The last Open Thread seems to be bulging at the seams so here we go again……
Beeboids will be annoyed at this:-
“No more defence cuts, says David Cameron.
Defence spending will rise again to avert the threat of fresh cuts to the Armed Forces, David Cameron has promised.”
Not before time, PM Cameron has come to realise this.
But BBC-NUJ-Labour will demand that ‘Defence’ is decimated further; and that our money goes instead on increasing spending on’Welfare’, especially to the millions of recently arrived immigrants, largely under Labour government.
does anyone watch The Review Show? It’s complete utter bollocks
Whenever I might doubt for a moment that the BBC will only promote politically correct approved arts, then I watch the Review Show and am reassured that they really are very very biased to the left.
The BBC makes the sort of programmes BBC types like to watch. The BBC employs the kind of people that like the kind of programmes which BBC types like to watch. Your function is to pay for it.
At risk of giving a starving Flokker a morsel to gnaw on..
Wot… it’s all not ‘real’ then?
Thing is, like 70’s ITV wrestling ‘reality’ my Dad was happy to pretend was actual, most probably live with such rigging on Top Gear.
It’s just the daily ‘news’ versions that rankle.
I remember back in the 1980s when Top Gear was about cars.
Now it’s just a kids show.
But one is sure the BBC would strenuously deny any hint of dumbing down.
As with their addiction to ratings and tribal supporter vindication, much that is unique can be tolerated when the money’s flowing in.
Do you reckon they count as complaints about BBC right-wing bias?
Jeremy Clarkson is right wing. Jeremy Clarkson is on Top Gear. BBC gets complaints about Top Gear. BBC therefore gets complaints about being right wing.
Throw that into the stats. Who will ever know?!?!
“does anyone watch The Review Show?”
I take it you were being rhetorical there Mavis 😉
David Cameron and before him Tony Blair, tells us we’re fighting a war on terror.
So why are we importing millions of muslims into the country then ?
The 7/7 muslim bombers came from Bradford, not Afghanistan.
Sorry, I meant to say ‘Men’ instead of muslims.
War on men?
it’s all those islam(ic terror)ists
It is a sad inditement of the modern UK.
There was a time when we had the get up and go to get up and go to Johnnie Foreigner’s home turf and show him the benefits of English Civilisation.
Now we are so lazy we invite them to come here for their lessons. Its all very civil of us but it will only end in tears.
If the bBC made political broadcasts for the left of spectrum they would look this:
Muslim vigilantes: Peter Tatchell on homophobic abuse
The bBC, the traitors in our midst who try to tell you that actually black is white.
That was the most appalling clip I have ever seen…Thanks for posting Pounce.
They are so far up Islam’s arse, it has actually shocked me, watching that, I thought the homophobia slant would at least make the pinko beeboids sit up and take notice…..
Tis all OUR fault, for being phobic about a brutal, alien culture spreading through our towns and cities.
There’s none so blind as etc etc.
Ha ha! oh, that’s priceless! Love it!
Dear, oh dear, Tatchell. Beautiful piece of dhimmi work…
Dhimmis: it has proved unpopular on these pages to challenge some folk about the meaning of dhimitude. I never understood why, as defenders of the indefensible had a real problem with it. They even invented a new persona by whom the definition was invented.
Repetition does not invalidate any logic!
Pathos, absolute pathos, anyway, more to the point, what’s Peter Tatchell doing, walking about the streets of Lahore ?
To use the ananolgy that a liberal is just someone who hasn’t been mugged yet, tatchel is just someone who hasn’t felt the real effects of islam on homosexuals, not yet!
“Self-proclaimed Muslims”, eh? Are Tatchell and the BBC tacitly suggesting that this is a false flag operation? Or are they going with the standard “If they do anything bad, they’re not proper Muslims because Islam is about justice and fairness, full stop, and, shut up”?
I suppose Tatchell is supposed to hold absolute moral authority here because he has complained in the past about anti-homosexual sentiment in Mohammedan countries. Nice one, BBC. Keep trying to sweep it under the rug and tell anyone who’s concerned about this that they’re actually the problem. Your Social Cohesion plans are working out so well, aren’t they? Time for another special programme about more people turning to Islam.
How the bbC hides things it doesn’t want the great unwashed to see:
Galloway and Cameron on Arab dictators and Mali
So how many people have seen the above advertised on the bBC?
A better question for Galloway would be to ask which policy he disapproves of, support for jihadis or support for dictators.
Bit of ” pot and kettle” in that exchange huh?
David …. Can you clarify the point you are trying to make in your post regarding the origin of potential terrorist activity? Yes I understand that the 7/7 bombers came from Bradford and not Afghanistan… But surely you are not suggesting that based on this our intelligence should only look at the problem on home soil and rely on immigration to ensure no terrorists from abroad visit Bradford to safegaurd the people of the UK?? The truth is that both here and on foriegn soil terrorists remain active and in the case of `home grown` Jihadists, they are able to use the internet as a knowledge base for thier instruction and planning of bomb making and twisted ideals which fual thier hatred and disdain for humanity….. Also they travel abroad and allow thier passports etc. to be duplicated and also take part in training at camps from people who will never visit these shores…. The war on terror has to be both outward and inward looking for threats……
Justin, I cant speak for David, but I interpret his post as:
The 7/7 bombers were uk resident.
If the fools running the country had not allowed millions to come here such as those, we would not have to have any fears about terrorists acting within the uk. Well, certainly less to worry about anyway. Dont forget this foreign invasive culture follows a religion and ideology based in 7th century barbaric, savage practices.
