Right, we are open again for business so DETAIL the bias here please.
OPEN THREAD…
Bookmark the permalink.
Search Biased BBC
Recent Comments
- JohnC April 25, 2024 at 4:39 am on Midweek 24th April 2024Arizona indicts Trump allies over 2020 fake elector scheme https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-68893365 Arizona is the 4th state to do ...
- Broadcasting-on-Behalf-of-the-Caliphate April 25, 2024 at 3:17 am on Midweek 24th April 2024Well done to the new Slovakian Government which the BBC absolutely hates for abolishing the national broadcaster RTVS for political...
- JohnC April 25, 2024 at 2:30 am on Midweek 24th April 2024Seven teens with alleged 'extremist ideology' arrested in Sydney raids https://www.bbc.com/news/world-australia-68887448 WTF is going on in ...
- JohnC April 25, 2024 at 1:59 am on Midweek 24th April 2024The BBC would call that high-spirited and vibrant multiculturalism. We have to wait until their own middle-class neighbourhoods get infested...
- JohnC April 25, 2024 at 1:57 am on Midweek 24th April 2024And I will guarantee you that none of those will be accusing BAME of racism against whites. They've even changed...
- Lucy Pevensey April 24, 2024 at 11:59 pm on Midweek 24th April 2024https://twitter.com/DaveAtherton20/status/1783235207719448909
- tomo April 24, 2024 at 11:49 pm on Midweek 24th April 2024Do they share a kitchen + toilet with the Hope Not Hate gang?
- tomo April 24, 2024 at 11:47 pm on Midweek 24th April 2024Local Green + Labour councillors go after Israeli Elbit company in Bristol.... A soft write up by a fellow traveller...
- Lucy Pevensey April 24, 2024 at 11:25 pm on Midweek 24th April 2024https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1783053802033332486
Categories
agw anti-American anti-conservative anti-Israel anti Israel. pro Palestinian Antisemitism BBC - sickeningly biased at all times. BBC agenda BBC bias bbc bias and balance. bbc bias by omission BBC censorship BBC Question Time BBC selectivity bias Biased BBC climate change dhimmis general thread immigration Islam israel Mark Mardell obama obama bias Obamalove open thread pro-labour pro-palestinian pro EU pro Hamas pro Islam pro Labour bias pro Obama PRO OBAMA AT ALL COSTS. pro Obama BBC agenda question time question time live Richard Black save gordon. USA politics US economy US News US politics US presidential elections
posts not showing?
“Who cares whether Andrew Mitchell did or did not say “plebs” when he had an angry confrontation with police officers on the gates of Downing Street?”
That is the reaction of “some” the BBC’s chief political correspondent Nick Robinson helpfully tells us.
After all there is “no evidence at all to suggest that the officer arrested in this instance was influenced by any Police Federation campaign.”
Yeah right.
The Labour Party spin merchant Robinson concludes that the story is “part of the tug of war between press and politicians over press freedom.”
Nope. It is about police officers lying and forcing the resignation of a Conservative Cabinet Minister. But that is not a story for the BBC is it – much more important is the fact that Obama almost cried at his press conference.
Or is that made up as well?
What agenda are the BBC pushing this week? What a surprise it was Channel Four who exposed the tissue of lies. The BBC prefer to make documentaries about the Barclay brothers employing accountants to reduce their tax burden.
Radical.
“Who cares whether Andrew Mitchell did or did not say “plebs” when he had an angry confrontation with police officers on the gates of Downing Street?”
The BBC cared about little else when the Tories were guilty… now they’re innocent… well who cares.
Exactly
sorry to post here david, but most of my responses don’t show. Any ideas?
There’s nothing to indicate a problem on this end. No comments ending up in the “awaiting moderation” queue or anything like that. Browser weirdness, maybe? Ditch IE?
‘That is the reaction of “some” the BBC’s chief political correspondent Nick Robinson helpfully tells us.’
The BBC chief political correspondent’s use of endless un-named sources makes him about as much use as a wet fart in a forest fire.
Is he even around? Usually he’s on holiday for the entire school break plus a week either end, and only phones in from the slopes if pressed.
Welcome back 🙂
Testing: previous comment did not show.
Same here!
Tried reposting, but I was told that the post was duplicated.
Does re-writing in your user name and email address work?
Testing, after another attempted ‘comment’ did not appear. Next time, I’ll exclude hyperlinks.
BBC politically SUPPORTS Binyam Mohammed
(al-Qaeda trained operative);
BBC politically OPPOSES Andrew Mitchell
(innocent ex-Tory government Minister).
It seems new ‘B-BBC.org’ set-up may reject some hyperlinks.
Testing hyperlink for above:
http://www.longwarjournal.org/archives/2009/02/binyam_mohamed_the_f.php
Testing: A ‘Sky News’ hyperlink did not transmit.
If ‘biased bbc.org’ has been having technical problems, so have Beeboids:-
“Wave of discontent over lack of microwaves at BBC.
“A heated row has erupted among BBC staff moving to the New Broadcasting House because there are not enough microwaves to warm up their lunches.”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/bbc/9748644/Wave-of-discontent-over-lack-of-microwaves-at-BBC.html
Testing: above posting worked technically OK.
Would love to know what they’re ‘warming up’.
A good old butty box obviously not good enough for them.
And don’t forget there was this:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/bbc/9631164/BBC-men-wake-up-and-smell-no-coffee.html
Think of that the next time you hear a Beeboid parrotting Labour’s mantra about the Tories being ‘out of touch’.
I have also just posted a comment that doesn’t show up, containing an ‘a href …’ link.
I have also had problems losing posts in the past, before the crash of the last site, and trying to repost was given a ‘duplicate comment’ notification, so unable to repost.
I’ve been trying to log in using either my Google or Yahoo ID, but when I click on that sign-in link nothing happens so had to use my WordPress log in which doesn’t have avatar.
BBC-NUJ, GITMO and political comedy.
