Category Archives: BBC bias

Time for another one of these….any bias about?  Perhaps some careless talk?…such as Emma Barnett talking of ‘IRA soldiers’ giving the murderous terrorists a massive amount of undue respect that the BBC never affords to British soldiers whom they hound at every opportunity….Barnett, as she rejected claims that there was a witch-hunt against British troops in NI, never once mentioning Phil Shiner’s fall and the false claims he made that the BBC peddled as fact for years.

Historian Niall Ferguson has already seen the light with Trump and after lambasting him for months now recognises he may just be the man for the job…but there’s more….Niall has had a double-double-take you might say and is now a fan of Brexit after similarly having spent months attacking it.

Let’s get down to brass tacks and the essence of his message…one that the BBC needs to read and understand….

‘This is not about GDP, it is principally about the complete loss of control of the EU’s external border and what that implies for our country’s future.’

Not about GDP.  The BBC ‘fought’ the Brexit campaign, and continues to do so, purely on the basis of the economics…as they saw it…showing it in the worst possible light.  The BBC refused to engage in debate on the actual issues that concerned the Leave voters, immigration and sovereignty, and it still does.  The BBC continues to pump out endless reports of economic doom and gloom ‘because of Brexit’ and limits the debate to that subject.  The idea of course is to portray Brexit as hugely damaging and a failure in the hope that there will be another vote and it will be influenced by all the ‘bad news’ that the BBC has been flooding the airwaves with for so long.

You may also recognise that Ferguson is saying Farage was right when he used a photograph of massed immigrants heading into Europe to illustrate his point about the failure of the EU to control EU external borders and that this would also threaten us in Britain.

It is curious that the BBC don’t report what Ferguson says…he is after all an influential and famous historian that if he’d said Brexit was a disaster would have been headline news and the subject of a Nicky Campbell phone-in.

Also consider that the BBC is desperately trawling around to get Leave voters to say they now regret voting leave and using that to suggest we should have a second vote…why no interest in those who regret voting for Remain?

What does Ferguson say?  The EU is a complete and dangerous failure…..and Cameron’s ‘reforms’ were a fraud [that the BBC loved]…..

With hindsight, he said, David Cameron should have rejected the ‘absolutely risible’ offer from the EU on migration and backed Brexit as well.

Professor Ferguson then listed the EU’s failures over the past decade including the euro, which he said had been a ‘disaster for all the reasons we said it would be in the 1990s’.

‘It has been a disaster for southern Europe and has only worked for Germany and northern Europe,’ he said.

‘European security policy, especially with respect to North Africa and the Middle East, has been a disaster.

‘On the migration issue the European leadership got it disastrously wrong. On the question of radical Islam the European leadership has fundamentally got it wrong. One has to recognise that the European elite’s performance over the last decade entirely justified the revolt of provincial England that was what we saw in Brexit.

LOL

Corbyn’s hi-jacking of the Labour Party in concert with his Marxist chums was one of the political bombshells of the last year…..his vehicle of choice was ‘Momentum’ which the BBC admits played a crucial role in getting Corbyn elected leader…now Momentum is being hi-jacked  by the hardcore Trots.  A fairly big, and amusing, story you’d have thought.  The BBC begs to differ and hides it away on the politics page as a small side-bar report even though the Times had a two page spread and little Owen Jones is going into melt-down trying to save his beloved Leader’s fan base. [oh yes…are the Corbynistas mere ‘populists’ or a genuine political movement that represents the genuine, reasoned and informed views of his voters?]

What else does the BBC not think newsworthy?  Oh yes…remember Brexit, one of the greatest constitutional events of our history apparently, remember the two massive court cases about Article 50? Remember that the House of Parliament held a vote on triggering Article 50 yesterday?  NO?  That’ll be because that vote has all but disappeared from the BBC…not a mention on news bulletins on the radio, and it is relegated to a ‘what the papers say’ item on the UK page and an actual report tucked away on the politics page.   Extraordinary….a vote that was the subject of those two court cases in essence, cases that the BBC followed relentlessly and reported in exacting detail is now of no interest at all it seems.

