RALLY FOR SANITY (pt 3)

The BBC airbrushed Yusuf Islam from its sanitised account of the Jon Stewart rally. Will it also ignore Salman Rushdie’s response, posted on Nick Cohen’s Standpoint blog? This is newsworthy, is it not?

PS Just had this message from Rushdie: “I’ve always liked Stewart and Colbert but what on earth was Cat Yusuf Stevens Islam doing on that stage? If he’s a “good Muslim” like Kareem Abdul-Jabbar then I’m the Great Pumpkin. Happy Halloween.”

IMPARCIALIDADE

Lucas Mendes is a New York based Brazilian journalist who writes a weekly column about US current events for a Brazilian audience. His articles often attack the American Right, and in particular the Tea Party movement (which he really hates). He works for the BBC.

Here are the Google translations, Portuguese to English, of some of his recent columns for BBC Brazil. The translations aren’t perfect, of course, but they’re good enough to give a pretty full flavour of his views, all courtesy of Britain’s “impartial” national broadcaster.

October 28, 2010

October 7, 2010
September 23, 2010

The BBC’s English-speaking US correspondents must be envious of Mendes – BBC Brazil doesn’t bother with even the slightest pretence at balance.

(I don’t quite understand why the BRITISH Broadcasting Corporation is employing a Brazilian journalist to provide opinion pieces about America for Brazilian consumption.)

US Mid-Term Elections Live-Blog 2nd Nov

Since long before his election, the BBC has been fawning over The One.

After that the media has systematically ignored the failure of Hoax’n'Change, glossed over the rise of the Tea Party and dismissed the rise of small-government anti-Obama voices as ‘kooks’ and ‘racists’. 
Tuesday sees the BBC’s runaway love-in coverage hit the buffers of the US electorate, and we’re going to live-blog the humiliation.
Shadowing the BBC’s live broadcast, we’ll be hosting a chat here which will also include a feed of the latest results. We’ll be analysing both the results as they come in, and the BBC’s reaction to them.
It’ll start at midnight, and we’ll be joined by readers from David’s other blog A Tangled Web and also All Seeing Eye and a couple of others to be confirmed.

RALLY FOR SANITY (pt 2)

[Apologies for a second blogpost on this subject but I was working on it when David Vance posted his one. Hope he and others don't mind if I put it up anyway.]

[UPDATE. I mistakenly thought Finlo Rohrer was a female journalist (I used to know a girl called Finlo) but apparently that's not the case. Have updated the blog accordingly.]

When BBC correspondent Finlo Rohrer reported on the Glenn Beck rally he made a point of mentioning the racial make-up of the crowd:

The audience at the rally was predominantly white, but there was the occasional African-American in the crowd, some Tea Party-aligned, others without symbols of affiliation.

Yesterday’s Rally To Restore Sanity was at least as white (if not more so) but Rohrer’s account of that event fails to say so. Here are some images of the crowd from the Stewart/Colbert smugfest. If you look carefully you can just about make out a couple of non-white faces in the centre of the top-right image: [Read More...]


(Click to enlarge. Pics from American Elephants and Small Dead Animals)

It serves no purpose for the BBC to highlight the overwhelmingly white nature of yesterday’s rally so the fact is simply ignored, airbrushed from the bigger picture. The only white narrative the BBC is interested in is the angry white conservative one. A rally of young white hipster liberals is just a rally. Agenda-driven bias from the BBC, pure and simple.

Rohrer’s account of the Glenn Beck event included this:

Activist Jeremy Batterson, manning a stall festooned with posters of President Obama sporting a Hitler-style toothbrush moustache, explained why he was so steadfastly against the nation’s leader.

His report on yesterday’s event mentions only funny slogans and placards. Here’s another side to the rally – isn’t it amazing that BBC journalists never see stuff like this at leftie events?


(Click to enlarge. Pics from Falling Panda and Don Surber)

One of those Hitler moustaches is on a Jewish congressman, btw. Once again it doesn’t fit the BBC narrative, therefore it is ignored.