In contrast to the way in which BBC-NUJ presumed ex-Tory government minister, Andrew MITCHELL was GUILTY, so BBC-NUJ etc presumes Shaker AAMER is INNOCENT, giving out one-sided, pro-Islamic propaganda, such as this:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-20715511
‘Huffington Post’-
“Shaker Aamer, Guantanamo Detainee, To Sue British Intelligence For Defamation, With Support Of Frankie Boyle.”
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2012/12/14/shaker-aamer-guantanamo-frankie-boyle_n_2300887.html
BBC-NUJ sees it role as to censor out that Aamer was translator for Bin Laden:-
‘Telegraph’ (2011):-
“WikiLeaks: British resident still in Guantanamo ‘was Osama bin Laden’s translator’.
A British resident held in Guantánamo Bay is allegedly a highly-trained terrorist who served as Osama bin Laden’s translator and is willing ‘to become a martyr for his cause’, according to the files.”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/wikileaks/8472824/WikiLeaks-British-resident-still-in-Guantanamo-was-Osama-bin-Ladens-translator.html
Testing: above ‘Comment’ reproduced OK.
Is anybody else able to ‘connect with’ Google or Yahoo to post comments?
Wow 🙂
It just did it automatically after I entered my details – problem solved.
My posts are still just disappearing, but with repeat attempts rejected with the ‘duplicate comment’ message.
I am, as before, entering my name and e-mail directly: do you have to use one of the ‘connect with’ systems?
I don’t. Just name and email. No rejections yet :fingers crossed:
Welcome back BBBC.
I rather enjoyed some of the sites that replaced it. I’ve had a Botox injection in my buttocks and am set to earn a lot of cash with a nice Nigerian chap.
The BBC has though run riot without your scrutiny. Leading off on Today this morning with pleb gate (anti police?). Blanket coverage of her maj at Cabinet. And NRA gun nuts all over the news upholding ancient freedoms.
The comment section’s lay out’s a dog though.
Hidden story? The BBC news website reports that there has been a riot in Sweden after indecent pictures and comments were placed on a social networking site (perhaps it should be called an anti-social networking site in the circumstances). The article is accompanied by two photographs:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-20774640
Of course, all sorts of people live in Sweden these days but notice how the teenagers do not look like traditional Swedes – there is a decided lack of Nordic features. It makes one wonder whether there is perhaps a little more to this story than the headlines suggest. Perhaps these videos tell us a little more:
http://vladtepesblog.com/?p=57464
Jim – Why do you devote so much of your life to a site that you consider to be pointless?
Add up the time you’ve spent in 2012 on this site (to the nearest 100 hours will do), and ask yourself what you could have achieved during that time…
Jeff
I cannot rest while someone on the Internet is wrong.
Catch 22
It will always be you!
I cannot rest while someone on the Internet is wrong.
Then you will forever be in turmoil…
Rather than focus your energies on what you consider to be a benign message board, why not turn your talents to places in the Internet where you might do some good?
You could try to convince fascists to be tolerant, for example, or convince alcoholics that they have a problem that needs to be addressed.
Why instead spend so much time here, achieving nothing but rubbing people up the wrong way? 🙂
Jeff
It’s not benign. A lot of the points the site makes ( and indeed parrots) are made elsewhere in more influential fora. So I wouldn’t argue it has no influence: it does primarily as source material for people looking to attack the bbc from a similar political perspective.
And there are good discussions to be had here.
Discussion? That’s a bit rich coming from a BBC-climate-change-secret-meeting-with-eco-activists-lies evader.
Wait: if you say this site merely “parrots” points from influential fora, how are you not arguing this site has no influence? It’s source material for which “people”, then?
‘I cannot rest while someone on the Internet is wrong.’
Seems that your slumber avoidance is a bit selective in nature, and indeed more dedicated less to righting wrongs and more to acting as a corporate shill in trying to derail others trying to hold those who really deserve it to account.
The Dandy name seems noticeable by its absence across the blogosphere where the BBC is shown to be not just in error, but engaged in active cover-up.
A £4Bpa unaccountable policy-influencing propaganda monopoly funded by the public via compulsion.
But your pursuit of rectitude is to devote yourself to a niche blog that does highlight such errors. to then try and mess with it. Classy.
That seems ‘odd’ (a word in the news… a lot, of late) to the point of perverse.
Could it be that you share with some a notion of holding to account that is, at best… unidirectional?
Here’s one to chew on as you look up some ‘isms to flounce out with as you head back to the nest..
http://bbcwatch.org/2012/12/20/myths-and-lethal-narratives-on-the-bbc-website/
The comments seem to be even so far, so you and the rest can maybe add your special heft to the balance.
The question as to stealth edit vs. admitted correction remains unanswered.
Oh, and I also note that newly stood back inside Hug’s famously-embarrassing thread has gone from modded to closed to… just gone.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/aboutthebbc/posts/helen-boaden-director-of-bbc-news-at-the-lse
Unique , eh?
BBC terminology.
I notice 5 Live are consistently referring to the ‘shelved’ Newsnight Savile report.
Not scrapped or spiked as journalists would say. Shelved. Implying it was simply moved aside and kept for future use.
Lets not forget ITV dragged this story out a year after the BBC had shelved it. Think that scene at the end of Indiana Jones and the Raiders of the Lost Ark where the treasure is shelved in a huge warehouse. No doubt the Savile story was shelved next to a file named Balen.
‘moved aside and kept for future use
Speaking of which, Hug’s garden seems set to suffer as the BBC finds she got it about right today.
Independently (with some exclusions).
Pollard Report due this afternoon.
Nicky Campbell’s phone in this morning : Tell us your stories about overcoming adversity.
“The fast-tracking of a complaint to the BBC”
http://hurryupharry.org/2012/12/19/the-fast-tracking-of-a-complaint-to-the-bbc/?
Comments are already nifty…
‘What surprises me is that any Muslim group could find anything to complain about regarding the BBC.’
tried again to post – lost 2 last night and one this morning – therefore testing
BBC-NUJ relegates the issue of Andrew Mitchell’s victimisation, and adopts the official police line.
In contrast, ‘Telegraph’:-
“Senior Tories call for Andrew Mitchell to get job back.”
