Category Archives: BBC bias

The BBC has long pandered to the idea that Capitalism is finished and that a great new idea must replace it, a great leap forward in the way mankind provides the necessities, and luxuries, of life for itself.  It’s complete rubbish of course, Capitalism, like Democracy, maybe the worst form of running our affairs, except for all the others.  It does need reining in naturally but it has lifted so many billions of people out of poverty and hard laborious lives that for all its ills it is still the only true way of life that provides material benefits and the essential freedoms necessary for a civilised society such as individualism and choice in how we conduct our own lives…and of course the essential ability to have a say in and influence on how a society is run.

The BBC would like to see the end of Capitalism but what would it replace it with?  You don’t hear much about that, which could be a problem.  More of a problem is that nearly all other systems are run by dictators at the point of a gun and necessitate the use of force to run ‘smoothly’, or at least give the impression of running smoothly as all information to the contrary gets suppressed.

You just have to look at the petty class-war nastiness we get from the Left already to know how full blown Corbynism would play out.  People pay for the state education system  regardless of whether they use it or not, and the richer you are the more you will pay towards it.  If you send your children to private school you are making the state system less crowded and are ensuring that each pupil in that system gets more money per head and yet Labour want to take away the charitable status of private schools.    Similarly we now hear that Labour wants to make hospitals provide free parking, as they should, but to do it by taxing private health care more.  As with schools the Rich pay for the NHS regardless of whether they use it or not, and they pay far more than somebody on a low income.  Again by not using the NHS they free up resources for NHS patients that would otherwise be spread more thinly.  And yet Labour wants to punish those who use private health care.  Moronic dogmatic ideology, they should encourage people to take out private health care and education so that those in the state system get more resources and attention per pupil or patient.

You may have received your tax summary for the year recently which tells you how your tax contributed to public spending.

Income tax and National Insurance are not the biggest source of income for government, surprisingly maybe, indirect taxes, such as VAT or the fuel levy, are.  In effect, whatever you earn, hardly any of it goes into your own pocket at the end of the day.  But here’s the most important point…all that Government income comes from Businesses, Capitalism, one way or another.  So again, how does the BBC propose to replace that system of funding and provision for all necessary government spending to feed, school, house, clothe, care for, defend and entertain the masses?  An allotment with a goat and a couple of chickens out the back just won’t cut it.  Maybe if you have a magic money tree….didn’t end well for Adam and Eve did it?  Keep away from the trees and snakeoil salesmen like Corbyn.

Government spending is huge and most, around 70%, goes on what might all be lumped together under the title of welfare…the top four items being Benefits, Health, Pensions and Education.  The next highest cost is national debt interest, that’s just the interest on the debt not paying off the debt itself.  It is higher than defence and public order and safety.  More than housing, more than on business and industry, more than on transport.  And yet Labour and the BBC keep telling us we must rack up more and more debt…which accrues more and more interest payments.  Labour says this is good…borrow to take industries like Rail, Water and Power out of private hands and stop profits going to the banks…hmmm…and who do they borrow the money off, and who gets all those interest payments?  The Banks.  Labour’s policy is all smoke and mirrors, lies.  Shame the BBC doesn’t point that out.

No such thing as a free lunch or indeed a free renationalised rail service.

The BBC’s position on Business is of course a complete farce so muddled and contradictory is it.  On the one hand they roundly oppose what they call consumerism, on the other they constantly criticise government for not increasing productivity and not making Britain a more successful place business-wise.  I would like to know how they define consumerism…how much is too much…and which jobs and industries would they like to shut down?  Which products and how many, should people buy?…..sounds dangerously close to Communism where the government decides all that.

Maybe the BBC has a five year plan.  Or an orchard.

The good Bishop in the interview below says they can’t get rid of Jesus from Europe.   Some might say Christians, Christianity, Christian culture, Western culture are being erased from Europe.  Slowly but surely.  Time for a bit of that muscular christianity or liberalism we keep hearing about?  Of course it would help if people could remember what liberalism was about.  The BBC et al seem to have forgotten and now tolerate the intolerable, not just tolerate but promote it as something good that we must all praise and appease.  You get the feeling the Nazis might get a more receptive welcome these days from the BBC if only they could present themselves as the victims. [By happy accident I seem to have coincided with a theme on the open thread….. relativising about the war and the Brits/US being war criminals]  Yep, here’s the algorithm…murder 6 million Jews and then, when you have been roundly condemned, claim you are the real victims,  victims of discrimination, marginalisation, alienation, that your community is being targeted by the security services unfairly and this is all making your youth feel angry and unwelcome in Britain.  They are angry and becoming radicalised and this anger may be expressed in violence, quite justified if, naturally, ahem, unjustified, but who can blame them victimised as they are?  Nazis must have their own schools, their beliefs and culture must be respected and non-Nazis must adapt their lives and behaviour so that it does not offend the Nazis.  Nazis spokesmen and their views will be given prominence in the Media and given rapid promotion to places of power and influence so that they feel they have a stake in society.  Nazi culture, beliefs and values will be promoted by the BBC as the norm, as part of British culture, as British culture, and all critics of Nazism will be denounced and vilified as racists and Naziphobes.

