Category Archives: BBC bias

Why is coventry a shit hole?

Likely Coventry is described as such because it smells bad, is an unpleasant place to be, trashy, un-kept, or generally lacking in desirable qualities.

Tags: shit hole,  coventry 

So not skin colour then?

That’s odd because as we know the use of that phrase is predicated upon racism and skin colour….as the liberal quoted by the BBC tells us:…incredible the way he can just twist things to make black white and white black…..apparently Trump was actually calling Haitians and Africans ‘shitholes’ not their countries….most might agree with Trump…hence they flee their own ‘shithole’ countries and head towards America….

Yes, it was racist

Mr McIlwain: Yesterday, Donald Trump said African and Haitian immigrants hail from “shithole countries”. A little black girl and child of Haitian immigrants I know overheard. Unprompted, and defiant she responded to her mother: “Donald Trump is a shithole!” The word itself was foreign to her, but she intuitively understood the words were derogatory, demeaning – racist. [really?  No. she didn’t] In Trump’s words she recognised a constellation of associations and inferences that Trump drew on to make this so.[No she didn’t]

A statement is racist when it explicitly denigrates and/or asserts as true a negative, longstanding stereotype about an entire group of people, signalled by the colour of their skin. “Shithole” fits the bill in the vilest way. [er in what way is ‘shithole’ associated in anyway with colour of skin?  It describes a place not a person] Those who manage with a straight face to say Trump’s words were not racist no doubt will point out that he did not specify that black people from these countries are shitholes. But, he did not have to.

We have longstanding and differential associations between the colours white and black. For much of our recent history, white has always represented all that is pure, clean, desirable. These associations are found in the language of our dictionaries, the one-time definition of Africa as the “dark continent”, and the way we demarcated slaves from non-slaves throughout the slave trade. These associations define our beauty standards, animated through film and television’s past and present. And, these colour associations still dominate our perceptions of leadership, images of success and attributions of worth and value.

Because of these longstanding and pervasive associations between black and white, Trump need only connect a few dots to express his racism. Denigrate immigrants from countries like Africa and Haiti as shitholes with no value, then specify their opposite – people from “Norway“. Even a little girl can see what the primary difference is between the two.

The only dots being connected are by a ‘professional black’ whose whole identity and being is wrapped up in being ‘black’, a black ‘victim’….naturally he works in the media department of his university…..

Typical of the mindset of so many on the left…and in the BBC.

Millions of cheap labourers imported and the BBC wonders about the ‘productivity puzzle’ and why the NHS is ‘in crisis’ as patient use explodes.  Still, it doesn’t pay to look too hard, they might find something they don’t like.

List the bias here……

Americanization

The Commission supports effective Americanization of new immigrants, that is the cultivation of a shared commitment to the American values of liberty, democracy, and equal opportunity. The United States is one of the most successful multiethnic nations in history. It has united immigrants and their descendants from all over the world around a commitment to democratic ideals and constitutional principles. Those ideals and principles have been embraced by persons from an extraordinary variety of religious and ethnic backgrounds, partly because they permit and protect religious and cultural diversity within a framework of national political unity.

At the same time, immigration to the United States should be understood as a privilege, not a right. Immigration carries with it obligations to embrace the common core of the American civic culture, to become able to communicateto the extent possiblein English with other citizens and residents, and to adapt to fundamental core values, constitutional principles, and democratic institutions.

US Bi-partisan report on immigration reform 1995

Sh*t normally runs downhill but the BBC, as is their want, try hard to push it uphill so that they can then pile it from on high upon Trump…such is the case with the ‘sh*thole’ legend created by a Democrat who is probably a liar on a grand scale.

The BBC isn’t really trying too hard to find the truth or any context….here it tells us…

Mr Trump has denied using the language reported.

He has been backed by two Republicans who were at the White House meeting, but Democratic Senator Dick Durbin said Mr Trump called African countries “shitholes” several times and used “racist” language.

So two Republicans at the meeting back Trump…..who are they and does the BBC go any further in reporting what they say? No of course not.  Instead the ‘report’ continues to paint a picture of a racist president based upon the unproven words of one man…one man who is highly motivated to make that picture stick.

Democrat Dick Durbin is also a hypocrit….he calls Trump a racist for using the ‘hurtful’ term ‘Chain migration’ and yet he himself used it not days ago…

We can agree on some very fundamental and important things together on border security, on chain, on the future of diversity visas. 

If he’s being dishonest about that what else is he being dishonest about?

Well maybe the fact that it is not Trump who invented the phrase ‘chain migration’ for one thing…something the Left are trying to pin on him…as a supposed racist term.

