The thing about Jeremy Bowen is his dogged determination to ensure that the Jews are always to blame for the Palestinians killing them. Here Jeremy asks the loaded question
He could, of course, ask the better question “Did Arafat’s survival kill the best chance of peace” but then again that might be a tad risky to the BBC narrative which, is redux form, is always the same -“Blame the Jews”
May I commend this excellent insight into BBC bias and in particular how it bigs up the loathsome man-hating Labour MP Jess Phillips? This is on the thoroughly recommended HE Equality blog.
“At HEqual we’ve followed the story of Jess Phillips’ opposition to International Men’s Day very closely and a number of her most notorious tweets are actually replies to us. For those who dont’ know about this story, Jess Phillips MP laughed at he idea of discussing men’s issues in Parliament and insisted there shoudl be no debates on men’s issues until 50% of women were MPs! As most people know by now, the BBC and much of the rest of the media have been telling countless lies about this story and turning reality on its head. We’ve complained about the blatantly biased BBC coverage on Newsnight, the following article covers the various biases they’re shown and also highlights much more interesting and competently unreported realities about the misconduct of Jess Philips and her sexism against men.”
A great read, ensure you read it in full.
This is a really interesting insight into the warped world of BBC bias..
“Watching BBC3’s Britain’s Biggest Sexists? tonight it’s clear this tax-payer funded propaganda machine has hatred written into its DNA. There is one thing it hates above all others: The white, British male. And if said WBM votes UKIP (or Tory) then they really don’t deserve to call planet earth their home, right BBC?
That Britain’s Biggest Sexists? was always going to be crude, biased and disingenuous was abundantly clear to anyone with even the faintest shred of intelligence. Is Britain Racist? asked the same channel a few weeks ago. And yep you guessed it, the good old WBM was once again exposed as a species that ranks in the hierarchy of evolution as somewhere between a cockroach and plankton.”
All so very predictable.’
Read the rest of it.
And then, try this, another insightful contribution…
“Tonight BBC3 broadcast Britain’s Biggest Sexists?, presented by Ms Green. Predictably, she turns out to be a whiny, sneering, narcissistic, ignorant, misandrous, sexist bigot. Other than that, I have no opinions on her. Having those qualities is probably required to be a journalist with the Guardian, to be fair. Without any apparent irony, her programme includes footage of three of Britain’s most extreme and vile sexists – Laura Bates, Jess Phillips MP, and Stella Creasy MP.
I recommend you watch the hour-long programme, if only for some unintended laugh-out-loud moments. There’s a BBC-approved token unfunny ‘comedian’ mangina of whom I’ve never heard, despite being a comedy buff. The piece will remain available on iPlayer – here– for the next 29 days. We’d add it to the lengthy list of BBC anti-male pieces on our YouTube channel, but the last time we tried to post a whole BBC programme on the channel, it was rejected by YouTube. A link to a small number of the countless BBC anti-male TV and radio programmes is here.”
Middle of the week and time for a new one of these. Off you go, detail the hateful bias.
Ex-transport minister, Labour MP Tom Harris, threatens to quit party as Corbynistas say they will consult the BBC on which policies to adopt on Syria….
Harris says …
In a Facebook post, Mr Harris said: “Shadow Minister Catherine West says she’ll consult the BBC in the event of a vote on military action in Syria. Jesus. Where to start?
“So anyway, after 60 per cent votes for sure fire election losers, IRA-supporting Shadow Chancellors and Scottish Labour unnecessarily splitting the party on issues over which it has no responsibility, we have a Shadow Minister telling the BBC– a madcap coalition of trots, Islamists and anti-west fury chimps – that Labour will consult them on how it will vote on Syria.”
I could believe it.
New week, new Open Thread. Detail the bias here please.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JvhJsbFwbFc
The Sun is now free to view which is why we can bring you this…
‘Cocaine on sale at BBC’
SENSATIONAL claims that a drug dealer is delivering to BBC staff at their desks have been made by Beeb veteran Alan Dedicoat.
On a tape, passed to The Sun, he is heard telling a man that the peddler regularly sells ecstasy and cocaine.
Dedicoat, 60 — the announcer on Strictly Come Dancing — is also recorded claiming that certain members of BBC security staff were “in on it”.
He says: “The police can do nothing about the fact that he’s delivering desk to desk.”
Asked about drugs, he adds: “Well, they are recreational items of interest, I think you’ll find, that’s the way we categorise them.”
Dedicoat is heard claiming the dealer would visit the unspecified offices “monthly,” and says: “It’s everywhere, isn’t it?”
When quizzed on how many of the staff would buy from the seller, Dedicoat responds: “Erm, at least 50 per cent.”
Asked if the drugs included cocaine and party drugs, he replies: “Yes, Es for the lower grades, then whoever can afford it — goes up. It’s the business we’re in . . . ”
‘He just goes from desk to desk’ – the transcript of Dedicoat tape
SOURCE: Tell me again, this guy in the BBC, the guy who can get stuff for you, he goes in the offices? Does he work for the BBC?