Exactly my point . Japan has this quaint notion, that Japan should look like Japan, by having a very tight restriction on immigrants, thus no muslims, equals no muslim terrorism.
Our ruling elite, on the other hand, wants Britain to resemble the Tower of Babel !
It took a couple of nukes to put a stop to Japans` aggresive nature towards the world… It is based on a warrior class culture with strict rules regarding social hierachy, misguided values regarding honor, like Islam they have used suicide attacks in war, they also believe thier Emporer is a living God and until recently are a very insular society like the Muslims regarding other cultures and nationalities with disdain….. One of the main reasons they have a strict immigration policy due to overpopulation of thier home islands. also their treatment of the peoples of the Far East in the past has made potential migrants think twice about settling there…. But the main obstacle for any Muslims is not so much the border controls, Japan doesn`t provide much for those unwilling to work so a lot of Muslims have no reason to go there as there are no free handouts for lazy Arabs who contribute nothing to thier own society let alone anyone elses….
My internet has been down since Saturday night so I missed two chances to complain to BBc.
1 Breakfast calling the Union Flag a jack -again.
2 Those cult lovers at North West Nerws. “More young women are turning to islam”. Really? How many? Where did this information come from? All questions unanswered by the cult lovers. Yes the story of a woman and her “problems” that she has been forced to face- Yep name calling. All unsubstantiated of course, so lets take her word for it the presenter has. No mention of course of a woman being worth less than a man. Compare this PR exercise for the cult compared with the marked reluctance of North West to report on other aspects of the cults activities in Manchester and Liverpool. Yes BBc I’m sure you know exactly what I’m talking about I complained enough times to you about it.
Oh there was one I just remembered. Chief constable of Manchester Fahey. He wants positive discrimination for ethnics in top ranking Police jobs. Does the North West reporter point out that it might not follow the “EQUALITY” message we all have rammed down our throat? Take a wild guess clue the answer is two letters and starts with a n.
That’s what we want more Ali Dizaei’s. Last heard doing 4 years for God knows what.
Third world people third world ways.
Peter Fahy is fully Common Purposed and has long wanted discrimination against ethnic British police – pulling up the ladder on his countrymen after he himself has elbowed his way to the top of course.
I am rather surprised he wasn’t more fully on board with this Government plan to ‘fast track’ which could legitimise promoting young foreigners, without the need even for overt discrimination. Perhaps he’s just treading softly because he knows his reputation will sink like a stone among his workforce if he doesn’t appear to be cautious.
Hell…from James Anderton to Peter Fahy in only 25 years or so.
Probably as good a barium meal or radioactive tracer to show the cancer in the body politic as any I can think of.
In general, of course, BBC-NUJ takes its political line on police force/service from the police trade union, the Police Federation.
Happy with Union Jack here.
The Chief Executive (everyone’s a CEO these days) of the British Institute of Flagology (or whatevs) was on the radio before christmas saying Union Jack was perfectly acceptable. My old mate Jackie Mogg was on at the weekend (rightly) carping about pedants who affect a great knowledge of British maritime history by insisting on ‘Flag’. An affectation, nothing more.
Right up there with people who (think they) know one rule of grammar and that is when to use ‘fewer’ rather than ‘less’. Except they then consistently use ‘fewer’ when the should use ‘less’. BBC autocuties are particular sinners here – they actually pause after saying ‘fewer’ as though waiting for a round of applause.
“Thinking Allowed” Radio 4 at 00.15hrs on Monday. Climate Change Denial:
The Laurie Taylor Comedy Show
Yes it WAS, another piece of science censored dogmatic madness, in fact it was another comedy with psychiatrists. Must be the second time this year. I am sure that means that the BBC Climate Change policy for 2013 must be to only debate Climate Science with psychiatrists not atmospheric physicists.
They did not specify exactly what was being denied, I assumed they meant denial of AGW, but they did mention denial of weird weather. A case of being pig ignorant of the science, but absolutely certain of what is being denied.
They did not talk to anyone, not even a scientist, classed as a denier.
But suggested these reasons for “The Psychiatry of Denial“:
(1) They have a vested political interest in denial.
(2) Denying reality is part of the grief process.
(3) Turning a blind eye.
(4) A culture of denial.
(5) Too much reality, so they block it off.
(6) They cannot bare the truth.
(8) Denying the Facts.
This last one “Denying the facts” reminds me that this was what got the BBC Trusts knickers in a twist when Mensa members made a complaint. This is from the report in a Mensa publication about this complaint.
“Surprisingly the most blatantly biased statement by the BBC said that “Anthropogenic Global Warming is a fact” the IPCC using an assumption says “very likely” and the BBC which claims to be impartial says “fact“. This also does not come from the Royal Society. This evidence proves that the BBC takes a more extremely biased view than the IPCC or the Royal Society and conflicts with the BBC Trusts claim that impartiality is important. This also now leaves open the possibility of legal action against the BBC Trust which has continually refused freedom of information requests for details of how this decision was made by what the BBC calls “the best scientific experts“. I suspect the decision was made by Environmentalists not by Atmospheric Physicists.
The Mensa members got that right about the BBC Climate Change seminar. The BBC seem to have been warned by their legal team that “Anthropogenic Global Warming is a fact” would leave open the BBC to legal action for supporting scientific fraud.