“Two senior Conservatives have called for Andrew Mitchell, the disgraced former Cabinet minister, to get his job back after a police officer was accused of fabricating an account of his foul-mouthed outburst.”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/conservative/9754845/Senior-Tories-call-for-Andrew-Mitchell-to-get-job-back.html
BENGHAZI: INBBC denial on Islamic jihad massacre persists.
Two reports:-
1.)
‘Jihadwatch’:-
“Analysis of social media in Libya on day of Benghazi jihad massacre finds no reference to Muhammad video that Obama blamed for attack”
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2012/12/analysis-of-social-media-in-libya-finds-no-reference-to-muhammad-video-that-obama-administration-bla.html
2.)
INBBC:
“Benghazi attack: Security was ‘grossly inadequate'”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-20778578
Crickey, I had some trouble finding this site. I was getting quite worried, really missed it.
Crickey, I had some trouble finding this site again. I was getting quite worried, really missed it.
“BBC knew about Jimmy Savile’s ‘darker side’ months before the truth became public”
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/bbc-knew-about-jimmy-saviles-darker-side-months-before-the-truth-became-public-8425596.html
Now they are spinning ‘The Force’ George Lucas-styly too?
And this all costs us what to have whitewashed for Xmas again?
Months? How about years. The really disgraceful part is they still dished out tribute programmes to the public about this creep. That should tell you all you need to know about the BBC.
“Nick Pollard has delivered a scathing verdict on the BBC’s news operation”
By David Hughes.
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/davidhughes/100195031/?
“BBC WAS ‘INCAPABLE OF DEALING WITH JIMMY SAVILE NEWSNIGHT CHAOS'”
By Emily Fox.
http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/365993?
“BBC Trust lists catalogue of failures which led to airing of disastrous McAlpine Newsnight broadcast”
http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/bbc-trust-lists-catelogue-failures-which-led-airing-disastrous-mcalpine-newsnight-broadcast?
Illegal immigrants in 1.) U.K. and 2.) Belgium -not an issue for BBC-NUJ.
1.)
‘Daily Mail’:-
“Up to 90,000 students ‘in Britain illegally’:
Thousands fail to attend courses and some don’t even register.”
By Jack Doyle.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2250276/Up-90-000-students-Britain-illegally-Thousands-fail-attend-courses-dont-register.html
2.)
‘Daily Express’
“BELGIUM BOOTS OUT UNEMPLOYED MIGRANTS”
http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/359725/Belgium-boots-out-unemployed-migrants
Nick Pollard Report out today. By all accounts it was a bit of a rush to get it out his week.
BBC: Calm down, calm down, let’s talk about Hillsborough
Just in case the BBC obliterates this…..
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/simonmayo/2011/11/not_the_bookshop.shtml
Simon Mayo Drivetime blog 16/11/2011
‘Yesterday I was delighted to see Ted Beston again. Ted was a legendary producer at Radio 1 and my first on the breakfast show in 1988. He was famously Jimmy Saville’s producer for many years and I remember Jimmy on the Old Record Club on a Sunday afternoon asking Ted how much time he had left on the show. Through some kind of audible talkback system, Ted’s voice would appear saying “One more record Jim” and the show would conclude. In honour of Ted I asked Colin, one of our top studio managers at the time, to rig up a similar system when I was on the breakfast show so that we could hear his contribution to the ‘guess the age of the celeb’ feature.’
http://uk.news.yahoo.com/savile-abuse-probe-man-70s-arrested-092956448.html#H5QsCcZ
Detectives investigating the Jimmy Savile sex abuse scandal have arrested former Radio One producer Ted Beston
‘In case’?
That’s what page grabs were made for.
I have taken a screen grab…
“BBC Pollard review finds George Entwistle was warned about ‘the real truth’ behind Jimmy Savile TWO YEARS ago and uncovers plot to ‘protect’ former Director-General”
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2250246/BBC-chiefs-face-harsh-criticism-Savile-inquiry-report-conduct-published.html
Top comment:
‘Hang on a minute, if those ‘BBC execs’ knew about a criminal offence and made no attempt to report it to the police they are complicit in the crimes and should be prosecuted. End of story. Or are the BBC immune from normal laws, like politicians??
Just questions being asked; powers being held to account..
Hah! So Steve Mitchell has now resigned (with full pension, of course). That’s two of the see-no-evil monkeys gone, one to go.
In lighter news, I saw this..
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-20777042
..and felt that, all things considered, it was a brave headline.
Page not found?
I noticed Chris Patten was his usual condescending, odious self at the news conference re: the publishing of the Pollard Report. Is there no one in the printed press willing to take on Fatty Pang about his patrician attitude? Patten seems to think the BBC Trust exists to cover for the Corporation when it becomes involved in scandal. If that IS what he apparently believes then the Trust is not fit for purpose and should be abolished – although I will not hold my breath waiting for spineless Dave and his bunch of incompetents to do anything about it.
David, I notice Biased BBC’s new web address is way down Google’s listings and could be easily missed by some regulars and occasional visitors. Is there any way of getting Google to put it at the top of their listings page?
Spending money on buying a higher slot is the only way to guarantee a top slot. It will take some time for their bot to rediscover everything.
FWIW, I still cannot access the site on any of the URLs, old or new.
I only found my way via a new post to an old thread that was emailed in, and then clicked on the page link.
Thereafter by going to new threads by clicking the hyperlink at the top.
It may be ‘cos I’m on an Old Mac OS/Safari combo, but it’s weird to be told there is no site to find via the browser when there clearly is.
Yes, this new domain thing is a massive pain in the ass. I have no idea yet when this will settle down. Someone (not me) who has already done a ton of unsung yeoman’s work restoring the old titles and comments is doing what he can behind the scenes now, but it will take time.
I can imagine there’s a lot to do behind the scenes but it would be good to update the links here from friendly websites such as Tangled Web, CIFwatch, etc.
DV can do the Tabled Web, but nobody here has any control over what any other website does. The most anyone can do is email them and ask. If this is all only temporary until the original domain is restored, I’m not sure it’s worth the effort.
