Here you go and as requested – a new PJ Harvey approved Open Thread for you to detail the bias!
FRIDAY OPEN THREAD!
Bookmark the permalink.
Search Biased BBC
Recent Comments
- Zephir Nov 2, 00:35
Weekend 2nd November 2024
They cannot tolerate X and Elon Musk and wage continual war against him via their pet marxists at the bbc… - JohnC Nov 2, 00:24
Midweek 30th October 2024 . Budget
… and as usual, when the BBC ask a question in the headline it means the answer is no but… - JohnC Nov 2, 00:22
Midweek 30th October 2024 . Budget
A man lived by a sewer And by a sewer he died At the coroners inquest They called it sewercide… - JohnC Nov 2, 00:20
Midweek 30th October 2024 . Budget
Modern socialism is seeing all the money other people have when you are a student and wanting it for yourself… - StewGreen Nov 1, 23:52
Midweek 30th October 2024 . Budget
Yes @Up2snuff I did know that already But there is a bigger story #1 turnout was just 19.18% #2 People… - StewGreen Nov 1, 23:44
Weekend 2nd November 2024
catchup lnk to page 5 of the Midweek Thread Some good posts there And worth checking before you spend ages… - Zephir Nov 1, 23:43
Weekend 2nd November 2024
Fcku Red Nose Day. I’m proposing an annual Red Noose Day. At lamposts next to cycle lanes. And pride flagpoles. - Sluff Nov 1, 22:59
Weekend 2nd November 2024
Meanwhile in the People’s Socialist Republic of South Yorkshire….. For 50 years, Sandford Road in Doncaster has been a dual…
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
It had to happen – the Ship of Fools bunker YouTube clip:
This bit of film serves all purposes…a gift that keeps on giving!
The subtitles script is so absolutely perfect. The creators have made one of the best of the best.
This was always my favourite. A true masterpiece!
Fantastic, I hadn’t seen that prequel before although all the best ‘Downfalls’ are of Brown.
http://www.cracked.com/photoplasty_747_the-23-most-surprising-true-facts-about-awful-people
Look at who they’ve got on there, then see #4 – FACEPALM.
BBC-Democrat censors on Islamic jihad, again.
1.)
‘Sky News’ has this:-
“‘Jihad Jane’ Faces Lengthy Jail Sentence.
More than four years since her arrest over a plot to kill a Swedish cartoonist, Colleen LaRose could be jailed for life.”
http://news.sky.com/story/1189659/jihad-jane-faces-lengthy-jail-sentence
2.)
Pamela Geller’s ‘Atlas Shrugs’:-
“PROSECUTORS SAY ‘JIHAD JANE’ DESERVES LENGTHY SENTENCE”
http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2014/01/prosecutors-say-jihad-jane-deserves-lengthy-sentence.html
3.)
BBC-Democrat:
Zero.
‘Jihadwatch’ reports relating to Swedish cartoonist, LARS VILKS –
http://www.jihadwatch.org/cgi-sys/cgiwrap/br0nc0s/managed-mt/mt-srch.cgi?search=lars+vilks&IncludeBlogs=1&limit=20
Converts to the Islamist cause present a very, very tricky problem for the BBC et al because they absolutely prove that race is not a factor.
Best just ignore it, eh?
In the mad, mad Beeboid world of ‘Today’:-
“For 18 months he’s camped in a tiny room in Equador’s embassy. His only solace? Takeaway sushi and a sun lamp… Thought for the day: Is Julian Assange going stir crazy?”
By STEVE BIRD.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2533009/Thought-day-Is-Julian-Assange-going-stir-crazy.html#ixzz2pL47UoJ7
And no Beeb fears about the drain on the poor Ecuadorian taxpayer for funding the farrago. Merits a musical doesn`t it?
Let no Beeboid tell you that buying cocaine serves to help their economy either….Columbia hardly prospers does it now?
Answer for the day: ‘Let’s hope so.’
Oops Re; my post on’ Free The Antarctic 52!’
“While trawling through ‘Ice age now’ site for more on ‘ship of fools’ came on this Australian TV report from November
Listen carefully at 1 min 25. So what exactly is the status of those ‘passengers’? Either Professor Chris Turney was making stuff up then or he’s lying now
No wonder the BBC are being circumspect about the exact nature of ‘expidition’ ”
Just noticed link didn’t post,sorry hear it is again ,I hope.
Again check statement on video at 1min 25
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-11-25/15-million-australian-expedition-to-antarctica/5116158
Hers full article from ‘Ice age now’
http://iceagenow.info/2013/12/preconceived-ideas-supposedly-scientific-expedition-video/
Mr Turney was filmed in his office(?) with a pith helmet in the background. Is that appropriate headgear for the antarctic? Or does he just live in a fantasy world? I’m afraid I had to stop watching after just over 6 minutes, so perhaps the relevance of the pith helmet was explained.
Apparently as he was on his way out to join the expedition a colleague shouted ‘Are you going to take the pith, Chris?’
BBC allowing lies to pass unchallenged again:
Victoria Derbyshire on Five Live has been reporting on Italian detention centres. Some Globalist woman (British) being interviewed admitted most don’t want to stay in italy but want to move to Nortehrn Europe, and so she claimed they ‘want to go to Germany, the Scandinavian countries and a few to Britain’.
Unchallenged by VD although it is a FACT that the majority by far want to come to Britain, and every single one interviewed spoke some English.
Beeboids continues with their daily campaign for getting unlimited numbers of immigrants into Britain, from Asia, Africa and Eastern Europe.
“New report highlights the BBC’s Islamism and immigration bias.
“A report released today by the New Culture Forum finds that over the past 15 years, Britain’s public broadcaster has given ‘greater weight to pro-migration voices'” (May, 2013).
http://www.thecommentator.com/article/3646/new_report_highlights_the_bbc_s_islamism_and_immigration_bias
“‘Deep liberal bias’ stopped BBC from properly reporting on immigration and EU.
“IMMIGRATION concerns were not on the BBC’s radar as it had a ‘deep liberal bias’ which stopped it recognising the fears of ordinary people.”
(July, 2013.)
http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/412205/Deep-liberal-bias-stopped-BBC-from-properly-reporting-on-immigration-and-EU
The person who they interviewed wanted to come to UK to ‘study’ (no doubt at the taxpayers’ expense). No questioning of where he was planning to stay, or how he would fund his living costs (no doubt, all together now… at the taxpayers’ expense).
And they could have interviewed any one of them and got the same answer:
“I want to go to UK”.
Come to Britain all you drugstas, gangstas and spongbobs on the taxpayer!
Don`t listen to the weather forecasts, amber alerts etc…that`s only to “put the wind up” the natives nighties.
We here at LibLabLuvvie.com see it as ideal kite-flying weather a la Mr Banks(boo hiss!).
Which helps us do our money laundering, so we find-ideally for drying those dame Euros, lei etc.
If you`ve any “blow”…don`t tell Frank…WE`D like to know!
Polly-Alabaih-Jones.
PS…no reference to what Labour created for those poor Chinese cockle pickers 2004 will ever be mentioned again…might scare our Balkan buddies off you see.
4th sentences-damp Euros,
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2532975/Skewed-figures-BBC-agenda-How-questions-asked-immigration-reform.html
see this – http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-24813467
in particular this – “Immigrants from outside the EEA contributed 2% more in taxes than they received in the same period, the report showed.”
Then note that the graph DIRECTLY BELOW shows that non EEA immigrant receipts versus expenditure NEVER goes above 1.0, which is break even; so how can they have brought in 2% more tax then they consumed?
This is how stupid the BBC thinks/ knows the general public is.
They tell you A is the truth, then provide a graph DIRECTLY BELLOW which shows that B is the truth.