AD: No, he doesn’t no.
Source: So how does he get in? Is there no security?
AD: There is yeah, but they’re sort of in on it anyway, and he goes around us…because the police can do nothing about the fact that he’s delivering desk to desk.
Source: Even though he’s selling drugs?
AD: Well they are recreational items of interest, I think you’ll find, that’s the way we categorise them.
“There’s nothing… It’s everywhere isn’t it?
Source: Of course it is, I’ve got no qualms with it, but I just wanted to kind of… so… how often would he come in?
AD: Monthly
Source: And out of all the employees at the BBC, how would he… how many of them would buy from him
AD: Erm, At least 50 per cent, he just goes from desk to desk.
Source: Coke? Party drugs, all sorts?
AD:Yes, E’s for the lower grades, then whoever can afford it, goes up. It’s the business we’re in…
Source: And it’s rife in the BBC?
AD: You say rife like it’s horrible and wrong. He only comes in because it stops him being intercepted by the police.”
Can’t find any BBC mention of Gerald Kaufman’s latest anti-Semitic blood libel….
Curiously whilst the BBC was quick to air this video…..
…..It seems reluctant however to air another example of a black person being ‘islamophobic’…..
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QLSWf7mV28o
But then again the BBC didn’t actually ‘report’ the first video, they chose instead to look at other people’s reactions to the fact that the ‘islamophobe’ was black.
What’s missing from the videos is what the ‘victim’ did or said to provoke the ‘racist’ rants, if anything……perhaps it was some anti-black racism.
Go back to Jamaica……
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zpCQwqjbryc
The BBC’s reaction to complaints seems to be to blame the person complaining rather than admit fault in its reporting….here’s Kevin Connolly’s weasel words (ht Craig at Is the BBC biased?)…
Roger Bolton: Kevin Connolly has been a BBC Middle East correspondent for five years. I asked Kevin if the job of reporting the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is getting even more difficult.
Kevin Connolly: I don’t think so. The pressure comes and goes according to the pressure of the newes. The higher the profile the story has in our news bulletins the more we will hear from people who have very strong views on the conflict themselves about how our coverage measures up against their own feelings.
So the complaints aren’t based upon facts or reason but strong views and feelings so can be dismissed…..however that doesn’t apply to Connolly and his own colleagues where ‘feelings’ and local narratives are the key ingredient in any report it seems…
You know, before I write something for From Our Own Correspondent I will circulate it among my colleagues. I’ve got colleagues who are Israeli Jews. I’ve got colleagues who are Palestinians from Gaza. We have colleagues who live in Bethlehem and in Ramallah and in Jerusalem. So we take as collegial approach as we can because, you know, that brings in feelings that they are coming across in their own communities and the stories that they are hearing reported by their own local media.
He goes on….
We absolutely accept that, you know, we are accountable to the British public and that they are entitled to express what are often very, very strong opinions and a very strong sense of disappointment where they feel that our narrative is not close enough to the narrative of one side or the other.
Ah yes, our narrative, their narrative…..what about the facts, what about not reporting a narrative but what really happened?
Interesting to note that Bolton raises a criticism of BBC reporting but it is one that says the BBC is pro-Israeli.
BBC Watch also investigates the same Connolly piece and asks about the lack of context….
BBC explains why it can’t always report history accurately
There are lots of newsworthy events happening the world over that deserve just as much time spent on them as that dedicated to the Middle East. We’ve to make difficult decisions based on the evidence and independent verification our news teams can gather in order to report on the news we do. This does lead to subjective decisions being taken on what news we report on and as is often the case the lack of reporting on any issue lays the BBC open to criticism from interested groups/supporters who accuse the BBC of deliberately failing to tell the whole story. This is never our intention.
We’re subject to ensuring our news coverage is of national interest to our domestic audience and there isn’t the time or resources available to cover every current or historical aspect of a conflict that some sections of our audience would like.
As a public service broadcaster and ingrained in our Royal Charter all journalists and news teams have a firm commitment to impartiality and we cannot be seen to be taking the word of interested groups and we always aim to verify all stories we receive before we give airtime to them. The situation in Israel and the Palestinian territories is fraught with difficulties, two sides with opposing views, each seeking to undermine the other. It is a difficult path our journalists take, they’ve to bury their emotions as much as possible to remain impartial when reporting on the attacks that take place in Israel and the Palestinian territories, and any other conflict. They come under intense pressure to report on what one side is saying but they’ve to keep a clear head and remain committed to reporting events as they happen to avoid emotional language.
