The 8.10am item on BBC Radi 4 Today is a wonderful example of the BBC doing everything possible to defend the previous Labour government’s many follies – in this case the poorly negotiated PFI schemes that now cause so much misery in the NHS. Humphrys was on top form and before we even got to the interview with Andrew Lansley, there was a set up interview with  John Appelby of the Kinh’s Fund who insisted that in the “greater scheme” of things, the “few” billions added by PFI “investment” were nothing to worry about. Cue Lansley and an onslaught from Humphrys which demonstrated both a woeful lack of economics (unsurprising coming from a denizen of State largesse) and a real determination to try and defend Brown and Balls. It would be touching were it not so blatantly biased. Oddly enough, although I have waited for almost 4 hours there is STILL no link to this part of their programme, the inefficiency is staggering.

Following on from this, a Biased BBC reader notes;

“The BBC are going big on the disastrous PFI contracts which will cost us Billions extra. I looked at the comments on the story but was surprised at the comment which was the ‘Editors Pick’. 

9. Tony
“I have huge admiration for our health service, to my mind one of the best in the world. We can argue and complain about the past funding issues for ever more. I as a tax payer would love to pay a little more tax to keep it out of private hands but whilst it remains a political issue regardless of political colour, nothing will change. Lets all pay a bit more for something we all rely on.”

This was in vast contrast with the main body of comments.


“O what a tangled web we weave when first we practice to deceive” – Sir Walter Scott’s words (Good inspiration for a blog btw!) come to mind again reading McDoom’s latest evasions over the shabby and degenerate deal to off-load Megrahi for Libyan Oil. Have you read this BBC treatment of Brown’s desperate efforts to get his DNA off the Libyan appeasement? I did enjoy the little side quote from the HYS section, highlighted to get our attention. “It’s a sad state of affairs when on the one occasion a politician does a decent thing, he is forced to prove that he has no ulterior motive.” Yes, very sad, though not quite as sad as losing family at 30,000 ft when a plane explodes.

The BBC is trying to be sympathetic to McDoom and the gang by placing all the responsibility on that “Scottish Government” and it’s world-famous “Scottish justice” which Nelson Mandela himself has endorsed. Brown just keeps digging himself into a deeper hole on this one and try as it might the BBC needs to realise that Brown and Salmond come out of this looking exactly what they are – two faced double dealing shysters.


Just watched the BBC evening news. Macavity has been found almost a week after it became apparent that the Scottish administration was preparing to release the convicted mass murderer Megrahi. And the BBC reports he is “repulsed” and “angry” at the scenes of celebration in Libya as they got their boy back. In a display of testosterone-induced anger that would have done Caster Semenya proud – Brown showed his true colours, right? Wrong.

On the substantive issue as to whether he approved of this decision, he remains mute. The BBC plays along with this nonsense – refusing to explore WHY the British Prime Minister refuses to accept responsibility for the UK releasing this killer. Around the world, people wonder why the UK Government dares not express an opinion on what happens in the UK. It’s a tricky business for the BBC. Obviously the ill-considered and reckless devolution experiment carried out by Blair must not be criticised, nor must the moral degeneracy of the Scottish administration. Instead attention is switched to what happened in Tripoli and Brown feigns rage when in fact all we see is impotency.

Desperate Times, Desperate Measures

Don’t get me wrong. I think we can all feel a little sorry for Gordon Brown these days – at least until we look at our pensions, or our children’s futures. The BBC were really doing us all a kindness when they kept his poor rictus grin off the screens as Nigel Farage and Dan Hannan tore into him the other day. It was painful to see him.

But when Gordon’s advisers study the polls and attempt to get some more positive media coverage for him, there’s no need for the republicans in the BBC (i.e. 97% of the staff) to go quite so far overboard. Is the fact that the Great Leader is attempting to browbeat HRH over the tragic Royal discrimination against Catholics really worthy of the main headline on all BBC channels and the website this morning ?

It’s certainly not a subject that exercises Catholics, and I don’t think that’s what the recent trouble in Northern Ireland’s about either. The only people who are really bothered by it are the usual left wing suspects (who generally can’t stand Catholics unless they’re armed, anti-British and homicidal) and Lib Dem MP Evan Harris.

Why the BBC is acting as a megaphone for Gordon’s “diversionary exercise” I simply can’t understand – any more than I can understand why Robert Peston does the same for him on the economics front.

(of course the problem with the Act of Successsion is that Britain is (formally) not a secular democracy, but an explicitly religious state, with the head of state also head of the state church. Once discrimination against Catholics is removed, the basis of the UK constitution must also change. And why stop at Catholics ? Discrimination is discrimination, surely ? Shouldn’t Prince William be able to marry someone like Chah Oh-Niyol Kai Whitewind ?)


. Did anyone else hear the simpering publicity that Gordon Brown’s visit to the USA is being afforded by Al-Beeb? I was amused to hear the BBC parrot that Brown will invoke “memories of JFK” when he stands beside Edward Kennedy today and urges the US to embrace the global world. A few points here; 1/ Given the size of Teddy Kennedy, I’m surprised that there is the space to stand beside him! and 2/ How patronising is Brown’s “advice” to the current Presidency and those MILLIONS who voted for George Bush? The BBC is pulling out all the stops to pretend that Brown is making any impact in the States when it is obvious that it is the visit by the Pope (an elected leader, unlike Brown or Bush, natch) which is creating the real headlines.


