Category Archives: BBC bias

Here you go, a new Open Thread to see us off into the Easter weekend! Detail the rancid bias from the Statist monolith here.

Thanks to Stewgreen for the link to the NUJ’s guidelines on how journalists should report on race.

This piece of advice provoked a thought…..

‘A fairer term to use for someone who has outstayed their visa is “undocumented” or “irregular”.’

Hmmm…but the BBC uses the term to describe illegal immigrants and not people who overstay their visa…who wouldn’t be migrants as such.

And why aren’t Israeli settlers ‘undocumented migrants’ in the BBC’s eyes? What’s the difference between the Jewish settlers flooding into the West Bank and the Mexican settlers flooding into the US? Is it just that they are Jewish? BBC anti-Semitism? Must be.

Oh, and actual ‘illegal immigrants’ should not be called ‘undocumented’ but ‘refused’…

Don’t use terms such as “bogus”, “illegal” or “failed” asylum seeker. If necessary, use “refused” asylum seeker instead.

That’s assuming of course that they have been caught in the first place.

Then there’s this…

‘Use the term “immigrant” with caution, it is still wrongly used to describe people born in Britain. Asylum seeker, refugee or EU migrant worker? Get the terminology right. Asylum seeker is a person who has left their home country as a political refugee and is seeking asylum in another country. A refugee is someone who was an asylum seeker but who has now been granted refugee status.An EU migrant worker is someone who has moved to the UK to work. Their stay in the UK may be temporary or longer term.’

The BBC mixes in economic migrants with refugees and calls them all ‘refugees’…even acknowledging this but deciding, off their own bat, as this is not a UN definition of refugee, that because they face a level of poverty in their own land they are seeking ‘asylum’ from that poverty…thus they are really asylum seekers despite being purely economic migrants….so let’s let the whole world in because the BBC journalists make it up as they go along to suit themselves and their own liberal elitist agenda.

‘Get the terminology right‘?  LOL

It is worth noting that a report from FCO Services highlighted that no DDOS attack was ongoing at the
 time of the incident.

Lessons learned

The government tells us that the voter registration process for the Brexit referendum was not ‘hacked’ and that the crash of the registration site was due to unprecedented demand…so why is the BBC giving a claim that the system was hacked such high credibility and prominence when even in the MP’s report it is a very minor claim coming after a long explanation of why the system actually crashed?…Why is this the claim that the BBC zeros in on?….

Brexit vote site may have been hacked, MPs say in report

A voter registration site that crashed in the run-up to last year’s EU referendum could have been targeted by a foreign cyber attack, MPs say.

The “register to vote” site crashed on 7 June last year just before the deadline for people to sign up to vote.

The UK government and electoral administrators blamed a surge in demand after a TV debate.

But MPs on the parliamentary Public Administration Committee say a foreign cyber attack could not be ruled out.

The MP’s evidence for that?…

Although the Committee has no direct evidence, it considers that it is important to be aware of the potential for foreign interference in elections or referendums. The report on lessons learned from the website crash described it as “technical in nature, gaps in technical ownership and risk management contributed to the problem, and prevented it from being mitigated in advance”.  However the crash had indications of being a DDOS (distributed denial of service) ‘attack’.

No, no it didn’t…there were no indications of a DDOS attack and the MPs provide absolutely none to back up that claim….a claim that the government itself denies…..

It is worth noting that a report from FCO Services highlighted that no DDOS attack was ongoing at the  time of the incident.

The BBC itself acknowledges that and yet puts the claim up in the headline…

“There is no evidence to suggest malign intervention. We conducted a full review into the outage and have applied the lessons learned. We will ensure these are applied for all future polls and online services.”

Cybersecurity experts are sceptical.

“I think there’s lots of conjecture,” says Ollie Whitehouse at NCC Group. “It appears to be one committee’s opinion but with no supporting evidence.“

The MP’s only ‘evidence’ is pure speculation…

‘…it’s not unreasonable, given there’s quite a lot of this going on in other countries, that this could have happened in this case.”

Despite all that being nonsense the BBC still gives credence to the idea in its summing up…

The committee called on the government to set up a new Cyber Security Centre to monitor and contain potential attacks on UK elections and referendums – particularly foreign attempts to influence public opinion and disrupt the democratic process.

“The US and UK understanding of ‘cyber’ is predominantly technical and computer-network based,” said the report.

“For example, Russia and China use a cognitive approach based on understanding of mass psychology and of how to exploit individuals.

“The implications of this different understanding of cyber-attack, as purely technical or as reaching beyond the digital to influence public opinion, for the interference in elections and referendums are clear,” the report added.

Legend will slowly become ‘fact’ as the BBC knows full well and this no doubt will be the subject of many a BBC programme with the presenters pushing the idea, keep spreading doubt and confusion, that this was ‘possibly’ a cyber attack whatever the evidence may show in an attempt to undermine the legitimacy of Brexit….just as the New European is doing…

Hacked off: Did Russia or China try to influence Brexit vote?

A voter registration website that crashed in the run-up to the Brexit vote may have been brought down by foreign hackers.