Oh look…here’s the phrase being used in 2003:

The commission’s second report, Legal Immigration: Setting Priorities, addressed legal immigration, including family and employment-based immigration, refugee admissions, and naturalization. It concluded that the current immigration system’s core element of chain migration was not in accord with national interests and urged the adoption of a new system scaling back significantly on overall immigration levels.

And in 2010 in an article reporting on a report from a bipartisan committee produced in 1995 and signed off by President Clinton that said  ‘family migration’, otherwise known as ‘chain migration’, should be scaled back…

A scale back of family chain-migration by implementing a prioritization of nuclear family relationships to determine who will be admitted through family-based immigration. Spouses and minor children of US citizens would continue to be admitted as first priority.

Also used not just in the US context…from 2009:

Remittances and Chain Migration: Longitudinal Evidence from Bosnia and Herzegovina

The BBC are happy to go with the lefty anti-Trump flow and keeps on flinging the muck in the hope that it sticks regardless of facts and context.

You have to laugh….long and loud.  The biters have been bitten by the very culture of sanctimonious, offence taking, trigger-word fearing, safe-place craving, snowflake ‘don’t mention reality’ neurosis that they  helped create…and deep joy…Trump’s ‘beauty’, Jon Sopel, is one of the victims….and there is a tape recording to prove this one.

BBC ‘deeply unimpressed’ over Carrie Gracie pay jokes

The BBC is “deeply unimpressed” with an off-air chat in which two of its high-profile journalists joked about the gender pay gap, a BBC source has said.

Radio 4’s Today presenter John Humphrys and North America editor Jon Sopel were discussing Carrie Gracie, who had quit as China editor over equal pay.

Before Monday’s show, The Sun and Times reported, they joked of “handing over” pay to keep Gracie in the role.

A BBC spokeswoman said the presenter regrets the “ill-advised” conversation.

Speaking in the Radio 4 studio, Humphrys reportedly asked Sopel about “how much of your salary you are prepared to hand over to Carrie Gracie to keep her”.

He then referred to “other men who are earning too much” at the BBC.

Sopel is understood to have replied that “if we are talking about the scope for the greatest redistribution I’ll have to come back and say well yes Mr Humphrys”.

The presenter is then reported to have uttered a profanity and said that he was “still left with more [pay] than anybody else”.

They were shopped by…

Miriam O’Reilly, who won an ageism case against the BBC in 2011 after being dropped from Countryfile, described the exchange as “base, smug and condescending”.

Claiming to have heard a recording of the chat, Ms O’Reilly said it represented the attitude of “back-slapping entitled males”.

Hilarious…a completely harmless jokey conversation that would be entirely normal in the circumstances has now become an issue of sexist, entitled, smug and condescending males.  Note that ‘claiming’…when she clearly had heard it.

This is how it happens to the likes of Trump…innocent or innocuous comments taken out of context by people with axes to grind and whipped up into a cause celebre and given plenty of sensationalised airtime by the BBC.

Nice to see it happen to their own.

However, one more wrinkle….O’Reilly believes she was taken off air in order to silence her once it was known she had heard the incriminating tape…

She also said she had been dropped from Friday’s Today programme, when she was expecting to talk about equal pay, adding that she believed it was because of concern she would mention the leaked tape on air.

A BBC spokeswoman denied this, saying it was because the item on the programme had become “a much broader discussion about social change” and another guest was more suitable.

She added: “The Today programme often makes changes to schedules and contributors in the run-up to broadcast… It’s wrong to suggest anything else.”

The BBC only so concerned about the gender pay gap and reporting it?….not so keen to do so if it thinks it can get away with it…nor to report on sexist and condescending comments from its own until forced to.

Spielberg has produced a film designed to be a Liberal elitist reposte to Trump….The Post.  A film about newspapers trying to publish a secret government report about the running of the Vietnam war.  Apparently it has resonance today.  Well yes, but not in the way Spielberg likes to pretend.  Things are in fact reversed today….an Administration under attack by a corrupt and dishonest media…it is that Media which should be exposed today for the lies and falsehoods it produces as it tries to unseat a President in order to impose its own choice of candidate….an attempted Media driven coup d’etat.

Jim Naughty had a bit of a love-in with Spielberg this morning on the Today show [08:20].  They should really have got a room where they could have whispered their bitter-sweet anti-Trump nothings in private but instead we had to listen to them as Naughty rolled over and had his tummy tickled by Spielberg who was allowed to witter on about how Trump was ruining America and how the upright, honest and honourable Media were under attack by dark forces orchestrated by Trump.

