Here you go. This is a Selfridges approved Vince Cable endorsed open thread for your attention.
WEDNESDAY OPEN THREAD
Bookmark the permalink.
Search Biased BBC
Recent Comments
- tomo April 20, 2024 at 12:46 pm on Weekend 20th April 2024https://twitter.com/iainpdooley/status/1781584523404132824
- Deborah April 20, 2024 at 12:30 pm on Weekend 20th April 2024Some years ago Barnet Council took the decision to be ‘light touch’ councilling. Those of us who believed in low...
- Zephir April 20, 2024 at 12:05 pm on Weekend 20th April 2024Ditto, maybe I should explain further.. Yes, Benjamin Britten, with an e Aldeburgh is a coastal town in the county...
- Deborah April 20, 2024 at 12:03 pm on Weekend 20th April 2024I had been a reall BBC junky, certainly from listening first thing in the morning to the Today programme to...
- Thoughtful April 20, 2024 at 12:02 pm on Weekend 20th April 2024Ah, perhaps I should explain further. Peter Grimes is a rather dark opera by Benjamin Brittan. Peter Grimes is not...
- Fedup2 April 20, 2024 at 11:54 am on Weekend 20th April 2024Double - yes - i used to listen to Today out of duty - as a witness to what they...
- Zephir April 20, 2024 at 11:49 am on Weekend 20th April 2024It would not have been a problem if I was still working at a local authority, they swan in at...
- Zephir April 20, 2024 at 11:28 am on Weekend 20th April 2024I don't know if she was Welsh but got stuck for 10 miles behind some twat driving at 20 mph...
- taffman April 20, 2024 at 11:13 am on Weekend 20th April 2024"20mph Wales: Some roads to revert to 30mph after backlash" https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-68859568 It looks like as if someone in the ...
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
Significant info here for INBBC-
“Selfridges assistant not punished after refusing to serve friend of English Defence League leader Tommy Robinson”
http://metro.co.uk/2013/09/18/selfridges-assistant-facing-sack-after-refusing-to-serve-friend-of-english-defence-league-leader-tommy-robinson-4045661/?
Of course, there is the INBBC sacking of Ms Sam Mason:-
“BBC Radio host sacked after call to taxi firm requesting ‘non-Asian’ driver ”
(2008).
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1084702/BBC-Radio-host-sacked-taxi-firm-requesting-non-Asian-driver.html
And then there is the obvious ethnic difference between the two cases of Selfridges, and BBC Bristol, which may have affected to outcomes.
‘It was a different… er… well, it was different, so there’.
So much unique, such different times.
There are sound reasons for not wanting an Asian driver to take your 14-year-old daughter home – just looks at the statistics of taxi-rape. It is not racism, it is prudence. The BBC waved all that aside, of course.
Refusing to serve a customer in a shop may be OK if the person owns the shop ? But that didn’t work for the hotel-keepers deciding who they would let in their own home. For an employee to refuse to serve someone – just because they were with Robinson – should be a sackable offence. The shop assistant has now been warned off refusing to serve anyone – quite right.
The phone call was illegally recorded (set up?) yet still she was still sacked and it looks like career over.
Her short lived replacement at BBC Radio Bristol was paedophile Peter Rowell who was sentenced to six years for 12 charges of indecent assault against five girls under the age of 16 and seven counts of making and possessing child pornography in 2012.
Was it illegally recorded? Isn’t it standard practice these days to record all customer service calls “for training purposes” or whatever?
Yes because you have to be informed the call is being recorded.
Though you can’t opt out of being recorded.
But it can’t possibly have been a set-up. You’d have to explain how that would be possible.
I suspect they decided to cash in on her BBC status, no doubt she rammed it down their throats (and she called back and got the manager to get her the taxi); the operator lady probably got miffed and they decided to tell the press. If she was just a ‘normal’ person nobody would have given a toss so she made her own bed and then had to lie in it.** That said, she should have pushed the illegal taping (which I presume taxi firms and the like do as a precaution and tracing passengers due to many assaults on drivers)
** I actually agree with her point
Reporting people for thoughtcrime isn’t cool, though. I know it’s standard procedure at the BBC, but still.
I’ve had a really good chuckle at this one because it says everything about the BBC.
Ms Mason’s response; “I work at the BBC. I’m far from racist and that uneducated woman has no right to call me one.”
Analysis; I work for the BBC and therefore I am an A list celebrity and therefore above any law in this land. The person serving her is automatically stupid (less educated; based on what evidence) because she works for the BBC.
This is classic. Everything is cool until it affects their World and then its not cool anymore. This is classic Left wing mentality. These are problems ordinary plebs must deal with day-in-day-out but must never be endured by the people that make the headlines. These include politicians, celebrities and aristocrats.
In fairness to Sam Mason, she was never the sharpest tool in the box, having spent most of her time at HTV and Men and Motors only a recent arrival at the BBC.
She was not in the true sense of the word an out and out Beeboid and quite un-pc, this I feel was the reason for her convenient sacking.
Yes, it was only a matter of time before she upset someone, not being the quietest of women. Still I suspect if she’d gone to right school it would have been forgotten about.
Or read the right news paper
carefully selected picture from the BBC yet again.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-24145261
No doubt this will be covered tiresomely over the course of the night, and even worse, gameshow Nicky will conduct a whole “debate” on it tomorrow morning. I can just hear his toxic tone now; ‘Mohammed from Tower Hamlets, what are your thoughts on Robinson’s behavior in the department store? Was he in the right?’
Of course, in true Nicky fashion, he’ll reel in some faux right wing caller to ‘even’ things up a bit.
This is east London of today, with its apparent violent Islamic politics, which INBBC has not yet reported:-
“Police investigate ‘terror attack’ on Bangladesh Minister”
http://www.eastlondonadvertiser.co.uk/news/court-crime/police_investigate_terror_attack_on_bangladesh_minister_1_2675301
Reading this article you can’t help but form the impression that the radio station and those involved in the assault are still living their lives as if in Bangladesh but with all the comforts and generous ‘free’ provisions that living in a western civilised country gives them.
Oops, sorry, I’m a bit slow catching on here, it’s called a multicultural society – right?
Ridiculous piece here about costs associated with Scottish independence, where the referendum is still a year away.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-business-24140981
What is the point of such an item, written on the basis of so many assumptions and suppositions hardly any of which may stand up in the long term (even assuming that the Scots vote for independence)?
The assumption that the Scots will vote in favour is one thing, the assumption that negotiation on (a) what they will take with them and leave behind and (b) that such negotiation will be quick is something else.
The reality is that such negotiation is likely to be complex, more so than the writer pre-supposes and is unlikely to be complete in advance of the next Westminster election, which in itself has a number of potential outcomes.
BBC trying to be agenda-setting I guess, rather than just reporting the news.
‘BBC trying to be agenda-setting I guess, rather than just reporting the news.”
BBC ‘News’ vs. news.
BN;n?
BN;n?
Is that code for b*llsh*t?
A lot of that oil belongs to Orkney & Shetland , lets hope they declare UDI , & Salmond won`t have any cash at all . Ha Ha !
The thing is, there is never any mention of the national debt associated with bailing out the country’s two broken banks.
The Scots studiously avoid this, and the article makes no mention of it either.
Which broken Banks? Both Halifax Bank of Scotland (HBOS) and Royal Bank of Scotland Group conducted significantly more business outside Scotland than within its Borders.
RBS is still headquartered in Edinburgh, Bank of Scotland’s name still appears on the banknote. Both were ultimately bailed out by the taxpayer.
I’m unsure what you’re point is, after all Barclays and HSBC both undertake more business internationally than they do at home and yet both are classified as British banks, same as Deutsche (Germany) and Citibank (US)
NatWest, the largest retail bank within RBS Group, is registered in London. The Capital Markets division, which ran up the majority of debts, is also registered in London. Allowing RBS to fail would have had a greater impact on England than Scotland.
Notwithstanding, it was RBS that was bailed out, RBS Group, the parent company is registered in Edinburgh.
To be specific, it is registered in Scotland No 90312. Registered Office: 36 St Andrew Square, Edinburgh, United Kingdom, EH2 2YB.
The constituent parts of RBS Group were bailed out. Like: National Westminster Bank Plc. Registered in England and Wales. No. 929027, Ulster Bank Limited. Registered in Northern Ireland. Registration Number R733, RBS Invoice Finance Limited. Registered in England No. 662221, Coutts & Co. Registered in England No. 36695…………………….etc. etc
You are wrong, but I cannot be arsed and frankly don’t have time to argue with you… I have worked in the sector 25 years, and for part of it with RBS.
At the time of the bailout, the only division “in deficit” was the RBS wholesale banking division. This explicitly didn’t involve NWB, RBS Insurance, Invoice financing or any of the other subsidiaries or divisions that you allude to.
You can try to split hairs as much as you like, but on this you are wrong.
“RBS wholesale banking division……………” Which emanated from the NatWest and was registered in England!!!
Are you saying that neither Scottish
bank were broken and needed to be bailed out by UK government?