The BBC Trust told the Mensa members that this was not mentioned or referred to in the BBC Trust Editorial Standards Committee’s finding. That was like saying we know we are biased but you can not take legal action against us because we will not include this in the monthly bulletin of the BBC Trusts Findings.
In the scientific method, once you make an assumption, you then try to prove whether that assumption is right or wrong. It is the fact that the assumptions have been proven wrong that is causing all the problems at the BBC.
As we await further developments, it now seems that there is growing cross party support in parliament to look into the bizarre Climate Change policy at the BBC. It is becoming apparent that climate scientists have surprisingly little influence over this policy, and are intimidated by a powerful group of neo-communist journalists, public relations people and green activists.
If you are unsure of who the magical 28 were that decided the science was settled in relation to global warming/climate change, here it is for your enjoyment Richard.
“The Psychiatry of Denial“:
amazingly,that is exactly how the bbc deals with the religion of peace
Religions, not Science, use the terms “believer” and “Denier”. In science, for instance, I know of two very serious errors in the Met Office computer models, but I am not sure this is because of ignorance or denial due to the implications of the errors for the man made climate change scam.
There’s an added post in comments by the author on the matter of 28Gate, too.
Bogus breakfast again. Serious faces on presenters over “bedroom Tax”. Does it apply to family’s who have soldiers on active service? WTF? Err I spent 6 years in HM forces apart from being on exercise or active service, HM Forces will relieve you of money TO PAY FOR YOUR ACCOMODATION unless that’s changed. So I assume the uninformed will thing little Johnny lives at Mummy & Daddy’s house and wanders in to the base which is of course right next to where Mummy & Daddy live. Ho hum I remember one year when I was in Berlin I had 2 weeks leave in the whole of the year. Spot the red herring.
And in the complete absence of any evidence that any such event took place, never mind agaisnt what, Jeremy Bowen on the Today programme this morning condemned Israel for an attack on Syria. Never mind that this purported attack may have been on a weapons convoy to stock up Hezbollah for its next attack on Israel. Even Russia has qualified it’s comments by questioning whether anything has taken place, but Jeremy Bowen obviously knows better. This was then compounded by the later interviewer when she asked our Defence Minister, Mr Hammond, not for facts, because they aren’t available, but for his feelings about this attack. She had to be immediately reminded that no facts existed, and why would any minister comment on anything that might even be a complete fabrication ?
The BBC – fast becoming a New-Age, fact-free, feelings-based News Service.
‘she asked our Defence Minister, Mr Hammond, not for facts, because they aren’t available, but for his feelings about this attack.’
“It’s ‘news’ Jim, but not as we know it.”
Mr. Bowen’s report was doubtless about right based on his comfort in his beliefs of rectitude.
….and just catching a BBC TV ‘news’ report…. well, it has now become a fact, as far as the BBC is concerned, that Israel has bombed targets (note the plural now) in Syria. They got round any doubt expressed by Russia by quoting another statement which had no qualifier included, and now Russia ‘would condemn any attack on Syria….. ‘ i.e., for the hard of thinking, this is not a general statement (which it clearly is), but one, as far as the BBC is concerned, about a specific attack by Israel.
At the end of the day – it MAY BE that Israel has targetted something within Syria’s borders. But, amazingly, Syria has provided no photographic evidence of any weapons establishment which it claims has been ‘attacked’. There has been no thought given to other possible options for an explosion at a weapons base, such as an accidental explosion, the local ‘insurgents’ waging war with Bashar al-Assad’s government, the possibility that it’s all a sham by Assad to deflect interest from what he’s doing within his own country, the possibility that it really was a truck filled with advanced weaponry heading for Hezbollah…. etc., etc.
Is it not also strange that the BBC has not uttered (to my knowledge) the usual phrases which accompany reports (even with film) like those which depict Assad’s murderous attacks on his own people – such as… “This report is unconfirmed by any independent source….”
Basically the BBC is showing its true colours on this one…..let’s not bother with any verification that anything has even taken place, but condemn Israel out of hand on the basis of some claim by a government which has lost all credibility across the world .
And just to compound matters, The Daily Telegraph has, on its ‘World’ news pages, a heading “Russia ‘deeply concerned’ over Israeli attack on Syria”, when the text in the article actually says that Russia WOULD BE concerned about any attack… i.e. the text indicates conditionality. But much worse, the headline is accompanied by a photograph of someone next to a building clearly under attack from someone. Only when you get right into the article does it become apparent that the photograph is of an attack by Assad’s forces against the Syrian insurgents – and it has absolutely nothing to do with the article whatsoever.
Shoddy, biased, and downright deceitful reporting like this is tainting our media…. never mind what Leveson says – we shouldn’t be gagging the media but we should damn-well demand a bit of honesty.
‘Only when you get right into the article does it become apparent that the photograph is of an attack by Assad’s forces against the Syrian insurgents’
Seems to be a tried and trusted [sic] ‘reporting’ technique now.
If they ever sort out the beard on beard predilictions of the Religion of Peace Activists, I’m worried where the media will get their deliberately mis-attributed next.
A previous online article said that “these reports have not been confirmed,” but they went ahead and shouted it from the rooftops anyway. Israel has done something similar in the past, so this must be true. All the people the BBC respects more than Israel say it’s true, so it must be.
I mean, it probably is true, but it would be nice if the BBC was more open about reporting incidents going the other way.
Just read the BBC report…. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-21281923
The `Analysis by Jim Muir begins with….