I’m not a fan of the Conservative Party here in the UK because I don’t think they act as conservatives under the leadership of Mr Cameron. However, I can understand the huge problem Cameron has to overcome when faced with the relentless pro-leftist agenda spewed out by the State Broadcaster and so I suppose it inevitable that he triangulates ever leftwards if only to escape the savage mercies of the BBC guardianistas. You see I don’t think the BBC will EVER bring itself to actually like the Conservatives and instead when push comes to shove, it will always cheer-lead for the Left. This is evident in a trio of stories leading BBC news this morning.

First up comes the news that despite the (now admitted) influx of 800,000 migrants from eastern Europe, (I thought Labour told us it was going to 14,000?) there is NO evidence that this has led to an increase in crime. Phew – what a relief for nice Mr Brown and his ten year long support for the multiculti nation without borders project. Yes, there has been the odd bit of bother here and there but let us be clear; overall crime has NOT risen despite this massive increase of eastern Europeans – those Romanians and Bulgarians are a law-abiding lot apparently – from the moment they hit these shores. The BBC runs this as if it were definitive. It’s not. The “investigation” is purely based on anecdotal reports from “detectives and community officers” and since the nationality of offenders is not even recorded, on what factual basis can any serious judgement be made?

Next up, good old Labour are showing how tough they are on cracking down on terrorism by announcing that 300 police officers “will be moved”into “helping dissuade” a small minority of people from being “radicalised.” How they will actually do this is left unclear and the BBC point blank refuses to tell us precisely which group this “small minority” might belong to. Ssssh – don’t mention ISLAM. Jacqui Smith’s so-called announcement is risible but the BBC are, in anything, worrying that it might be too tough and could alienate that “small minority.”! Last time I checked out a poll it indicated up to 10% of UK muslims supported Jihad attacks – with a UK population of at least 1.1.6 million British Muslims this means that up to 144,000 support terrorism. And 300 plods are going to sort this one out?? Really?

Finally the dear Leader himself is in the States today and preparing to tell Wall Street to “come clean” apparently about the financial losses they have made. Why doesn’t he do the same and why doesn’t the BBC ask this question? Also, in another PR makeover for Gordon the BBC is telling us that he is going to force a UN security council meeting chaired by Thabo “Crisis, what crises?” Mbeki to deal with Zimbabwe even though it is not an agenda item! The idea that Brown is going to get the corrupt African Union, and the even more corrupt UN, to do ANYTHING of substance here is laughable, and yet this is put out as if it were credible.

Labour is spinning like crazy these days and the State Broadcaster is doing as much as possible to help Brown and his dismal crew. There is little, if any, attempt made to query the substance of what the NuLabour masters put out. The more desperate Labour gets, the easier the ride given by the BBC. Preserving leftism in power is the number one objective at play here and you and I are being made to fund it through the taxation policy of the State Broadcaster.

Brown Again!

Well, what do you know? There’s a crisis in Burma. To whom can we turn? Someone brave, strong, fresh, a man of influence, buoyed by popular mandate.


Er, no. I mention this because it is highlighted as the number one story on the BBC World News website at present. It’s the same sort of puffery they gave to Blair in his early days (years, in his case), where the British PM is seen being sought for his input by the great and good- and indeed is seen as the front man for the international community. The spin (yes, spin!) operation on Brown has been sickening enough, given the frankly old government trade that he is- the BBC seem to be losing no opportunity to cooperate in raising his profile on the world stage.

This fondness will not do.

It’s the rose-tinted spectacles of the BBC that give the Left a relatively easy task, a user-friendly task, in presenting themselves to the British public.

Currently on the BBC website is a goofy sort of article about Mrs Blair and Mr Blair’s proposal to her, many years ago. It’s actually a kind of advert, too, as there is a documentary coming out this week about the “first couple” as they might like to be styled (hat-tip to Iain Dale for pointing this out). So, instead of a sober reflection on a momentous period (for good or ill, depending on POV), we get a soppy take on the “human angle”.

This comes just as Gordon Brown is presenting he and his government as the defenders of the nation in the face of the fizzes and bangs of Islamic extremism (article here– defiance is easy when threats evaporate). Brown had the softest of soft interviews with the BBC’s Andrew Marr, who is something of a specialist in these, on Sunday morning. There could have been two lines of attack which dealt with the news agenda- one that the Government has never sold the war on terror to the public effectively (I would not expect this line from the BBC, though it might add a touch of impartiality), the other that the UK’s Iraq venture was the cause of strife at home. Neither emerged- the BBC incapable of making the former criticism (because they do not believe it) and unwilling to make the latter (mindful, no doubt, of Brown’s importance to their darling projects). What we had instead was a kind of sloppy drawing room chat, Brown intoning reassurance with every word, his accent a little softened, his hair short and dapper. Marr made a few wry remarks about Brown’s non-spin, Parliament-centered pitch- he knew it so well, he could barely bring himself to point out this, let alone give vent to what many viewers may think about Blair’s Presidential style or point out that Brown has many a crony in the wings of his new “administration”, ahem.

I remember the old days- the Thatcher hate- when “that woman” was routinely villified. Today no-one, especially not the BBC, speaks for those who loathe Blair. Much as I dislike hatred, the real feelings of many are utterly ignored by the BBC. Just put a lid on it, they seem to say.

The Blairs’ valedictory documentary brought to mind a rather more remarkable spouse, Dennis Thatcher, whose only interview was broadcast four years ago on Channel 4. Channel 4 vs BBC1. One week versus 13 years after the events. There is no balance to the BBC.