Trouble is, that is not a joke is it?

In the meantime….laugh….

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YsiJhZgbWww

If you can fake sincerity you’ve got it made.  It helps of course if you have the inherited respect and reputation of a venerable and massive institution behind you giving your claim to probity, truthfulness and sincerity a sheen of credibility whenever you are lying through your teeth.

The above interview by Wark of Anne Coulter is on an Ofcom reporting level of dishonesty and misrepresentation so utterly and wilfully deceptive and misleading is it.  Wark is ostensibly interested in ‘fake news’ but it is only alleged fake news that she claims comes from the Right.  Guardianista Laurie Pennie isn’t there to be interviewed, she is there to bolster Wark’s ‘argument’ that Right-wing fake news is a danger to democracy.  Penny is allowed to talk freely and make her points without interruption or challenge whilst Coulter is in the hot chair constantly under attack and inquisition.  Penny makes a completely false claim that Coulter is trying to make out that there is no difference between fake news and the truth, calling Coulter a troll, when in fact Coulter has consistently pointed out fake news in the MSM….Penny deliberately missing the real point…that fake news is the same as MSM news these days, that the MSM news is not the Truth, a point Wark was totally uninterested in examining despite it being more important than fake news coming out of a dodgy website in Macedonia that few people see or believe.

Look at the issues Coulter raised….Ferguson where a black man was shot dead by a white police officer…the BBC still falsely uses this case as an example of police racism in America when in fact it was conclusively proved the officer was justified in using lethal force having already been punched in the face, his eye socket fractured, by the suspect who tried to take his weapon and who later ran at the officer in a threatening  manner and was then shot.  The BBC lied about this being a racist killing, it lied about so many other similar cases, and it is this narrative from much of the left-wing media, of Blacks being deliberatelyy targeted by police and killed, that helped create the murderous backlash we saw when Blacks started to murder police officers in ‘revenge’ attacks.  Trouble is that narrative was completely false, a dangerous lie that the BBC knew was untrue  but continued to peddle it anyway as it suited their agenda.  How many people died because the BBC lied?

Coulter also mentioned Trump being attacked for allegedly mocking a disabled reporter.  The BBC reported this as fact.  Unfortunately the gestures and words used by Trump were the same ones he used to describe anyone whom he thought had lost the plot…and the evidence was plentiful that this was the case.  Trump was not mocking a disabled person he was in fact treating him as he would anyone else in similar circumstances.

Two big fake news stories from the MSM and Wark was totally uninterested in exploring that, she was only concerned with right-wing fake news on social media, as no doubt directed by her bosses, the BBC blatantly targeting social media and trying to blame it for right-wing terrorism, hate crimes and abuse of politicians….never mind it is mostly Muslims and the left-wing who are guilty of the majority of that.  Remember Wark’s attack interview with Tommy Robinson in which she blamed him for the Finsbury Park attack…forgetting conveniently that it was the BBC programme, ‘Three Girls’, that the police said was the catalyst for Osborne’s radicalisation….and indeed Robinson had absolutely nothing to do with the attack or Osborne.

What else is the BBC downplaying?

How about a foreign billionaire trying to corrupt our democracy by using his billions to fund anti-democratic movements in this country in order to overturn one of the most democratic votes this country has ever had?  The BBC is more interested in allegations that Russia interfered in American democracy than in blatant attempts to corrupt our own.  The BBC doesn’t like Trump so it supports all narratives that it thinks will unseat him, on the other hand they don’t like Brexit so they happily ignore the foreign Soros’ attempts to buy influence and power over our Parliament and country….we did have John Humphrys suggest that Soros was ‘subverting the democratic process’ but beyond that we have had almost nothing from the BBC…a remarkable silence about a real corruption scandal when the BBC was quite excited about a C4 programme about a fake Chinese company buying power and influence entrapping Tory politicians.  Hilariously in the Humphrys interview with Lord Malloch-Brown, who runs the campaign that received the Soros money, M-B claimed that he was empowering democracy and that the referendum result was ‘a howl of protest of the people being ignored‘.  Hmmmm…..so he empowers democracy by trying to overturn a huge demcocratic vote and he answers a ‘howl of protest at being ignored’ by, er, ignoring that protest.  What a knobhead.  And Soros has stumped up even more cash as a snub to his critics.  I’d say ‘lock him up’.