The business out side of Scotland that landed them in trouble was the american ‘sub-prime’ market but it wasn’t St Obama that stumped up the £75 billion bailout it was the British (Mainly English) taxpayer
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/banksandfinance/9968122/MPs-report-to-slam-HBOS-management-over-30bn-bailout.html
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/outgoing-rbs-boss-stephen-hester-taxpayer-wont-recoup-bailout-money-for-another-decade-8660822.html
I am saying that neither Bank was “Scottish”. The largest constituent part of HBOS was the ex Halifax Buiding Society whilst RBS Group was a multi-national financial services organisation with a significantly larger presence in England than in Scotland.
“significantly larger presence in England ”
That’s simply because England is bigger than Scotland but despite that
Wiki-“The Royal Bank of Scotland plc (Scottish Gaelic: Banca Rìoghail na h-Alba, Scots: Ryal Baunk o Scotland)[1] is one of the retail banking subsidiaries of the The Royal Bank of Scotland Group plc, and together with NatWest and Ulster Bank, provides branch banking facilities throughout the UK and Ireland. The Royal Bank of Scotland has around 700 branches, mainly in Scotland ”
Bentley and Rolls Royce motor cars may still be based in England but are a German owned making profit for their German parent
“
He needs to understand corporate structures better!
http://www.investors.rbs.com/ir/rbs/ir.jsp?page=news-item&item=883747503245008
Strange comment from someone who seems to have no knowledge of financial structures himself.
Tsk – how noble Scottish institutions allowed themselves to be raped senseless by irresponsible English bankers (well, retailers actually).
Oh, hang on, Fred Goodwin was from where, exactly?
‘The late 1990s saw a new wave of consolidation in the financial services sector. In 1999, the Bank of Scotland launched a hostile takeover bid for English rival NatWest. The Bank of Scotland intended to fund the deal by selling off many of the NatWest’s subsidiary companies, including Ulster Bank and Coutts. However, the Royal Bank subsequently tabled a counter-offer, sparking off the largest hostile takeover battle in UK corporate history. A key differentiation from the Bank of Scotland’s bid was the Royal Bank’s plan to retain all of NatWest’s subsidiaries. Although NatWest, one of the “Big 4” English clearing banks, was significantly larger than either Scottish bank, it had a recent history of poor financial performance and plans to merge with insurance company Legal & General were not well received, prompting a 26% fall in share price……
The Group was part of a consortium with Belgian bank Fortis and Spanish bank Banco Santander that acquired Dutch Bank ABN AMRO a on 10 October 2007. Rivals speculated that RBS had overpaid for the Dutch bank[19] although the bank pointed out that of the £49bn paid for ABN AMRO, RBS’s share was only £10bn (equivalent to £167 per citizen of the UK).
Eh, Jimmy, ae we got the world’s biggest bank or what?
And then:
‘After previous denials following press coverage,[20] on 22 April 2008 RBS announced a rights issue which aimed to raise £12bn in new capital to offset a writedown of £5.9bn resulting from credit market positions and to shore up its reserves following the purchase of ABN AMRO. This was, at the time, the largest rights issue in British corporate history.’
And then:
‘On 13 October 2008, in a move aimed at recapitalising the bank, it was announced that the British Government would take a stake of up to 58% in the Group’.
At which point the familiar combination of Little Scotlander mentality and eternal victimhood blames the evil sassenachs.
Yawn.
Not surprisingly ‘if North Sea Oil Revenues are higher than predicted, Scots will be better off’ – a fucking degree to work that out?????????
“the assumption that negotiation on (a) what they will take with them and leave behind and (b) that such negotiation will be quick is something else.”
Spot on. Had an argument with one of my Scottish in-laws about this a couple of years ago. I said that his assumption that Scotland would be able to walk away with the full benefit of “their” old reserves would be like a husband or wife claiming the car or even the house on separation because it happened to be in his/her name. Naive to vote for independence on that basis.
As you suggest, oil would simply be one of thousands of issues that would have to be thrashed out. Take the oil, lose something else.
Damn – should be ““their” oil reserves”.
Not fair, but then neither is the BBC.
http://order-order.com/2013/09/18/watch-bbc-presenter-mistakes-paper-for-ipad/
Made me smile.
And I thought there were bad punmeisters here.
This gaffe was reported on this morning’s Today with the closing comment from an obviously irritated Humphrys ‘I suppose newspapers never maker mistakes, do they?’
Ha ha ha. They don’t like it up ’em.
I wouldn’t be too hard on newscaster Simon McCoy. At least he told the truth about the non-news story of the royal birth.
So we have wall to wall Cleggy, an un-elected jerk , live on BBC2, BBC News, BBC Parliament and BBC Radio 5Live.
I’ll be watching closely to see if the same happens with the Tory conference. I guess for the Labour conference we’ll be able to add Radio 4 to that list.
Yer being a bit unfair to Clegg.
He’s an elected jerk.
A word for Obama supplicant, Mardell:- ‘Treason’.
“GLENN BECK DISSECTS MOVE BY OBAMA ON SYRIA THAT HE SAYS MAY AMOUNT TO ‘TREASON’”
( 6 min video clip)
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/09/17/glenn-beck-dissects-move-by-obama-on-syria-that-he-says-may-amount-to-treason/
All this week Jeremy Vine has a 30min series “My Country My Music” in which immigrants tell us their life stories and we have to suffer their ethnic music, why?
Would it not be better to find some WW2 heroes (while we still can) and hear their stories and their favourite music, that would be far more interesting to 95% of the listenership.
Have a listen to yesterdays excruciating one featuring Vine in Manchester.
Poor Chinese woman hadn`t heard of Ian Curtis or Morrissey….so Vine had to play some on his phone-AND play some more of his Smiths stuff over her choices as well.
Embarrassing patronising guff from another Hulme trenchcoated ex stewdunt…the type Paul Calf should be paid to beat up for the rest of us.
Vine needs a pruning!…the Chinese would be marching on Media City here , had he insulted a Muslim in the same way!
what annoys me most is the way vine puts down this country. He is almost apologetic for being british. He mentions how thick we are that we could not passs our own citizenship test, our food is rubbish and if it wasn’t for hard working immigrants we would be on the scrap heap. Another bbc journalist who panders to anyone and just hates the british.
Joy Division A.K.A. New Order?….Haven’t they got ermm..,,cough, cough….form?…..Or have the leftists buried this under the carpet too, as Ian Curtis has become a Saint?..
“You all forgot about Rudolf Hess”..
http://www.neworderonline.com/forums/MessageList.aspx?ThreadID=10901
cant wait for question time on bbc 1 tommorow night when the question of this imported alien practise of wearing the veil in this country comes up,we all no what is going to happen there dont we,the usual invited rent a mob socalist workers party lot will howl and scream anybody down who is in favour of the veil ban and all these politacaly correct politicians who are invited on the question time panel will go out of there way to butter up and pander to the muslim community.it will a sick inducing spectacle.
Will INBBC ‘QT’ ask audience to wear burqas in political sympathy with its agenda of Islamising Britain?
They should do everyone a favour and ask Julia Somerville to wear one.
and Julie ‘extermination’ Etchingham on the other channel.
Don’t hold your breath, the whole program will probably be devoted to the Liberal conference and free school meals, thus giving a excellent reason to circumnavigate the ‘uncomfortable’ subject ….
I hope I’m wrong! But as the panelists are Ken Clark, Harriet Harman, Shirley Williams and the editor of the New Statesman we already know the outcome, maybe Anthony Worrell Thompson will be the ‘bad guy’?
Ken Clark, Harriet Harman & Shirley Williams on Question Time? It’s like travelling back in time to the 1980s.
What’s the point in watching?
Because now, it is a different time?
Anyone from right of centre?
At least Clark has an idea of what life is like beyond the public sector.
Could get some shoplifting tips dressed in a Burka………….
The temptation to sneak in weaing the full gear, putting my hand up for a supplementary, waiting for the microphone and then doing an impression of Charlie Brown’s teacher is very strong.
Excellent idea, but as the program is no longer live – to make sure it doesn’t go ‘off script’ you will be conveniently edited out.
Which would meant that things like that dopey Labour apparatchik screaming about the “disgusting” UKIP woman aren’t considered a problem.
Continuing the theme of carefully selected images, Amy Rutland
Yuk!
That’s enough dodgy images, please do not insert the one of Andrew brillo-pad Neil cuddling up to that young bint whilst wearing a white vest.
Ah, little miss 14%!
She looks like a bullfrog.
Now there is a perfect candidate for a burkha.
Jowelly
The face confirms she’s had more than her share of pies. Typical for the party of “equality and redistribution”
Has BBC-Democrat reported this yet, or is it too politically embedded with Obama to do so?:-
“Obama waives ban on arming terrorists to allow aid to Syrian jihadists”
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2013/09/obama-waives-ban-on-arming-terrorists-to-allow-aid-to-syrian-jihadists.html
Of course they should be armed. It’s not like they’re Tea Party supporters or anything……
Good link.
Did anyone catch the Newsnight “Scottish Independence” debate? There was an associated animation (they also used it on BBC News) – I’d say subliminal bias was being used – in which the union flag separates – the Scottish Saltire separated from the rest.