DIRECTLY BELLOW!!!!!!!!
COME ON!!!
It is interesting how the BBC seems to promote dodgy science, usually based on models or ‘reports’ that ‘reveal’ information that the BBC is predisposed to believe (and normally glossing over huge statistical errors)
Here is another one
Maybe they could find some money in their apparently inexhaustible employment budget to employ a proper statistician and, good grief, some actual scientists to error-check their output?
Perhaps subtitles could be provided for that Hitler video – the BBC fuhrer raving on about the right-wing media exposing the dodgy statistics, questionable polls, unrepresentative interviewees, rigged QT audiences, platinum handshakes, etc.
And if they did he would have been checked out first for the PeeCee political bias – can’t have anyone who isnt on message working at the BBC.
‘Phone in’ says Jeremy ‘…if you lived in a miners village during the strike.’
I suppose he could always have said,
‘Phone in if you wanted electricity 24/7/365 rather than whenever a bunch of gangsters decided you should have it’ or
‘Phone in if you thought there was a better way of running a country than paying £2.5 billion a year for underground dole offices and increasing the benefits package by ‘the going rate’ (20-25% a year)’.
We probably pay Jeremy Vine £1.5 million a year. Of course we can’t find out commercial confidentiality and all that. I mean Magic FM must be falling over themselves to pay presenters Vine’s sort of money for Vine’s sort of drivel.
I bet he played the Smiths or some similar anti Thatcher anti establishment band from the 80’s that he favours during the item….
Vine is a typical champagne socialist evident by his rudeness to Judith Keppel on Eggheads ‘cos she’s ‘posh’.
Suppose the BBC “secret 1984” will be telling us too much about how
1. Yvonne Fletchers murderers were aided and abetted by the Liberal authorities in dealing with The Libyan Peoples Bureau.
2. The NUM were aided and abetted by Gadhaffi and his Marxist paymasters during the miners strike of 1984.
3. How Catherine Ashton was managing to get by as mere CND Treasurer during 1984
4. How the murder of a Swansea Taxi driver during 1984 was condoned or pardoned by the Labour Party and its UNITE-type fellow travellers of the times…many of who have gone onto “greater things” in Europe, assorted Charities, third way vehicles such as the BBC. journalism and police, councils etc.
You see folks-the likes of Kearney and Vine like SOME condidential files…but, funnily enough; would rather not shine their lamplight on things that might embarrass Ed, Hermann or Harriet etc…..
F OFF Beeb!
I hate it when he’s on the programme. Dermot is far more professional and watchable.
He teases Judith just as much, though. Only he’s not as petulant and doesn’t come across as being so ignorant as Vine.
From the same mould.
He teases Judith but it’s much more good natures than Vine’s awful attempts. And I fully agree with you on your other descriptions of him David.
I don’t think Vine really understands people. He speaks to the contestants on Eggheads as though they were slightly dim twelve-year-olds, or like dimwits on Radio 2 phone-ins.
What if you were a dopey student gathering Little Lord Fauntleroy outfits and designer frocks from outside Highgate Sainsburys in 1984?
Does the BBC want to know what the miners thought of that as they opened the parcels, expecting something for the winter?
I could tell them plenty…about what Wham thought of Billy Bragg?…but Jeremy won`t be letting ME on to illuminate.
Wrong limelight you see.
“Phone in if you think the government of Britain should be elected by the people rather than decided by a Communist conspiracy masquerading as a trade union”?
The racists are at it again.
Today’s bBBC One O’clock News has an important piece of ‘news’, that someone has made a film about slavery.
Immediately followed by bBBC NorthWest ‘news’, that a film director wants a statue of Mandela to be erected in Manchester, because errr … Manchester is a diverse city and Mandela was black …
It is Steve McQueen. He thinks that the film industry ignores slavery and his reasoning is that many films have been made about the WWII, which only lasted for six years, whereas slavery lasted for 300 (or thereabouts – can’t remember the exact figure he used).
This clown, who only seems to have one subject of conversation, seems to be ignoring the facts that WWII is still within living memory of many people, and that slavery has lasted longer than 300 years – a lot longer.
Much of it, of course, was the “wrong” type of slavery.
As for the film itself, sounds like classic award fodder.
300 years? The man’s an idiot, it lasted thousands of years. I don’t suppose he learned anything about the Ancient Eygptians, Greeks, Romans.. who did it to each other. As you say it’s only been done by Whites against Blacks in his world.
Interesting fact about slavery
By extension, for the 250 years between 1530 and 1780, the figure could easily have been as high as 1,250,000.
This is the estimated number of white Christian slaves taken to Africa.
So hopefully they make a film about this.
A statue of a white slave in Algiers sounds good…plus a shedload of compo for related descendants.
As with groups of people being killed, postmodern relativists like McQueen value lives only according to who does it to them. In this case, it’s whites in the US owning, buying, and selling black people. So that’s all that matters.
If non-whites own slaves, and had done for thousands of years before there was any such thing as the US or the Atlantic slave trade, and before the countries this type of person blames exclusively for it even existed, that doesn’t count. The lives of those slaves are not valued as highly as black slaves owned by whites. Never mind that black and Arabic slavers brought them to the white man’s attention in the first place.
It’s a simple, sick calculation. We see it done by the BBC on a regular basis.
As for the ruins of that medieval slave-trading fort called “Zimbabwe” by the Shona….
Will Mr McQueen visit the fact that, of the many “settlers” of British North America and the Caribbean, a goodly lot were non-free WHITE people, i.e., transported convicts from Britain (especially Highlanders after the Clearances, sent to North Carolina) and Ireland, sent to people the frontiers (and fight, and be killed by, Red Indians, essentially), and debtor-prisoners working off an indenture (who in many cases were pretty much worked to death, because their term was not unlimited, like an African slave’s was)?
Who does he suppose the “straw bosses” and “paddy rollers” were, in many if not most cases? Usually a white man who was no more free than the black man he supervised and/or punished.
But of course, none of that would matter except insofar as it was to do with the maintenance of the subjugation of the African slaves and their descendants.
The slave trade was obviously an obscene business altogether, that left nobody it touched unscathed, including the coastal black Africans who participated in it to keep British Indiamen, the Dutch East Indies Company, and Spaniards and Portuguese coming to their shores to be re-provisioned and from which ships to obtain trade goods.
300 years, by that logic Islam’s self declared war against the west, which has been going on for 1,300 years should be the subject of every other film made.
I’ll hazard a guess that the film is about the least widespread and the least far-reaching type of slavery and the one that lasted the least time of any ‘type of slavery’ (mainly because most of the others are still ongoing and very widespread): that of white masters and black slaves?…just a guess.
It’s okay for blacks to continue to encourage everyone to accept the burden of the sins of the fathers. When Jews try to remind everyone of certain moments of unpleasantness, it’s the grievance industry, everyone’s tired of it, and the Jews need to get over it.
Of course, as the conventional wisdom is that Jews control the movie industry, I think we can all do the math as to why some feel there aren’t enough films about slavery in the US. By comparison, how many films have there been about what happened to the Jews in Spain or England or Eastern Europe in the centuries before the 20th? The Holocaust wasn’t the only thing that ever happened. You’d be surprised how little most people are aware of this.
I do wonder, though, if it would be acceptable to people like McQueen or any BBC journalist if a film about slavery in the US would be allowed to include a mention that it was not condoned and practiced by all the Founders and all the discussions about ending that went on even before Independence until the Civil War. I suspect such nuance wouldn’t be allowed, because that’s never going to be the point of these films. Nor would BBC journalists like Justin Webb accept it. The point is to increase awareness of how racist the US still is. By contrast, can someone point to any Holocaust movie or TV miniseries which was used to provoke discussion about how anti-Semitic Germans still are?