And if you think Soros isn’t dangerous look at the boasts of his ‘missionaries’ and then think on how it all turned out…the Arab Spring, Libya and the Ukraine….

It was later during lunch at a plush Budapest hotel that I encountered the full force of the arrogant ethos promoted by the Soros network of organisations. At my table I listened to Dutch, American, British, Ukrainian and Hungarian representatives of Soros NGOs boast about their achievements. Some claimed that they played a major role in the Arab Spring in Egypt. Others voiced their pride in their contribution to the democratisation of the Ukraine. Some bragged about their influence in preparing the ground for the overthrow of the Gadafif regime in Libya.

Then there is Trump again….the CIA have been caught trying to buy compromising material on Trump from the Russians…they deny that this is what they were doing but that must have been their main purpose….getting back so-called cyberweapons is by its nature impossible…‘Yes of course I’ve given you all copies!’…so there must have been another purpose for the meetings…..and remember Trump jr was said to have committed treason for meeting a Russian who claimed to have information on Clinton…so is the CIA committing treason on that logic?  The BBC were very interested in Trump jr, seemingly not so interested in this even though it broke in the lefty NYT….

According to the @nytimes, a Russian sold phony secrets on “Trump” to the U.S. Asking price was $10 million, brought down to $1 million to be paid over time. I hope people are now seeing & understanding what is going on here. It is all now starting to come out – DRAIN THE SWAMP!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) February 10, 2018

Just more proof the Russians were intent on damaging Trump and yet the BBC still pushes the notion that he was colluding with them.  Fake news?  Course it is.

You always know you have a stupid, lazy, unpleasant, cowardly comedian when they go for Trump.  They know that they are guaranteed some applause from a certain segment of the audience if they sneer at Trump and make some asinine joke about him, it doesn’t even have to be funny or true…just say ‘Trump’ and you’ll get the applause.  They of course won’t do jokes that are seen as in his favour as to do so would result in Twitter going into meltdown and their credibility as a right-on comedian left in tatters.  They just aren’t brave enough to do real funny, they just go for the group-think tribal self-confirming comfort blanket of anti-Trumpism.  It would be like a white comedian making jokes about Obama because he’s black to a KKK meeting.  Anti-Trumpism is a sort of racism, it’s bigotry, stupidity and cowardice.  The same comedian of course would never make jokes about Mohammed and Islam despite the extraordinary horrors done in the name of Allah.

‘Comedian’ Desiree Burch on the News Quiz is that lazy, bigoted comedian who instead of thinking up some real jokes goes for the low hanging fruit of the Trump.   She laughs at his Tweet about the NHS being in crisis and sneers that he gets his news from Fox…how they laughed.  Only Trump was really just ‘retweeting’ the extremists of the BBC, the Labour Party and the activist doctors and nurses who agitate on behalf of the Labour Party and whose constant drumbeat has been of an NHS in crisis but who suddenly all now agree that the NHS is the best health service in the world.

So a chance to make a joke about the hypocrisy of those who have weaponised the NHS and told constant lies about it and another chance to reference Trump retweeting extremist material not by ‘Britain First’ but by ‘Britain Last’...ie the BBC et al.  But no…go for the easy laugh from your unthinking tribal groupies….don’t challenge them, don’t challenge yourself with some original thought.

It’s the same with thoughtless, partisan politicians who go for that easy applause as Stephen Kinnock did on Any Questions [again the audience seemingly packed with lefties…or a very vocal minority] when he claimed Trump was the problem when it came to North Korea.  Apparently Trump has only made things worse there and he needs to tone his rhetoric down.  Yep, that has worked really well for decades hasn’t it as North Korea totally ignored everything ‘diplomatic’ Presidents have said?  Kinnock is either a fool or bigoted liar prepared to make totally untrue statements for his own ends….intended to make Stephen Kinnock look good [but failing, like father, like son]…‘Trump, what a crass, dangerous and stupid fellow ha ha ha!…clap me now!’