The Commons Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee (PACAC) said it was deeply concerned about the allegations of foreign interference in last year’s EU referendum vote.

While the committee did not identify who may have been responsible, it noted that both Russia and China use an approach to cyber attacks based on an understanding of mass psychology and of how to exploit individuals.

The warning comes amid repeated claims that Russia has sought to interfere in foreign elections, including last year’s US presidential election.

The official voter registration website on crashed June 7 last year just hours before the deadline for people to sign up to vote in the referendum.

The BBC et al knows well the time honoured practice of telling a big lie often and loudly until it becomes fact.

The BBC is busy doing what it does best…undermining democracy…the enemy of the people?  I’d say so.

The truth is that immigration was not inevitable on the scale on which it took place, and that its effects have ranged from the pleasing – more ethnic food – to the positive – more cultural diversity – to the truly terrible – race riots, social tension, terrorist attacks.

 

Even the Guardian, in 2009, admitted immigration is a risky and unnecessary experiment…

Immigration on the scale that Europe has experienced constitutes a risky experiment to which we need not have submitted ourselves, and of which the final result is not yet clear….. we frequently talk about it in stupid and dishonest ways.

In a week in which the European election results have shown the potency of the anti-immigrant vote in many countries, including Britain, Christopher Caldwell’s contention that immigration has not only changed Europe but revolutionised it has a topical plausibility. Immigration, he says, and above all Muslim immigration, has planted in the heart of a weak and confused civilisation communities, rapidly growing in number, that have already changed Europe to suit their needs and beliefs. And the chances are, he insists, that in the future we will bend to their will rather than that they will bend to ours.

Rightwing rubbish? Caldwell cannot be so easily dismissed.

Where he is right is in underlining the fact that immigration was encouraged by elites who took a ludicrously short-sighted view of its costs and consequences. The idea was to prop up industries already in decline and, later, to staff industries, such as health and tourism, the full cost of which our societies refused (and continue to refuse) to pay. The manning of underpaid and menial positions could be maintained only by a constant influx of new migrants, since people in established migrant communities either got better jobs or chose, like many in the native white population, to depend on the welfare state and to have no jobs at all. More recently, immigration has been defended as a way of making up for falling birth rates when, as Caldwell points out, it would have to be multiplied an unfeasibly large number of times to have that effect.

This inherently unstable and dysfunctional system was set in motion, in other words, for no good reason. Those who started it off did not foresee how big it would become, nor the mechanisms of family reunion and arranged marriages that would drive it on even when restrictions were belatedly imposed. Most of them did not imagine, says Caldwell, that the newcomers would “retain the habits and cultures of southern villages, clans, marketplaces, and mosques”.

He is right to argue that immigration on the scale that Europe has experienced constitutes a risky experiment to which we need not have submitted ourselves, and of which the final result is not yet clear. He is right that we frequently talk about it in stupid and dishonest ways.

Guido reported that that looney, dishonest, hate mongering ‘New European’ has been trying to stir up yet more hate and anger with its latest edition which doubles as toilet paper…though the old joke that more crap comes off it might well apply here…

Remain-cheerleading newspaper The New European has accidentally released an internal marketing note detailing its plan to “stir up controversy” and inflame community tensions across Britain’s Brexit heartlands.

The sneering front page was emailed out this afternoon accompanied by a note revealing The New European‘s ploy to sow division in order to boost sales:

“The cover story – Skegness: The seaside town that Brexit could close down; this is unlikely to go down well, locally, and there is an opportunity to stir up some controversy locally – worth sending the cover and the story to local television and newspapers (as I don’t suppose we sell many copies there).”

The BBC’s report on this is somewhat less than honest, missing out as it does the fact that the Neo European intended to ‘stir up controversy’ in an area where so many voted for Brexit…the BBC skirts the issue not acknowledging that this was done deliberately with the intention to create controversy and anger…and then adds a quote from the Neo European that Leave voters are stupid…so no change there then from the Remainders…

The magazine appeared to be aware that the cover would prompt controversy, as it acknowledged in an email sent out with a copy of the front page ahead of publication.

The email suggested the cover and article were “unlikely to go down well”.

The editor, Matt Kelly, has responded to some of the criticism on social media, tweeting: “Yet again, so many leavers demonstrating inability to understand satire.”

The BBC also gives the impression that it is only the ‘stupid’ Leave voters who will be upset..and yet Remain voters in the area are just as annoyed..

As Ingo Kramer, head of the Confederation of German Employers’ Associations, put it, “We need immigration for our labor market and to allow our social system to function.” Large numbers of these immigrants have come from Muslim countries, bringing with them a religion and social mores radically different from Europe’s. Yet European countries have done a poor job of demanding assimilation of immigrants into the cultures of their new homes.

The result has been large concentrations of immigrants segregated in neighborhoods like the banlieues of Paris or the satellite “dish-cities” of Amsterdam. Shut out from labor markets, plied with generous social welfare payments, and allowed to cultivate beliefs and cultural practices inimical to liberal democracy, many of these immigrants despise their new homes and find the religious commitment and certainty of radical Islam an attractive alternative. And like the two French-Algerian brothers who attacked the offices of the satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo, some turn to terrorism.