“Amid a welter of contradictory reports and rumours, it seems to be established that Israel did mount a lightning air strike inside Syria, despite complete silence from Israeli officials.” WTF??? What does that sentence even mean??? `It seems established`…. `Amid a welter of contradictory reports and rumours`… and the last part `despite complete silence from Israeli officials.`…. WOW!!
Then there`s the third paragraph which is completely untrue.. `That is exactly what has happened, with Syria and its ALLIES IRAN and HEZBOLLAH saying the attack exposed complicity between Israel, the West, and the SYRIAN OPPOSITION.` …. Iran and Hezbollah are in no shape or form an ally of Assad and his Alawhite sub sect of Islam and the Syrian opposition is being armed by Iranian and Hezbollah sources…. Taking into account the fact that the Iranians and Hezbollah despise Isreal so much I hardly think that the anti Assad militias count the IDF as being on thier side…
Seriously ….. I am going to male a formal complaint about this….. They have no proof of anything… or that something even happened, the video footage shows a Jet plane in the air and a picture of a wreckage next to a defensive wall….. I want to know why they are quoting Iranian news sources and relaying Political statements being made by Iranian diplomats from within Iran itself….. Also why are they quoting Syrian State media reports as fact???
I think you’re a bit mistaken there: Iranian and Hezbollah personnel are fighting side by side with Assad’s men against the rebels.
Why on earth would a Shia based Islamic state which already has been proven to be arming the so called rebellion in Syria and also Hezbollah in Lebanon fight alongside a regime ruled by the Baath party (same as Iraq b4 Sadaam was deposed) ??? The truth is… the so called free Syrian army is a vast number of fundamentalist and Jihadist groups who have one thing in common…. They want an Islamic state, and Iran wants it too… Where do you suppose the arms convoy which was hit on its` way to Lebanon came from?? There isn`t a missile factory underneath a mountain in the Golan heights you know…. Iran wants to gain a foothold in the Mediterranean and control of Syria would provide a link up with Lebanon and also put them close enough to attack Israel too…. This is why they are also lending full backing to the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt… Assads regime is in the way of wiping out Israel…. Although the eventual outcome of the revolt in Syria may not end with an Iranian influenced regime, the confusion and lack of a centralised aministration will supply enough time for Iran to place enough firepower along the borders to attack Israel….. They know that a Russian backed Gov`t will end up in charge of Syria, both Israle and Syria act as counter balances between East and West and also prevents the region from becoming a no go zone for shipping and trade in the region…. Iran is not fighting alongside Syrian forces, it is nonsense to think that they are…… Assad is in the way and like I said before the arms are coming from somewhere aren`t they???
News at 10pm on Radio 4 made the Syria airstrike the second main item of “news”, with comments from all over including Barbara “Tears for Arafat” Plett at the UN,
Another example of the BBC;s anti-Israel agenda, How can this incident – IF it happened – possibly be worth such prominence ?
There’s a word for this sort of article – ‘Agitprop’
All those days in the Students Union do not seem to have been wasted on the Beeboids.
This mornings cosy chat between Ken Clark and John Humphreys about the UK in or out question. According to Humphreys there was only a small proportion of tory MPs who wanted out of the EU, There will be very few interviews with articulate Outers. Mandleson was also back on TV yesterday being listened to with great care.
We know all about the BBC’s relentless promotion of man-made global warming and sea level rise, but as the scientific data shows this to to be absolute bollocks, they resort to slipping in their message – usually about three-quarters way through an article of video.
Here’s ‘Memories of the great flood of 1953’ with some unchallenged bozo from the Environmental Agency doing his bit for the BBC pension funds (2:05)
Did they mention Gordon Brown using the East Coast flood defences money to pay for an EU fine?
yesterday on the Biased Bleaters Corportation I listened to The Media Show on Radio 4. On it were two astonishing interviews which show just how out of touch some people are.
Firstly, there was some media big wig who was pontificating as to whether or not Murdoch should be allowed to merge the Times and the Sunday Times. According to this chap the very strong argument against this was that by doing so the public would lose a degree of plurality of news, and be denied the diversity of opinion, that they currently get, which he pointed out, had decreased markedly over the past thirty years.
Of course this is the strongest possible argument for getting rid of the near monopoly of news and current affairs broadcasting that the BBC currently enjoys. Even if the BBC was doing a fine job opposite it’s charter it would still be unhealthy for so much power to be concentrated in one organisation. Of course the fact that they are state funded by a poll tax exacerbates the issue.
Secondly, a BBC senior person was interviewed and complained that the press didn’t have the same obligations to be total impartial and objective that the BBC had.
It completely passed him by that we can choose which newspaper we buy, so we can choose which ever type and degree of bias suits us. We can’t do that with the BBC because we have to pay them our money whether we want their service or not and whether we agree or disagree with any bias that they show. How can these BBC types be so arrogant and how can they get away with it?
I think that they believe themselves to be an elite which has the only valid view of how things should be and has been tasked with guiding the ordinary people in the country through life and ensuring that they make sensible liberal left choices for the common good. They really are that arrogant!
‘a BBC senior person was interviewed and complained that the press didn’t have the same obligations to be total impartial and objective that the BBC had.’
This was the mantra at the height of Leveson, and OFCOM was there to ensure broadcasters were driven snow.
Unsure if Schofield/Savile and Newsnight’Leveson supports that.