Trouble is what is going on over there directly relates to Trump’s sabre rattling which was intended to, and did, scare the Chinese who then imposed sanctions on North Korea…and now we see North Korea at least going through the motions of trying to be more friendly to South Korea…will it last?  Who knows but it is due to Trump, his sabre rattling backing up a good deal of behind the scenes diplomacy.

Shame Dimbleby then referred to Kinnock’s interpretation as if it was the reality and that Trump really did have to tone down his language…doesn’t he?

Kirsty Wark on Newsnight continued in similar anti-Trump vain with some stupid comments that made no attempt to make a fair assessment or judgement on Trump’s claim that CNN [and all the rest] has been pumping out fake news, it has.  Wark, as is the standard BBC line, claims Trump [apparently now a ‘despot’] is wrong and the MSM, the BBC, is totally blameless and trustworthy….might say such shameless white-washing and stone-walling comments defending the MSM prove her completely wrong and Trump right….H/T Sue at Is the BBC biased? for the quote….

“Aren’t you aiding the despots who say “it’s all about fake news from CNN even the BBC, so we won’t believe it?” You are aiding people by undermining the probity of the mainstream media?” 

‘Probity of the mainstream media’…ho, ho,ho….and you still believe in Father Christmas, unicorns and man-made climate change.

Is there any difference between Afua Hirsch and Hitler?  Both advocates of racial purity,  both using race as a weapon to further their own political aims and those of their own race.  It’s a shame that just about the only black ‘role models’ people see on the BBC or read in the Guardian are the race baiters like Hirsch whose sole aim it would seem is to create a race war, to set up a ‘them and us’ scenario so that Blacks only think of themselves as victims and the only way to be successful is to ‘be black’ [ironically…Britain is racist so be even more ‘black’ to beat the racism!] and to separate themselves from ‘white’ society blaming that for any or all of their problems.   The BBC continues to play its very dangerous game of sensationalising race and giving platforms to people who are not acting in the best interests of black people and are quite happy to stir up racial division and conflict, constantly abusing white people and ‘white’ society in their own racist way because that is how they make a living…writing or broadcasting about race problems, no problems then nothing to write about, no money, no ego-boosting media appearances….problems they have invented or indeed generated themselves…..just like the old joke about the newspaper editor starting a war to sell more  newspapers…only in this case it’s not a joke,  it’s all too real and the BBC aids and abets in that.

List the bias here…..

So a Remainer at the Treasury leaked a document claiming to predict what the economy would look like in 15 years time after Brexit, it assumes the EU would remain as it is now…clearly nonsense.  The document was incomplete and didn’t include data that would show how Brexit might improve the economy but that didn’t stop the BBC et al from using it to tell us we’re all doomed #duetobrexit.

Curious then that the Bank of England’s Ben Broadbent on Wake up to Money, when asked why he couldn’t predict what the interest rates would be in one year, that’s one year not 15, he said …..

That’s why we meet eight times a year, because stuff happens.

‘Stuff happens’….‘stuff’ that they didn’t or couldn’t predict…In other words it’s almost impossible to accurately assess what any economy will do even in a relatively short period of time never mind over 15 years especially when the assumption is that nothing will change in the EU.

Also you might have noted the furore over crime going up according to police statistics whilst the British Crime Survey said it was going down.  The BBC chose to use the police record as the gold standard whilst dismissing the BCS as useless.  Might be because Corbyn is using the rising crime figures to attack May and according to the BBC that is a ‘crack in her armour’.

Whether crime is rising or falling is hugely important. It can affect how much is spent on policing and other related services, even how people vote.

How times change.  When Labour was in power and the BCS showed crime going down but  police records showed crime was going up with Tory MPs making political capital out of the police records the BBC, in the shape of Mark Easton in particular, went out of their way to explain the issues telling us that it was the BCS that was the gold standard, it was unchangeable and thus could be compared year on year and used over 40,000 interviews from crime victims as its basis.  The police records however were totally unreliable, the methods of collecting and recording data changed and this meant there was no reliable means of assessing the true figures for crime from them.

So when Labour was in power the British Crime Survey was the gold standard as it showed crime dropping, when the Tories are in power the police records are the gold standard as they show crime rising.  Funny that.

The BCS is completely unreliable…of that 40,000 or so crime report maybe 1,500 are actually used, and who selects which crimes are judged to be crimes?  The Home Office…so hardly impartial or independent when drawing up crime figures.  On top of that the methods and systems the BCS uses to record crime also change frequently thus making a lie of the BBC’s claim that it is consistent and thus trustworthy when it comes to comparing year on year.  Naturally the BBC now see the error of their ways and have declared the BCS as a total waste of time…until Labour get in again and the BCS shows crime going down.