Maybe, just maybe, the vote did not go the way the BBC wanted it to.  Brexit is drawing nearer and the BBC is having to think up new ways to stop its progress.

Lawyer Phil Shiner has had his come-uppance and lost all credibility for his witch-hunt against British troops….

One allegation concerned his claims at a press conference in February 2008, when he said British troops had killed and tortured Iraqi civilians at the 2004 so-called “Battle of Danny Boy”, in southern Iraq.

The tribunal heard Mr Shiner accepted he acted recklessly in saying Iraqis were taken alive and later murdered after the gun-fight.

The aftermath of the battle became a central point of the Al-Sweady public inquiry.

The five-year investigation, which cost £31m, ruled in 2014 that allegations of murder and torture made against British soldiers by Iraqi detainees were “deliberate lies”.

Mr Shiner denied the claims he made were dishonest.

The BBC unquestioningly reported Shiner’s accusations as fact.  No mention of their own part in all this by the BBC.

Let’s have Lord Hall apologise to all those troops and their families who were put through hell and whom his ‘news’ organisation maligned.  Perhaps he should consider his position.  Perhaps MPs and the government should start asking questions about the role the national broadcaster played in the witch-hunt.

Yesterday the BBC was attacking the MOD for having prosecuted Sergeant Blackman for shooting a seriously injured Taliban…however why did the MOD prosecute?  Because of the enormous pressue put upon them to show they were absolutely perfect and 100% adhering to the Geneva Covention and human rights considerations by the reporting and anti-war narratives from the likes of the BBC,, as above, that put massive, unrealistic and unreasonable constraints upon troops in battlefield conditions.

Remember this?…

Guardian: Our Israeli Organ Harvesting Headline Was Serious Error

Curiously the Guardian seems uninterested in this recent story reported by the BBC, which the BBC itself has ‘vanished’ from the news pages now….

Egypt arrests ‘organ trafficking ring’

Not a sign of it on the Guardian pages.  Bet if it had been Israel instead of Egypt the Guardian, and BBC, would have been running endless stories and exposés.

The Left have been creating a whole new narrative about ‘truth’ suddenly becoming a rare commodity…the results of the US election and Brexit both being the fault of foolish and ill-informed voters who made their decisions based upon lies fed to them by Trump and Boris….therefore both results are illegitimate.

Odd then that when Boris tells the plain truth the Left jump on him, even odder because he speaks the truth about the Left’s lastest and greatest enemy in the Middle East…Saudi Arabia.  Guess they feel Brexit is the greater threat rather than a nation that is one of the most dangerous sources of terror and ideological oppression.

Saudi Arabia is at war with Iran, even the BBC admits Boris is right about that, but the BBC does not admit what is the real threat to the West and its interests…..that Saudi Arabia is engaged in an economic, cultural and ideological war against us.

Saudi essentially declared war on the US when it set out to destroy the US fracking industry by forcing oil prices ever lower, many think there is proof of course that Saudi was behind 9/11, Saudi pumps billions of dollars into funding Islam in the West, funding mosques, Muslim schools and educational establishments and Islamic cultural centres, as well as giving huge amounts to universities to teach about Islam and spread the word.  Saudi money buys our politicians and aristocracy….the Royal Family are very close to Gulf monarchies.

Saudi Arabia spreads Islam, the true Islam, the fundamental Islam that is ‘extreme’ in its purity.  The ideology that the Saudis promote radicalises Muslims and encourages them to ‘defend Islam’ from the West [and the BBC is happy to tell Muslims that the West is at war with Islam]…the result…terrorism and the Islamic State….also backed by Saudi Arabia.