I can tell you feel very strongly that the BBC has failed to properly convey the impossible situation that Israelis are in. Our only goal is to report truthfully and honestly the situation faced by both Israelis and Palestinians without bias. “
As for lack of time for ‘context’, the BBC always finds time to claim Israeli ‘settlements’ are illegal under internationasl law and to always add on the casualties from the last conflict in Gaza to most of its reports. The BBC always likes to play the numbers game…more Palestinians have died, the Israelis have better weapons and bunkers for their kids, so therefore the Palestinians are the victims here….funny how the BBC always finds time and space for such ‘context’.
Yolande Knell displays total ignorance or cynical manipulation of the conflict…..
Knell closed this report by telling BBC audiences that the story of the current wave of terrorism in Hebron is all about ‘narratives’.
“Basically on the ground here you get two starkly contrasting narratives. Speaking to the Israelis over there, they see all of this as hateful, senseless violence. But Palestinians here say that their anger stems from the political situation and their feelings of despair. This is really a nationalistic struggle but increasingly, it’s also taking on a religious dimension.”
So a decades long conflict based upon Muslim hatred of Jews is only now ‘taking on a religious dimension’? Curious how the BBC finds time for a bit of context there….context that just happens to be painting the Palestinians as the victims, I’m sure that’s completely unintended by Knell.
Why do Muslims not object to the creation of Jordan from ‘Palestinian’ land? Because Jordan is a Muslim country. If it wasn’t you can be sure it would be under attack from ‘interested parties’ as Israel has been for 70 years.
The Palestinian’s are in the position they are in now because their leadership and the Muslim countries around them have set a course that seeks the destruction of Israel and of continuous conflict until that is achieved. Nowt to do with the Israelis. Shame Knell & Co can’t find time for that little fact.
Contrast the BBC’s entirely different take on ‘illegal’ Israeli settlers to the one they take on Muslim settlers in Burma where they have been fighting a ‘Jihad’ to annex and establish a Muslim state…the BBC blatantly supports the Muslim insurgents and denounces the native, Buddhist, counter reaction…the BBC goes so far as to tell us that Buddhism is a religion of violence….how different to their narrative on Islam, that well known religion of peace, and Muslim terrorism and extremism.
It will be a cold day in Hell before the BBC’S climate propagandists bring you any story that casts the slightest doubt on their fairy tales……so here’s a couple that must send a chill down the backs of Harrabin’s cabal of climate hacks, his ‘hacktivists’…
NASA study: Mass gains of Antarctic Ice Sheet greater than losses
Ice increasing and sea levels not so much…..
The research challenges the conclusions of other studies, including the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s (IPCC) 2013 report, which says that Antarctica is overall losing land ice.
This small thickening, sustained over thousands of years and spread over the vast expanse of these sectors of Antarctica, corresponds to a very large gain of ice – enough to outweigh the losses from fast-flowing glaciers in other parts of the continent and reduce global sea level rise.
Or how about doubts about the importance of CO2?…From WUWT…
Greenpeace founder delivers powerful annual lecture, praises carbon dioxide – full text
The contention that human emissions are now the dominant influence on climate is simply a hypothesis, rather than a universally accepted scientific theory. It is therefore correct, indeed verging on compulsory in the scientific tradition, to be skeptical of those who express certainty that “the science is settled” and “the debate is over”.
But there is certainty beyond any doubt that CO2 is the building block for all life on Earth and that without its presence in the global atmosphere at a sufficient concentration this would be a dead planet. Yet today our children and our publics are taught that CO2 is a toxic pollutant that will destroy life and bring civilization to its knees. Tonight I hope to turn this dangerous human-caused propaganda on its head. Tonight I will demonstrate that human emissions of CO2 have already saved life on our planet from a very untimely end. That in the absence of our emitting some of the carbon back into the atmosphere from whence it came in the first place, most or perhaps all life on Earth would begin to die less than two million years from today.
Or this on predicting future climate….
Over on Vox.com a few days ago, David Roberts wrote an essay about climate modeling uncertainty loops. In his Vox essay, Roberts noted that climate modeling didn’t really have any skill out to the year 2100::
Basically, it’s difficult to predict anything, especially regarding sprawling systems like the global economy and atmosphere, because everything depends on everything else. There’s no fixed point of reference.
Grappling with this kind of uncertainty turns out to be absolutely core to climate policymaking. Climate nerds have attempted to create models that include, at least in rudimentary form, all of these interacting economic and atmospheric systems.
Think about how insane it is to try to predict what’s going to happen in 2100.
Or this…
Russia’s official view appears to have changed little since 2003, when Putin told an international climate conference that warmer temperatures would mean Russians “spend less on fur coats” while “agricultural specialists say our grain production will increase, and thank God for that”.
The president believes that “there is no global warming, that this is a fraud to restrain the industrial development of several countries including Russia,” says Stanislav Belkovsky, a political analyst and critic of Putin. “That is why this subject is not topical for the majority of the Russian mass media and society in general.”
Can’t say he is entirely wrong…climate change is more about politics than climate, especially the politics of ‘redistribution of riches from the industrial countries to the no hopers.