Here’s Mark Easton in 2008 beating the drum for the BCS:

Police figures go up and down depending on police activity. Crime may not be reported. But the crime survey gets round this problem by asking individuals what has happened to them.

It is regarded as the most robust survey on any subject in the country – tens of thousands of respondents and with a remarkably high completion rate.

And even in 2014 here he is again, telling us the police records are totally unreliable….

Now we know that the statistics watchdog doesn’t trust the police recorded crime figures, what faith can we have that crime really has been falling for the past 20 years?

The answer is plenty.

The UK Statistics Authority has said that police recorded crime data in England and Wales should no longer be designated as National Statistics because of accumulating evidence that they may be unreliable.

Recorded crime figures have always been a lousy way to identify crime trends.

So how can we be confident about crime trends?

Ask people.

The British Crime Survey (now the Crime Survey of England and Wales or CSEW) is a world-renowned invention. Using robust statistical modelling, it identifies far more crimes than are recorded by the police.

And yet today….

Labour, and the police, want to link an alleged rise in crime to Tory cuts to the police and the BBC obliges by making that link explicitly again and again whilst talking down the BCS figures…

The Crime Survey continues to show a reduction. But it’s increasingly clear that the survey, with a relatively limited sample, is not good at gauging emerging crime trends and offences which are small in number but great in impact, such as knife crime and robbery.

For now, the police statistics are a more useful guide as to what’s really going on.

Funny how the BCS, ‘world renowned’ and ‘the most robust survey’,  is now so easily dismissed by the BBC when Corbyn goes onto the attack on crime figures and the BCS shows a fall in crime.

Life changing events?  How to cope with them?  Who to ask?

The BBC chooses Brendan Cox and a survivor of the 7/7 attacks….out of all the survivors they manage to pick a Muslim, one who runs the Jan Trust which teaches that Muslims are right to be angry about the West’s involvement in world affairs [Muslim] and of course about Israel…get angry it says but don’t be violent….deradicalising, anti-extremism…or the opposite?….

British survivors of terror attacks are coming together to offer a new voice for survivors. “Survivors against Terrorism” will campaign for policies to tackle the causes of attacks, and we’re speaking to two of the founders: Brendan Cox, husband of murdered MP, Jo Cox, and Sadja Mughal, who was in the next carriage down from one of the 7/7 bombers, when he detonated his device in London in 2005.

I imagine ‘Survivors against Terrorism’ is going to be a highly political, pretty one-sided affair that tells us the real threat is right-wing extremism and that the Government’s Prevent strategy is failing and is alienating Muslims….the two founders being a very political lefty and a Muslim.  The ‘steering group’ seems weighted against the ‘Right’ with Cox, Mughal, Mike Haines who travels the country lecturing about the wonders of  unity and the horrors of hate crime [right-wing] despite his brother being beheaded in Islam’s name and Dan Hett [ex-BBC] whose main concern is the Far-Right despite his brother being killed in the Manchester bombing.

Can’t find any mention of this on the BBC despite all their concern about sexual abuse…and in light of Cox’s own pious preachings….

Murdered MP Jo Cox’s husband was reported to police over sex assault claim in Harvard bar – nine months before his wife’s death

A new charity sex scandal erupted last night after it emerged that the husband of murdered Labour MP Jo Cox was once accused of groping a senior US government official.

The woman reported Brendan Cox to American police, claiming he assaulted her late at night at Harvard University – although Mr Cox strongly denies the allegation.

Her complaint came soon after Mr Cox quit as a senior executive with the Save The Children in 2015 following separate claims of inappropriate behaviour towards staff.

Mr Cox declined to comment last night, but his lawyers said he denies the ‘spurious allegations’ and says no sexual assault took place.

Take look at this article from the BBC….shame such slanted tosh comes from the respected RUSI…no surprise the BBC is pushing it….co-authored by Raffaello Pantucci and Dr Mohammed Elshimi….looks like ‘Mo’ may  have had a bit too much influence….commissioned by the BBC…’Co-authored with colleague Mo again, this one focuses on extreme right wing terrorism and its particular expression through lone actors for the BBC.’…..

The clues right-wing terrorists give away

They present this as if it is a major and extensive problem…

Plans to kill by lone individuals such as these have been a persistent feature of the extreme right wing for many years.

