Category Archives: BBC bias

The BBC gave Melvyn Bragg his head and allowed him to go free range for two weeks spouting tripe about t’North in a highly personal, highly political one-sided rant.

Why?  Just why did the BBC allow Bragg to proclaim independence for t’North?

Could it just possibly be that the Great Unwashed voted for Brexit and the BBC is doing its utmost to undermine that by cheerleading a move to split the UK up into regions….just as the EU wanted to do?  The BBC is attacking Brexit by the backdoor…..it has always, ironically, backed the various ‘independence’  movements such as the IRA, the Scottish National Socialist Party, the Cornish, and Palestinian terrorists  At the same time they attack UKIP and proclaim it a neo-Nazi, racist, hate movement.  The only nation states they don’t like are the ones that work.   Bragg suggests that those who voted for Brexit were the stupid and ignorant folk, a sort of peasants’ revolt against their betters.

Bragg argues that t’North is a separate country in its own right and should be recognised as such and the UK turned into a federalist confection.  What this does is destroy the idea of ‘Britain’ and of course destroys the power that comes from the union built up over centuries to such good effect.  The Left and the BBC has always sought to break up Britain with the aim of reducing its power and influence in the world which they see as malign and which fits in neatly with their pro-EU fanaticism…divide and rule…split up the UK and make it vulnerable and dependent on the EU, ala Greece, rather than have a proud and independent nation able to make its own decisions and stand on its own two feet.

Bragg’s two weeks of northern griping was two weeks of tripe, spinning a tale of a mythical North that was the centre of the universe but has long been abandoned by the far off politicians in London to rot and tumble into neglected ruin.

We heard that Thatcher was like William the Conqueror and had her own version of the ‘wasting of the north’ as she laid ruin to the the land.  We naturally heard of the heroic miners who were basically ethnically cleansed by Thatcher, the NUM fighting a glorious last stand against the ravages of Thatcher’s decision to harrow t’North and lay waste to it.  Never mind that the NUM ballot was against the strike and Scargill ignored that and led the miners out into a disastrous strike…never mind that the NUM bitterly attacked Labour in the 70’s for its own decimation of the coal industry.

The National Union of Miner’s own website says:
Throughout the 1960s, with a Labour Government in office from 1964, the pit closure programme accelerated; it decimated the industry. During this period, nearly 300 more pits were closed, and the total workforce slumped from over 750,000 in the late 1950s down to 320,000 by 1968. In many parts of Britain, miners now became known as industrial gypsies as pit closures forced them to move from coalfield to coalfield in search of secure jobs.

They were victims of madhouse economics.

Bragg then joined up the dots to make a thoroughly unconvincing case that t’North has been the victim of a Southern inspired plot to reduce it to a penurious wasteland as he linked the miner’s strike, Hillsborough and Orgeave as evidence of political anti-northern connivance.

The last programme was essentially a Labour Party broadcast that pumped out all the old issues…and continued their highly political attempt to have an inquiry into Orgeave.  This is business as normal for the BBC which of course wants to denounce the police for their actions at Orgeave and by extension attack Thatcher.

As I’ve said before...

The reality is that the violence was always initiated by the miners and that Scargill used them as cannon fodder for his own political games not caring one jot about them, their jobs and their families.

Seems that the BBC has conveniently forgotten all that as it pillories the police and romanticises and glorifies the miners.

Bragg seems to forget that those politicians that he alleges ignore t’North don’t just come from London….they’re MPs from all around the country and I’m pretty certain most would be astonished to hear that they have abandoned their constituencies in favour of a London-centric world view…..something which the BBC itself is very, very guilty of….and you can take the Beeboid out of London, to Salford, but you can’t take the metropolitan sneer of superiority out of his mind wherever he is.

This was an utterly bizarre series in which Bragg spouted what in other circumstances the BBC would dismiss as racist pub-bore cant that was mythologising a North that never existed and which completely forgets that the rest of the UK exists and contributed to the ‘Great’ in Great Britain.  How could Bragg forget the Midland industrial powerhouse, or the Cornish tin mines or the Welsh coal industry?  According to Bragg the industrial revolution started in Manchester and stopped just north of Watford.  When he complains that t’North was a forgotten land he seems to forget that many areas of the UK have problems…Cornwall and the East spring immediately to mind…or any coastal area.