It was mostly rubbish, weepy liberal angst on the couch…and Naughty had nothing of any consequence to say, no challenge to the narrative, no analysis, no thoughts that Trump might be right about the Media…90% of which is actively against him.

Odd that when Trump complains about that massive Media drive against him it is a threat to democracy and the fine upstanding values of the US Press but the Liberals have no such qualms as they attack Fox, the Mail or the ‘right-wing’ Press in this country.

A blatantly prejudiced, partisan and very one-sided ‘interview’ that was designed with only one intent…to smear Trump and portray him in the worst, and most misleading, light as possible.

Most fascinating meeting I’ve been involved with in twenty plus years in politics.

I very much appreciate @POTUS @realDonaldTrump attitude, demeanor, and desire to get something done that will make our nation more secure – while being fair to the #Dreamers.

— Lindsey Graham (@LindseyGrahamSC) January 9, 2018

There is to be an inquiry into how the Media acted towards the families of victims after the Manchester bombing by a Muslim terrorist, maybe instead they should have an inquiry into the BBC’s reporting on Brexit or perhaps on Trump.  Today’s BBC reports on the supposed ‘shithole’ remarks would be a good starting point.

Did Trump really say ‘shithole countries’?  He denies it and there is no proof he did, no proof he didn’t…but that didn’t stop the BBC presenting it as fact this morning and happily reporting that Trump was a ‘racist’…even though his supposed words would have merely indicated he would have liked educated people who could make a valuable contribution to America rather than uneducated people who came with a begging bowl, very costly needs and demands, and more than likely an extreme culture that was at odds with the American one…not racist just common sense and indeed what most countries practice in their immigration policies. As for being ‘shitholes’…possibly a term many people would use.

The BBC’s ‘proof’ that he said this?….

The Washington Post, the New York Times, Politico and the Wall Street Journal all reported the comments on Thursday, quoting witnesses or people briefed on the meeting.

Except that’s not what happened…the Washington Post admits its scoop is second hand rumour…..there were only two others at the meeting, one a Republican and one a Democrat….

The president met on Thursday with Senators Lindsey Graham, Republican of South Carolina, and Richard J. Durbin, Democrat of Illinois. The senators are working to codify the protections in DACA.

The WaPo though is convinced…..

President Trump grew frustrated with lawmakers Thursday in the Oval Office when they discussed protecting immigrants from Haiti, El Salvador and African countries as part of a bipartisan immigration deal, according to several people briefed on the meeting.

“Why do we need more Haitians?” Trump said, according to people familiar with the meeting. “Take them out.”

So told to the Washington Post by people not at the meeting but ‘briefed’ on it by someone obviously anti-Trump[why else brief against him?] and who ‘sexed it up’.  And ‘people familiar with the meeting’…what does that mean?…such amorphous phrasing suggests the WaPo is trying to imply it has a credible source when it doesn’t have one.

The New York Times has managed to name a name…a Democrat of course…..

Senator Richard J. Durbin, Democrat of Illinois, said on Friday that the president did use the term “shithole,” repeatedly, during the course of the meeting on immigration — which Mr. Durbin attended. The senator described Mr. Trump as saying “things which were hate-filled, vile and racist.”

Pretty much at odds with the Tweet at the top of the post from before this ‘scandal’ broke from Rep. Lindsay Graham, also at the meeting.  So why does the BBC believe a Democrat with an axe to grind and not a Republican?

Curiously Durbin doesn’t Tweet at all about his alleged accusation reported in the NYT…..in fact he tells us he has successfully concluded an agreement on immigration with the Republicans…..

My colleagues and I have reached a bipartisan agreement on the #DreamAct pic.twitter.com/5BdOgXBOz2

— Senator Dick Durbin (@SenatorDurbin) January 11, 2018

Odd no?

The virulently anti-Trump NYT goes on to claim Trump doesn’t deny using such words…and yet he does….’This was  not the language used’…

The language used by me at the DACA meeting was tough, but this was not the language used. What was really tough was the outlandish proposal made – a big setback for DACA!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 12, 2018

The NYT links to another supposed ‘quote’ from Trump in its bid to mark him down as a racist…

In a private meeting in June of last year, Mr. Trump said immigrants from Haiti “all have AIDS.”

But once again it’s those very credible sources…

They “all have AIDS,” he grumbled, according to one person who attended the meeting and another person who was briefed about it by a different person who was there.

So nothing in black and white, no verbatim written record, no tapes, just the word of someone who clearly is anti-Trump.