OK. I hadn’t seen that it might move back again.
I’m hoping. No data yet to tell if it’s possible or not.
I’ve updated the links on my blog, FWIW.
SWEDEN:
Two contrasting reports:-
1.) ‘Jihadwatch’
“500 Muslim youths riot in Gothenburg, Sweden, to protect honour against sexual rumours”
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2012/12/500-muslim-youths-riot-in-gothenburg-sweden-to-protect-honour-against-sexual-rumours.html
2.) INBBC’s censored reports on SWEDEN –
“Sweden students riot over Instagram sex insults page”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-20774640
Classic BBC sanitisation exercise. And then some claim they have no agenda….
I noticed on the gun control thread that various valued contributors (Prole, RWB and some other bloke) have flounced off in a huff, vowing to never come back (with the same user name…). I find it ironic that the posters most likely to use the expression “swivel eyed Daily Mail reading loon” are the types most likely to work themselves up into an absolute, foaming at the mouth, lather should anyone dare to publish an opinion (on their own blog) that runs contrary to theirs (and co-incidently the opinion of the left wing “wankocracy” (C) J.Delingpole).
Apparently, the right of US citizens to own a gun is another verboten subject that is to be added to a list that includes immigration, islam, gay rights, “climate change” scepticism and the Hodge family tax arrangements.
Exactly.
“The McAlpine error and dwindling trust in the BBC”
By Victoria Macdonald.
http://blogs.channel4.com/victoria-macdonald-on-health-and-social-care/the-mcalpine-error-and-dwindling-trust-in-the-bbc/628?
The Beeboids will be required to make a report to prove that lessons have been learned? Yawn. Nothing will change, except yet another biased management team put in place and more boxes to tick on some compliance form next time they do something like this.
“Why Do BBC, ITV and Sky News Not Report What is Happening In The World?”
By John Fleming.
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/john-fleming/why-do-bbc-itv-and-sky-ne_b_2328492.html?
Thanks for this, George. It explains so much. The closing line is a real coup de grace:
There is also the risk, of course, that a “mission to explain” means explanation and editorialising outweigh reporting… and ‘explanation’ and ‘editorialising’ can easily overlap into opinion.
BBC News should report the news.
It should not have an opinion.
This damns the entire stable of titled “editors”, and boy do they deserve it.
That was the whole point of “mission to explain”. It is a bit like the medieval Church explaining the meaning of the Bible. The idea that there might be a conflict of interest between the interests of the establishment and what the establishment thinks should interest us is conveniently ignored.
Of course the religion these days is not Christianity.
In other words, BBC journalism is a modern equivalent of all those icons and gargoyle figures sculpted in medieval churches and biblical scenes portrayed in stained glass windows? You might be onto something there.
Yeah – the icons are Obama and Mandela, the gargoyles are Bush and Thatcher, whilst the biblical scenes include Tony at the Funeral of Diana and The Building of the Wind Farm.
But there would be no icons, gargoyles or biblical scenes at the Beeb, since Beeboids venerate a rather different holy book … and it isn’t Talmud or Torah !
That last line should be tattooed on every so-called ‘Editor’s’ foreskin to read as they issue their next golden shower of enhanced narrative or bukkake of interpreted events.
‘On the BBC TV News programmes that same night – zilch, nothing, nada’
Not strictly true.
There will have been what they fancied. The nothing will be what they didn’t have time to twist.
Not sure Lords Hall Hall and Patten will have enough fingers for all the leaks in all the dykes (metaphorical, ex-colleague or positively hired) now.
“Bloodbath at the Beeb: BBC deputy director of news quits as Newsnight editor and deputy will be replaced after damning reports into Savile and McAlpine scandals”
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2250529/BBC-news-deputy-director-Stephen-Mitchell-latest-casualty-Newsnight-scandal.html
Almost exactly as predicted. Nothing will change except on which doors the nameplates go. A national treasure is saved!
Next time a defender of the indefensible screams bloody murder about how David Vance or anyone else here uses a tragedy to push a political agenda, ask them if they equally condemn their beloved Obamessiah for the following:
If this past week has done anything it should give us some perspective. I-I-I-If there’s one thing we should have, after this week, it should be a sense of perspective about what’s important. And I would like to think that members of that caucus would say to themselves “You know what, I disagree with the president on some things. We wish the other guy had won. We’re gonna fight him on a whole range of issues over the next four years. We think his philosophy is all screwed up. But right now, what the country needs is for us to compromise, get a deficit reduction deal in place, make sure middle class taxes don’t go up, make sure that we’re laying the foundations for growth, give certainty to businesses large and small, not put ourselves through some sort of self-inflicted crisis every six months, allow ourselves time to focus on things like preventing the tragedy in Newtown from happening again, focus on issues like energy and immigration reform, all the things that will make a determination as to whether our country grows over the next four years, ten years, 20 years, and if we could just pull back from the immediate political battles, if ya peel off the partisan war paint, then we should be able to get something done.”
I think, I think the Speaker would like to get that done. But an environment needs to be created not just among House Republicans but among Senate Republicans that says the campaign is over and let’s see if we can do what’s right for the country, at least for the next month! And then, we can re-engage in all the other battles that they’ll wanna fight.
They won’t, of course, because they’re massive hypocrites. Nevertheless, everyone should remember just what kind of man the President is.
Obama – the hypocrite’s hypocrite. He obviously doesn’t do irony. His administration authorised the supply of thousands of assault weapons to Mexican drug gangs and whose murdered ambassador in Benghazi was clandestinely passing on Libyan munitions to Syrian Jihadists via a Qatar middleman now wants to restrict firearms in the US?
Obama, Rahm Emmanuel, Feinstein, Harry Reid etc. don’t give a toss about murdered schoolchildren. They just want to use their deaths to further their own agenda.
Dave P., why doesn’t anyone in the US seem to have the guts to call out your despicable government over their dishonesty and hypocrisy?
“…don’t give a toss about murdered schoolchildren. They just want to use their deaths to further their own agenda.”