From Rohrer’s account of the Stewart/Colbert rally:

What was going on was effectively a mixture of a stand-up comedy gig and a one-day rock festival featuring Ozzy Osbourne, Tony Bennett, Sheryl Crow and others.

Ah yes – “and others”. Rohrer sidesteps the controversy over the appearance at the event of Yusuf Islam, a man who wants Salman Rushdie dead just because he wrote a book. Quite an odd choice of guest when one claims to be “promoting sanity” as Jon Stewart is, but once again it’s not deemed worthy of mention by the BBC. Airbrushed and ignored.

Rohrer’s Glenn Beck article includes the following sidebar column:


Readers of Biased BBC won’t be surprised to learn that there is no equivalent criticism accompanying yesterday’s article (there is a link to a Mardell blogpost about an “all-white” Tea Party gathering, but no same-page critic.) The idea that there could be negative opinion of Saint Jon’s event probably didn’t even occur to him.

Update 3pm. The BBC online team is trying to drive as much traffic as possible to Rohrer’s article by making it the top item on the BBC home page:

ASK DOCTOR BEN…

BBC Sunday Morning Live
Does prison work? “No” says Rasta “Dr” Benjamin Zephaniah on Sunday Live. “No” says the Christina Rees the very opinionated lady from the General Synod. “Yes It could work” says Ian Collins. So, three panellists but two stating that Prison does not work. That’s the BBC vision of balance. This is how they operate – the majority view is traduced by careful manipulation and the liberal hand-wringing agenda is presented as somehow being “mainstream”. Zephaniah is never off the BBC, he’s another one of their stool pigeon favourites who can be relied upon to spout the drivel that they believe. Because he has dreadlocks, it is not possible to contradict him, obviously, since that might be….r-a-c-i-s-t.  Mind you, I did laugh when he stated, without irony apparently, that “not everyone can be a poet”.  Dr Ben then explained that he had to explain to Muslims that not all British people were on “a crusade” against them. This was his response to the news of the Yemeni attempted terror attempt on cargo planes. During a discussion on whether “Killing animals for Sport” is wrong, he somehow suggested that since slaves were once hunted for fun, and since he was a Vegan, he couldn’t even understand the issue. What a guy! No wonder the BBC can’t get enough of him.

RALLY FOR SANITY

I’m sure the Islington sophisticates at the BBC were horrified at the fantastic success of Glenn Beck’s “Restoring Honor” rally in Washington DC. So when leftist comedian Jon Stewart organises his counter rally in DC, the BBC can be relied upon to cast it in as favourable a light as possible. Go to the story headed “Ruly Mob” on the main news portal that has the that leads to the story “A rally for sanity”. Get the picture? Maybe you need a little more guidance so just read what BBC correspondent Finlo Rohrer has to say, it’s all so cute, such an innocent rally full of non-partisans. And not even a mention of those pictured below carrying placards showing Republican with Hitler style moustaches. Maybe Finlo missed that? As we approach the US  Mid Terms the BBC has gone into full defense mode – denying that poster boy Obama is responsible for the devastation about to hit his Party.

MARRED BY BIAS

Alright, this one causes me to stir from my B-BBC slumber. I’m talking about the Andrew Marr Show this morning which has been an utter disgrace even by the wretched standard of the BBC.

We had token Tory Iain Dale on who could be relied upon to join in the BBC mockery of the Tea Party people in the States and true to form he lived down to expectations. (Hope the cheque is a good one, Iain) The Conservative Party here in the UK could learn from how the Tea Party has energised, motivated and in a few days will history. Instead we have a Conservative joining with with Dame Helena Kennedy and Marr himself in denigrating those in the Tea Party. Let’s see their faces on Wednesday morning.

Next up we we had guilty Jew actress Miriam “Nursy”Margoyles on to express her horror at what “our side” is doing to those poor helpless Palestinians. Apparently she has been to “Palestine” (Not sure where that is) and it’s all too awful what the Jews are doing to the innocents there. You’ll never get a Jewish person on with Marr who condemns the Jijad-supporting Palestinians and robustly supports Netanyahu – wrong attitude you see.