But tell it often enough, guys…
“..a BBC senior person was interviewed and complained that the press didn’t have the same obligations to be total impartial and objective that the BBC had.’
maybe, but there is a clear difference between having an obligation and fulfilling that obligation. The BBC may have the former, but as sure as heck, it does not even aspire to the latter.
Yo big up to ma homeboys at da BBC
is this an early april fool?
Suspect. It’s not.
One of the most depressing things about mass immigration is the debasement of the English language by ebonic, patois speaking ‘yoofs.’
Strange how everyone at the BBC from the 1930s right up to the 1970s spoke like Celia Johnston out of Brief Encounter, in that very clipped staccato way. Now it’s swung 180 degrees in the opposite direction.
Rap is poetry for retards.
Always sad to hear 50, 60, 70 year old men on the telly/ radio spouting ‘gonna’, ‘wanna’, ‘kina’ as though they’re fresher week students chatting up a piece of skirt.
Or, even worse, writing it.
Rap is one of those enriching imports that I try not to comment on. I’m concerned that, sooner or later, I’d have plod (who have nothing better to do) knocking on my door.
It’s is simply missing a ‘C’ from the beginning of the word. Innit.
Blimey, that strumming beardie-weirdie who usually handles such sycophantoditty gigs will be miffed at the new boy in da hood.
Be funny if he pulls a classic spurned staffer and heads to the Mail to plead ‘Is it ‘cos I am white?’
Comments are disabled for this video.
Hey, just like a BBC blog! Probably wise, though.
Da BBC’z bizziniz…day iz keepin’ it real….innit.
Be still my beating heart!
The BBC Today programme somehow managed to get Kenneth Clarke on to say his little piece on what he thought of the E.U.
Now this is news-what will the great oracle and sage of our age say about this confounded, confusing referendum thing….do tell us Ken!
And Humphrys teed him off nicely-for not only Clarke was about to break cover with his musings…but Lord Peter Whimsy, and the charismatic Danny Alexander were in full agreement with our Kens views on the E.U Referendum.
Now I would hate to spoil your surprise about what Ken said about his views on Europe…you`ll have to go to iPlayer for the results…but it`s fair to say that Ken thinks that there`s not enough pro-EU gubbins all over the media outlets…why the BBC itself doesn`t make its own views clear…despite Eurovision and EU sluices being opened 24/7…it`s not enough…bloody plebs in danger of thinking for themselves and all that!
Mandelson…Clarke what a tag team eh?
Heseltine and MacShane next I imagine…for this is not mere politics, dear boy…but a national consensus of goodness…bit like kicking the chocolate bar around the trenches that Christmas of 1914, or whenever.
Hope the BBC plant a tree or two to compensate for their constant digging up of old fossil fools, to spout what Barossa wants said between now and 2015….
Yesterdays run up to the 8am news managed to put the skids under the police.
Today it was the Armys turn to be unaccountable and cover ups.
Any chance of yet another “agency of order, trust, tradition and necessary integrity” getting its shellsuits and smalls aired in public for the likes of Monty and Jim to judge on their Daz-white goodness, I wonder?
The BBC?…any questions for the BBC?…no, never are….just a suggestion box begging them all to have yet more money!
Appreciating the BBC has only limited space on twitter to get its message across, the phrasing of this intrigued..
BBC News (UK)(@BBCNews)
Many hospitals not sharing violent crime data – despite coalition pledge bbc.in/11i2Frn
All good and factual.
However, it’s the conflation of the two notions that cranked an eyebrow.
It would seem to me that the coalition is being held to account… for a failure the godlike NHS is responsible for.
Now there may be something in our medical profession being tied up doing a ton of stuff not as such medical, but which do you want, BBC, as you appear to be wishing to assign blame but not upon those who are responsible.
Which would move from reporting to political agitation.
Good catch. Can’t wait for the BBC to then make a fuss about the Coalition meddling in the precious NHS when they try to do something about this.
‘His past life is there for all to see on the pinko wonkshop’s website. For some reason the BBC omitted to mention that to their viewers…’
For some reason…
5Live have been describing it as ‘the indepenendent Resolution Foundation think tank’ all day. Let’s have a look at a few more of their staff.
Gavin is a leading media commentator on politics and public policy – writing for the Guardian, FT, Prospect as well as being a regular blogger for the New Statesman
Deputy Chief Executive
Vidhya spent three and a half years in Washington D.C, initially as a Harkness Fellow in Healthcare Policy conducting independent, comparative research and then working for the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation at the US Department of Health and Human Services Before moving to the USA, Vidhya was a Senior Policy Advisor at HM Treasury and at the Prime Minister’s Strategy Unit working on policy for children, young people and families.
(so worked for Blair/Brown, I take it)
Director of Policy and Development
From 2008 to 2009 he worked in the Prime Minister’s Policy Unit at 10 Downing Street
(A Brown boy)
Senior Research and Policy Analyst
Prior to joining us, she worked on criminal justice issues at the national charity Victim Support. Before this, she was at the Prime Minister’s Delivery Unit, HM Treasury, working primarily on policy on children, education and skills.
(a Brown/Blair girl)
Communications Officer and Research Assistant to the Chief Executive
Prior to joining the Resolution Foundation, Joe was a Research Intern at Demos where he contributed to the Home Front report on parenting and the Open Left project
The Resolution Foundation had donations of £870,000 last year (Charity Commission website) but their accounts give no clue as to who donated. Anybody have a clue? I have never seen a charity box in the street for them.
Can answer my own question with info kindly supplied by Guido in 2011.