Such violence, along with cultural practices like honor killings, forced marriages, and polygamy, remind Europeans of just how alien many immigrants are. They are stoking a political backlash against Muslims, the political consequences of which will be disruptive, if not dangerous. Populist parties, for example, opposed to unfettered immigration, angry at sluggish economies, and chafing against E.U. regulatory encroachments on national sovereignty, are growing across Europe. And there are signs that there is a constituency for these parties.

The BBC really does HATE Britain as this tweet neatly demonstrates.

Here you go – middle of the week and time for a new one of these. Please detail the many egregious instances of BBC bias here.

Alternate facts….how, with a change of perspective, to turn a drama into a crisis….

BBC sports reporter, Jacqui Oatley, is being investigated after allegedly assaulting a BBC cameraman whilst reporting on a woman’s football match.  The incident is being looked into by the BBC as well as the Football Association to whom Oatley has provided her own observations about the alleged attack.

Oatley has expressed her regret at the incident which occurred after the England women’s team scored a goal at the Rio Olympics and she says she became overwhelmed by emotion but that, unknown to her, the camera was still rolling and filming her as she celebrated in an excited and passionate manner.  Oatley objected strongly to this, she went absolutely ‘nuts’ and proceeded to bearhug the cameraman in an attempt to stop him filming and, when that failed, she punched him hard in the ribs shouting ‘Take that ya ginger bastard’ and as he lay defenceless in agony on the ground is reported to have jumped ‘up and down, up and down’ upon his helpless body.

David Moyes, Sunderland manager at the time, and a BBC pundit in the same studio as Oatley, is believed to be able to confirm that Oatley did indeed batter the cameraman and scream abuse at him but cannot say whether that was in any way sexist in nature as there was no reference to gender in the exchange.

A spokesperson for the BBC said: “This incident took place last year and we’re looking into what actions were taken at the time.”

On the day of PC Keith Palmer’s funeral, the BBC decides to play a clip about ‘Plebgate’ and Andrew Mitchell ….is this a deliberately sly attempt to try and defame and malign Mitchell, a not so subtle comparison of the death of a brave police officer who died defending politicians with the politician who allegedly insulted a police officer at Downing Street?

The BBC stooping so low?  Of course they would.

Look at this video of the EDL rally and you can see that it completely contradicsts the heroic Islamic girl’s tale…that she was coming to the rescue of a woman in a hijab, that she was under attack and that there was no minute of silence…..

At around 29:20-29:40 the speaker on stage announces the beginning of the minute’s silence…. “We’re going to start the minute’s silence. Please bow your heads… [inaudible] in remembrance of the five people that died in Stockholm… [inaudible] very, very seriously whose lives have been brought to an end.”

So one lie out of the way.

Next the mysterious girl in the hijab…there is one in the video but nowhere near any threat, she is in no danger or under any kind of attack or abuse.

Ms Khan, from Birmingham, said she stepped forward when another woman shouted “Islamophobe” at EDL members in Centenary Square on Saturday.

She said the woman was “quite intimidated” and was being told she was “not British” and being questioned about Islam.

Ms Khan said despite her smile in the photograph “it wasn’t a pleasant interaction”.

“His aggression can be seen by the picture,” she said

You can see the Hijab’d girl at 30 mins (left of screen) not surrounded by EDL ‘thugs’ but by her own side…everything is peaceful until they start shouting about ‘Fascist scum’…you can see our heroine standing in the background not interacting at all until the shouts start and she joins in…and at 31:15 heads off into the crowd to have her little chat….

And so what of our heroine herself…is she being viciously abused and insulted?  Doesn’t look like it from the video (33 mins 30 secs)…the reason she is smiling is because she is having a nice chat with the EDL fellows who are not in any way trying to intimidate her…they didn’t ‘mob’ her…she walked in amongst them.  You can see she is led away by police soon after.

So when the BBC continues with its lies you know they are lies….

EDL viral photo woman denies minute’s silence interruption

A woman pictured smiling at the leader of the English Defence League (EDL) has denied an allegation she interrupted a minute’s silence for terror victims.

The image of Saffiyah Khan’s confrontation with Ian Crossland, in Birmingham, went viral.

EDL supporters claimed on social media Ms Khan was in a group that interrupted a tribute for Stockholm attack victims.

She said it was “an attempt at a smear because the story is in my favour”, adding she was defending another woman.

‘Wasn’t pleasant’Ms Khan told the Victoria Derbyshire programme: “It’d like to make it very clear that people who know me…. would tell you and vouch for me that a minute’s silence by either side – the EDL or UAF (Unite Against Fascism) – I would happily respect.

“But the fact of the matter is – and the video shows it – there wasn’t a minute’s silence while I was there.”

Trouble is the video does show the counter protestors (Khan was herself included) shouting ‘Nazi scum off our streets’ during the minute silence, does not show our heroine defending the woman in the hijab and does not show our heroine being threatened in any way.