I just love how the left always play the slavery card in which to castigate the west. The thing is a whole generation of people have been brought up on a diet of white man bad, black man victim when it comes to putting chains around our fellow man. In reply I inform these people to listen to the US Marine hymn in which to get a get a facts based account of just whom are the real ugly people.
The lyrics read:
“From the Halls of Montezuma
To the shores of Tripoli
We fight our country’s battles
In the air, on land, and sea;
First to fight for right and freedom
And to keep our honour clean;
We are proud to claim the title
Of United States Marine.
“To the shores of Tripoli?”
That refers to the First Barbary War where the 54 US Marines and around 500 Greeks invaded Libya and took on 4000 Muslims and killed 800 muslims at the battle of Derne over the Islamic penchant for piracy
First Barbary War
The above took place between 1801-1805.
In 1807 the UK passed the Slave Trade Act and from then until just after WW2, the RN was instrumental in removing slavery from around the world (But primarily in the West)
Funny how the left only mention the former and not the latter.
Beeboid global broadcasting empire expands (at licence taxpayers’ expense):-
“Carrie Gracie leaves BBC News Channel”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-25590442
I guess her qualifications are, ummm, that’s she’s a woman?
I would also wager that another instead of saving a few bob a replacement will be found, probably a woman and probably with a name I would struggle to pronounce …
Her qualities are that she speaks Mandarin (if you had watched the video at the link, you’d have noticed), and has a lot of experience in the region, including having studied economics there. If that’s not good enough for you, here’s a thumbs up from a former BBC insider who knows a thing or two:
She might be biased, and apparently it was yet another violation of BBC policy for not making it an open application process, but she is technically qualified for the job, so we’ll see how it plays out. For once, the BBC got something right, sending somebody with a clue – and equally importantly, doesn’t seem to hate more than half the population before they even arrive) to cover a huge, important country. If only they had the decency to have the same respect for the US.
I stand corrected, but more often than not the bBC would prove me correct!
I was actually very impressed that she is fluent in Mandarin, and that – as she is going to Beijing to become their first ‘China editor’ – the bBBC has appointed someone who appears to be well-qualified for the job.
Fluency in Mandarin is impressive and relevant.
SKY has had a blonde (I think Australian) correspondent covering that beat for a while who is also linguistically blessed.
But I have on occasion wondered if speaking the language is always quite enough when it comes to investigative matters, as those being chatted with are going to be in no doubt where the questions are coming from, and may answer accordingly.
Still, quite a bit better than the awesome output from the BBC ME desk, where it appears the local hires and/or sources can tell the editors anything they fancy as few speak a word, that explains if not excuses a whole bunch of stuff.
Yes, of course you’re quite right that, in many countries, people won’t talk openly and honestly to a foreigner regardless of which language they are speaking, so we never get the full picture.
Just like when a beeboid interviews someone away from their London comfort-zone and the interviewee accidentally says something non-pc.
Perhaps in a population of 1.3 billion people the BBC could have recruited a ‘local’ rather than importing another ‘júwàirén’
Ah, but a local might not be a true believer. They might not except the BBC’s holy tenants of multiculturalism, diversity and moral relativism as the received truth.
They might embraced such heresies as National pride, cultural heratige and, heaven forfend, racial solidarity, where as Ms Gracie is one of the faithful
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carrie_Gracie
Well at least we’ve found out something she can do with a degree of competency. Because all the time I’ve seen her present news she appears to be drifting off to sleep.
Seem to recall that she is married to a Hong Kong rock star as well.
That should cover Cantonese then, too.
Hope now that the BBC will roll up their 10 tog sleeping bag and piss off for the year.
Just heard the best thing that they are ever likely to do for the year-here it ishttp://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b03mj945/Across_the_Board_Natan_Sharansky/
A true hero of the one needed revolution-Nelson wasn`t fit to “polish his bishop”(oo-er missus!)
Beeboids’ top Politics story:-
“BNP’s Nick Griffin declared bankrupt”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/
Is Griffin now notorious enough for Beeboids to give him three hours’ editorial control of ‘Today’?
Hardly credit card abuse though:
The firm once represented Mr Griffin, including during the early stages of his long-running legal battle with the Equality and Human Rights Commission over the BNP’s membership rules.
Mr Griffin said the two parties had become involved in a legal dispute of their own, culminating in a court order last February ordering him to pay the law firm about £120,000 in fees and costs – a ruling he is intending to challenge in the High Court.
Funny how it’s “BNP’s Nick Griffin” in the headline, but it was never “Labour’s Denis Macshane”. You have to get to the third paragraph to get that snippet of information.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-25494191
As if anyone wouldn’t recognize Griffin’s name. The BBC will probably use the same inane excuse they once gave to someone here for always referring to “the Prophet Mohammed”: they’re just making sure people don’t confuse him with other Mohammeds.
Would most people be able to identify Macshane’s party affiliation? Which one is less likely to be identified by most ordinary people who don’t follow this stuff regularly?
Just noticed that the links to other sites at the bottom of the article are The Financial Times, The Guardian, The Independent, Channel 4 and The Huffington Post. You really couldn’t make it up, could you?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-25590155
Nick “Emanuele Goldstein” Griffin
This story is fascinating. Not the story itself, merely the manner in which each paper has covered it.
The Daily Mail have given him some nice photos- one doing the peace sign, the other in front of a British flag looking upwards.
The telegraph have him in front of a “support our troops” flag.
The Independent have gone easy on him as well (slightly unflattering photo, but nothing to mean).
And the Guardian have him looking gaunt in front of an english flag.
While the BBC have him with a swivel eye (I can picture the editors picking that -rahrahrah Tarquin, aren’t we just a riot. Now lets go shopping in the responsibly sourced sandal shop rah rah rah)
A number of observations come to mind.
1) Everyone is going easy on him. The idea I presume is that the LIBLABCON have come together and decided that as UKIP are gaining ground on them, so they will seek to encourage/ allow voters towards BNP (divide the vote in their mind, which is pretty stupid). So expect more Nick Griffin coverage in the near future.
2) The hierarchy of eagerness of the papers to follow their leader’s orders (LIBLABCON cartel party) are the Mail, then telegraph, then the Guardian, the Times, then the Independent, as can be deciphered from the photos.
3) The Guardian are trying to equate racism with Englishness (not Britishness mind). As they always do. Everyday racism hey?
As we know, you can’t be British and racist. in fact, you can’t be British unless you hold one of the following characteristics according to the BBC-
1) You’re gay
2) You’re Muslim
3) You’re a terrorist
4) You’re Somali
Hit all four and you become royalty.
“Funny how it’s “BNP’s Nick Griffin” in the headline, but it was never “Labour’s Denis Macshane”
—-
It is quite quaint. Brings to mind another noted qualifier…
Did anyone notice that the main plotline of the new “Sherlock” seemed to have been lifted straight from “V for Vendetta”? Perhaps it was a homage?
Ah, but there was an off switch.
World of difference.
Amazing what a honking great budget and £4Bpa PR budget can swing.
I’ve enjoyed many, but this one erred on the derivative, as well as indulgent. Or just daft.
Anyone else see this BBC webpage?
Gay love theory
by China Blog staff
It’s like the BBC has employed a few of “The Onion” writers to parody their own website.
Why would I be interested in what some Chinese people (and some anon. Chinese blogger) think about the gay subtext in “Sherlock”?
Ah, the bubble-dwelling Beeboids have discovered the joys of fanfic. This isn’t just a Chinese thing, and it’s hardly new. Star Trek fans were writing Kirk/Spock stories in the mid-70s. Although this genre is rather more mainstream in the Asian cultures than in the West. I guess it’s just now that the BBC has a major property that’s popular over there that’s subject to this stuff (Dr. Who not having the appropriate same-sex combination of characters), it’s an opportunity to talk about it.