Resolution Foundation is bankrolled by Clive Cowdery, an insurance tycoon and Labour donor. Cowdery sold Resolution Plc in 2007 for £5 billion, earning himself close to £150 million. As is the way with these things, he has based his company offshore in Guernsey, to minimise tax exposure, like The Guardian does. The company is effectively run from London through the limited liability partnership Resolution Operations LLP, the company made £1,189 million in net profit. If it was domiciled in the UK corporation tax on these profits could have amounted to £333 million.
I want to begin by paying tribute to the work of the Resolution Foundation… Politics today is being conducted in the shadow of the financial crisis: the argument about the deficit and how to return the economy to growth. But what your work is showing is that we cannot settle for a return to business as usual: life before the crisis hit.
That deficit is not helped by Resolution shirking one-third of a billion pounds in taxes. Gordon Brown’s former deputy chief of staff and economic adviser, Gavin Kelly, runs the foundation.
Now only this morning I heard Evan Davies sneer at one he interviewed as he asked if he had put his name to something because he was a ‘Toree’ donor. Sorry I cannot find the running order for the first half of the Today programme on their site. Shame the Today programme didn’t mention that Resolution is funded by a Labour donor.
Contrary to many of my fellow countrymen, I have long held the view that one of the ‘stars’ who has is a real example to his fellow sportsmen is David Beckham.
He comes across, to me at least, as a gentleman, damned good at his chosen profession, modest about his achievements, a real Brit, and, given today’s news item below, a genuine guy beyond comparison in today’s ‘celeb’ world. I would sink a pint with him anywhere in the world, at any time.
Kevin Hutchinson-Foster has been found guilty of supplying the gun to Mark Duggan, whose death was used as an excuse for ethnic riots, arson and looting,
As usual, the bBBC uses their favourite photo of Duggan, looking as innocent as any career-criminal can be, instead of the more honest photo of him pretending to hold a gun.
Anyone betting that the rioters will now turn round and apologise for their behaviour on a false pretence, and repay the millions to the property owners on whom they inflicted so much damage – and that the put-up do-gooders/apologists who bleated that this was a response to the wicked state and its attitude to the ‘yoof’ in these areas will now apologise for their capacity to swallow so much dreck…. ?
…whistles whilst watching the progress of the tumbleweed blowing through town and waiting for any response from any of those mentioned…
The shooting of ‘saintly’ Mark Duggan didn’t spark the race riots. no, it was poverty, social exclusion of minorities, lack of basketball playing facilities for ‘yoofs’, greedy bankers, tory cuts, the global economy, capitalists in top hats smoking Havana cigars, etc etc.
So long as the elephant in the room is ignored. Meanwhile someone in the media dares tell the truth.
”He explained that about 80 per cent of gun crime took place in the black community. I smiled uncomfortably. But no, he said, it was worse than that. Then he told me that 80 per cent was black on black gun crime, and that of the remaining 20 per cent about 75 per cent involved at least one black person.”
Check out this massive BBC piece offering succor to late-term abortion and fretting over the banning in the US of destroying late-term unborn disabled babies. A new documentary about the last few doctors willing to kill disabled babies who would be born otherwise perfectly healthy with no danger to the mother’s health. Of course, they destroy perfectly healthy unborn babies as well, but the focus is on the eugenics angle. The documentary screening required heavy security, the BBC cries, making sure to tell you that it’s because a doctor who did this kind of thing was murdered for it a few years ago. Naturally, this profile in courage received a standing ovation at the very Left-wing Sundance festival.
The BBC is worried that the ability to take a step toward Nazi-style eugenics is in jeopardy. Who will provide women this choice in future? Awwww.
Once these doctors are gone, it’s unclear who will provide women this service and if it will still be accessible.
The Albuquerque clinic is training a new doctor, but eight states have amended their abortion law to prohibit the procedure after 20 weeks.
20 weeks. Sounds innocuous until you understand that this is about banning abortions in the final trimester, a stage where modern technology often provides for survival of babies born prematurely. The BBC doesn’t like to think about that because it makes ordinary people take notice. So they use the language of advocates instead. They point out that the film itself is done in sober fashion, without going into the politics, but make the extra effort to inform you all about the politics. It’s “controversial”, you see, but in a good way, since the BBC approves of it. As opposed to other “controversial” things which the BBC doesn’t like. In those cases, all kinds of opposing voices get through.
Complete promotion of the ideology, no dissent allowed. Also, no mention of the term “eugenics”, or anything like that. Don’t want to distract from the message. If anything, they try to play this procedure and these families who don’t want to deal with disabled children as victims of a general opposition to all abortions, full stop.
When does the BBC discuss US incomes and top earners without whining about income inequality? When they can use it to suggest that the new tax increases from their beloved Obamessiah won’t hurt so much after all.
US personal incomes jump ahead of New Year tax rise
US personal incomes jumped 2.6% in December, the biggest monthly increase since 2004, as high earners sought to beat a New Year tax rise.
Oh, did they now?
“Personal income in November and December was boosted by accelerated and special dividend payments to persons and by accelerated bonus payments and other irregular pay in private wages and salaries in anticipation of changes in individual income tax rates,” the Commerce Department’s Bureau of Economic Analysis said.