But just how true is that image of t’North laid waste?  The BBC in the run up to the election insisted that Manchester was practically an industrial wasteland…and yet that was far, far from the truth, Manchester was thriving as were many cities where industries came to prosper.  Far from being abandoned a lot of effort went into regenerating t’North and attracting industry to it…such as car manufacturers.

Here’s Manchester City Council’s own view of the city’s successful regeneration…and note the original decline began in the 50’s not in 1979…

From ground breaking urban regeneration programmes, to the phenomenal success of the Commonwealth Games, Manchester has been transformed into a regional powerhouse of sustainable, economic growth offering opportunity and a better quality of life for all.

Over the last generation traditional industries have been making way for an economy based around knowledge, fresh ideas, expertise and entrepreneurialism. As the epitome of the post industrial city Manchester has seen some fundamental changes over the last 15 years. It now boasts an increasingly diverse economic base, real investor confidence, one of the highest concentrations of world class higher education activity in Europe along with cultural and leisure facilities that make it the nation’s most important destination for overseas visitors outside London.

This remarkable renaissance of the city has created the firm foundations on which to tackle the long term consequences of the economic and population decline in the city that began in the 1950s.

And finally a word from the BBC’s Evan Davis adopting a tone that is all too foreign to the BBC and indeed Davis himself…Just where does our renewed vigour and economic success come from?…Thatcher…..

If you want one simple fact to remind you of why we were not insane to follow the path we did, just note that our national income grew faster than that of each of Germany, Italy and France in the 1980s, the 1990s and the 2000s. We were clearly doing something right. As fast as we exited some industries, we found new ones that raised national income per head. On average, we got richer, not poorer. And in addition to that, contrary to popular perception, there more jobs in Britain rather than fewer.

Oh, and let’s not forget this…

Finally, the church admits it was wrong on Thatcher: Bishops say ‘they failed to see the moral vision’ of former PM’s benefits reforms

Bishops yesterday admitted that the Church of England was wrong about Margaret Thatcher.

In a paper that amounted to a sweeping U-turn in the Church’s longstanding Left-wing attitude to poverty and the welfare state, they declared that it ‘failed to see the moral vision that informed Margaret Thatcher’s administration’.

Their acknowledgement that the late Tory prime minister was driven by ‘moral purpose’ contrasted strongly with the view taken by the bishops even last year, when before the General Election they were severely critical of her legacy.

Instead of demanding higher benefit spending and criticising the market economy – the default position of most Church leaders for more than three decades – they said that ‘we should support welfare policies which create incentives for work’.

Friday arrives and a brand new Open Thread to see us off into the weekend. Keep detailing the BIAS here!

An eagle eyed B-BBC reader writes…

“Not sure if you caught the BBC News at Ten last night but the lead story was one of the most bizarre I have seen on the Beeb. I’ve watched it back a second time this morning and still can’t get my head around what it is trying to say. There must be an angle in there somewhere, mainly because of the BBC’s inclusion of some pretty shocking content and language in a supposed “news report”. I can’t understand why they would include such language if it was not for a certain reason or agenda.

The puff piece was for drug-dealing gangstas in Chicago that seems to be a quasi-endorsement of gun culture, while at the same time seeming to suggest that it was not the fault of the people or black sub-cultutre but the system.

Amongst the waving around of pistols, handguns and even machine guns, amphetamine bottles and general glorification of criminality, there was an interview with rapper and gang member Bo Deal, which contained a line that was either an error or sets a new precedent for BBC: (from 6m 45sec).

“But a lot of guys need to die in order to make it better…some of these niggers need to get killed and knocked off to get them out of the way and make it a better place cos some of them…[interrupted by siren]….”

The “n word”, on BBC News? Not just that but the BBC just allowed someone to support the killing of “niggers”. I wonder how that fits in with the Beeb’s Black Lives Matter rhetoric?

To quote the other gang member at around 8.55. “This shit don’t end…”

The BBC has been to the fore in seeking to ensure that the Burkini is NOT banned in France, despite the fact the overwhelming majority of French citizens support such a ban. The again, the BBC is very selective about the voice of the people when it says things they don’t like. A few weeks ago we read about a “brawl on a Corsican beach” between “people of North African origin” and some local people that involved harpoons. The way the BBC presented it one was given the impression the “people of North African origin” (Muslim illegal immigrants to you and me) were the victims in the brawl – turns out they were the aggressors. Now the BBC returns to the story with the shock horror new that …

A court on the French island of Corsica has upheld a local ban on the burkini – the full-body swimwear preferred by some Muslim women. The court in Bastia ruled that the ban was legal on public order grounds.