“BBC HR boss Lucy Adams’ colleagues ride to the rescue”
http://www.theguardian.com/media/mediamonkeyblog/2013/sep/18/bbc-hr-boss-lucy-adams?
Looks like I was not the only one to wonder if there was an extra meaning to match the number of standards at the BBC, which may not have sunk in to the assembled market rate talents within BBC Heavehos-Richesbeyondavarice.
Unless, of course, her colleagues were indeed playing another game.
Thicker than bat guano or Machiavellian sack ferrets?
That seems the choice.
Must be a peachy place to work. No wonder they wangle King’s ransoms just to make it to 4.30pm some days.
There’s a funny comment there from a Beeboid about a different mandarin. Apparently the loss of Mark Byford led to things like Savile/McAlpine, revealing that the Queen wondered why Abu Qatada was still around, and for broadcasting a photo of Prince William with a penis drawn on his forehead.
I thought restructuring the management was going to prevent this sort of thing?
There does seem an odd logic afoot that if only the vast funds had been still sloshing about to retain a Titan like Mr. Byford, the vast funds consumed in his loss and subsequently would not have been needed. As one doubts he was personally patrolling the whispering corridors of the top floor ready to intercept an outbreak of astounding uncuriosity or Alzheimer’s, the systems he put in place in all his time must have been pretty poor.
I don’t know about that, but the defense of Byford from whoever wrote that letter in Ariel flatly contradicts Lord Hall’s supposed policy and pretty much everything we hear from all corners about how restructuring the management is going to address the problems which led to the Savile/McAlpine fiasco and all that.
Byford was exiled supposedly because nobody could justify his job, and his position was eliminated, no? And he was there because Thompson was clearly not involved in the kind of editorial matters Byford, according to the letter, was allegedly handling. It’s all very silly, and the only result of that ridiculous Margaret Hodge dog-and-pony show was that many people learned that none of them can be trusted.
So which is it? Should Byford have been DG instead? Should he still be there at the fat salary and pension under Lord Hall? Somebody else elevated to his place because it apparently was a vital role? What? I don’t think anybody over there really knows.
I’m sticking with my original thought: only a serious purge from top to bottom is going to address the real problems. Then do a little management housekeeping.
As I recall it, after the previous D-G resigned over the Gilligan / Kelly affair, it was felt that the previous role of the D-G as “editor-in-chief” which had applied for decades (eg under Alastair Milne) was too much for one person who also had the job of running the whole BBC empire. So Byford was given the deputy post – to act as editor-in-chief on Thompson’s behalf.
And a fat lot of good he did.
Exactly. It’s not the management structure: it’s the personnel.
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/education/london-schools-forcing-pupils-to-wear-burkas-with-appropriate-punishments-for-incorrect-uniform-8823820.html
‘London schools forcing pupils to wear burkas, with ‘appropriate punishments for incorrect uniform’ ‘
over to you BBC – how are you going to handle that one?
‘how are you going to handle that one?’
By telling ‘it’ often enough that ‘it’ is great.
Already in hand…
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-21283301
Apparently the Walk Like An Egyptian Day was restricted to men on hotel balconies, after the women they sent down into the streets fared less well. But that was, of course, a different time.
What on earth is wrong with the Sand Dance (as well publicised in the 50’s/60’s:-)
Well BBC on line for London seems to be napping on this story. Searches show they have plenty about ‘banning the burkha’ but – oddly – nothing about schools making it compulsory.
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/former-crimewatch-presenter-nick-ross-gets-the-goahead-for-40-million-london-super-home-8823637.html
‘Former [BBC]Crimewatch presenter Nick Ross gets the go-ahead for £40 million London super home’
Perhaps a Mansion Tax may be order afterall?
Mind you, as Nicky Campbell quipped this week ‘It’s-gonna-cost-the-Queen-a-lot… hahahahaha’
And lots of yer mates Nicky
‘We are interested in the whereabouts of an ex-BBC presenter (rich, naturally), who has a special interest in the top-end London housing market…’
And do remember, the BBC presenters you see on your TV are just tiny minority of the actual population of Britain. So don’t have nightmares.
Sometimes you have to be grateful that bBBC ‘news’ censors some items.
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/man-in-court-for-trying-to-have-sex-with-sheep-at-tottenham-training-ground-8824375.html
There’s a Gareth Bale joke in there somewhere…..
Real Madrd… Bar.. bar… celona?
Got the wrong team – was looking for Demba Baaaaaaaas
And finally, in other news…
http://tradingaswdr.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/yard-of-ale.html
‘175ml glasses of wine at £3.75. In Damson, they start at £4.75, and pints of Kaltenberg cost £4.’
Sure they can afford it, but… what if some more vocal, easily-offended staff members start to express concerns on cultural practices they don’t expect to find around and about?
Maybe all that will soon be allowed to be served is Irony Brew?
Boring snoring ‘green’ economist Noreena Hertz is doing the rounds puffing her new book,
‘Eyes Wide Open: The Bleeding Obvious For Gullible Libby Wibbies’ (William Collins).
She was given a Q&A fax to fill in for one of the Saturday rags. One of the questions she was asked (or more likely asked to be asked) was about the recent BBC management cluster-****.
On she droned ‘The BBC is one of Britain’s most valuable public institutions and it needs the right structures…Yet the constant bashing in the newspapers smacks of schadenfreude. It risks damaging something we should all feel very proud of and enjoy. No other nation has a public broadcaster of the quality and impact of the BBC. We need to cherish it.’
Yeah nice encomium, and unsolicited too.
Oh did I mention that Noreen is married to Danny Cohen, Director of Television at the very same BBC? No. That’s funny, neither did Noreena.
“BBC faces major review by MPs following recent scandals.
Culture, media and sport select committee chairman John Whittingdale says payoffs row has given inquiry ‘more urgency'”
http://www.theguardian.com/media/2013/sep/18/bbc-john-whittingdale?
Today’s London Evening Standard has this article on the subject of the upcoming Panorama programme on the Anni Derwani case in South Africa, which says it all really…
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/world/anni-dewanis-cousin-demands-changes-to-bbc-expos-on-killing-8823963.html
Wouldn’t this all normally be sub-judice under rules specified by BBC themselves elsewhere previously?
A couple of choice quotes from that report :
“failing the BBC viewers on so many levels”
“We, as Anni’s family, have little right when it comes to turning to legal help on getting this sub-standard piece of journalism banned from being screened, but surely we have a right to be heard on it.”
“Your programme is a gross interference on the police process with the unauthorised use of police evidence including, I hear, of evidence which I have given to the police in confidence.”
Calling all Licence payers – how’s your trust in the BBC these days?
One had to presume that this passes all tick boxes that the BBC sets itself (as no other body seems to for now) but does seem extraordinary, not just for the intrusion but the selectivity and partiality.
Legal systems and processes are not perfect, and there is no doubt that money deployed on one side or other can effect a different result.
So I am intrigued that the broadcast monopoly of the UK seems here to be weighing in on the side of the defence with a court case in another country.
For sure we are talking a British citizen, but then the victim was too.
What other occasions may there be when public funds are consumed in the pursuit of truth?
Maybe a full BBC investigative team was en route to check around the facts behind the Zimmerman trial, but got turned around when Obama weighed in for the prosecution.
If Keith Vaz pops up and says that if he had a daughter she’d have looked like Anni, possibly a few BBC heads will explode?
Wow I see jeremy whine is actually deigning to participate in the programme these days.
Given he used to get paid £250k pa for a pointless ‘top and tail’ on it before, I shudder to think what he gets now.
It’s getting more and more difficult for the BBC to maintain that Republican Intransigence Is The Only Thing Stopping the President from Saving the Country narrative:
As Budget Fight Looms, Obama Sees Defiance in His Own Party
For four years, President Obama counted on fellow Democrats to rally to his side in a series of epic battles with Republicans over the direction of the country. But now, deep in his fifth year in office, Mr. Obama finds himself frustrated by members of his own party weary of his leadership and increasingly willing to defy him.
In recent weeks, disgruntled Democrats, particularly liberals, have bolted from the White House on issues like National Security Agency surveillance policies, a planned military strike on Syria and the potential choice of Lawrence H. Summers to lead the Federal Reserve. In private, they often sound exasperated describing Mr. Obama’s operation; in public, they are sometimes only a little more restrained.
They complain the White House has not consulted enough and failed to assert leadership.
Yes, this turns out to be mostly whining that the Republicans have too much power in the House. But it sure is refreshing to hear somebody blaming the President for that and not those awful white racists. Mardell actually sort of acknowledged that the President was to blame for this kind of thing once, but I think he got away with it. He probably went to confession, said a few Our Presidents, lit a candle, and went back to work, sin absolved, faith restored.
http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/local-national/northern-ireland/flag-protester-willie-frazer-will-dress-as-abu-hamza-for-court-date-29586757.html…interesting
No bias at the BBC News Quiz, then:
“I seek neither confirmation nor debate.”
There , my friends, you have it in a nutshell. How very Hardy. He really should be put to sleep humanely.
Humanely?
JH obviously doesn’t understand irony.
While I’m looking at Jeremy Hardy’s delightful twittering:
Groupthink? What groupthink?