Yes, indeed. People like Al Gore and George Lucas and that Facebook guy and all the other extraordianrily wealthy people who sold off assets before year’s end. Funny I never saw a BBC report highlighting the greed of these people. Not even a concerned tweet. I know they reported about that Facebook guy awhile back, because he was giving up his citizenship as part of the deal. I’m talking about there being no BBC special report on how all these famously wealthy but Left-leaning people were contributing to what Katty Kay often moans about as the growing problem of income inequality.
Now, about that “jump”.
Other factors also exaggerated the income increases in the two months, including lump-sum benefit payments handed out in December, and the loss of income for many in the New York area during October because of disruption from Storm Sandy.
Excluding all of these special factors, incomes rose 0.6% in November and just 0.4% in December – in line with the trend increase during the rest of the year.
Most of the windfall income was not spent, with the US personal savings rate increasing from 4.1% of income in November to 6.5% in December.
So, not even a whole percentage point – Nov and Dec average out to half a point – yet it’s still a “jump”? David Cameron would love that kind of enthusiasm. Still, I wonder why everyone is suddenly starting to save more money? Any thoughts about that, BBC?
Beeboids don’t like PM Cameron for this:-
PM Cameron, (who is a bit of a Mr Slippery marketing man), is currently showing something like international leadership qualities for the West, given that Obama has abdicated his own role to the Muslim Brotherhood.
Following his (limited) democratic critique of the E.U, Cameron now show his (implicit) support for opposition to jihadists in Africa as he develops diplomatic activity with personal visits to Algeria and Libya.
Meanwhile, as for Obama and Clinton:-
“STATE DEPT. RECRUITS MUSLIM FOREIGN SERVICE OFFICERS AT JIHADIST CONFERENCE”
Stand by for green on blue attacks on a whole new level?
In this BBC report about the sub-optimal performance of Sen. Hagel in front of the Senate committee to judge whether or not he’s fit for being Defense Secretary, Steven Kingstone says this in the “Analysis” inset:
It’s also clear that some of Mr Hagel’s former Republican colleagues have deep misgivings about his judgement. There’s a discernible suspicion that he would prove soft on Iran.
The BBC mentions concerns about Iran in the main body of the report as well, and have previously covered concerns about Hagel possibly being soft on Iran. Here’s what Kingstone and the BBC don’t want you to know:
Ted Cruz blasts Hagel over interview agreeing that America is the world’s bully
Hagel: Iran Has ‘Elected, Legitimate’ Government
I know the BBC agrees with Hagel on the former, but I don’t think anyone at the BBC other than Jeremy Bowen actually believes the latter. But the BBC will still try to tell you that it will be the fault of evil Republicans if there are no Republicans in the President’s new Cabinet.
News Sniffer is an interesting resource.
It shows how BBC stories can evolve over time.
For example, the BBC wanted to use the anniversary of the floods of 1953 to frighten us with an extended lecture on coastal flooding. Even going so far as to raise the spectre of Hurricane Sandy! Watch out Norfolk!
But the BBC decided to make a major cut in the story. All of this has now disappeared……
‘In Holland and Belgium the destruction was even worse, with more than 3,000 people killed.
More than 1,000 miles of British coast, from Shetland to Kent, was affected by the storm.
The Environment Agency said that, despite major improvements to sea defences and warning systems, 1.3m people or one in 25 homes in England and Wales remained at risk of coastal flooding.
David Rooke, the Environment Agency’s director of flood and coastal risk management, said: “The extra protection and reassurance flood defences give to many communities should not be under-estimated but nor should the reality that tidal surges along the coast still happen regularly.
“We cannot afford to be complacent and the experiences in the United States during Hurricane Sandy should make us pause and reflect on the destructive power of a major coastal surge.”
The floods were the catalyst for major flood defence investment, notably the Thames Barrier and Thames estuary defences which protect 1.2 million people.
Other schemes completed since 1953 include a scheme at Jaywick protecting 2,600 properties, a £6m scheme at Canvey Island and a beach replenishment programme to bolster flood defences along the Lincolnshire coast, protecting more than 23,000 homes.
In the last 10 years, more than £250 million has been spent on coastal defences in Lincolnshire, Norfolk, Suffolk and Essex.
Much of the investment has been focused on areas where there was major loss of life in 1953.
The Environment Agency added that improvements in flood forecasting, including the use of tide, wave and weather data, meant businesses and emergency responders were now better prepared.’
Posts not appearing?
Here’s how important job creation really is to the President:
President Obama takes heat for ‘laying off’ jobs council
You’re fired! Council on Jobs and Competitiveness was to collect ideas and get feedback on job creation. Republicans were quick to point out its ‘layoff’ comes on the heels of news that the economy retracted in the 4th quarter.
President Obama took some heat from Republicans on Thursday as word emerged that he is disbanding his jobs council even as there are fresh signs the U.S. economy is still struggling.
The Council on Jobs and Competitiveness was created in January 2011 to get ideas and feedback on jobs creation from business leaders.
A White House official told The Associated Press that the President does not plan to extend its charter after it sunsets on Thursday, although he will continue reaching out to the business community.
No heat from Democrats or the Left-wing press (the Daily News is resolutely Left-wing except for a couple of editorial writers – there is no political influence from the publisher), which tells you something. The President hasn’t met with the group in over a year, and not even Senate Democrats would pass any of his awesome jobs plans. Oh, and before the last election, at least one member of the council endorsed Romney.
wondering when the BBC will do a version of The New Normal?
The bBBC racist Asian Network has a ‘news’ story about a Muslim family forced to move home after offensive graffiti nearby.
Have the Asian Network covered the Muslim vigilante gangs attacking white people who dare to walk in their ghetto?