You have to be pretty cynical and sick to believe that. isn’t it an entirely rational political response (even if you disagree with the policy) to want to control the availability of assault rifles when 20 children have been butchered with an assault rifle? Think about what happened in the last decade on contraband for air travel. This is just special pleading by gun fetishists.
‘You have to be pretty cynical and sick’
I’ll leave Andy to defend his estimation, but you have to be pretty cute or blinkered to not see those two traits as being in daily evidence across the political estates these days.
Are you really going to claim that tragedy, especially involving the young, has not been pounced upon in a less than honest manner of late to further political ends?
There may or may not be a case for banning the sales of assualt rifle, but you shouldn’t imagine that doing so would necessarily stop mass slaughter at schools.
At a school in Wolverhampton in 1996, this happened:- Wolverhampton machete attack. Horrett Campbell, a 33-year-old man with paranoid schizophrenia, invaded a Teddy Bears’ Picnic being held at St Luke’s Primary School and slashed three young children and four adults with a machete. Lisa Potts, a 20-year-old nursery nurse, was awarded the George Medal for saving children’s lives despite suffering severe injuries.
What the report doesn’t say is that he had a full can of petrol with him with the apparent intention of setting fire to classrooms.
It seems he was known to the mental health professionals, but had dropped off the radar and was not taking his prescribed medication.
Around the world, mental health provision tends to be the poor relation of health provision.
As President Obama himself said, these are complex issues.
Have you asked yourself how much more damage he would have done with an assault rifle? That is the point. Don’t give the sick people who do this the means to slaughter innocents. No one outside the military or police has a legitimate reason for owning firepower like that.
In your opinion. In case you missed my earlier comment, let me point out to you that the weapon which you incorrectly (or deliberately falsely) call an “assault rifle” can fire only one round per trigger pull, just like a handgun. The only difference aside from accuracy (not much of one considering that the lunatic boy was trained, and the close-range circumstances) would be the higher volume magazine, meaning he would have had to reload more often when using only handguns. As the police took 20 minutes to get there, that’s pretty irrelevant. A trained shooter on a mission with loads of time doesn’t necessarily need a big sexy weapon to do this kind of damage. Maj. Hassan in Ft. Hood is a fine example of this reality. Two handguns in an enclosed, gun-free zone seemed to work rather well for him.
There are already laws against “sick people” acquiring guns. The lunatic boy’s mother trained him to shoot, and he stole her legally owned (Connecticut does not have very strict controls) guns. His mother was already working on getting him committed, but unfortunately the lax laws regarding the dangerously mentally ill prevented her from taking care of it in time. Nobody dared lift a finger about Hassan for other politically-correct reasons, and he bought his guns perfectly legally. Had Left-wing pressure to treat Mohammedans with kid gloves at all costs not prevented the Army from reassigning or discharging him, a tragedy could have been avoided. Banning sexy rifles would have prevented precisely nothing.
I would support a law barring guns from households where there’s a mentally ill person, until our laws regarding handling the dangerously mentally ill are reformed. But the Left would never let that happen, so we’re stuck.
My point is that a disturbed individual can do more harm with a semi automatic military weapon that can fire 45 rounds in a minute than they could with a machete.
If people in the US prefer to balance their right to own weapons such as this (illegal up to 2004) against the safety of their people and a far greater likelihood of spree killings like this then that is fine. But in this country we would consider that trade off utterly bizarre and perverse.
A machete? So you’ve moved the goal posts and are now banning handguns as well? I was responding to your ban on assault rifles.
I’m comparing with the Campbell incident mentioned above. We have pretty much banned handguns in this country, after Dunblane.
It’s up to the Septics what they do. So yes, just an opinion.
‘We have pretty much banned handguns in this country, after Dunblane.’
Yes, can’t remember the last time anyone was shot dead in the UK. Must be years.
Yes sirree, that ban sure worked a treat.
Oh, hang on a minute…..
You’ve missed my point Jim. If he had succeeded in splashing the petrol into the classrooms, he would have killed many children. It was only the bravery of Lisa Potts (who was very badly injured) in tackling him while help was summoned, that prevented this.
Many thousands of children and adults were slaughtered in Rwanda by people who used, machetes, spears, sticks, stones and fire. You don’t need advanced technology to kill lots of unprepared helpless children and adults. It does seem that mental health issues seem to be behind the motivation for attacks on schools. Children may still be killed or severely injured even if assault rifles are banned. To say otherwise is to offer parents false security.
“You don’t need advanced technology to kill lots of unprepared helpless children and adults. ”
No, but it helps as the experience in the US attests.
So Mr Dandy how do you explain:
Rwanda?
Jim, I am cynical after seeing the way Obama has behaved in power. Remember the killing of 17 U.S soldiers by a Muslim Major at Fort Hood? Did Obama weep for those, or did he try and cover the fact that the Major was of the religion of peace? Remember the shooting of a number of people, including Congresswoman Gabby Giffords? Straight away Obama and his minions in the MSM blamed the Republican Party – especially Sarah Palin and the Tea Party for encouraging the shooter. Be civil in your dealings with political opponents was his message. And what did Obama later say? “We’ll bring guns to a knife fight.” when referring to his dealings with the Republican Party. Remember Hurricane Sandy and Obama’s mock concern about the victims? That soon disappeared when the cameras went away. There are still victims of the hurricane suffering hardship but I haven’t seen Obama showing any sympathy for them in recent weeks.
How about the terrorist attack in Benghazi? His administration refusing military rescue that was only a few minutes away and where the terrorist mortar crew had already been laser targeted by US soldiers. He also lied by saying that a little known video about Mohammed was the cause when he knew within 55 minutes of the attack that it was terrorist related.
The Fast and Furious operation, supplying thousands of assault weapons to Mexican drug cartels was a cynical attempt to fast track gun regulation when the expected mass killings began to take place. The murder of a couple of US border agents where a couple of these weapons were found near their bodies turned the Government inspired gun running operation into a major scandal that could still see Obama impeached. That the Obama government apparently weren’t concerned, indeed expected, hundreds of Mexican nationals to be murdered was cynical in the extreme.