Like Messrs Thomas and Steel, the two Marx, Hardy has been a busted flush for many, many years.
If it wasn’t for Toksvig’s bizarre cackling leading the way, much of Hardy’s material on the News Quiz would be met in stony silence.
I see 563 Beeboids have found it oh so droll and retweeted it …
But….but….but…..RED is good!
This one is for Mark Mardell:
It should be required viewing at the BBC College of Journalism, and all BBC News staff plus all BBC Radio hosts should be required to watch it as part of an online training course about impartiality and balance in reporting gaffes by US politicians and public figures.
Anyone wishing for further proof of how the BBC sees we mere mortals only has to watch any of the Beeb’s consumer shows.
Patronising tripe from beginning to end, from the vaguely disturbing “Dom” Littlewood, a man who seems predestined to appear in a news story containing the phrase “before turning the gun on himself”, to the undisputed king of treating viewers as mentally impaired toddlers, Matt Allwright.
Watchdog in particular revels in this cretinous lowest common denominator style, never far from explaining slowly how 1 in 10 is ten pencent, and just how serious losing a wheel whilst travelling 70mph on the motorway could be.
Known to veteran ‘Strictly’ watchers as ‘Dom The Groper’ 🙁
Disgusting little runt.
They will harp on about a supermarket selling biscuits 2p more than last week yet never ever mention the £145.50 extortion they impose on every household whether they view them or not.
Quite right, no one is forced to by the 2p more expensive biscuits…
They are forced to pay to fund the BBC.
Speaking both of “thorny subjects” and “unauthorised recordings” above-can I draw your attention to Womans Hour this morning?
Ann Furedi of the BPAS was condoning the CPS in their decision not to prosecute doctors who were signing death warrants for foetuses of the wrong sex-tomorrows Womens Hour listeners, but hey-pro abortion-so waht of it( Certainly the liberal media have kept well away from this conundrum…maybe if we said they could all wear veils, the wimmin at the BBC and Guardian might see it as infanticide.
But I digress-Furedi complains that this was an “undercover sting”…”entrapment” and the like…
Yet the BBC and Panorama etc never allow such accusations to fly at themselves when they sneak into tax meetings, MPs surgeries etc…for then it is “pioneering undercover investigations” and “exclusive public interests” that need “exposing”.
Typical of the likes of Furedi and her chums at the BBC…if it`s in the liberal John Lewis list of approved liberal causes then it`s fine….whereas if it exposes a mullah or doctors that kill foetuses for nothing but convenience or wrong gender…well that`s entrapment and unethical.
The BBC skewer themselves in the sewers every day…how many forked tongues are in that nest of vipers there where the Guardian meet the BBC?
‘Telegraph’ (£):-
“BBC’s Springwatch and Countryfile offer ‘fairytale’ version of the countryside.
“The BBC wildlife programmes Springwatch and Countryfile have been accused of feeding urban populations a ‘fairytale’ view of the countryside.”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/earthnews/10319174/BBCs-Springwatch-and-Countryfile-offer-fairytale-version-of-the-countryside.html
More like Blue Peter. Country life for bunny huggers.
The countryside for London-centric weekend squires. Like most of the Beeb employees.
A friend posted this on facebook a few minutes ago. It seems some BBC reporter is skulking around Atlanta with the usual agenda driven crap. Note how my pal, Felton, is almost hurt by the BBC report. Innocent Anglophiles still expect some semblance of truth from the great British broadcaster.
Felton says: “I don’t listen to the BBC via NPR much. Today I heard something that gave me pause. A BBC reporter is in Atlanta currently and he was interviewing Georgia Tech students who happened to also be military veterans. They offered that their fellow students (who have not been in the military) have little knowledge or interest in world events and are more focused on weekend partying than even studying for exams. I hope this is mistaken. Georgia Tech is not a rural campus at which kids feel the urge to raise cain merely to alleviate boredom. These are supposed to be some of our best.”
Who is the reporter? Antone know? It sounds like Dymond. It appears his next target is the Georgia Governor Nathan Deal.
Who knows what sickness they’re pursuing in their lust to exploit a senseless tragedy for ideological ends? Whatever it is, you can bet it has nothing to do with this story:
Police: Georgia Tech student shoots intruder
Police say one Georgia Tech student shot another student who broke into a home early Tuesday morning near the university’s campus. It happened on Curran Street at around 5:30 a.m. when the suspect entered a home where three other students were sleeping.
Investigators say 22-year-old Adam Keller got in through a window, and they say he was high at the time. Atlanta Police Investigator P.J. Roberson told FOX 5 Keller lives in the general area, and they believe that he thought the house he was going into was his. Roberson said the students inside the house were scared, and when Keller charged at one of them, one of them fired a shot.
Keller was shot in the chest. He was taken to Grady Memorial Hospital, where he’s listed in stable condition. The three students in the home were not injured.
The incident left neighbors and Georgia Tech students who live nearby shaken.
“Made me think, like maybe I need to go buy a gun now. This has happened so often and is my life going to be at risk?” asked Georgia Tech senior Saman Balkhanian.
Unless the wounded intruder was black, and the shooter not black, in which case the BBC might falsely report this as another racist shooting an innocent black boy in cold blood, and other Beeboids will tweet again about someone shooting a black boy simply because he wanted to.
Seriously, though, Georgia Tech has a big military graduate studies program, so maybe that made them an easy target. Or it could be something as dopey as their special football uniforms which incorporate a little digital camo, in honor of Saturday’s Military Appreciation Day game. The idea would probably give most BBC journalists the vapors.
First there was the BBC news presenter who interviewed a job interviewee instead of some legal expert and now we find Simon McCoy thinks a stack of paper is an iPad.
There must be a basic IQ test that candidates for BBC jobs should take?
That should be “anyone”.
PS: Are British students focused on weekend partying? Surely not. Come to think of it: are BBC staff members focused on weekend partying? Perish the thought.
Ask the prat with the “albert ” on Toady!
What is it with how Muslims can do anything they want in the UK: Blow people up,Rape,Commit murder,FGM,Fraud, assault,Homophobia, issue threats and yet for some strange reason the society treats them as the….victims.
Fear and a loss of belief in our own culture. But really fear. The ruling elite in this country is decadent. Cocooned from reality by wealth and anxious above all else to continue a life of privilege. They have corrupted their own children – that is when they can be bothered to have any.
The worst generation in our history.
No centre to their useless existence and they know it.
They probably secretly admire the certainty of the fundamentalist. If only they could possess such certainty.
Now this awful generation controls education, media and politics.
They are weak. They might have the police, the economic power and the state structure but they are weak.
In their hearts they know this and this accounts for the way they behave.
If it was not militant Islam that terrifies them it would be something else. In their more reflective moments they know they are weak and doomed to destruction.
The tragedy is that they could drag a fine nation down with them .
Listen to them – you can sense the fear that things are slipping beyond their control and that their comfortable lives are threatened.
It is now that they are at their most dangerous.
Ask Millipede ( Brown, Blair, Balls et al ), and that’s just a few of the “B’s”. I could go on.
Blunkett, Blears, Brown (Nick), Benn, Beckett, Bradshaw, Bryant!!! ahhhggghhhh
Burham, Byrne
Jeez…and that’s just the ‘ones in the public eye’ connected to various bad news, corruption, sleaze, nepotism scandals etc, I’m sure there’s a few more Bs under the radar.
Brussels
Barroso. “Baroness” Ashton. The BBC.
The Muslims have observed that with every atrocity they commit, they get a higher level of victim status than before.
So, it ought not surprise anyone that more and more atrocities will occur.
Via self imposed dhimmitude of the ruling classes, and bloated victimhood for the ROP this country is going down the pan.
Console yourself with this
Well, it made me laugh.
Loved it too, had to tweet that one!
Another huge and very offensive gaffe by Obama that is all over the US media. But somehow Mardell and the BBC appear to have missed this gaffe ?
http://nypost.com/2013/09/17/if-only-obama-were-just-a-fake/
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2013/09/our-divisive-president.php
….. or Maureen Dowd at the New York Times :
“President Obama also gave a speech Monday, talking at the White House while the drama unfolded at the supposedly secure Navy Yard nearby. He could have posted his original remarks on the White House Web site and replaced them with a cri de coeur on gun control, or comfort for the shaken city. The 12 who died were, after all, under his aegis as workers in a federal building.
But, jarringly, the president went ahead with his political attack, briefly addressing the slaughter before moving on to jab Republicans over the corporate tax rate and resistance to Obamacare.
Just as with the address to the nation on Syria last week, the president went ahead with a speech overtaken by events. It was out of joint, given that the Senate was put into lockdown.”
http://dailycaller.com/2013/09/17/scarborough-slams-obama-for-harsh-partisanship-in-post-navy-yard-shooting-speech/
If you think anyone at the BBC would perceive that as a gaffe, you’re mistaken. He mentioned the incident, what more can we ask of Him? He’s too busy healing the country and the planet to drop everything every time some emotionally immature yank starts having a little gun fun, I’m sure.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leicestershire-24145142
The BBC, with its reputation as a paedophile incubator, seems to be trying to lessen the impact of this crime by painting the individuals involved in this story as the victims. These two men are/were sexual predators and were caught in the act. Unsurprisingly, the police criticise anyone who does their job better than them (which isn’t hard). Perhaps if the police allocated resources away from Tom Daley’s twitter feed then they could tackle real crimes.