A guilty Jew, a gay Conservative – the BBC picks its guests very carefully.

Sometimes Racial Voting Is Approved by the BBC

The BBC approves of voting for one’s own ethnicity: when it’s Mexicans doing it.

Border politics in Texas ahead of the mid-terms

I know I’m late in getting to this, but it’s been a long week. In any case, at the beginning of the clip (just after the intro voice over) listen to what the candidate on the stage says: “…we need workers…” Remember that for later.

Andy Gallacher is in a town where both the Democrat and Republican candidates are Mexican-American. The Democrat (the guy who says we need workers) says it’s an honor to be elected to serve, and diversity is what makes this country great. We’ve all heard that before.

Gallacher talks about how the race of candidates matters, but asks, since both candidates are of Mexican descent, how do the voters feel now? He gets a couple of Mexican-American vox pops to say that issues are more important than race. What a shock.

For what seems at first like no reason, Gallacher then speaks to a Mexican-American academic who says his research shows that, regardless of what they say beforehand, most people vote for the race in the end. The Beeboid even helpfully says, “for their own kind”. In stark contrast to all BBC reporting about white people, either in the US or UK, this is presented as a good thing. Hispanics need Hispanic representation. Never mind any non-Hispanics living in the area. If one non-white ethnic group has the majority, then it’s important for someone of that ethnicity to represent them in government.

I say it seemed at first there was no reason for Gallacher to bring in this academic to talk about racial voting because both candidates are of the same ethnicity. So why talk about whether or not the voters will vote for a Hispanic candidate? It’s a moot point.

Then we got to the part where he talks to the Republican candidate. Horrifyingly, he’s wearing a US flag pin on his lapel. He says he’s proud to be an American, while still being proud of his heritage. But for him, American comes before Mexican, as one is his cultural background and the other is his country. He also has lighter skin, no ethnic mustache, and no trace of the Mexican accent like his Democrat opponent does.

So he’s presented to the viewer after the academic who speaks of racial voting because he’s clearly a traitor to his race. He doesn’t talk about diversity, so he is no good. The subtext here is that the Mexican-American voters will and should vote for the candidate who is more proud of the Mexican part than the American part.

Remember the beginning of the clip where the Democrat said in his speech that “we need workers”? Of course he’s talking about the racial politics of illegal immigration. When he spoke of diversity to Gallacher, he was spouting the same old theme we heard a few months back on the BBC that it was racist to be against illegal immigration. Of course the qualifier “illegal” is absent now, as it always is when advocates speak. The Democrat doesn’t care about the law: he cares only about his race. When he’s talking about “diversity”, he means we should grant amnesty to people who look like him. How bringing in more of the same will lead to diversity is beyond my tiny little brain.

The Republican doesn’t talk that way. Or at least isn’t encouraged to by the Beeboid.

The thing is, there’s racial politics everywhere in the US. Right here in New York, former mayor (African-American) David Dinkins endorsed the non-white candidate for State Senate in the Democrat primary in my neighborhood. Here’s his reason:

I grew up in Harlem where we taught that New York City is a melting pot. Well I don’t agree with that. I have always said that we are a gorgeous mosaic. We have as many separate ethnic identities as the United Nations. That’s why we have a parade about every hour and a half. But it is important, it is so very important, particularly for the people of this district who vote on Tuesday to recognize how important it is to understand that the city is changing. Most people in the city are going to look more like us than others and that’s just a fact. It is not a bad thing. It is frankly a good thing.

Imagine if Giuliani had said the equivalent. The BBC would be all over it. Not only that, but Espaillat’s opponent was a Jew. You’ll never hear from the BBC that anti-Semitism is common in the African-American and Hispanic communities. And NYC isn’t a border town, so it’s inaccurate to portray the racial angle in that Texas town as being due to its proximity to the border. The fact that they’re Mexicans is obviously connected to the border, but not the racial angle in the abstract.

But the BBC approves of racism when it’s not white people doing it, so never mind.

Times A-Changing?

Justin’s interview with Professor Anthony Glees and Shami Chakrabati this morning.
Confusingly, Professor Glees pronounces ‘T’s as ‘D’s in the lefty manner, while Shami speaks standard Engrish.