Don’t forget current Chicago mayor Rahm Emmanuel’s advice to Obama – “NEVER LET A CRISIS GO TO WASTE.”
If you’ve ever researched Obama’s true past – not the fiction of his so called autobiographies, one of which was ghost written by unreformed terrorist Bill Ayres- you will see that he has been the supremely cynical political opportunist par excellance.
I may be cynical but I’m a novice when compared to the Obamessiah.
I may also add to the example of the Arizona shooting. It seems that Obama has forgotten about the other people who died,including a young girl. All he and the MSM seem to remember is Gabrielle Giffords, who after all is a Democrat politician.
Let us not forget also that while Obama and his cronies were very quick to blame the Republicans, the Tea Party and especially Sarah Palin for
the tragedy, the shooter was of the Leftist/Liberal persuasion as well as being emotionally disturbed.
Who was cynically trying to manipulate public opinion on the backs of murder victims there, Jim?
It’s Obama’s mob who are sick and cynical, banking on the fact that their opponents would be reluctant to answer Obama’s slurs for fear of being labelled political opportunists themselves.
You, Jim,must be really naive if you don’t believe a narcissist and corrupt political operator like Obama wouldn’t stoop to using murder victims to advance the Administration’s political agenda.
The BBC was full of much the same thing at the time. Mardell and several other Beeboids blamed Sarah Palin and openly speculated without evidence that the killer in Tucson was a Tea Partier/right-wingnut, then whined about the need for more gun control laws.
I’ve been expecting a cutting riposte from Jim Dandy after he implied that not only was I cynical about Obama’s use of murdered schoolchildren to advance his gun control agenda, but he also accused me of being sick for thinking such a thing.
After outlining Obama’s behaviour after certain tragic events which colours my belief of his political opportunism, I would have thought Jim D. might have replied.
What’s up, Jim? Have you no defence of Obama’s conduct?
Perhaps you could also answer me one question, Jim. Can you explain why Obama’s administration has ordered ONE BILLION rounds of ammunition for supposed use by the Forestry Commission?
Neither can I!
Andy, people are trying to call the President and His minions out, have been the whole time. They’re the ones the BBC and the Washington Post and our defenders of the indefensible call racist (or, as Mark Mardell suggests, crypto-racism).
In summary, it looks like Jim has unwittingly played devil’s advocate here, and in so doing helped to clarify and strengthen the arguments of Andy S, David P and Co.
It’s like condemning GWB for using the tragedy of 9/11 for the war on terror. Obama is using an event of unique horror to propose political action. It’s what many would expect of him, rather than shrugging issueing a homily or two and carrying on.
In the UK David controlling the availability is not a left right issue. There remains widespread support for what the believe social inclusion remains a key priority for ESF in the UK Government dud after Dunblane.
Not sure what happened with the last bit.
“believe social inclusion remains a key priority for ESF” shouldn’t be there!
‘Not sure what happened with the last bit.’
Frankly, not sure what is happening with most of your ‘bits’ these days but the metaphor is sound, still.
Especially on what should not be there.
Maybe a glitch in the Matrix?
‘It’s like condemning GWB for using the tragedy of 9/11 for the war on terror.’
What are you saying the left and the BBC don’t do exactly that ?
Indeed the left make exactly that point; as dumb as the US right in this instance.
Jim, that is absolute bullshit. The war on terror is/was directly related to 9/11. The debt ceiling is not. What the hell is wrong with you?
Sorry, misunderstood your point. It is indeed disingenuous to invoke the shootings for a broader political agenda. I thought mistakenly your point was about gun control. I see now I was wrong.
Jim, it would waste less time if you read and understood the posts properly.
Indeed it would.
Nicky Campbell and Rachel Burden bring us a very BBC 5 Live take on the news. Inadvertently they also do a passable impression of the Krankies.
This morning they have on their show a favourite BBC ancient historian.
http://humanities.exeter.ac.uk/theology/staff/stavrakopoulou/
‘Her research is primarily focused on ancient Israelite and Judahite religions, and portrayals of the religious past in the Hebrew Bible.’
[Hebrew Bible? The Bible, surely? Have some reaspect]
‘More specifically, she is interested in biblical traditions and religious practices most at off with Western cultural preferences.’
[‘….most at off….’? I suppose we are all prone to typos – even University of Exeter Profs]
‘Francesca’s media work includes presenting a three-part BBC documentary series about the Bible and archaeology, called Bible’s Buried Secrets, broadcast in the UK on BBC 2 in March 2011, and ‘talking head’ contributions to various television documentaries. She also appears regularly on BBC1’s debate shows The Big Questions and Sunday Morning Live, and has discussed biblical scholarship on several radio programmes.’
Oddly, although based at Exeter which is a significant recipient of funding from the Middle East, Francesca doesn’t touch on Arab and Islamic history. Always play safe – as they say.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/mar/14/gaddafi-regime-university-links-under-scrutiny
So, it is Christmas, chuckles our Nicky, so how much of the story of the Nativity is true?
Not a lot. (I paraphrase Prof Francesca here)
Beeboid: ‘So what would you say to Bible Literalists?’
Ahh, here is the BBC agenda!!!! It may be Christmas but always remember kiddies – it’s all a load of made up tosh. ‘Cos our Prof Francesca says so. Not us, honest!
And a similar BBC item on Islam? Hahahahahaha.
And what would you say to Koran Literalists? Hahahahaha
Im afraid decades of inaction have left the bBC rotten to the core.
I’m waiting for the Beeb to do a hatchet job on Islam and the Koran .. sorry, Qur’an … with the same gusto they use to disparage Judaism and Christianity. Next Ramadan would be an ideal time to expose the Islamic faith and their Prophet, wouldn’t it ?
Nicky Campbell doesn’t believe in the virgin birth but would probably claim that the world, the universe and everything derives from cosmic soup. I can’t see either belief morally or intellectually superior but what is it in the BBC psyche that seeks to bully, mock and cajole (selected) people holding different views to themselves? The BBC self-presumption of intellectual superiority and mindset that supports gratuitous mockery and bullying may well have played a part in the sad suicide of Jacintha Saldanha recently.