I’m afraid you just have to accept gay propaganda as part of BBC drama nowadays. I did feel that the plot twist of how Sherlock survived his jump off the roof was a bit pathetic. The whole point was that he had to sacrifice himself to save Watson, who was being covered by a sniper. As an aside, Sherlock mentioned that Mycroft’s men had neutralised the sniper. This surely meant that the whole performance which followed was meaningless. Good grief, is it possible that Stephen Gattiss isn’t as good a writer as Arthur Conan-Doyle? Surely not, Conan-Doyle wasn’t gay for a start, though he did believe in fairies.
“I’m afraid you just have to accept gay propaganda as part of BBC drama nowadays.”
Too true. The first big storyline of the new owners of the pub in Eastenders is what? Yes you guessed it their 16 year old son has come out as being gay.
It was a pretty weak attempt, yes. Way too many people involved in a top-secret scheme with apparently a lot of witnesses. The writing on the entire series has been like that, though. Taking everything too far, too soon.
There was no homosexual kiss on Sherlock, though. Whoever said there was is telling a fib. There was a suggestion of the possibility of one, a gesture towards a kiss between Sherlock and Moriarty, but it was during an imaginary sequence, when somebody was telling their theory as to what might have happened.
There was no kiss. The two acted as if they were going to, obviously, there was that look of recognition, etc., they leaned in, but the camera cut away long before they got close. Kirk and Uhura got far closer to actually kissing in that famous Star Trek episode (and they didn’t actually kiss on camera, either). It was clearly a fantasy, fanfic, if you will, and the person telling the tale got a negative reaction from her friends.
This particular sequence was not pushing the homosexual agenda. Anyone who claims it was either didn’t see it, or is as intellectually dishonest as our worst defenders of the indefensible or BBC journalists.
More or less attacking the figures of Christians being killed by Muslims.
The main thrust is that 90% of these deaths were in the Democratic republic of Congo. Well I guess that makes it all OK then!
The statements that Muslims killing Christians was just nonsense just shows how desperate the BBC is for this not to be happening.
Seeing as I was last poster on the other thread here it is again !
An interesting post from a different forum – how many of these have come to pass?
This is the result of mass immigration. However it is one aspect of the amoral globalism of big business and the cultural Marxism of the metropolitan elites and the left-wing media. (The Frankfurt School of Marxism – see below)
They devised strategies by which the destruction of the West could quickly and effectively take place: “To further the advance of their ‘quiet’ cultural revolution – but giving us no ideas about their plans for the future – the School recommended (among other things):
“1. The creation of racism offences.
2. Continual change to create confusion.
3. The teaching of sex and homosexuality to children.
4. The undermining of schools’ and teachers’ authority.
5. Huge immigration to destroy identity.
6. The promotion of excessive drinking.
7. Emptying of churches.
8. An unreliable legal system with bias against victims of crime.
9. Dependency on the state or state benefits.
10. Control and dumbing down of media.
11. Encouraging the breakdown of the family.”
If anyone is wondering why the West is embarked upon sexual suicide, much of the answer can be found in the Frankfurt School: “One of the main ideas of the Frankfurt School was to exploit Freud’s idea of ‘pansexualism’ – the search for pleasure, the exploitation of the differences between the sexes, the overthrowing of traditional relationships between men and women. To further their aims they would:
“• attack the authority of the father, deny the specific roles of father and mother, and wrest away from families their rights as primary educators of their children.
• abolish differences in the education of boys and girls.
• abolish all forms of male dominance – hence the presence of women in the armed forces.
• declare women to be an ‘oppressed class’ and men as ‘oppressors’.
Munzenberg summed up the Frankfurt School’s long-term operation thus: ‘We will make the West so corrupt that it stinks’.”
…fantastic comment Thoughtful and entirely worthy of being in the new Open Thread 😉
Any good links to this list? Sort of thing I like to keep handy.
Just do a search on Google, the Frankfurt School of Marxism is well known enough to be mentioned on Wikipedia.
Span Ows,
This looks like the original article:
http://www.newsweekly.com.au/article.php?id=3986
Thanks Craig and Thoughtful (I have heard about it and read about it but never seen the issues listed like that as per Communist theory as well – something we’re well down the road of)
What an eye-opener. It’s the New Labour script 1997-2010.
Great find.
Freud wasn’t preaching pansexuality, he was describing it. Still, he was Jewish and that’s good enough for you.
Erm where does it say in the post that Freud was ‘preaching’?
Typical to make these paper tigers which you can destroy and then think how wonderful you are for slaying them.
The post talks about ‘exploiting Freud’s idea’ no mention of ‘preaching’ at all.
Freud was an atheist , like Hitler and Stalin booth admirers of Freud both believed that ‘sexual liberation’ would deconstruct traditional society. And to say he was describing not preaching is a bit like saying Nietzsche described moral relativism without endorsing it.
The Frankfurt school’s critical theory clearly owes more to Freud than Marx (why as I have said here before I dislike the term ‘cultural Marxism’) which is why the self appointed bien -pensant patrician class have embraced it so dearly
If you listen to John Grays ” Point Of View” on Radio 4 tonight, he seems to blame the Church for most of the evil…words like Crusades and evangelism bandied about with far more abandon than Atheist, Communist or Socialist-with(of course) absolutely NO mention of Islam…Iran and 1979?…what of it?
History-so simple when you`ve simple-minded atheists on a free pass…Gray is so much better than this, but the BBC requires the flatpack solution…usually Jewish or American Christian at the end.
The Frankfurt School forgot one thing. There is always a reaction. History does not end with one way of looking at the world. Actions never take place in a vacuum. Reality is not like this.
My worry is that so extreme will be the inevitable reaction that it will make so called right wing conservatives appear positively liberal.
It is impossible to point this out to the liberal. The liberal really thinks he is the end product of 5000 years of history.
In the current state of the world it would be a very foolish man who can predict what 2020 will look like.
That’s the mad thing about these liberal intellectual revolutionaries. They never think about the future, the whole point is to eliminate the capitalist west, never mind that they are destroying the only tolerant, secular societies that allow them to flourish in the first place.
Of course as soon as their plan comes to fruition they’ll all be hung from cranes or redeployed to the gulags.
BBC News home page carries a picture of young Nida Ul-Naseer missing from her home in south Wales.
Follow the link and her sister Naila is pictured making an appeal for information.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-25594535
The sister appears in a headscarf – an item of identity related apparel noticably not evident in the picture of missing Nida.
‘Gwent Police say Nida, 18, had an argument at home which could have upset her.’
Answers – to the picture puzzle, I mean – on the back of a post card of Newport Gwent.
That explosion in Prague:-
1.)
“Prague locals want ‘Palestinian’ embassy out after envoy killed in mysterious explosion”
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2014/01/prague-locals-want-palestinian-embassy-out-after-envoy-killed-in-mysterious-explosion.html
2.)
“Weapons found at Prague home of dead Palestinian envoy”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-25576938
So does the Jewish Lobby control the Czech police and government now, BBC?
BBc news
It’s stormy.- Yes it’s the winter it tends to be
House prices are rising.- No one I’ve spoken to agrees with this, but then none of them live in London.
It is more stormy than usual, but then it’s within the normal limits.
The issues with rain + wind + high tides has made matters much worse. It’s not the weather per se, it’s a combination of events.
Temperatures are way above where they should be for the time of year though, 9deg C at midnight on the 2nd Jan? We’d be lucky to see that during the day normally.