Last month, a beach brawl between families of … coughs.. North African descent and local youths left five people injured.

France’s top administrative court ruled in August that the ban, imposed in a number of towns across the country, violated basic freedoms. However, it also found that the measure was permissible if wearing the burkini was likely to cause a public disturbance.

The BBC is seeking to avoid saying that the violence on the Corsican beach was caused by aggressive Muslim men, hence the ludicrous “Of North African origin” euphemism. It also seeks to try and subvert the will of the VAST majority of French people by implying they are intolerant of minorities by banning the Burkini. It has been successful in helping ensure that the vast majority of people here in the UK support the public use of the burkina – I wonder would people on Brighton beach be quite so keen on the use of that garment were a Jihadist to mow down more than eighty people on the Brighton front?

One of the favourite ploys of the pro-endless immigration brigade, of which the BBC is a paid up member, is to exploit our natural human sympathy for children in peril and then use this to advance their agenda. This was most apparent in the use of images of the drowned Syrian boy, Alan Kurdi, last year, when the gates of Europe were thrown open to millions of muslim opportunists on the back of such exploitative imagery. But the ploy is used time and time again. Today, the BBC reports;

The number of asylum seeking children in the care of English councils has risen 62% in a year. The largest group are boys aged 16 and 17, coming from countries such as Afghanistan or Eritrea. A refugee charity says many children are facing “serious shortages” in legal advice to help them make their case to stay. The Home Office said it had increased funding to cover the costs of care and other support for unaccompanied minors.

Mmm. “Boys” aged just BELOW the 18yr old threshold at which they would be classified as men. How convenient. We are seeing this across Europe as these illegals masquerade as “children” for the benefit of bleeding heart liberals such as those in the BBC when in fact the likelihood is that they are anything but children. Furthermore, EVEN if they ARE the age they claim to be, why on earth would the UK be providing “sanctuary” to Somalis, Sudanese, Afghans, Eritreans who have trekked thousands of miles through several perfectly safe countries to roll up at OUR door?  Do’t you love the image the BBC deploy to try and sell us this story?

On time and awaiting your insight, here is a new Open Thread on which to detail the bias! Over to you…

What to make of Sara Khan, anti-extremist campaigner, Asian and Muslim and a BBC favourite?  How different the BBC treats this anti-Islamist campaigner to how they treat Tommy Robinson.

Khan speaks a lot of sense, she gives a balanced view of the Prevent policy at a time when it is under heavy attack from the ‘Islamists’ who get the unquestioning support of the BBC which naturally is opposed to what it believes is a policy that makes suspects of all Muslims and which it tells us also stigmatises and victimises them….the BBC not conceding that whilst not all Muslims are terrorists most terrorists these days are Muslim….so it is only natural for them to be ‘targeted’.

Khan also supports equality for women and rails against the Left’s support for the Islamists…..

Politicians and wider society must recognise these nuances as opposed to the distorted image offered by Islamist propagandists. That particularly applies to the Left, where some have got into bed with Islamist-sympathising groups that have no interest in Western Muslim integration. These groups push a constant victimhood narrative where Britain is portrayed as an inherently “Islamophobic” society that seeks to destroy Islam and deny Muslims the freedom to practise their faith. This conspiratorial view is being pushed aggressively, and it is vital that public institutions work with Muslim groups trying to counter this toxic narrative. Whether in communities, in universities or on social media, it is vital we counter the arguments of Islamists, otherwise an uncontested space is left open and their message will be taken as truth not just by Muslims but well-intentioned young activists who oppose racism and prejudice.

Hmmm…isn’t that a perfect description of the BBC’s narrative?  The BBC that pushes the line that Muslims are victims of Islamophobia and that anyone who speaks against Islamism is a racist?

Vital we counter the Islamists’ narrative? Instead the BBC peddles their narrative…of Islam under attack, of a Western foreign policy that targets Muslims, that the Islamist cause is about fighting Western oppression and imperialism.

As said many times on this site the BBC is dangerous, it supports the terrorist narrative as well as the one peddled by the non-violent Islamists in Britain who use the media, the law and weak politicians to further their aims of Islamising Britain.