It’s a long article in which the first bit is running through some basic groundwork but then we get onto the real message..

None of this paints a picture of particularly sophisticated terrorist plots, or networks, in particular among those on the extreme right.

Rather, it suggests isolated individuals acting out an extreme ideology – and, in most cases, this has been the nature of the plots.

Potentially more worrying for the UK is the emergence of a more organised extreme right wing, with the recent banning of the neo-Nazi group National Action, for example.

Yep, National Action, a tiny group of like-minded souls who get absolutely no traction in mainstream society….unlike Muslim terrorists whose motivations and ideology get widespread support in their own community though most Muslims will say they are against the violent expression of that…as with the Jan Trust.   The communities that feed on conspiracy theories and widespread acceptance of the narrative that the West is attacking ‘Islam’, a narrative that the BBC pushes relentlessly and gives credibility to, are the breeding ground for the terrorists…and help recruit active members, those who facilitate their actions and those who stand by with silent approval doing nothing to stop them.

Here’s the meat and potatoes of the article with a clear attempt to cast the net as wide as possible and implicate anyone who says anything critical of Islam, extreme liberalism or even Marxism bizarrely….

Across the continent, the ideology around far-right extremists is varied and diverse, but some common threads can be found.

Racial “purity” is often highlighted, as are claims that the world is run by powerful elites, including Marxists, liberals and Jews.

Some minority groups are presented as posing a threat to European culture and society.

Er…The Western world is run by liberals…to its great cost in many cases….and some minority groups are presented as a threat to European culture and society…because they are a threat so radically opposed to Western society are they….and the minority groups include Marxists.  Many ‘liberals’, they who see the promotion of interationalism, globalisation [and paradoxically anti-capitalism] and open borders are pretty much aligned with the Marxists as we see with the great and the good at the BBC championing Corbyn.

And here’s the usual refusal to accept any criticism as valid, presumably ‘xenophobic beliefs’ are those criticising Muslims behaving badly ‘in the name of Allah’ and those arguing to control immigration, with the claim that it gives licence to violent extremists and thus is a danger to the glorious multicultural society we live in….so close it down…this is pure Muslim/left wing propaganda trying to control and police what can be said…..

The continued existence of such people – often drawing on the ideology of a more organised extreme right wing, or the xenophobic beliefs of a vocal minority – has a damaging effect on society, causing frictions between communities and tearing at our social fabric.

Not only do their actions hurt those caught up in attacks, but they can drive others on the extreme right, as well violent Islamists – who use the sense of a divided society to justify their actions.

It is easy to simply dismiss Osborne and Stables as pathetic losers angry at society.

But they represent a broader trend that has worrying potential ramifications for the United Kingdom.

Did I really hear Alistair Campbell on Chiles tell us that the IRA were actually really nice chaps and that the real problem is that we have created a misleading characterisation of them, we have invented the stories about them that label them as terrorists?  Might have just been the drains burbling away venting off gaseous vapours.

Chiles was on form today as he chopsed on about May and her interview which she did with a 13 year old…entirely uneventful and not a thing controversial or newsworthy and yet Chiles went off the deep end claiming it all went downhill after a while.  May answering a question about whether she liked Bake Off or Strictly was her sitting on the fence avoiding the answer…apparently not wanting to offend Bake Off or Strictly fans in case they might vote for her.  Yes Adrian, we’re all agog about that question…never mind the economy or Brexit.  Another question asking if she had a pet supposedly received a macabre reply….May had a dog, it got run over and lost a leg.  Dreadful, shocking, traumatizing….and of course macabre.  Chiles was clearly on dinner party mode and thought he was back home with his BBC chums all chortling about the simple pastoral Maybot when not being witty about Trump.

Chiles for all his right-on, dyed-in-the-wool BBC credentials does let some things slip occasionally that are totally at odds with the orthodoxy.  A week or so ago he admitted that when he was back in the homeland, Brum, and he spoke to a lot of Black and Asian people, they said they had voted for Brexit in order to limit the number of East Europeans coming here…so two things there….as we know the lie about Brexit voters all being white, old and racist is just that, a lie, and two if the Whites are racist in the BBC’s eyes then why is the BBC not saying the same about the BAME Brexit voters?

Chiles also admitted that his London friends thought Leave voters were too stupid to be allowed to vote.  Chiles said he didn’t like that sort of attitude from Remainers…however his two guests, Remainers, just ploughed on slagging off Leave voters and he said nothing.