It’s just a mild winter with stormy weather! I just hope we don’t end up with winter in March like last year.
Here’s one for the anti-gun BBC to ponder:
Concealed Carry Means Fewer Murders, Says New Study
Abstract:
In the BBC’s favorite useful city for propaganda, Detroit, the Chief of Police says that armed citizens can help deter crime.
Anti-gun nut BBC News editor of the US & Canada page, Daniel Nasaw, who even tweets to his followers and readers of the BBC News website to follow an activist for all #GunFail news, was unavailable for comment.
Meanwhile, people in Connecticut are having to line up in order to register certain guns so they can be grandfathered in under the new law banning even more things (thanks to the “national conversation” on guns after the Sandy Hook mass murder of children by an insane teen who killed his mother and stole her legal guns which she taught him to use), and New York City has sent letters to gun owners telling them to hand the newly banned weapons over or the authorities will come to their homes and pry them from their cold, dead fingers.
See, this is the kind of thing the Second Amendment was meant to prevent. BBC employees can’t – and won’t – understand that.
”See, this is the kind of thing the Second Amendment was meant to prevent. ”
Come, come, David, I think you’re being slightly fanciful, dare I even say the word, conspiracy theorist ! The government is always helpful to it’s people !
For BBC-NUJ to report?:-
“British man charged with murder by Skype for ‘telling his Norwegian mistress to dunk crying baby in a bucket for interrupting their video chat . . . then watching it drown.’
“Ammaz Qureshi, 35, is charged with murder in Norway.
“Accused of telling mistress to dunk her baby in water over Skype.”
“The child had allegedly interrupted their secret online chat by crying.
“Qureshi ‘masterminded months of abuse against one-year-old girl.'”
By SARA MALM.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2533138/British-man-charged-murder-telling-mistress-dunk-crying-baby-bucket-interrupting-Skype-chat-watching-drowned.html#ixzz2pMaHMiQu
Ah, those good old “British” men and “Norwegian” women again, I see.
It wouldn’t have happened to a baby boy.
Only the BBC could give us the highs of the Frankie Boyle-Kevin Bridges “Chain Reaction”…a curates egg, but still bloody funny in parts-with the low crash that followed…Mark Steel visits Glastonbury!
Boyle at least shines a light on BBC culture, Bridges at least has a few good lines…what the hell is Mark Steel doing as “comedy”?
When Nigel Farage went to Edinburgh last year, Scottish UAF marxists surrounded him and jeered him, Farage escaped by hiding in a pub !
Frankie Boyle made this joke ” That’s a bit like putting on a zebra costume to escape from a lion ! ”
Quite right David.
Another sign of our times that seemed to escape-Savile like from the “Highlights of 2013” as shown us by the Beeb.
Like Falkirk and McClusky/UNITE….didn`t seem to register as something that shows the Left for what it is. As if their evil treatment of Mrs Thatcher was all that they did.
Fascists these days call themselves as anti-fascists, anti-Semites call themselves pro-Palestinians, and re-education camps are called universities.
Lisa Jardine (on the BBC) told us the other day that Maurice Wilkins was somebody to admire in his youth. Why? Because he was a Stalinist.
As we all know the BBC boasts that they don’t advertise, so why are they promoting a film on the 6 o’clock news called ” 12 minutes as a slave” ? as if the British people are interested or care.
We’re they referring to these slaves..
The fishermen and coastal dwellers of 17th-century Britain lived in terror of being kidnapped by pirates and sold into slavery in North Africa. Hundreds of thousands across Europe met wretched deaths on the Barbary Coast in this way.
Irrelevant to the current political climate.
The left won’t allow white people to forget that they are linked to slavery. The problem is that in the whole history of civilisation slavery has been the norm for over 98% of that time. Across the whole globe. It was only thanks to the British Empire (whilst it had leverage) that slavery was curtailed.
Unfortunately, for free people, that Empire is dead and foreign forces – advocating slavery – are almost unfeterred in Asia, Africa and parts of Europe.
Not that such facts will deter future film makers from pursuing an agenda of ‘formenting-white-guilt.’
I don’t want to forget, but neither do I think it should be used to gain political power.
Not a bias question, but does anyone know what powers OFCOM has over the beeb? I know they are limited, but they do have some. Specifically any powers over beeb trailers for future progs?
None (although they want them)
The BBC trust regulates the BBC and as it has been such a stunning success I assume that will continue to be the case……
Its just another way that the uniquely funded BBC gets to play in the global media playing field with its own set of rules, players and referees
None (although they want them)
=====================
I think they do, but v limited, but my complaint might be covered? I wont bother if not, cos of course the beeb will have got it ‘about right’, but are BBC trailers covered by ofcom ad rules?
In short, can I get my complaint truly ‘independently’ examined?
“Independently examined” Not a hope in my experience, from the BBc , Offcom, Advertising standards etc.
If it ever does replace the BBC Trust, Ofcom will be just as bad. It has links to Labour, Common Purpose, the Media Standards Trust….
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2233713/Why-Leveson-Inquiry-figures-connected-New-Labours-favourite-media-quango-Ofcom.html
‘Not a bias question, but does anyone know what powers OFCOM has over the beeb?’
—/
It is a good one, and the confusion on definitive answers is telling and needs addressing.
The other day I learned a not insignificant £3,000,000 passes between them and still remain unclear for what exactly.
All I do know is that at the height of Leveson one the market rate high table harpies was on Newswatch making claims of what could not happen with the BBC due to such oversight, and it was utter (unchallenged or corrected of course) bollux.
What I do know is if a mere mortal raises anything BBC with OFCOM (or DCMS for that matter), they’ll bounce you back into the Beware the Leopard labyrinth that is the internal, in camera Trust before you can say ‘get it about rigged’.
Hate say it, but currently there is little chance of anything BBC related escaping BBC control.
Unique really.
I do believe the new ‘Echo Chamber’ blog has come up before.
This is the latest, taken from the BBC FB feed.
BBC World News
Did Kim Jong Un feed his uncle to dogs? http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-echochambers-25597324
A report out of Asia has people wondering whether Kim Jong Un executed his uncle by feeding him to 120 attack dogs. The rumours may not be true, but the way they have spread says a lot about Western media, Chinese politics and public credulity.
BBC’s Anthony Zurcher http://bbc.in/1g6uFlS takes a look at the claims in our new Echo Chambers blog.
Have to say, it takes a special disconnect to get from ‘Did Kim Jong Un feed his uncle to dogs?’ as the lead headline to ‘The rumours may not be true, but the way they have spread says a lot about Western media, Chinese politics and public credulity’ a few sentences later with such apparent lack of irony.
Now its #rumourasnews?
Quite a few commenters have felt the same way.
Top on so far:
83. EjukayshunWurks
Our opinions will be useful on this because…..?
BBC staff all gone home early for the weekend? Website left to be run by the interns?
It’s not closed. Yet.
I think the pressure to crank this crap out might be getting to poor Anthony Z. This is so lightweight it’s a waste of time to read it, never mind spend the time collecting links and writing it up. Quoting the common sense of Tim Stanley (former Labour activists turned some sort of neocon in drag – or maybe he’s a genuine transpolitisexual, as gung ho as so many recent hardcore converts), a guy from the Progressive, JournoList-infested WaPo, and somebody from the WaPo-owned, JournoList-infested, Progressive Slate. In other words, he’s chosen which echo chamber to believe. Not that it means he’s wrong, it’s just tiresomely predictable, and he’s only been at this a few months. Is there anyone outside the usual elite Anglosphere media saying anything of value? His primary reason for not trusting the initial report is little more than argumentum ad hominem anyway.