Off topic, but the much like the BBC they seem to want to supress discussion on the veil and give a scewed opinion, no recommends are being allowed on the comments. Maybe a new way to allow comments but distort public opinion?
oops! The Telegraph that is.
Still nothing on BBC on line about this story
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/education/london-schools-forcing-pupils-to-wear-burkas-with-appropriate-punishments-for-incorrect-uniform-8823820.html
‘London schools forcing pupils to wear burkas, with ‘appropriate punishments for incorrect uniform’ ‘
Meanwhile, in case you were interested, there’s room for some London news from the BBC…
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-24148385
Ricky Gervais confirms David Brent to play live gigs
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-24146612
Fat Man on a Bicycle dies – Former Radio 4 presenter Tom Vernon, who was known as the Fat Man on the Bicycle, has died at the age of 74.
He died of a heart attack at his home in France, his widow Sally confirmed to the BBC News website.
Today Program 08:40 There’s a piece about the Golden Dawn Party in Greece following the murder of a young loonie leftie in Greece by someone which the left claim was a member & then a ‘supporter’ of the Golden Dawn party.
Despite the denials of the party the BBC goes on to broadcast all kinds of hysterical claims in a way they certainly would not if it was a right wing supporter murdered by a leftie.
Finally the BBC asks the question should the party be banned, fully indicative of the lefts views that only their views should be heard, and are acceptable.
Typical of the oppression and the bullying associated with the left wing in the UK.
So groups whose beliefs allegedly cause the death of others should be banned, even without proof? They might want to be careful where they’re going with that.
One suspects there will be exceptions (reasons FoI exempt, natch).
Agree. I had the radio on for about 75 minutes during ‘Today’, up to 08:55. I feel less and less inclined to pay attention to much of it: this sort of thing is the reason why.
The whole way the murder story was reported was tiresomely predictable and the link to Golden Dawn was not established clearly. Humphrys, of course, has a personal interest in Greece, as his son lives there, but the BBC likes to look after its own (Lefties) in any case.
While searching (in vain) for something else on the BBC I happened on this report tucked away under BBC News Surrey…
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-surrey-24143939
‘Tories win Woking by-election held after Lib Dem ‘electoral fraud”
‘The Conservatives have won a by-election that was called after the High Court ruled the previous winner and his team rigged the vote.’
– So after a ‘High Court’ ruling the BBC still feel the need to use scare quotes around the phrase ‘electoral fraud’. Oh well.
So much yellow Lib Dem news on the BBC this week and yet I’ve not heard a word about this story.
Just of local interest I guess.
‘The judge’s ruling stated there had been an “abnormally high” number of late registrations, multiple registrations in the same property, and abnormally high turnout figures.’
Sounds bad. Sounds like cheating the democratic system. Sounds as though someone has no respect for the British democratic system. Doesn’t sound like the same Lib Dems we hear so much about on the BBC. What’s going on down there in Woking? What Lib Dem would dream of subverting British democracy?
I wonder, is anyone in this story named Malcolm? Martin?
‘[The] judgement said Labour candidate Mr [Mohammad] Ali had alleged Mr [Mohammed] Bashir and his electoral team had caused false names to be entered on the electoral register, using the names of people who did not live at the stated address, or never existed at all.’
And, in fairness to the Tories, there’s a lot of it about…..
‘Tory candidate Rashid Mohammed was elected to represent Woking’s Maybury and Sheerwater ward on Tuesday.’
Oh and just in case you might think this was an isolated incident….
‘Surrey Police said its investigation into electoral fraud in the Maybury and Sheerwater area around the time of the May 2012 local election was still continuing.’
PS the BBC don’t give the Labour man Mr Ali’s first name and they don’t let on that prosecutions may follow….
http://www.wokinglabour.org/
‘Not only did Judge Mawrey find that the election of Mohammed Bashir had been achieved through fraud and corruption, and overturn the election, he also intimated that prosecutions might follow. ‘
Well you can’t expect the BBC tell you every detail about a news story?
“Is your name not Bruce, then?
No, it’s Michael.
That’s going to cause a little confusion.
Mind if we call you ‘Bruce’ to keep it clear?”
It’s time that sketch was updated. Although the “no poofters” line could probably remain, it might cause some heads to explode.
What’s New Mohammed going to teach? Probably not logical positivism.
I know nothing about the make up of said ward, but are we to believe that in 2012 that Mohammad Ali (Labour), Mohammed Bashir (Liberal) and Rashid Mohammed (Conservative) were the candidates selected by the main parties? WTF!
This is scary stuff, and yesterdays result proves that the ‘people’ are voting for the race of the candidate rather that the party, demonstrated maybe by the Liberals falling from 1st to fourth, and the Tory being the only ‘ethnic’ candidate.
What worries me about parties fielding ethnic candidates is that when the tipping point arrives, in one fell swoop defections to an Islamic ideological party will be aplenty.
Ah Woking… (I left Woking last year, after 40 odd years, man and boy)…. this surprises me not one jot. The ward described represents the centre of the muslim community in the town, and houses the oldest mosque in the country. The voters are overwhelmingly of muslim background.
There have been issues in this ward for many years, not just of a political nature as evidenced by this article http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-559158/Muslim-governors-hatched-race-campaign-force-says-headteacher-sacked-Islamophobic.html
bbc, guardian, and … well muslims,
3 unwise monkeys of political correctness.
analysis – the niqab judgement 😀
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-24106142
not be allowed in SOME 😀 public places?
The niqab debate – ‘Is the veil the biggest issue we face in the UK?’ lets listen to 3 leading muslims ?!??*??!
likewise with Newsnight?
how about V Drearybyshire – bbc 5 and an outrageous, litany of excuses and bias
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2013/09/top-british-conservatives-grovel-to-islamic-supremacist-agenda-over-veils.html
have Teresa May? (shakes head) … how about Scameron?
that other airhead Johnson?
even questioned its only use as over political statement? as two fingers to our judiciary, the rule of law? as reiteration of Islamic dominance over women? – and its demand to the vast majority who view it as abhorrent?
The Al Azhar (look it up) has stated that the burqa and nijab ‘have no place in Islam’?,
why? is it discouraged from the “zombiefest” of the Hajj?
It means that if your non-Muslim, non-niqab wearing sister/ mother/daughter is accused of a crime she HAS to face the public scrutiny of her peers while a Muslim, niqab wearing woman does not in a very important, way, hiding
masked arrogant and indignant, because HER political ideology has given her special privilege, because of rank political correctness, because of cowardice.
http://www.thecommentator.com/article/4151/bizarre_landmark_ruling_on_muslim_veil_by_english_court_now_you_see_her_now_you_don_t
Move outside your “Aren’t-we-terribly-caring-and-inclusive” BBC-type ‘liberal’ and, in my experience, you’ll find pretty well everybody else, regardless of political leaning, thinks there is no place in this country for wearing a sack with eye holes over your face. It’s intimidating and a mark of oppression which wouldn’t be tolerated in any other sphere.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/nhs/10319264/Secret-ban-on-face-veils-for-staff-at-17-hospitals.html
The Government has ordered a review of all health service policies on workers’ uniforms. It will ask professional regulators to draw up clear rules so that communication with patients is always given priority over the right of a nurse or doctor to wear a veil.
It follows indications from David Cameron that he would support public sector bodies wishing to ban staff from covering their faces. MPs have called for a national debate on the issue.
An investigation by The Telegraph has found 17 NHS hospitals across five NHS trusts which have already quietly instituted a ban on front line staff wearing the niqab — a full veil which covers the face — while in contact with patients.
…
Many of the hospitals which have introduced explicit restrictions are in parts of the country that have high Muslim populations, such as East London, and Bradford and Dewsbury in Yorkshire.
Here’s the BBC’s take on the story. Not surprisingly, no comments allowed because they know what the British public at large feel about it, although we can email in our experiences of being treated by veiled staff. I’m sure 95% pleasant experiences will be relayed back to us.
bBC going large today into the TUC “bedroom tax” survey.
now i wonder what angle thats going to take………………
A Google Consumer Survey of 1008 people has shown that the average Brit believes that the bBBC costs taxpayers just £164 million per year, rather than the £4.8 billion that the public is forced to provide through the licence fee. The highest guess was still only £900m.
No wonder the average punter thinks the bBBC is a national treasure, the envy of the world, sun shines out of its posterior, etc.
A robust defense of the BBC from the Mail isn’t going to help.
Also, according to the Spectator’s gossip columnist, the Mail got rid of Mel Phillips because she defended Israel on Question Time. That no longer passes the “dinner table test”. If I was a Jew living in Britain, I’d be frightened and consider moving.
She was still writing in the Daily Mail just 4 days ago, are you sure she’s been sacked?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2421455/MELANIE-PHILLIPS-No-human-right-hide-justice-veil.html
From link
“This, I’m sad to say, is the last column I shall be writing in this slot. I am extremely grateful to you, my dear readers, who have written to me in such huge number over the years to express your often passionate support for my views.