The BBC isn’t really interested in that war of ideology being waged aginst the West [it in fact seems to support it]…it is more concerned with the war in Yemen, using it as a stick to apparently beat Saudi Arabia but only as a proxy for the usual BBC attack on Britain and America whom the BBC blames for the war as we sell arms to Saudi Arabia.

The BBC of course denies that Iran is involved in Yemen, or Bahrain, or in Saudi itself, despite it being well know that it seeks to stir up the Shia populations in those countries, as it does in Iraq.

The BBC has shown its true colours as it has invented a new narrative…that Brexit is intensifying and aggravating these wars….May went to the Middle East to sell arms because Brexit meant she had to make up the loss of revenue [er…what loss of revenue due to Brexit?] by making these morally questionable sales to the Middle East….we have, the BBC assures us, abandoned our morals due to Brexit.

As said the BBC’s real target is not Saudi Arabia but the West and its foreign policy but it is not above peddling sickening anti-Brexit myths and lies as it shamelessly tries to associate Brexit with the Far Right, hate crimes and now war in the Middle East.

Fake News?   The BBC is one of the biggest purveyors of such dodgy delights.

Evan Davis agrees with Oliver Letwin….the government does have a Brexit plan and it’s very clear and simple…

In which case why do BBC presenters and journalists keep insisting in mocking tones that the government has no plan?  The same line that Labour peddles of course.

The plan is simple….to carry out the instruction of the British People and leave the EU…the first issue is to stop the free movement of immigrants…..what naturally follows as a consequence of that is a negotiation on the single market and all that, the outcome of which the government cannot possibly know other than the initial conclusion that to stop free movement means we exit the single market completely….but that is open to negotiation as it may not be in the interest of the EU itself to enforce the letter of the law.  The government’s plan therefore is to get the best deal possible, an amorphous, even abstract possibility…and that is not something that can be predicted and written down in detail.  So why does the BBC give any credence to Labour’s call for that detail?  Such a statement is impossible to give.  Labour clearly wants to define Brexit in its own terms…continued membership of the single market and the customs union….which would actually mean we stay in the EU and continue with freedom of movement…hence Brexit is shelved.  Where is the BBC’s challenge to Labour’s dishonesty and betrayal of the British People?  Labour politicians all too often get away with their glib assurance that they respect the referendum’s outcome and are only seeking a deal that is best for Britain…when that deal is actually one intended to destroy Brexit.

 

“The British people will have the final and decisive say. “

The Minister for Europe, David Lidington, and Minister for Constitutional Reform, John Penrose December 2015

In the referendum debate in June 2015 Phillip Hammond said this…

Few subjects ignite as much passion in the House or indeed in the country as our membership of the European Union. The debate in the run-up to the referendum will be hard fought on both sides of the argument. But whether we favour Britain being in or out, we surely should all be able to agree on the simple principle that the decision about our membership should be taken by the British people, not by Whitehall bureaucrats, certainly not by Brussels Eurocrats; not even by Government Ministers or parliamentarians in this Chamber. The decision must be for the common sense of the British people. That is what we pledged, and that is what we have a mandate to deliver. For too long, the people of Britain have been denied their say. For too long, powers have been handed to Brussels over their heads. For too long, their voice on Europe has not been heard. This Bill puts that right. It delivers the simple in/out referendum that we promised, and I commend it to the House.

Quite clear…he thinks the decision to leave the EU is for the British public….not ministers, bureaucrats and not even Parliament.

Hilary Benn must agree judging by his words…

This Bill will set before the British people a clear and simple question: should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union? It is 11 words, but the answer will have profound consequences for the future of our country, as the people of the United Kingdom make the most important decision on our place in the world for 40 years…..uncertainty about Britain’s place in Europe is not good for the British economy, so we should get on and make this decision so that the British people can have their say, and I hope they will reach a decision to remain in the European Union.

We want a debate and for everybody to participate, and we want the British people to make that judgment.

Benn though points out Labour’s true position…

We support the Bill and its passage through Parliament, but we also support Britain remaining a member of the EU.