“Cosmic soup” as you put it is intellectually superior. Only a daftie believes in the virgin birth.
Explain why it is superior.
Koranic references to virgins also for dafties, Jim?
Yes.
I dunno, Science has proved that virgin births a possible.
Well, as it is now permissable in the UK to have all-female parents on a birth certificate……what further proof is needed? Wish Jim would keep up.
Then where did the cosmic soup come from, Jim? An immaculate conception? The point is serious: why do BBC presenters feel the need to belittle? Radio 5 Live jumped at the opportunity to mock the Royal Family during the hoax call afternoon and we all know the terrible result of that ‘joke’ blown out of all proportion by media such as the BBC. Nicky Campbell would be among the first to wag a finger if the subject of bullying came up on one of his shows.
nice to know mr dandy has all the answers.
Mr Dandy.I am no mathematician. But I think it only common sense to assume that the spontaneous emergence of an embryo in a womb is far less a whirlwind than than the spontaneous emergence of time and space from absolute nothing.
Well if you believe that the universe and everything in it was created by a divine power i.e. God then the concept of fertilising an ovum is small change.
If you don’t believe in a divine power you would believe that random molecules suddenly came together to create everything.
I suggest students of interview listen to Jenni Murray’s World Service encounter with Dr Alice Rivlin, a former U.S. Cabinet official, Obama advisor and an “expert” on the budget. I fear Dr Rivlin was a little disingenuous in two important answers, which were left unchallenged.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p011qhpz
On President Reagan, Dr Rivlin states: “The Reagan administration was making major changes and he came in – and he campaigned that he was going to cut taxes, and he did, and he campaigned on increasing the defence budget. If you cut taxes and increase the defence budget you’re very likely to create a deficit. There was a considerable cadre of economists in the Reagan camp who said, “Oh, we’re not going to create deficits because the economy is going to grow so fast that it will eliminate any deficits.” They sort of forgot that we were just coming out of a very serious stagflation in the 1970s and that inflation was very high, and the Federal Reserve who was in charge of inflation would take drastic measure to raise interest rates which they did under the leadership of Paul Volker and that threw the economy into recession and we did have big deficits.”
(27’00″ onward…)
But hold on! Wasn’t Dr Rivlin’s President Jimmy Carter responsible for the horrors of stagflation? Didn’t the Reagan tax cuts slash federal income tax rates, for taxpayers in every income bracket, by 25% over a three-year period thus allowing investment and growth? After the first year of readjustment, didn’t the US enjoy the most prosperous decade since WW2? Anyone listening to Dr Rivlin would believe that Reagan ushered in a ‘recession” and that was that! No follow-up questions from Jenni Murray.
Later in the interview Dr Rivlin extols the virtues of the findings and recommendations of the Simpson-Bowles Commission, a bi-partisan group, to tackle the USA’s current financial crisis. However, she fails to mention that her hero President Obama having set up the group, didn’t like what they said and walked away from their recommendations.
The sections of the interview about “a woman’s role in the world” and Dr Rivlin’s career are fine in a Woman’s Hour sort of way – what you’d expect.
But the subtle re-writing of economic history by omission from a wily old politician – yes, politician – needed to be challenged.
“BBC Takes Advice On Slashing Entwistle Pay-Off.
“Lawyers look at the £450,000 deal as MPs brand it
a ‘cavalier use of public money”‘and claim the BBC does not ‘get it’.”
http://news.sky.com/story/1027882/bbc-takes-advice-on-slashing-entwistle-pay-off
Anyone who has been alarmed by the BBC’s increasing tendency to shamelessly link major weather events to ‘climate change’ could take comfort from the ‘leaked’ draft of the the latest IPCC report (version AR5). The chapter on observations in version AR4 (Chapter 3) was written by notorious Climategate science abusers Phil Jones and Kevin Trenberth.
Version AR5 – where the equivalent chapter is Chapter 2 – is much less alarmist and seems to have been influenced by some rational science at last, especially when it comes to floods, droughts and storms:
“The most recent and most comprehensive analyses of river runoff which include newly assembled observational records do not support the AR4 conclusion that global runoff increased during the 20th Century.”
“New results indicate that the AR4 conclusions regarding global increasing trends in hydrological droughts since the 1970s are no longer supported”
“Recent re-assessments of tropical cyclone data do not support the AR4 conclusions of an increase in the most intense tropical cyclones or an upward trend in the potential destructiveness of all storms since the 1970s.”
Of course this is stuff many scientists (through peer-reviewed papers) – the ones the BBC choose to ignore because ‘the science is settled’ – have been saying for years and, of course, the report is still a draft, which will give the BBC a good excuse not to cover its inconvenient findings (as if!). But remember the above when the final version is issued, especially to what degree it has been ‘modified’ and by whom i.e. scientists, politicians or activists, and how it is then spun – sorry, I mean ‘reported’ – by the BBC. Whatever, it is being closely watched by people who believe in the true scientific method.
I noticed that ealier on when I watched this video clip of a fishing boat entering a harbour.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-20800411
Can anybody please explain to my single brain cell just why do we (humans) build breakwalls?
“‘We picked the wrong man’: Lord Patten could claw back some of George Entwistle’s controversial £450,000 payout after Pollard criticism”
By MARTIN ROBINSON
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2250955/BBC-boss-Lord-Patten-claw-George-Entwistles-controversial-450k-payout.html
And Patten was the wrong man to pick too.
“Chaos and incompetence at BBC over Savile scandal – yet STILL nobody gets the sack”
By SAM GREENHILL and PAUL REVOIR.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2250847/Chaos-incompetence-BBC-Savile-scandal–STILL-gets-sack.html
Patten’s intransigence and arrogance in the BBC interview today simply served to prove he was a round peg being inserted into a round hole (and what a hole they are both in – keep on digging).
Here’s a thought for the day.