Khan herself, whilst speaking against these violent extremists is still Muslim, she promotes Islam, disingenuously claiming there is such a  thing as ‘British Islam’….there is no such thing…there is only Islam.  She states that ISIS promotes a puritanical and literalist version of Islam, which she calls a false version…trouble is that version is the real Islam, the Koran is the word of God and is an instruction manual, it is designed to be followed ‘literally’….Historian Tom Holland tells us that what ISIS does is pretty much what Muhammed did as he blitzed the Middle East in his own time….bar some of the exotic methods used to kill people.  Khan seems to want to pick and choose what she wants to from the Koran and Hadith…which is a way of practising religion that Islam was ‘revealed’ in order to stop….Khan doesn’t understand Islam…one God, one faith, one mosque, that means something…do not divide your religion into sects, do not rewrite the scriptures to suit yourself…it’s in black and white in the Koran.  Islam was revealed because Christians and Jews corrupted their scriptures and divided themselves up into different sects….God disapproved.  Khan seems to think she knows better than Allah and that she can rewrite the unchangeable Koran.

You can hear her speak on 5Live (1hr 38 mins)….what’s amusing is her attack on those who shout ‘racist’ or ‘Isalmophobe’ when anyone dares to question the ‘Islamist’ narrative….she herself was banned from speaking at some schools by ‘well meaning liberal teachers’ who accepted the Islamist’s claim that Khan herself was an Islamophobe.

We heard that they were ‘understandably afraid of being called racist’.

She then goes on to say that she’s tired of this cultural sensitivity and that we as a society need to stand for the values we want such as freedom of expression, human rights and equality for women and that if we have groups in our society who don’t want those things then we must stand up against them.

Curious then that her only reaction to Tommy Robinson is to shout him down as a racist, a bigot and an Islamophobe in this clip from 2013…

The BBC presenter is aggressively against Robinson and hardly lets him answer his critics…the audience seemingly packed with them.

End of the day Khan still promotes Islam giving us a false hope of a reformed Islam, a slippery line that we’ve long been fed by Tariq Ramadan…who gets a mention in that interview as he is, of course, in the Guardian attacking Prevent.

Ramadan naturally voices his opposition to violent Islamism and yet, as do so many Muslim leaders and speakers, still supports the narrative of Muslims under attack…he suggests that allowing Muslims to express that same narrative will lead to a rejection of violence……and yet it is that very narrative, not countered but in fact reinforced by the BBC, that leads to Jihadism…..

The possibility that anyone can express their dissatisfaction, frustration and disagreement without becoming immediately suspected or stigmatised is, in itself, a powerful protective measure against those who call for violence. Those Muslims who are critical of government policies while rejecting violence are perhaps best placed to influence young people attracted to extremist acts.

Total rubbish…..it still sets Muslims against ‘The West’, Britain and government policy…it’s still telling Muslims to be ‘angry’, that they are victims of the West.

Ramadan is the slipperiest of slippery Islamists pretending to fight Islamism but in reality promoting it and the spread of Islamic influence across Europe and the world. In the end Khan is little different, she fights against the violent extremists and yet still promotes an ideology that is opposed to nearly all that Western liberal, progressive society stands for….she knows full well that it cannot, and never will be ‘reformed’.  She peddles the lie of a ‘British Islam’, an Islam somehow different from the norm and Islam tolerant of other religions, equality for women and open to criticism and freedom of expression.

When she herself is barred from British schools by British liberals how does she think she can possibly persuade conservative Muslims to give up their beliefs if she can’t persuade those British liberals ot back her?

I heard the BBC flogging this AGAIN in their “book at bedtime series”

“The assassination of Margaret Thatcher”

Even after her death, their hatred for Lady Thatcher runs deep.

Sometimes the BBC surprises even me! I was on BBC Radio London this morning talking to Vanessa Feltz about the Keith Vaz story. At one point in the interview, Vanessa postulated that Vaz’s support in Parliament for Poppers was akin to an MP who suffered from a heart defect advocating more funding for cardiac research. WHAT? I feel that the BBC sympathise with the odious Vaz and are determined to make him the victim of the piece. If the allegations are proven, Vaz will be interviewed by the Police. It is obvious that he has no political integrity or personal honour – and the BBC share this. Allegedly taking poppers and using male prostitutes seems to ring a few BBC bells. How odd.

Well then, if the allegations printed and supported by video evidence in the Mirror are true, then Labour MP Keith Vaz has many questions to answer, including some to the Police. The BBC response on Today this morning was predictable. They reduce it to the simple matter of whether he should step down from being Chairman of the Home Affairs Select Committee. One would also hardly know that Vaz was Labour in the way the BBC cover this. He’s in damage limitation mode and so are the Comrades.