So when they now say they respect the outcome of the referendum they don’t really mean it.

Benn makes a point in 2015 that undermines the BBC et al’s current narrative about the voters not knowing what they were voting for…

My view is that the question is perfectly clear and very simple. I do not think that anyone who goes into the polling station on the day, whenever it is, will not understand the consequence of voting either way.

You may have heard the BBC’s expressions of horror about the Mail having the temerity to outline the Supreme Court Judges’ history on the EU…something you might think relevant and of interest to anyone who is following the case.  The BBC thinks this undermines the Judges’ independence and threatens democracy and the rule of law.

Never mind that just about every other paper and publication has done similar examinations of the Judges’ history and possible political leanings…but the BBC only criticises the Mail.

Imagine then my surprise this morning when the BBC itself moved to attack the Judges…for being too white, too male, too old.  Naturally they are incapable of reaching a fair judgement because of their sex, colour and age….their vast legal experience and technical expertise amounts to nothing.  Clearly they only got the job because of the Old Boy network…the one women aside.

Bizarre what the BBC thinks important as to what qualifies you to do a job…not experience or technical expertise and professional qualification…but the colour of your skin or your gender.  The Mail is a rabble-rousing danger to society for examining the Judges’ political leanings but someone who defines them purely by their colour or gender is OK.

David Lidington, May’s stand-in at PMQs, put on quite a performance, less Flashman than Cameron but mastered the job just as well and far more fluent and quietly aggressive than May….he pretty much crushed Labour’s  Emily Thornberry though you’d never know that from the BBC’s post-mortem which gave the win to Thornberry.

Thornberry certainly was technically proficient, she’d done her homework digging up quotes about Brexit that Lidington himself had made but she couldn’t make anything stick because she had no substance to her claims…the quotes were from before the referendum and clearly Lidington’s own views are not the government’s. She based her whole attack on a demand to know the government’s position on the Custom’s Union and whether we would leave it on Brexit…suggesting the nation would grind to a halt if we did.  The BBC told us this was a very important point and we needed to know about it.

What the BBC failed to make clear was that this line of attack shows Labour is clearly not going to support Brexit…as Keir Starmer in the later debate also made clear as he claimed the referendum gave no mandate for a ‘hard Brexit’…when of course that was precisely and absolutely what it did give…a vote for OUT….meaning no single market, no open borders and no political control from Brussels.  Starmer indicates that Labour will try to finesse Brexit out of existence by demanding the single market, the customs union and so on….whilst of course ‘respecting the outcome of the referendum’….lol…lying bastards.

There is no such thing as ‘soft Brexit’….it is a lie…soft Brexit means continuing to allow Brussels to dictate our immigration policy and that is what we voted to stop.

The BBC should stop promoting the idea that there is such a thing as a ‘soft Brexit’ and start challenging those who raise the subject far harder than they do…if they do at all.  Yesterday we had Campbell keeping the ‘soft Brexit’ narrative going, that we can have ‘Brexit’ even though free movement continues….the BBC wants to keep that conversation going, to normalise the idea of a soft Brexit and to present it as the most sensible and only viable option thus hoping to delay a decision, confuse the issues and pressure the government into a compromise.

‘Soft Brexit’ is fake news….much as ‘Populism’ is a creation of the Left used by the BBC to dismiss voters and results it hates.

Speaking of which…Tory Steven Baker during PMQs accused the BBC of manufacturing fake news, inventing stories of backbench unrest, divison and rebellion about the EU.  Wouldn’t be at all surprised.  The BBC of course didn’t report that bit about the BBC generating fake news…they instead made up more fake news and suggested that he was merely aggrieved at the BBC attacking the government.  Emma Barnett laughed and said that was the BBC journalists’ job…to make life difficult for the government.  Yes, of course it is, there was me thinking it had to report news accurately, fairly and impartially…how foolish.