I’d say that a good reason not to believe the report is that if it did happen to make an example pour encourager les autres, somebody in the upper echelon would have leaked it somehow, in which case both South Korea and China would know all about it. After all, the uncle killed was doing close deals with them, wasn’t he? He surely wasn’t operating all alone, with nobody else having any contact outside the kingdom.
Chins apparently wasn’t even the first source. China has a vested interest in keeping North Korea somewhat stable and hopefully influencing some kind of long-term easing into sanity. They sure as hell don’t want a total collapse, with the resulting million and more half-starved, half-mad North Koreans flooding across their border. Why the hell does Zurcher think they were working with the uncle in the first place? Stanley at least says China ought to know but wasn’t the source, and I’d suggest that’s far more important than what Zurcher does quote from him. Of course, I’m not a highly experienced member of the priest caste, so my priorities are different and I don’t appreciate the importance of the bit about using kittens for target practice. Silly me. Page views, time spent, fool, not informing and enlightening.
Yes, China has a good reason to make NK look like a lunatic asylum. Wouldn’t it more enlightening to quote discussions about that than three bubble buddies saying the same thing?
South Korea hasn’t said anything, either, and they’re usually pretty reliable with the real horror stories. The WaPo even says that SK broke the story about the uncle being “purged” in the first place. The WaPo guy even agrees with me. That tells me a lot more about what to believe and what not to believe than a bunch of thirty-something elite media bubble-dwellers. Yet Zurcher, being one of them, quotes the bit about a silly Western media swallowing these stories instead. Then again, I’m not a highly-trained BBC journalist, so my priorities are a bit different.
The Slate piece is even more insubstantial than the Echo Chambers piece. An absolute waste of time.
But at least he’s cleared the air on that misunderstood North Korea, right? I know it’s the story that’s on everyone’s mind at the moment. Your license fee hard at work. At least it’s the exception that proves my rule that he’s usually just reacting to something gaining traction from the Right. Come to think of it, this isn’t so far off that, either.
I think I remember seeing somebody mention it when this job was advertised a while back, for curating current affairs something or other. Was it something you found at WDR? I’d really like to find that again just to see the qualifications required to churn out this (mostly) biased stuff.
Good grief I’ve now probably spent more time typing this than Zurcher spent “curating” and writing it up. More fool, me.
It’s interesting that they describe Tim Stanley as a Guardian journalist when the article they were quoting from was published in the Telegraph.
I guess it wouldn’t do to be quoting a Telegraph article as an authority on anything.
I didn’t even notice that. That just makes Zurcher even more an echo chamber luvvie if he thought he was quoting the Guardian. Guardian/WaPo/Slate – a Progressive troika.
The Echo Chambers feature is a joke.
Just read a few comments, and they are a treat. About half are people seeing this dopey feature for the silliness that it is, and the other half seems to be a combination of Koreans/dog eating cracks that made it through the moderators (or haven’t been flagged yet), and Koreans/dog eating cracks that are getting moderated.
Faith in humanity temporarily restored. Although the poor bastards obviously aren’t aware that this is just the start of the next level of the Birt/Boaden mission to explain.
‘It’s not closed. Yet.’
You’ll never guess.
Looks like 7pm – 9am, at 620.
Given 619 of them are varying degrees of ‘Just how much plot has the BB C lost?’, surprised it got that far.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-echochambers-25597331
The echo chambers blog is just absurdly biased. See this one, for instance, presenting would be legal cannabis dealers as legitimate entrepreneurs, and those arguing to keep drugs illegal as having the burden of proof on them.
I’m not sure what the purpose of it is meant to be… except spout leftist propaganda dressed-up as a news round up…
The purpose of the Echo Chambers feature in general seems to be to react to something gaining traction from the Right, and make sure BBC readers know how to think correctly and not listen to that particular echo chamber. Zurcher is usually quick to tell us to listen to a Left-wing echo chamber instead. The result has very little to do with the mission statement as it appears on the website.
In this case, it’s because David Brooks is a lightning rod for political media pundits. He used to work for George Bush, and then the Weekly Standard, so has been considered a “conservative” columnist. He’s a RINO at best, and anyone with even a single proper conservative (I don’t mean social conservative, either) bone in their body gave up on Brooks the moment he published the following ridiculous line about an interview with Candidate Obamessiah:
No, sorry, that wasn’t the ridiculous part. That was just foolish. This is the ridiculous part:
Ever since that moment, Brooks has been a punching bag of the Rightosphere. Nobody takes him seriously anymore outside the Beltway or Left-wing media. To them, he’s a very useful idiot they can wave around to the public as proof that The Obamessiah is so awesome even a “conservative writer” thinks He’s great. Read the whole New Republic piece I linked to (or as much as you can take without vomiting) and see just how smitten Brooks has been with The Obamessiah. He’s as deluded as Justin Webb was at the time and all BBC journalists are now. At least Peggy Noonan figured it out eventually and has done a mea culpa.
Now he’s pulled a silly “Do as I say, not as I do”, and is hearing about it. Zurcher, of course, has to react to it because some on the Right are criticizing the move to legalize marijuana, and people in the middle and on the Left, as well as Libertarians, however you want to classify them, are calling him out for being the hypocrite that he is. And Zurcher wants us all to make sure we know who’s right. It’s a big story right now because of what’s going on in Colorado and Washington (State, not DC), and the movement to legalize it all over the country.
As usual, he’s quoting from his own Echo Chamber almost exclusively: Slate (again), Mother Jones, WaPo (again), MSNBC, Gary Greenberg (who also writes for Mother Jones, which Zurcher neglects to tell us – Rule #1 in effect), and a writer for Vanity Fair.
The only thing missing is NPR and the Village Voice. To balance that out he quotes a Left-leaning writer from Bloomberg, and the pro-marijuana, Libertarian Reason.
This is an echo chamber. Whether one agrees with legalization or not, all this is is a collection of Left and far-Left voices (plus Reason, which is an advocate against Brooks’ position anyway) smacking down a nominally “conservative” writer for saying it should still be illegal.
It’s a joke, and I’m starting my little experiment either tomorrow or Monday, whenever Zurcher cranks out his next installment.
‘make sure BBC readers know how to think correctly and not listen’
I stumble across it more than seek it out, but so far it seems that most BBC readers paying attention are not responding correctly.
Normally that would see him out on his ear. However, being the BBC, more unique funding needed, clearly.
“Tony… another new role needing creating, STAT!”
It’s the BBC News and the subject of the miners strike first in the papers released under the 30 rule, and the BBC claim that Arthur Scargill was in fact right all along that the government had a ‘hit list’ of pits they wanted to close and 70 thousand job losses in the coal industry.
The real story is that the Director of National Coal McGregor had handed a report to the government recommending these closures, and that report was secret, but that does not make it government policy.
Then it’s onto the Libyan Embassy and the killing of PC Yvonne Fletcher which apparently is also the Tories & Margaret Thatcher’s fault for failing to take warnings given an hour or so before seriously enough.
And then after the event, Margaret Thatcher personally allowed the Libyan diplomats to all leave even though one at least was a murderer, for ‘fear of reprisals against British Diplomats in Tripoli’. That could have been phrased very differently than the accusing way put by the BBC.
And the bBBC broadcast ‘news’ has not made any mention of Thatcher’s ‘secret’ plans to try to intercept miners’ union leaders as they brought back suitcases of money from fellow-communists in Russia, who – just like them – were very keen to undermine the British government and bring this country to its knees.
The 10 O’clock news last night was a disgrace with the first 15 mins dedicated to commentary on this information from 30 years ago. They also provided an “expert” reporter from the day and referred to a dockers strike all in derogatory terms. Still rest assured, we only have another 6 more years of this to go.