Maybe Chiles is a bit disgruntled as he is shunted to the Friday spot and is rebelling by letting the inconvenient truths out bit by bit. If the BBC eventually relegates him to the dead zone at 3 AM what will he say?  Maybe brilliant and hard hitting but will anyone be listening?  Perhaps that is the idea…when a presenter gets a bit too old and starts turning right politically, as people do apparently, shunt them out of the way where there’s no one to listen to their heresy….or no one that matters…it’s all thick lorry drivers and working class shift workers…uneducated, bigoted, racist peasants.

Trump says the NHS is in crisis and British politicians, doctors, media types all rushed to its defence saying that it is the best health service in the world doing wonderful work for half  the money of the US system….and we thought the NHS was in a crisis…have to stop listening to the BBC….and clearly money doesn’t therefore bring you a better NHS.  No?

Also the Mail had Trump with his hair going feral splashed across its frontpage yesterday.  Distinct lack of outrage from our moral guardians about the hated Mail abusing people for their looks or for trivialising politics and endangering democracy as the Mail obviously did when it got the scoop on ‘Legs-It’ and got sent to the naughty corner, over to the far right, by Aunty.

Spot any more Trumpophobia [how long have you got?] note it all here…..

“It’s quite reductionist,” she tells me firmly, “to call them ‘jihadi brides’. They’re facilitators, logisticians, propagandists. There’s more to these women socially, politically, psychologically, culturally, that we don’t understand and that we need to understand.”

'My Return from IS' will not be broadcast as planned. We have made this decision for duty of care reasons following discussions with contributors to the programme.

— Panorama ???? (@BBCPanorama) February 5, 2018

Panorama has pulled, seemingly indefinitely, its film called ‘My Return from IS’ which would have told ‘the story of a British woman who is back in the UK after living with so-called Islamic State in Syria for more than two years before managing to escape with the help of her mother. She was arrested, but after extensive debriefing by counterterrorist officers the CPS decided there were no grounds for prosecution. `Fatima’ tells Panorama reporter Peter Taylor how the group has hijacked Islam, with men acting as cannon fodder and women used for cooking, cleaning and giving birth.’

As you might imagine it was most likely going to be a puff piece that portrayed the ‘Jihadi Brides’ as naive and well-meaning victims and the men as brave, if deluded, defenders of Islam under attack from Western aggression, men who didn’t understand the true, peaceful nature of Islam and who believed, wrongly, that they were carrying out its commands.   Naturally that is a picture the BBC has always wanted to peddle but even a Muslim expert on radicalisation doesn’t accept that saying the Jihadi Brides were far more willing and active than the likes of the BBC would have you believe telling us “It’s quite reductionist,” she tells me firmly, “to call them ‘jihadi brides’. They’re facilitators, logisticians, propagandists. There’s more to these women socially, politically, psychologically, culturally, that we don’t understand and that we need to understand.”

The question stands though as to why the BBC pulled the programme?  It tells us that it spoke to contributors to the programme and made the decision to cancel based upon ‘duty of care considerations’ but not expanding upon that.

You have to think that this may be related to the Darren Osborne terror attack at Finsbury Park and is a reaction to the news that the BBC drama ‘Three Girls’ was the catalyst for his descent into radicalisation….though why the programe wasn’t called ‘1,400 Girls’ is beyond me.  Good I suppose that the BBC admits, in a very roundabout way, that its programme was in its way responsible for the attack because the BBC otherwise has signally failed to admit that its coverage was ‘the catalyst’ preferring to blame the Far-Right, social media and Tommy Robinson, who had little to absolutely nothing to do with the attack.  The BBC was absolutely right to show the film, if years too late and an exercise in trying to make itself appear to be a leading campaigner against the abuse, when in fact it had covered it up for years….one of its own journalists admitting that he knew what was going on and asking why the police did nothing…but not thinking to ask why he himself failed to break the story which would have forced the police and authorities to act.

Douglas Murray in the Spectator believes the BBC may retreat back into those old ways of covering up crimes and other unpleasant behaviour by Muslims because it fears to report them may lead to anti-Muslim anger.

Will the BBC go back to ignoring grooming gangs?

For the best part of a decade the BBC – like most other mainstream media – chose to ignore the issue of the northern Muslim grooming gangs. They didn’t know any of the victims, didn’t know the towns and somewhere along the way (subliminally or otherwise) made the decision that all this was just too horrible and delicate a story to wade into.