Disregarding the fact that Shami was allowed both the first and the last word, the argument went like this. Shami wants a balance between the Secret Service’s obvious need for secrecy and their accountability.

Prof Glees says Shami’s lost the plot, forgedding that human rights and liberdy should primarily mean the freedom not to be terrorised by those who want to deprive us of the same, and not just the human rights of people like Binyam and the liberty of people who don’t like long queues at the airport.

I thought Shami was rattled. Somehow the balance, which has listed alarmingly to the left, might be on the move again, and what many people regard as common sense may now be starting the uphill struggle to regain the middle ground. No thanks to the BBC though.

Preaching by the Converted

My previous post was rushed to press in order to keep up with the rolling news, but there is more to be said. Bias by omission is almost accepted as a given, we breeze past it, forgetting that the BBC holds back a significant chunk of evidence it has deemed inadmissible, and consigned to room 101.

Politically incorrect things, unmentionable lest the illusory thought crime known as Islamophobia be committed. It is too risky to talk about anything that emanates from the immutable word of Allah.

Many people would rather not know what motivates the Arabs’ hatred of Israel. They blame Israel for constructing obstacles to peace without understanding that, for the Palestinians the obstacle to peace IS Israel. Some people say that Israel’s insistence on remaining a Jewish state is an inherently racist concept. That misguided theory is for another day.
The BBC always keeps an eagle eye out for fragments of news they can embellish to enhance the illusion that Israel is racist.
That must be why the BBC found Wednesday’s disturbance in Israel so newsworthy, while home-grown demos, some of which end in violence and vandalism, are played down or ignored.

For example a B.N.P. (I know, I know) Youtube clip entitled “The UK Muslim march the BBC didn’t let you see.” features a Hitler style rally in which Lauren Booth addresses a menacing crowd, inciting them to join her personal vendetta against Tony Blair and rise up against Israel and the police. She can be heard screeching inexplicably “We want Israel out of this country.” There are numerous examples of other rallies, speeches and treacherous behaviour on our doorstep which is far more relevant to us than a skirmish in Umm al-Fahm. Booth is a deranged self-publicist, but she has the backing of the Muslim world, and I guess her recent conversion to Islam gives her diplomatic immunity.

REVOLTING JOURNALISTS…(REAPING THE WHIRLWIND)

Many moons ago, I used to be a BBC FoC. That is, I was father of the chapel (shop steward) of the National Union of Journalists BBC information division branch. There were even in those distant days at least 70 people working in BBC spin (the total last time I counted was almost treble that), but I thus know from personal experience that we were a militant, left-wing, revolting lot. Nothing, I can safely surmise, has probably changed; and now the whole of the BBC NUJ has voted to go on strike over their pensions. Hurrah! That means that we will have four days totally free of BBC bias. But more seriously, there’s a big issue at stake here.

I reported some time ago that the BBC £8.2bn pension fund was run on an “ethical” (code for climate change/greenie fanatic)basis by Peter Dunscombe, who was also then chairman of the Institutional Investment Group on Climate Change(IIGCC). This has the following goals:

The IIGCC Investor Statement on Climate change was launched in October 2006. Asset owners and asset managers who signed the Statement committed to increasing their focus on climate change in their own processes and in their engagement with companies and governments.

Analysis of the BBC fund investment portfolio suggested a heavy emphasis on such “ethical” investments. Of course, BBC journalists no doubt supported this strategy; after all they are, collectively and individually, world leaders in disseminating greenie propaganda. So there’s a delicious irony in this strike. The BBC journalists all no doubt wanted a green investment strategy, and now they have got it. I can’t say with certainty that that’s the reason for the cutbacks that are now underway – I’m not a pensions actuary – but recent reports suggest that such investments don’t yield all that’s expected of them (to put it mildly). As the consequences and the truth hit home, and cut backs have to be made, the BBC propagandists, sorry, I mean journalists, are yelping with pain. My heart bleeds.