The final 15 mins of the bulletin was handed over to a campaigning piece about the terrible lives of people working in the Indian brick kiln industry. Now I admit, these people don’t enjoy a great time of it but how is this news, and why are they any better or worse off than, say, the people who work in the ship-breaking industry in Bangladesh (or somewhere else where this activity is undertaken)?
I can only conclude that the entire programme was really a campaigning opportunity rather than a news bulletin.
There was also a small piece about the weather. 3 topics. It was really that bad.
While the BBC is proudly recovering (They received only 37 complaints, you know – all those comments elsewhere don’t exist until they’re submitted in the proper format. That oft-quoted “Left-wing tosh” tweet isn’t even counted.) from the heady experience of speaking truth to power via the Today programme yesterday, specifically and most importantly of all giving a free platform to St. Julian of WikiHacks, their beloved Obamessiah is doing this:
Administration moves on 2 fronts to preserve NSA surveillance
Yeah, it’s Fox News! Fox News! but it’s essentially a rehash of an AP report. BBC journalists trust the AP, and lurking and non-lurking journalists know all too well how much their own organizations rely on it, so defenders of the indefensible can’t play the discredit-the-messenger game here.
Oh, sure, the BBC is reporting on the ACLU’s lawsuit and the not even remotely new information that the NSA is building a new super-computer to break encryption, and that “US authorities” have lately taken to seizing some people’s laptops and electronic devices at the border on a whim, without any legal justification. But Spot The Missing President. He, not His Administration, can push more gun control laws, He, not His Administration, can “create a programme” to order Federal Government employees not to enforce one part of immigration law (to which someone not in thrall to the notion of autocratic rule might object), ditto for a few parts of the ObamaCare law (for which the BBC uses the White House talking points), and be the best and most-informed and on-top-of-everything President evah, but He has no knowledge of and no control over this apparently disembodied government agency. If anything goes wrong, it’s Trapped In A World He Never Made time. Right, BBC? It’s nothing to do with Him, and He has no control over it and could never do anything about it even if He tried because (insert excuse here), right?
In contrast, do an internet search for:
“george bush” site:bbc.co.uk
Even when they’re talking about The Obamessiah ramping it up, they still make sure you know it’s Bush’s fault.
Then do a search for:
obama site:bbc.co.uk
Notice how many times you’re told He had no idea. And see if you can find one of those Viewpoints or opinion pieces from approved people condemning Him.
‘They received only 37 complaints, you know – all those comments elsewhere don’t exist until they’re submitted in the proper format’
Between the Beware of the Leopard process involved, and the FoI exclusion on any attempt to check veracity, the untrustworthy and opaque national disgrace’s claims on such matters may be worth little more than a pinch of salt.
One imagines any of those expedited who still are moved to complain anyway are not counted either… as the BBc has told the BBC it doesn’t need to read them.
Which may be why they do it.
Ner ner ner-ner ner!
Seems the grey beards at the BBC – you know, those sooty sons of toil who have laboured hard for three decades in the pinko mines of the past – well they have just had a quick root around in one of Mrs T’s old hand bags and turned up this scrap of paper which they now pass to the news room dolly to wave around in our face : “Note to self – reform the coal industry”
Or some such thing like that.
So if there are any elected politicians out there wondering… just you make sure you don’t try to run the country. Not unless you have BBC approval that is – ‘cos they gonna getcha’
If you don’t want to see spoilt brats yet unborn wearing hate T-shirts with your name on them thirty years hence…..
You better get “progressive”. Man, you better not be seen to be “conservative”
Pin your BBC button badges on here folks – Legalise It, I’ll Advertise It, Pantomime Marriage, The EU Rocks, Borders is Just a State of Mind, Mandela for the MOBOs, Obama for an Oscar… getcha tin badges here…. and don’t you even think about running the country… hey… what country anyway, man? Ha ha
Ner ner ner-ner ner!
The Antarctic Ship of Fools song – to the tune of “We’re all going on a summer holiday” :
And here is a scathing article in today’s Financial Times :
http://www.thegwpf.org/ft-antarctic-debacle-biggest-setback-campaigners-climategate/
The BBC is up to its neck in this fiasco – funding some of the people on board, with original plans for lots of broadcasts from them to push the Global Warming theme, then pretending it is just some sort of tourist group on a Russian ship. The BBC has refused to carry any serious criticism of the debacle on any of its channels – instead it has had just one comment on the whole affair, a supportive waffle from some idiot woman on World at One – plus hiding all the bad news in obscure parts of its website.
Sky in OZ carries a scathing attack on the “pseudo-science” of the Ship of Fools trip. It is lifted from an Agence Press Francais article – the BBC often reprints AFP stuff along with newsfeeds from Reuters and Associated Press. But the BBC won’t print this story – there is too much BBC mental investment in pseudo-science and Warmist propaganda. Just like it failed to mention the critical article by Andy Revkin of the New York Times – although it normally regurgitates NYT stuff quite happily.
http://www.skynews.com.au/topstories/article.aspx?id=939155&cid=BP_RSS_TOPSTORIES_3_PolarchiefslamsAntarcticcruise_040114
Seems like they’re buying the one side of the revolving-door narrative that this was a “commemorative” trip to retrace Mawson’s footsteps rather than an attempt to get out in the field and do scientific tests and studies to prove various scientific hypotheses. So which is it?
Before it started, and when it was all going well, it was a scientific and educational (the excuse to bring paying eco-tourists) expedition. Then when it all started to go wrong it was not. When they were rescued, the science came back again, but now it’s a pseudo-scientific tourist excursion?
They wanted to retrace Mawson’s footsteps for one reason, and one reason only: to prove that AGW was melting the Antarctic ice and destroying various wildlife and ocean habitats. That’s what all the experts on board were there to do. It was not merely a tribute to Mawson.
Turney’s and the BBC’s latest output is laying the groundwork to prove that AGW is causing the problem anyway.
Credit where it’s due: “PQ17: An Arctic Convoy Disaster – with Jeremy Clarkson” was an excellent program. An amazing story brilliantly told by Clarkson with no political bias. Even the Guardian liked it (begrudgingly)
http://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2014/jan/03/pq17-arctic-convoy-disaster-tv-review
Compare and contrast with the attrocious, dumbed-down, formulaic ‘Shipwrecks’ series, presented by an identikit BBC marxist revisionist twerp who took delight in rubbishing our naval heritage in every banal link and voice over.
For people with access to i-Player-
(60 mins video).
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b03n3297/PQ_17_An_Arctic_Convoy_Disaster/
It was a great documentary – made without malice or a hidden agenda. Clarkson was respectful to the Merchant Navy in particular, and as someone who was brought up by a stepfather who served in the WWII Merchant Fleet in Scapa Flow and used to hear stories from him of the terrible hardships suffered by Merchant sailors I was pleased to see the BBC, for once, able to deliver a coherent and fascinating insight into one part of their massive contribution to the war effort.
If you can catch this on iPlayer it’s highly recommended.
Clarkson did another excellent programme about WW2 VCs. some years ago. The last programme featured an officer who carried on the fight to the Germans despite being badly wounded, he rallied his soldiers to cover a retreat. I forger the exact details, but it was very moving. The bombshell ending -sorry- was that his man had never ever mentioned it to his family before his death. His daughter was Clarkson’s then wife!
Major Robert Cain VC of Arnhem fame.
The PQ-17 prog is repeated Monday at 2130 on BBC2 for those who do want to use I-Player.
Should read:
DON’T want to use I-Player.
Thank you.
Yes Chilli, I watched the Clarkson thing on the convoys,It was very good,Clarkson is a patriot,unlike the British hating BBC.
I don’t suppose he will be guest editing the Today programme anytime soon, more’s the pity.