More importantly, has the Asian Network given much prominence to Peter Tatchell’s call for tolerance of homosexuality in light of the “Muslim vigilante” video?
Another secretive BBC panel shocker! What possible justification is there for keeping the identities of a bloody music awards panel secret?? The ‘protected journalism’ excuse to dismiss a FOI is becoming an increasingly abused piece of spurious dishonesty to avoid accountability.
You would think that asking for and receiving the names of the judges of a set of BBC awards would be a straightforward matter. The corporation’s own awards guidelines, available on its website, demand transparency. So it was surprising that when I asked who chose the winners of the BBC Radio 2 Folk Awards, thinking I’d write about them in my music blog, The Glamour Cave, I was told it was a secret.
It was a more unpleasant surprise that a follow-up Freedom of Information request was denied on the grounds that the award ceremony, in the view of the BBC’s FoI department, was protected as ‘journalism’. If an awards ceremony qualified as journalism, I was left wondering, then what could they possibly consider my blog to be? Did I want to know?
Perhaps it was stocked with more ̶t̶o̶s̶s̶p̶o̶t̶ ̶l̶e̶f̶t̶y̶ ̶a̶c̶t̶i̶v̶i̶s̶t̶s̶ ‘independent’ pundits. This piece of small-minded, prejudiced nonsense posing as ‘social justice’ commentary reads like a script from Citizen Smith…
Mumford & Sons…class traitors – all the buzz words are there – class, race, privilege, capitalism blah blah blah…
The IPCC somewhat under the spotlight today, with claims it’s over-staffed by ex-police persons less likely to find out of favour with colleagues who may have acted less than professionally.
Should any BBC types decide a bit of fuzz-bashing is tempting, maybe as another unique set of precedents they can claim it’s ‘their little secret’ (also (c) BBC CECUTT) and matters of accountability the media should not bother their pretty little heads with.
It’s good to have standards, but when they are doubled like a DG’s hush money, credibility can suffer.
The BBC twittosphere already digging a nice hole with their point man Keith Vaz coming out with some peachy quotes that I can’t wait for the BBC to claim they can hold others to account on.. But they are exempted from, uniquely.
Rachel Burden on BBC 5 Live asks ‘Are the English arrogant?’
You know Rachel – she plays principal boy to Nicky Campbell’s panto dame.
Rachel is a Plastic Paddy who let slip that she planned not part with her London suburban house when she had to move to Salford – because she expected London house prices to rise faster than those in the North West. Power to the people, eh Rachel?
Anyway, what’s all this about the English being arrogant?
I’ve been watching and listening carefully to the BBC and as I was led to understand there was no such thing as the English! That area of the British Isles off the coast of France that lies between Wales, Ireland and Scotland has no particular culture or character. In contrast to it’s neighbours, it is inhabited by a mongrel race only defined by their diversity – that’s right wasn’t it BBC?
According to the BBC, the English don’t exist – except when they want someone to look down upon and sneer at for not holding the correct, metro-left friendly opinions – in which case we fade into focus just long enough for them to attach the prefix ‘Little’.
I wonder if Rachel Burden is one of the 174 Beeboids taking advantage of the scheme to pocket almost 4 grand a month (before taxes, if that makes you feel better) to cover their mortgage for a couple years until they can sell their home? The BBC has also offered to sell employees’ homes for them, although one assumes even the guaranteed price isn’t enough for her. Never mind a possible five-figure “relocation” bag of cash. So she can rent the place out for a while, essentially double-dipping, then sell at a handsome profit. All at your expense.
If she has any brains (or a sharp accountant), that’s what she’s doing. And only Right-wing extremists who want to shut the BBC down object to it, right?
White men kill Asian.
That’s the weekend cancelled for Beeboids. It’s overtime-tastic!
Rudely awoken this morning by Toady’s daily blathering about gays and climate change. Two gay issues – one of which was about HIV (or Haitch I V, according to the interviewee), and how because it was considered less of a fatal threat, bareback riding was becoming rife. I couldn’t believe mu goaty ears. Why do we have to endure this homosexual crap every bloody morning?
Then an item on moths, ending with the inevtable climate change reference.
Do they do it on purpose to wind me up, do you think?
Yuck, yuck and thrice yuck.
This, after the Channel 4 News was in thrall last night to Al Gore. The less said about that, the better. John Snow should be lined up with the beeboids and shot.
INBBC will still campaign for 80 million Muslim Turks to get entry to E.U, as part of the ‘left’s Islamising programme:-
“#MyJihad in Turkey: Two dead in jihad-martyrdom suicide bombing at U.S. Embassy in Ankara”
Never mind the bbc, we have a conservative pm campaigning for the same thing FFS!
Turkey Schmurkey….those EU loving Bulgars are already on their way here…..
‘Ivanov is in intensive care after being hit four times by bullets fired from an automatic rifle from a building opposite the Vitosha Boulevard entrance of the Sofia court building on January 29. He had been arriving for a hearing in his appeal against an eight-year jail sentence.’
A 20 year old woman has been attacked in East London by having acid thrown in her face. The attacker fled the scene.
Please see BBC report here – http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-21299687
So far, so dhimmi.
The real story ??
20 year old lingerie model has acid thrown in her face by a woman wearing a niqab.
a wild guess here but was she possibly a follower of the religion of peace.
FFS how much longer will the BBC cover up for these child abusing , murderous FUCKING SCUM.