I know what people at the BBC and elsewhere will be thinking. Perhaps this vindicates the silence of all those years. Perhaps the public cannot be trusted. Perhaps they are indeed the sort of people who have in their midst people on a hair-trigger who are willing to hire trucks and drive them into crowds of people at a moment’s notice. Perhaps the censorship and silence were after all a good idea? Personally I happen to think not. But nobody should be surprised if the BBC reverts to ignoring crimes like Rochdale in the future.

Matti Freidman in the Atlantic notes a similar attitude when reporting about Israel as the reporters choose to side with the Palestinians….’This group of intelligent and generally well-meaning professionals ceased to be reliable observers and became instead an amplifier for the propaganda of one of the most intolerant and aggressive forces on earth.’

Orwell spelt it out years ago….“The argument that to tell the truth would be ‘inopportune’ or would ‘play into the hands of’ somebody or other is felt to be unanswerable, and few people are bothered by the prospect that the lies which they condone will get out of the newspapers and into the history books.”

That is precisely the BBC’s attitude.  They believe that reporting such events ‘play into the hands of the Far-Right’ and thus should be censored and suppressed.  But that attitude sacrificed 1,400 girls to the Muslim predators that groomed, raped and abused them under the noses of the media and authorities who held back from acting due to concerns about race and religion.  It also of course does in the end serve to bolster the Far-Right as the story becomes massive and very toxic in a way that it never would have done if it had been nipped in the bud so many years, and so many victims, earlier.  The censorship creates the very thing it is meant to stop…just as the media’s attempts to silence voices on immigration lead to the rise of the Far-Right across Europe as most other people are intimidated by the ‘liberal’ intolerance of their views and the labelling of them as racists making life for them very difficult.

The BBC has in fact been slipping back into its bad old ways of suppressing or indeed rewriting history in order to change people’s perceptions by providing an alternate truth, alternate facts.  Reports of a Trojan Horse plot by Muslim conservatives to take over and Islamise secular schools was  fully backed up by the evidence and several investigations and yet the BBC ignored or downplayed its existence when the story first broke and suppressed crucial evidence that confirmed that such attempts to Islamise schools were in fact official MCB policy as revealed in its 2007 guidance document to schools, drawn up by the same man at the heart of the Trojan Horse plot, that tried to pressurise schools into Islamising their curriculum, buildings and activities…in order to make schools more Islam friendly so that Muslim pupils could fully follow their beliefs and would feel more integrated…and thus, the implicit threat, would not feel alienated, marginalised and angry which may lead to radicalisation, extremism and terror.

The BBC always reported the plot as if it was something made up by Islamophobes and that the letter which outlined the plot was a hoax.  The BBC’s Phil Mackie insisted that it was just fantasy, created by paranoid, racist Islamophobes…

Despite the plot having been proven the BBC is now working to discredit the story and you may hear several programmes that look at the subject and revise the facts the suit the BBC’s own agenda telling us that the letter was definitely a hoax and that there was no plot.

Recent events of course show why that narrative is not only wrong but dangerous as Islamists force a school to bow to pressure and Islamise itself.

Religious extremists are using schools to narrow children’s horizons and “pervert education”, England’s chief inspector of schools has warned.

Amanda Spielman said some community leaders see schools as vehicles to “indoctrinate impressionable minds” – with extremist ideology in some cases.

Ofsted inspectors are increasingly coming into contact with such extremists, she said.

She is asking head teachers to confront those who foster extremist behaviour.

The BBC naturally sides with those who would surrender to the extremists…‘is it the role of a head teacher to dictate who should and who should not be allowed to wear such an item? Even if they are in charge of uniform policies. By calling on head teachers to exercise a “muscular liberalism” in the face of ultra-conservative forces, she may yet stir up more opposition than she anticipated.’

Yep, let’s not make the extremists angry….do what they want us to do and all will be peaceful….and Kirsty Wark thinks ‘there may be a danger you conflate [islamic] conservatism with extremism’…Muslim of course, as the BBC always conflates conservatism, the blue kind, with extremism.  However, Muslim conservatism is extremism in the context of any Western society…completely at odds with our values and beliefs.

The Trojan Horse Plot is true and the BBC reaction is the same old one of trying to suppress the truth in the vain hope of keeping the peace…..not realising that the extremists will never rest and that every appeasement just emboldens them to keep on demanding more….and of course there may well be a counter-reaction all the more violent as it has been suppressed for so long.

As mentioned above, it does seem that this is the true nature of BBC journalism now…

‘This group of intelligent and generally well-meaning professionals ceased to be reliable observers and became instead an amplifier for the propaganda of one of the most intolerant and aggressive forces on earth.’