Update: The BBC boys and the girls in the NUJ who are worried about their pensions might benefit from a perusal of the latest Pension Fund accounts from 2008. They reveal that on top of the Peter Dunscombe connection to eckowackery, the trustees have put their faith in future investment strategy on an international investment outfit called Hermes EOS. Surprise, surprise, their reasoning is that this will effect:

environmentally responsible investing and to encourage these practices in the course of engagements

And guess what underpins their efforts? Why, it’s the UN’s “Principles for Responsible Investment”. What does this mean? Have a look here. The principles are outlined in publications such as “Launch of CEO Briefing: ‘Demystifying Materiality: Hardwiring biodiversity and ecosystem services into finance’”. In other words, its green fanaticism cloaked in UN verbiage, but meaning that they are all part of the same warmist/biodiversity religious fervour.

As you sow, so shall you reap.

Partiality Genes?

It must be true because scientists say so:

People with left wing views may have their political opinions controlled by a “liberal gene”

BBC US correspondent Katie Connolly is concerned:

Don’t worry Katie, we don’t need genetic tests to get to the essence of liberal bias at the BBC – we have Twitter.

In other news, the mythical BBC “impartiality gene” still eludes discovery.

Question Time LiveBlog 28th October 2010


Question Time tonight comes from Glasgow; twinned with Havana and a Conservative-free zone since 1982. In 2006, 29.4% of the population were on the dole and it has the lowest life expectancy of any UK city.

On the panel tonight we have Ed Davey, Nicola Sturgeon Murrell, Chris “Y-Fronts” Bryant, Hugh Hendry and Simon Schama. It’s also David Dimbleby‘s 72nd birthday.

For those playing the Buzzword Bingo, we’ll be using the Congratulations Rules so any links to people with special days today score bonus points. Double points for Iranian Threat (Mahmoud Ahmadinejad…happy 54th!), Tax The Rich (Bill Gates is 53), Gap Between Rich And Poor (Princess Sophie of Liechtenstein turns 43), Political Donations (Bernie Ecclestone is 80) and that annoying socialist whine Selling The Family Silver (Canaletto would be 313 today).

The LiveBlog will also cover the awful This Week, with Andrew Neil. According to the BBC published schedule only Michael Portillo is confirmed, so speculation as to the identity of the balancing socialist windbag is welcome.

David Vance, TheEye and David Mosque will be manning the barricades here from 10:30pm.

BRUSSELS PORK PIES

Very few people, apart from Richard North, admirably summing up the position here, understand the extent to which we are actually now ruled by Brussels, and how powerless we are to stop anything emanating from it. The reality is that David Cameron and the rest of his useless party, by saying that they want to be “in Europe but not run by it”, are guilty of disseminating a great big porky pie: truth is you are either in or out. And if you are in, then you do as you are told. No if or buts. Resistance is fruitless, you cannot opt out of budget increases, much as you might huff and puff and gesitculate, or make useless phone calls.

I have been a minor part of a campaign for years for the BBC to report this whole sorry saga properly, but everything that Global Britain has pointed out in reports like these has fallen on deaf ears. The sorry truth is that the BBC is an integral part of the EU project and it has repeatedly failed in its intrinsic duty to tell the British people about the awful, octopus, fascist nature of what is going on. And so the tradition continues today. In the report, they convey the semblance of brinkmanship and robustness on the part of the Cleggerons when in reality the government is powerless to resist. They spinelessly pass on vapid hot air from Labour suggesting that something can be done to avoid the £900m increase when it was Tony Blair’s budget cave-in in 2006 that made what is happening today inevitable. How short are the BBC’s memories and how limited is its ambition to carry out proper journalistic research and checks? And finally, Nick Robinson, the supposed political expert at the BBC, says that the meeting involved is a “summit”. He should damn-well know it’s not and to say it is both inaccurate and deliberately disingenuous. His innaccuracy sums up the poorness of the BBC’s journalism. The charade our leader is involved in is a rubber-stamp exercise and Mr Robinson should be saying so. He – and his colleagues – should also be talking to the Richard Norths of this world so that they can convey accurately what is actually going on. But they never do…