I will continue to champion the values in which we all believe and to stand up for truth, justice and the truly powerless against those who would destroy them. I look forward to sharing the next phase of my writing career with you all.”
Cheers! didn’t read it as I’m ‘veiled out’ I think we all know where we stand on the issue, that is apart from the INBBC….
” If I was a Jew living in Britain, I’d be frightened and consider moving.”
Why?
When the word “JEW” is used in the playground as an insult, experience suggests the gas chambers follow soon after.
Really?
What up? 6 million not enough for you. See the banners at Islamists demo’s in our dear country . “Hitler should have finished the job”. Not the white supremacist anymore but the hoards of Islamists newly arrived.
Albaman is obviously blissfully unaware of the rising tide of anti-semitism amongst the left wing press, BBC, trades unions and countless ‘charities’.
Think about it. When Tottenham supporters are being attacked by liberals for calling themselves ‘Yids’ it does not take much of a leap to think that being Jewish in Britain is becoming more and more unpopular.
That’s not why they’re being criticised though. The reason some think Spurs fans shouldn’t use the word ‘Yid’ is because it legitimises its use as an insult. David Baddiel wrote a piece in the Guardian on it.
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/sep/17/david-cameron-yid-really-is-race-hate-word
As it happens, I disagree with that reasoning. I don’t see any problem with Spurs fans using the word. But that’s a different debate I think.
It’s the Jewish word for Jew, so it boggles the mind that it’s considered a racial slur. It’s the exact opposite of how the word “nigger” works. Sure, when somebody uses “yid” in an obvious tone of disdain, it can be considered a slur, but that’s more about the tone of voice and attitude of the person saying it than anything about the word itself. It’s silly to me. I mean, the one time gentiles apparently don’t mind labeling themselves as being associated with Jews and this dope wants to ban it? Should any word be banned just because the wrong people start using it?
If pronounced YEED, to rhyme with ‘deed’, the Y-word is neutral.
If pronounced to rhyme with ‘did’, the Y-word is offensive,
Leo Rosten, ‘The Joys of Yiddish’
Then my entire family and all my friends are offensive. Meh.
I agree.
Pah!
I see it as being inclusive and embracing an identity. Baddiel is wrong and, as he admitted with his comment about Cameron, is simply campaigning. It’s one way to earn a living now Frank has ditched him.
So what if most Tottenham fans aren’t Jews – who gives a flying fuck?
Anyway as a Gooner I see Tottenham fans as committing a far greater sin. Namely supporting their shite house team.
All together now : 1 nil, 1 nil, 1 nil 1 nil.
Ahem!
Perhaps because of the experience of Jews in other parts of Europe were fundamentalist Islam is in the ascendant, notably France.
http://www.americanthinker.com/2013/03/europe_acquiesces_while_jews_are_threatened_and_killed_again.html
Or
http://frontpagemag.com/2013/davidhornik/jews-under-muslim-attack-in-europe/
Because, Albaman, when supporting Israel is no longer acceptable in polite company or in the Mail, Jews need to be concerned. Even while the BBC and people like you insist that the actions of an extremely Tiny Minority™ should never reflect badly on the vast majority of peaceful, moderate Mohammedans, you people never worry about a “backlash” against Jews in the UK whenever Israel gets negative press. We never hear the same concerns about how Jews breathe a sigh of relief when it turns out that Israel actually didn’t commit some atrocity this week. Perhaps that’s never even occurred to you.
Combine this with the growing boldness of Mohammedan extremists in your society and the growing number of Jew-haters inhabiting places like Spectator comments sections (their “Low Life” writer, Jeremy Clarke”, recently wondered aloud if the Jews really do control the world and order wars for their benefit, a nice complement to Taki’s occasional swipes at Israel), Katty Kay being allowed to say that US politicians fear the wrath of the Jewish Lobby, and the ever-increasing list of celebutards and universities making noise about boycotting Israel, Jews need to worry.
You don’t see any of this as actually happening, I’m sure. A Jew is Labour leader, possibly your next Prime Minister, you’ll say. If that happens, and things go badly for your economy, more military nonsense, etc., guess who’ll get blamed.
Ask yourself and your friends and family how much Jews control US or UK foreign policy, or how much of the financial crisis is to blame on Jewish bankers, or whether or not Israel is the root cause of all problems in the Middle East.
Your fellow travelers won’t be rounding up Jews any time soon, of course. But the reality is more prosaic. Quiet shunning in certain circles, a rise in vandalism and violence which is already largely ignored by the BBC, Israelis banned from conferences, Jews like Phillips losing their jobs for uttering unapproved thoughts, Jews who openly support Israel banned from your shores by your Home Secretary just as the previous one banned Geert Wilders and the current one banned Robert Spencer and Pamela Geller, and quasi-Protocols of the Elders of Zion theories once again pass the “dinner table test”.
Dismiss it as fantasy and paranoia if you wish. But not until you ask those questions I presented of yourself, your family, and your friends.
“Combine this with the growing boldness of Mohammedan extremists in your society….” ………………Once again a bBBC thread becomes an anti-Islam thread. How surprising, well maybe not!!
“A Jew is Labour leader, possibly your next Prime Minister, you’ll say.” ………… So what, his religion is of no consequence to the sensible majority.
“Ask yourself and your friends and family how much Jews control US or UK foreign policy, or how much of the financial crisis is to blame on Jewish bankers, or whether or not Israel is the root cause of all problems in the Middle East.” ……………….. I thought it was all Gordon Brown’s fault?
“Dismiss it as fantasy and paranoia if you wish.” …………..I will, thanks.
I’ll set you a challenge if you are man enough to take it 😉 :
Next time you are with fellow lefties who don’t know you very well; tell them you are Jewish… then count the number of seconds it takes them to mention Israel.
That will give you a measure of how welcome in their company you will begin to feel.
Go on! I dare you!
Albaman, I have never resorted to personal insult on this website before and I’m not going to start now.
Draw your own conclusion from that.
Spend some time with some of the distinguished inhabitants of Exeter.University. Never a single peep of anti Israeli or anti Jewish behaviour. I jest. It pervades the very air of the city.
I have seldom had to walk out of gatherings but in Exeter I have.
Maybe I am over sensitive but then my ancestors had every reason to be so but failed often to see the way things were going.
That’s right, Albaman. Don’t bother addressing any of the points. I wasn’t making an anti-Islam remark per se, really. Or do you think there are no extremists? Nobody said anything about Gordon Brown. You just made that up to avoid the issue. And your claim that there’s a sensible majority reveals your closed mind, so no wonder you won’t even think about what I’ve said. Oh, well.
How many people actually judge Ed Miliband on his Jewishness? Every single comment I’ve seen on him has been about his merits as a politician rather than his religion. I think it’s going a bit far to suggest that if he fails as PM (if he ever gets there) that it will be blamed on the Jews.
I don’t deny that there are some Muslims who do hate Jews, and this is an issue that the Muslim community must address. But I’m yet to see convincing evidence that Jew-hatred is on the rise amongst non-Muslims.
Not many people do now, of course. Not out loud, anyway. He’s not in power, so there’s no point.
No evidence, you say?
Prince Charles warns of rising anti-semitism.
The BBC usually has time for him – when he’s talking about favored issues.
British yobs, racial slurs and why I fear for my children: As a Jewish school is attacked in France, one British mother’s utterly shocking account of the anit-Semitism her children suffer
Don’t forget to check out the charming comments. Speaking of comments, I assume you don’t read the Spectator online much, if you’re not aware of any rise in Jew-hatred. Or maybe it seems just a normal level to you, and not an increase worth noting.
Anti-semitism on the rise in the UK
The BBC actually reported on it a couple years back, although it was one of those “a Jewish charity says…” deals. Probably not worth your time.
I’d list more sources, but you could most likely dismiss them out of hand with “they would say that, wouldn’t they?”
There is a point in attacking him. Yes, he’s not in power, but he’s still the leader of the opposition and a major figure in British politics. And again, your assertion that his failings would be blamed on the Jews doesn’t stand up.
The Prince Charles story doesn’t give any concrete examples. The Daily Mail story is horrible, yes, but as is pointed out in the comments below, the abuse her children have suffered tends to come from the kind of yobs who abuse anyone who isn’t like them. Looking at that Melanie Phillips piece in the Spectator, indeed there are some comments that come across as blatantly anti-Semitic, but plenty of others in support of Israel. The Commentator story mentions that some of the increase was motivated by the terrorist attack on a Jewish school in France, and indeed that there was a decrease in the Greater Manchester area.
Don’t insinuate what I would or would not say, please.
I meant there’s no point in moaning about Jews controlling things because that Jew isn’t in power. It wouldn’t really work.
If I provided links to Jewish sources saying there’s a rise in anti-Semitism, why would you listen to them? It’s just paranoia and playing the victim, no?
Oh OK, but your original comment I was responding yo was: ‘If that happens [Ed M becomes PM], and things go badly for your economy, more military nonsense, etc., guess who’ll get blamed.’ I don’t think that will be the case.