In Britain in 2012 the BBC have taugh all of our political parties that they must be ‘progessive’.
Even in Scotland, where the Nationalists used to stuff their pillar boxes with explosive haggis, we now find Alex Salmond’s shortbread Tartan Tories are proud to declare themselves ‘progressive’. And they want to set the clock back to 1707.
For progressive read permissive. Think about the issues. Take anything, from drugs via sexuality to crime. Not literally. I mean think about what the modern BBC demands of our politicians on these subjects. Remember how the BBC attacks anyone who steps out of line and takes a non-progressive (non-permissive) view on such issues.
Friends of the BBC were very quick to express the view that Jimmy Savile was active at the Beeb ‘in the past’.
We are slowly beginning to find out how rotten to the core was the BBC’s Radio One ‘silo’.
But Radio One was the old BBC’s first toe in the water of permissiveness. Pre-Radio One the BBC was manned by plenty of Cambridge Marxists. True they worked for the KGB on the quiet and dated sailors but their day job was to speak RP, smoke pipes and wear cardigans.
Then there came Radio One, Jimmy Savile and permissiveness. All jolly good pill-popping, authority defying bonking fun. As it ‘appens, guys and gals.
We have changed terminology. Permissiveness is now progressiveness. And the BBC from top to botton is shot through with it. The BBC will defend it to the last. Sweep them away.
Test
The bBC, its love for Islamic terrorism and its hatred of the US
CIA drone strikes: Is the UK involved?
Now that the UK has thrown out of court a bid by day and Co to try and stop the Uk from having anything to do with the US, the bBC goes into plan b mode and starts to spread misinformation in which to further polarize the populace of these Isles.
The central argument for the bBC and its Ilk is the so called death count in Pakistan: (Note Pakistan and not afganistan)
“There are no US figures for the number of casualties from drone strikes, but researchers estimate the number of people killed in Pakistan since 2004 is between 2,500 and 3,300 – more than 170 of them children.”
Yet what the left don’t mention is the total death count from the region since hostilities began in …2002. Why that would be 40,000 killed of which the even the worse case scenario comes up with less than a tenth of all peoples killed in the region. So why does the left centre on the estimated figures for UAV deaths and not the actual figures for total deaths in the region.
Could it be that the use of the UAV has whittled down the followers of Islamic terrorism so much that they are having problems filling in the blank spaces. That the only way to combat death from above is to use the left in which to promote this viewpoint of indiscriminate death while remaining very silent on the 37,000 deaths on top of the extrapolated figure of 3000+ they loft up high as their rallying call.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-20807934
Funny enough while the left play the poor Islamic terrorist angle they leave out that last month Pakistan purchased 7 of the Chinese clone of the Predator CH-4 Drone (Pterosaur) and is looking at purchasing more. Where am I going with this? There can be no targeting of Islamic terrorists inside Pakistan without the help of the Pakistani government. A government which is more than happy in which to play the victim card when it comes to getting rid of Islamic terrorists in the north.
I’d be more interested to know how many people have been killed by US drone strikes since Jan. 31, 2008. I bet a certain Nobel Peace Prize laureate has killed nearly as many people as Israel has since then.
DP wrote:
I’d be more interested to know how many people have been killed by US drone strikes since Jan. 31, 2008.
As its Panto season, its only right for me to grant your wish:
Attacks Min Max death count
2008 36 219 344
2009 54 350 721
2010 122 608 1,028
2011 72 366 599
2012 45 212 336
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drone_attacks_in_Pakistan#Statistics
That didn’t come out well. so here is something that does it better:
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/map_of_the_week/2012/10/drone_strikes_map_shows_pakistan_drone_strikes.html
Thanks, pounce! Just what I’m looking for. There’s a link in the Slate piece to a nice body count estimate for the Nobel Peace Prize laureate: from low to high estimates, it’s anywhere from 1542 – 2682, over a period of four years. Apparently 18-23 % of those were innocent civilians, mostly women and children. That’s about as bad as any of the BBC’s estimates for Israel and Gaza. Yet….silence.
And that’s just Pakistan. Now to find the body count for Yemen, Somalia, and wherever else He spreads His wrath.
Talking of drones, apparently it is BBC favourite, Billy Bragg’s birthday.
Not silence.Panorama did a programme “the Secret Drone War” a few weeks ago on this. Rather one sidedly anti-Obama’s policy I thought from what I saw of it.
Admirable honesty again, but I recall a resident hall monitor laying down some rule or other on the acceptability of posting without dedicatedly reviewing the whole thing, from circling hippos to the latest Fry vehicle tail trail during the credits.
So what is ‘thought’ of ‘what is seen’ sounds a bit vague to qualify.
DRONES.
Are these two ‘news’ organisations reporting the same case?:-
1.) ‘Express-Tribune’, Pakistan:
“UK judges block action over US drone attacks in Pakistan”
http://tribune.com.pk/story/482477/uk-court-blocks-us-drone-case-raised-by-pakistani-petitioner/
2.) Islam Not BBC (INBBC), Britain:
“High Court blocks US drone intelligence case”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-20807934
I did like how the bBC inserted this about another country into the argument in which to try and implicate the UK
The UK operates its own unmanned drones in Afghanistan, but these operations were not part of this case.
In this case? what there are other cases where UK UAVs fly around Pakistan is there bBC, pray get your so called defence expert to inform us mortals about all of this?
DAILY MAIL COMMENT:
” Patten must take the blame for a sorry saga”
[Opening excerpt]:-
“It was a shameless display of sneering arrogance. In his interview on the Radio 4 Today programme yesterday, everyone, according to Lord Patten, was to blame for the BBC’s shortcomings over the Savile and McAlpine scandals but the Trust chairman himself.”
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2251411/DAILY-MAIL-COMMENT-Patten-blame-sorry-saga.html
“In 2013, can we call off the Culture Wars?
This year, there was a decisive shift in the Culture Wars in favour of the ‘illiberal liberals’. The wrong side is winning, in the wrong war.”
By Brendan O’Neill.
http://www.spiked-online.com/site/article/13212/