And would Trump have been wrong to suggest HIV was a problem in Haitian immigrants?  A report from 2007 suggests very much right….

AIDS Virus Traveled to Haiti, Then U.S., Study Says

HIV went directly from Africa to Haiti, then spread to the United States and much of the rest of the world beginning around 1969, suggests an international team of researchers.

The findings settle a key debate on the history and transmission route of the deadly virus, the scientists say.

When AIDS was officially recognized in 1981 in the U.S., for instance, the unusually high prevalence of the disease in Haitian immigrants fueled speculation that the Caribbean island was the source of the mysterious illness.

This is the problem with the whole immigration debate, as in the UK the pro-open borders, let’emallin brigade weaponise immigration and try to win the argument by demonising anyone who wants to control it as a racist as they are doing with Trump, conveniently ignoring all the facts that support his position…such as Haitians brought HIV to America…and of course classically that Hillary Clinton also wanted a barrier to stop illegal immigation….Trump says it and he’s a racist, Clinton says it…and the BBC et al don’t mention it…..

Why Hillary Clinton voted for the anti-immigrant wall

4 October 2006

Last Friday, however, she did exactly that, joining Senate Republicans and the majority of her Democratic colleagues in voting for an ignominious piece of legislation known as the “Secure Fence Act of 2006.”

“I voted numerous times when I was a senator to spend money to build a barrier to try to prevent illegal immigrants from coming in,” Clinton said “and I do think that you have to control your borders.”

“As president, I will not support driver’s licenses for undocumented people and will press for comprehensive immigration reform that deals with all of the issues around illegal immigration, including border security and fixing our broken system.”

Glorious moment this morning on the Today show as the ‘underpaid’ Carrie Gracie enthusiastically cheered as she led a discussion on female scientists and heard that a male scientist in the golden age of male dominance thought that women were just as good and just as intelligent as men….hurrah said Gracie….and then the completely unaware speaker added…‘and cheaper’.…Gracie let out a very sudden, deeply disappointed ‘Oh!!’ and came to a full stop.  Gloriously funny.

Anyway…no shortage of bias judging by a mere 15 minute listening to the Today show this morning….apparently Labour could be in government inside 12 months [top tip from Nick Robinson] and Sadiq Khan’s anti-Brexit ‘project fear’ report was produced by an entirely independent and impartial group. [LOLLOLLOL….both pro-Corbyn and anti-Brexit]].

List the bias here…..

Absolutely nothing to do with nothing…but….

Everything's terrible, so here's a dog taking herself sledding pic.twitter.com/Y7KZAkNO6k

— Robert Maguire (@RobertMaguire_) January 4, 2018

The BBC’s James O’Brien is out to show how brilliant he is again with an astute, insightful and intelligent analysis of a letter sent by David Davis to the PM on his LBC show…..read it for yourself and check out how clear the meaning is…hard to misunderstand especially if you’re so intelligent as Mr O’Brien is…a ‘very stable genius’ no doubt:

LBC boasts:

James O’Brien took apart David Davis’ complaints that the EU is planning for a ‘No Deal Brexit’ in characteristic style.

In a letter seen by Financial Times journalist Jim Pickard, David Davis told the Prime Minister:

 James read out some key passages – and ripped them apart.

David Davis: “I am writing to draw your and fellow members of the European Union Exit And Trade Committee’s attention to a growing number of instances where the UK is treated differently by the EU institutions.”

James O’Brien: What the hell did you expect to happen when you voted to leave the European Union, David?

David Davis: “The UK is treated differently by the EU institutions, before we leave the EU and in a way which is frequently damaging for UK interests.”

James O’Brien: What? Oh my giddy aunt, colour me shocked. Who could possibly have seen that coming, Secretary Of State For Leaving The European Union?

Trouble is Davis was complaining that Britain, which is still a member of the EU, is now being treated as if it was not….clearly against the rules….O’Brien fails to understand that not so subtle point made in the first paragraph of the letter.  Still why let the facts spoil a good fake news story….happily ignoring...’before we leave the EU’.  The EU are not ‘planning for a no-deal’ they are already acting as if it has happened. Illuminating that O’Brien shows no interest in tackling the EU’s outrageous behaviour but is more interested in inventing fake news about those who are trying to implement Brexit and get the best deal for Britain….no prizes for guessing which way O’Brien voted in the referendum.  Seems he does not have Britain’s interests at heart.

No doubt it will feature on Newsnight with JO’Bby….they seem to have few qualms about promoting the EU’s side of things either.

H/T Katie Hopkins [boo hiss]

https://twitter.com/KTHopkins/status/950343610935009280