I would listen to those Jewish sources, yes. I would question their motives and look into their statistics (as any such organisation’s motives and statistics should be questioned) but I wouldn’t dismiss them out of hand as ‘playing the victim card’.
Millipead is not controlled by any Jewish lobby and it would take a certain type of brain dead moron to suggest it.
He is controlled by Unite however, which is far, far worse.
The rise in anti-Semitism has been an on going thing, getting worse each year as has been pointed out on this blog for ages. Millipeed being a Jew ( and lets face it he’s only one when it suits) won’t stop that or make it worse. There are other far worse causes.
“Millipead is not controlled by any Jewish lobby and it would take a certain type of brain dead moron to suggest it.”
Well, sure. But we’re talking about people who suspect the Protocols of the Elders of Zion is based on fact and various BBC employees.
‘I don’t deny that there are some Muslims who do hate Jews…
How true. In fact, there are enough of them in the Middle East to have had three serious goes i.e. full-scale wars, at wiping them off the face of the earth.
David Preiser,
You say that; “…according to the Spectator’s gossip columnist, the Mail got rid of Mel Phillips because she defended Israel on Question Time.”
I’m assuming you mean this article:
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/?p=8608231
In which case, it says nothing of the sort. Her latest melt-down on Question Time was not about “defending Israel” but attacking David Cameron, Iranians and “The British Public”; in such a way that made her look more like a caricature of a swivel-eyed loon.
It’s interesting that you equate criticism of Israel with being anti-Jew. Would you then also draw parallels between criticising Iran and being anti-Muslim?
Do you think there is any moral difference between being anti-Jew and being anti-Muslim?
It absolutely does say that, dez. In the video Phillips winds up her opening soliloquy by saying the real enemy is Iran because it wants to nuke Israel. That’s the sort of thing you call the ravings of a swivel-eyed loon. You surely heard a few boos from the audience. Why are you pretending she didn’t say that? She’s essentially saying that defending Israel is in the UK’s interests. Boris disagreed, so you’ve got something in common there.
(I have to admit it was nice to hear an audience member saying that Israel was a proxy for the US rather than the other way round.)
And it notes that the Guardian suggests that there was friction due to the Mail muzzling her on Israel. Why are you pretending it didn’t?
As for your question about parallels, no, not Iran, specifically, but Islamic terrorism in general, including things like the Woolwich murder and the Toulouse killings. You must have read at least one comment of mine here where I whine about the double standard of the BBC fretting about a backlash against Mohammedans every time there’s some unpleasantness, making sure to remind everyone that it’s no fair smearing all those other folks with the bad behavior of a Tiny Minority™, not all of them support jihad or will choose their co-religionists in another country over their non-Muslim neighbors in Britain, etc., yet there’s never a BBC special lecturing everyone about not accusing Jews of having dual loyalty, or a BBC online article worrying about a backlash against Jews every time Israel gets some bad PR.
Do a search on the BBC website for Malmö, Sweden, and notice which religion’s adherents are subjects of a story or two about discrimination they face, and then do an internet search about the Jews in that city, and notice which world’s largest news organization doesn’t mention it. But I digress.
As for the moral difference, obviously it depends on how you define the “anti-” part, meaning what the concerns actually are. Those terms will definitely need to be defined and agreed upon clearly before a fair answer is possible, and your question tells me that our definitions are light-years apart.
David Preiser,
“It absolutely does say that, dez.”
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/?p=8608231
The Spectator’s gossip columnist does not say the Mail got rid of Mel Phillips “because she defended Israel on Question Time” (perhaps you can quote where it does… go on, just for a laugh). It doesn’t refer to a single thing she said on Question Time. You are quite clearly wrong; so why do you revert to this feeble response of nothing more than; “oh-yes-it-did-not-listening-la-la-la-la-la-“?
What a load of bullshit you throw around, dez. Steerpike posted the video of Phillips saying what she said, and says this about it:
Meanwhile, the peaceniks over at the Indy claim that Mel’s incendiary appearance on Question Time in June made Paul Dacre hit the red button. The clip above will refresh your memory.
The Indy has an axe to grind (having lost Dominic Lawson, who is tipped to replace Mel); but I hear that it’s on the money. A source at the Mail tells me: ‘She played up to every stereotype of the paper, and it got too over the top’. Apparently, after the infamous Question Time, ‘the managing editor took her aside and hauled her over the coals.’
You’re a liar. It’s plain as day.
David Preiser,
“What a load of bullshit you throw around, dez. Steerpike posted the video of Phillips saying what she said, and says this about it…”
Yes, of course he did. He did not say why Mad-Mel’s appearance on Question Time was “incendiary” or why Paul Dacre apparently “hauled her over the coals”. You might have decided that it was “because she defended Israel”, but it doesn’t say, or even imply that anywhere in the quoted article (which is what you claimed and then constructed a whole argument around).
“You’re a liar. It’s plain as day.”
Yes dear, if you say so dear… Or perhaps you could try talking off your cardboard tinted spectacles once in a while; they seem to becoming more corrugated with every passing day.
Just a quick note,
“…yet there’s never a BBC special lecturing everyone about not accusing Jews of having dual loyalty, or a BBC online article worrying about a backlash against Jews every time Israel gets some bad PR.”
Again you compere criticisms against Islam (a religion) and criticisms against Israel (a country) as if they are the same thing when quite clearly they are not.
Because anti-Semitism is on the rise and it’s mainly not from knuckleheaded Nazis but Muslims. Look at the placards at rather well attended Muslim demonstrations, they want me dead. Oddly I’m not in favour of that.
Melanie has written this about it:
Clarification:
Following my latest piece in which I revealed that was my last column in that slot for the Daily Mail, I want to reassure readers that these email updates to you – and indeed my writing – will not stop. All that has changed is that I will no longer write my regular Monday Daily Mail column. I will nevertheless continue to write my blog posts, as well as articles for various publications, and all these pieces will continue to be sent to you as email updates on my work.
LOL! It looks like Mark Mardell read the same NY Times article I did yesterday about how the President is losing support even from Democrats, and that the racist/intransigent/hyper-partisan-let-the-country-fail-for-purely-political-gains Narrative was getting more difficult to support. He had to write a blog post about the problem:
Obama presidency: Decline in the fall?
Mardell actually said that the President made mistake in judgment of the media! But don’t worry, even though Mardell admits that many supporters no longer have His back, it’s mostly not His fault, you see. Leave it him to find a way to turn the entire situation around according to his own political ideology. he also acknowledges that the President “fumbled” the Syria situation, but don’t worry: the BBC’s US President editor still sees a silver lining everywhere:
Mr Obama’s foreign policy looks clumsy, as he feels his way towards a different role for America in the world, which accepts “the rise of the rest”.
It is so alien to many of the political class in the West that they are left feeling insecure and scorn his weakness.
It’s not Him: it’s us. We’ve failed Him. We just can’t accept the inevitable.
The US president now so disdains the 24-hour news cycle, that he has made a mistake of ignoring the narrative completely.
This is actually false. Mardell’s made a serious factual error here. The President is so acutely aware of it that He keeps meeting behind closed doors with the NY Times and other key Left-wing media types. I’m rather shocked that Mardell seems unaware of this.
He has fumbled his way out of a crisis, and at least for now looks like he may have got what he wants – no military action and Syria promising to do away with chemical weapons.
Yep. The smartest guy in the room seems to have won the day. What a shock.
His domestic problem is almost entirely different.
If many Democrats are no longer playing ball, it may have something to do with disappointment, but more to do with 2016.
It won’t be long before there is a new kid on the White House block, and that changes calculations.
As for the coming budget battles in Congress, while Mr Obama’s position looks weak, the Republicans look weaker – and as close as 2016 is, the mid-term elections of 2014 are even closer.
It’s not His fault, you see. Trapped In A World He Never Made, etc.
In BBC-NUJ’s selective ‘multiculturalism’:-
1.) the number and non-British composition of IMMIGRANTS entering U.K should be decided by intending immigrants;
2.) whether to ban the burqa/niqab in public, in U.K, should be decided by Muslims.
http://www.annaraccoon.com/
Jimmy Savile and the licence fee payers.
In the, not incomprehensible, desire to stick the boot into the perdiferous BBC it is easy to skate over the worrying aspects of Operation Yewtree. It seems the wheels are falling off the bandwagon with more and more cases having a, lets be fair, wee touch of fantasy about them.
There is another blog which takes a very partial view of the situation but, nevertheless, has some interesting information regarding Savile and his relationship with the BBC, much of it gained by repeated FOI requests. I don’t vouch for it’s veracity but it seems more odd the more I read about this story, more so because the BBC, which has the same information is not using it in it’s own defence.
Something is rotten in the state of Beebland, and it’s not just the broadcast output neither.
Is BBC-NUJ avoiding the reporting of the following, in case it offends the sensibilities of non-Muslims?:-
“UK: More than 1,500 victims of female genital mutilation in one hospital alone”
[Excerpts]:-
“Apparently just as Britain is vying to become the world capital of Sharia-compliant finance, so also it hopes to become the FGM capital of the world. FGM is justified in Islamic law”
[…]
“Nonetheless, even though it is illegal in Britain, and as many as 66,000 girls have been subjected to this barbarity there, the British have never managed to prosecute anyone for it. But they have summoned the energy to bar opponents of this practice from entering the country.”
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2013/09/uk-more-than-1500-victims-of-female-genital-mutilation-in-one-hospital-alone.html
BBC-NUJ’s politically biased ‘Viewpoints’ propaganda vehicle: today- IMMIGRATION.
As we know, BBC-NUJ is elitist, rather than democratic, when it comes to decision-making, re-British society.
This is borne out by BBC-NUJ’s political approach of getting 8 representatives of various NGOs and a political party to tell the British people what to do about immigration. Only one of the 8 (‘Liberty GB’) mentions the need to control and limit the numbers of immigrants:-
“Viewpoints: What should be done about ethnic integration?”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-24147027
The reality that Britain (and notably England, and especially London) are being rapidly colonised by an unending flow of mass immigration is relegated in BBC-NUJ’s utopia of a ‘multicultural’ Britain.
Apparently, it is now expected that indigenous British people should be more accommodating in their attitudes to being colonised, often by immigrant groups who intend to impose their culture on British society.
I think Multiculturism is a form of British Imperialism, which has replaced the Victorian Liberal idea of Britain ruling the World so as to civilise and look after the ethnics.
These British Liberals now want to bring the world to Britain, to create Multicultural ghettos with a permanent state of poverty, for the purpose of supplying the Labour party with a permanent supply of voters, all with the excuse that its to dangerous for ethnics to live abroad.
amazing comments section…………how long before it’s removed?
The “You and Yours” show on Radio 4 was the usual sneer at RyanAir.
The show quoted a “Which survey” of its readers and -unsurprisingly since the thirty seven subscribers all work for the OFT, Trading Standards and Notting Hill library-they were far from happy with poor Michael and his Oirish scorn for ash clouds, the disabled that won`t read their boarding passes correctly and for the eco taxes he`ll not pay to Ed Davey or Occupy.
He therefore is loathed by the BBC-the oiks get a cheap flight and take their chances…but the Beautiful people at the BBC/Which would rather not have to meet the oiks at passport control(unless they`re being prevented from boarding-but that`d be profiling…oh dear?)
I therefore will be flying RyanAir next time-and we should say that the more the BBC slags them off, the better they are for the rest of us.
Oh-and they had a thing on about e-cigarettes-they set it us as a debate about them, but we all know what Auntie thinks-and who she`s going to ask to speak that “thinking” of theirs-don`t we?
Let`s hope the cannabis/cocaine worthies like Brand etc don`t get a whiff of this…theirs are the drugs we must legalise aren`t they?
Bloody chavs and their Woodbines…dope is the new Styversand, doncha know?…f*** the BBC and their perennial weeds of an agenda.
Radio 4 PM program, more or less the very first story is about the wearing of the veil in hospitals.
17 hospitals have banned the wearing of it, but the Tories leftie minister has wimped out and refused to make any kind of ruling or recommendations.
Once again a religious fanatic is wheeled out to say why she MUST be allowed to wear it, but when challenged on how she might deliver bad news to someone she admitted that a face covering was inappropriate and that someone else would have to deliver it.
She was not challenged that she was deliberately making herself unable to carry out very important part of her job.
Again there was no statement that this is absolutely not a part of Islam, nor that this Wahhabist interpretation requires followers to not leave the house without a male relative as a chaperone, nor to drive a car (which they should not be doing with restricted vision anyway).
One has to ask if at the interview they were wearing the veil?
Probably not, she probably turned up one day wearing it and like all management nowadays is too sh1t scared to question it, afraid of reprisals and the sack.
Anyone want to join me in starting a new religion, one where it demands that our registration plates must be covered up, because it seems that CCTV is useless as far as the religion of peace goes, they might as well turn them off if they don’t ban the veil…
Can our cars now register in Swansea as Muslim women then…or are they not allowed to drive or be a petrol driven vehicle this month?
Any chance of a ruling from Cairo Uni?
Vehicle Rights for all!
Would Fatima get a driving licence to go with her passport?
http://files.abovetopsecret.com/uploads/ats34502_Fatimas_Passport.jpg " alt="a> " />
What bad news might that be if our veiled lady is standing over you with a knife then?
No problem-as long as she doesn`t pray over you with that charming Islamic Benediction, as pioneered by Mr Atta on 9/11.
Good old BBC…maybe the BBC should all be forced to wear Burkas…and charge us only for black and blacker TV licenses.
“Strictly” in burkas…that`d be It`s a Knockout wouldn`t it?
Womens footie?…could be worth a watch! 0-0 on the pools for ever!
What amazed me in this interview was the fact that there are already nurses in our hospitals wearing this sinister black hood which goes against the freedoms and openness we cherish whilst at the same time screaming ‘you can stuff integration up your arse’. It’s an in-your-face statement of political intent and should be banned whilst there’s still time. Not that the BBC sees this or other Muslim customs as barriers to integration because, basically, it doesn’t agree with integration.
What didn’t surprise me was the Unison rep who obviously didn’t see it as a problem – mainly because no staff issues had ever arisen as a result of it being worn – and she thought it reasonable that others should step in when face to face dialogue with patients is required.
Welcome to the madhouse.
“Police UNMASK Muslim woman who turned up in court wearing a niqab to face charges of stealing £21,000 to fund Florida holiday”
By MARK DUEL.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2424317/Muslim-woman-Shaheda-Lorgat-unmasked-court-stealing-college.html
Don’t think we’ll find too many of these types of articles on the BBC: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/8570506/Police-covered-up-violent-campaign-to-turn-London-area-Islamic.html
If a story involves Muslims then it invariably involves violence, bigotry and intolerance. If a BBC story involves Muslims, then it’s Kumbaya and Morning Has Broken!
Yes, the ‘Telegraph’ article (£), is just the sort of report which BBC-NUJ will censor if it can, so as to further the cause of the Islamisation of Britain:
“Police ‘covered up’ violent campaign to turn London area ‘Islamic.’
“Police have been accused of ‘covering up’ a campaign of abuse, threats and violence aimed at “Islamicising” an area of London.”
By Andrew Gilligan.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/8570506/Police-covered-up-violent-campaign-to-turn-London-area-Islamic.html
Is that why the BBC moved to Salford?
The BBC trying to be impartial but the very fact they’ve wasted finger energy typing this utter multicultural crap is a sufficient indicator of their underlying support for all things sandals, wooly jumpers and joss sticks:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-24147027
The bBBC is not trying very hard to be impartial when it interviews eight people, seven of whom are from left-wing organisations pushing their multi-culti dogma.
To be honest, mate, I didn’t even get that far… I read the title, a few sentences and then flicked onto the Sport to see how Plymouth Argyle are doing (and judging on Argyle’s performance to date it might have been better if I stuck with the multicultural garbage!)
Oh look-Mark Mardells researchers…hope they`re not on zero hour contracts though.
http://www.campusreform.org/blog/?ID=5070
Generation Why I presume…OMG!
Sounds a lot like the reasons the Nobel committee gave. And I bet you wouldn’t get any better answers if you asked most Beeboids why they love Him. Other than being the “greatest orator of our time” (© Richard Bacon), of course.
Report on the BBC lunchtime news about the last-ditch stand being taken by the Mayor of Newham, who is one of the dwindling population of British whites (now down to 17%) inhabiting that fair borough.
In a forlorn attempt to encourage integration, he is looking to ban foreign-language newspapers from libraries and get rid of all the council’s translation services.
The BBC, of course, honouring their commitment to balance and impartiality, intimate in the introduction that integration might be a bad thing. Yep, that’s right, the mayor’s attempts to bind people together with a common glue which has given this country the stability, freedom, tolerance and appeal for which it is renowned, could be a bad thing.
Cue some lefty country-destroying twat (didn’t catch who he was) wittering on about the vulnerable being isolated because of the mayor’s ideology. Yes, folks, an integrated society is now an ideology. Multiculturalism, which you sensed this traitor has had a big hand in promoting, goes unchallenged – because, as we all know, in BBC eyes it is not an ideology, but an ideal.
Isn’t it funny how on all BBC ‘debates’ on multiculturalism the concluding theme always tends be that multiculturalism is what the populace wants. However, the polls tend to suggest that when you ask the majority of British people on the street, they think it’s destroying this country and fast. The discrepancy here is one that’s emerged in direct ratio with BBC propaganda.
When was the last time we heard a BBC debate that openly discussed the misery which unfettered immigration has caused the white working class British person? All we ever get is BBC newsreaders stating ‘Now, it’s a sensitive topic that’s divided society…’ etc. And yet, we are coerced into funding this bilge.
Interesting that it is now the white British who are at fault, apparently we don’t feel british any more and should be dam grateful that immigrants want to come into this country otherwise as a country we would be on the scrap heap.
This article by the bbc sums up the bias bbc reporting, it is almost laughable.
It seems on the bbc HYS that you are not allowed to critisise Labour, the bbc or the left. The moderators keep removing posts.
Very annoying as they are not allowing a fair debate.
“Fair debate” and “BBC”? An oxymoron. For that you need to go to the “Fair and Balanced” Fox, routinely smeared as “far right” by the extremely far left.