“Clarkson, Parky and The Kinks – now that’s what I call a Today programme.”
By Richard Littlejohn.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2533572/LITTLEJOHN-Clarkson-Parky-The-Kinks-thats-I-call-Today-programme.html#ixzz2pQytVAHo
If you wondered where the cherry vultures seem to have gone to lately check the comments below that article.
Thanks to the folk above re the recommendation about the Arctic Convoy.
Fine programme.
Seconded.
The story of Gradwell & his trawler whitewashed escort was inspirational… and a tad topical. Only this time in a rather good way. Jezza really does admiration for honour and courage justice.
The old boys interviewed were a breed apart too.
The BBC has studiously avoided reporting on the broad swathe of problems with ObamaCare. Especially not the fact that Obama’s promise that people could keep their health care has been declared the Biggest Lie of 2013. The only problem the BBC can see is the Republicans. OK – there may also be a few glitches with the website.
January 1st has now arrived – and one aspect of the range of problems is biting – namely those who had thought they had signed up against all the website problems (usually for worse insurance than they had before) but who the system is not registering. because the back-office procedures are a total mess.
In one single report the Mailm exposes this one aspect of the mess, in just one US state, more than all the BBC reporting put together :
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2532869/They-no-idea-insurance-active-not-At-Virginia-hospitals-Obamacare-confusion-reigns-frustrated-patients-walk-out.html
Another story the BBC haven’t noticed
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k51cFilaolo&feature=player_detailpage
One of many who have wondered why the system didn’t recognise the worlds most famous Kenyan
It’s only going to get worse from here. It’s not just due to the website preventing enough enrollments to subsidize the others. There will be hell to pay, as I’ve been warning for well over a year.
BBc still banging on about job losses at the Environment Agency. Have they just announced these job cuts this weekend?
Didn’t notice any similar levels of concern about civil service job cuts any where.
Would be wonderful if this ruling by the European Court that the TV licence in Italy is “illegitimate” could be applied to the UK TV licence which funds the BBC! http://www.liberoquotidiano.it/news/italia/1380624/Corte-dei-diritti-europea—Il-canone-Rai-e-illegittimo-.html Corte dei diritti europea: “Il canone Rai è illegittimo”
Good point here!
I myself demand that I am a European citizen and insist on receiving only Eurovision…basically It`s a Knockout(once Stuart Hall is released, I s`pose now!)…and , of course The Eurovision Song Contest.
As long as we get a Katie Boyle and not yet more of Graham Norton!
Yes-today I am mainly a Brussels [sprout!
Go Ashton-go!
Good point here!
I myself demand that I am a European citizen and insist on receiving only Eurovision…basically It`s a Knockout(once Stuart Hall is released, I s`pose now!)…and , of course The Eurovision Song Contest.
As long as we get a Katie Boyle and not yet more of Graham Norton!
Yes-today I am mainly a Brussels sprout!
Go Ashton-go!
That would be hilarious. It would be fun to watch the BBC squirm and start asking why the EU has so much authority over domestic issues.
Above link not working, but this does.
Emphases mine. I think those are relevant to the BBC situation, especially police intervention preventing people from what’s apparently a human right to watch TV. Excellent.
CUBA is more important to Beeboids than is CANADA.
Beeboid Ms Rainsford has been posted to Havana (at our expense, but assisting the Cuban economy), to report at length on the price of cars there-
“Cubans shocked at prices as foreign cars go on sale”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-25595674
In contrast, under the Beeboid online misnomer of ‘US & Canada’ newspages, all that Beeboids can muster to report on Canada currently, apart from the weather, is that the mayor of Toronto is to stand again for election!
Of course, Beeboids have been politically attracted to communist Cuba since the 1960s, with the Castro regime representing the best of socialism for Beeboids.
In contrast, Canada, with its British (and French) historical connections, represents a different sort of ideology (and ethnicity) which is duly relegated by Beeboids.
You had me at “Cuba is more important to Beeboids than Canada”. Cuba is more important to them than almost anything on this side of the pond, short of The Obamessiah, racism in the US, and the success of whatever socialist regime in the southern continent.
THat reminds me of a great Emo Phillips joke:
“I’ve started to learn to speak Cuban – it’s the same as Spanish but with no words for luxury items”.
INBBC’s Muslim Brotherhood chums won’t like this:-
“Ancient Egyptian brewer’s tomb found in Luxor”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-25593526
My understanding from visiting Luxor and other places on the Nile is that the workers who dug the tombs and built the temples and pyramids were paid in barley and beer. So there will have been a lot of breweries.
INBBC will not commission a series of history programmes relating present-day Egypt to pre-Islamic Egypt, which is not presented by any Muslim, on such as this theme:
“Egypt’s Only Hope: A Version Of Taha Hussein’s ‘Pharaonism'”
http://www.newenglishreview.org/blog_direct_link.cfm/blog_id/32447
–
can’t understand why the bbc isn’t gearing up for another necro-fest now that ariel sharon is about to kick the bucket. why the contrast with st nelson’s demise?
Did Kim Jong Un feed his uncle to dogs? – http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-echochambers-25597324
The most popular comments in response to this article are from people criticizing the BBC.
Could that be why there is no Editors’ Picks for this one?
Everyone is criticising the BBC these days. That is why they seem to have a bunker attitude.
In a bunker within the bubble, then. No wonder they hold their audience in contempt (not the radio DJs with legions of listeners and fans, of course).
TUNISIA: INBBC obfuscates what’s going on.
Compare 1.) & 2.)-
1.) ‘Jihadwatch’-
“Tunisia MPs stop the Islamization of Tunisia, reject Islam as main source of law”
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2014/01/tunisia-mps-stop-the-islamization-of-tunisia-reject-islam-as-main-source-of-law.html
2.) INBBC-
“Tunisia’s parliament voting on milestone constitution”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-25593514
Supplementary.
“Report: Hezbollah, Islamic Jihad leaders denied entry to Tunisia”
http://www.maannews.net/eng/ViewDetails.aspx?ID=662463
Their mistake was to hold their ‘conference against Zionism’ in Tunisia. They should have scheduled it for Londinistan. I’m sure the City of London University or the LSE would have hosted it (complete with segregated audiences) ,and the BBC/Guardian alliance would have guaranteed entrance to any and all that wished to attend.
Good luck to Tunisia ,its parliament and people
It seems appropriate to put in reference here to the Islamification of Britain 2013 article at
http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/4112/islamization-britain
Apparently polling has shown that one of the biggest concerns of the British public is the influence or effect of Islam in Britain. If there have been any such poll results – I haven’t heard the BBC reporting them.
Here is a 2013 summary of why there might be a smidgeon of public concern :
http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/4112/islamization-britain
Someone pointed out something to me the other day. In the space of three days (30th Dec – 1st Jan), the BBC showed two gay kisses on its most prime-time, popular shows (Eastenders and Sherlock).
Now, I don’t much care for arguments in this area (I’m anti gay adoption and gay marriage – but realistically I do not care about it enough to engage others in massive arguments about it, esp. since the BBC has made it beyond the pale to espouse social/moral conservative opinions).
But I think it is interesting that, subsequent to other instances I can think of (in Eastenders especially), the BBC is so keen to normalise homosexual PDA (and yet minimise the presence of ethnic minorities and immigration – esp. in East London, where it would be more accurate to have dramas about who the next terrorist sympathiser will be to speak at the East London Mosque…).
Isn’t it offensive to moslem viewers to show gays kissing?
No. That just confirms their suspicions of the decadent West. Now, if the BBC was to show two Mohammedan homosexuals kissing in some prime time, wildly popular drama, that would be brave.
But the racist Islamophobes at the BBC think some Muslims might get violent.
They did though ,In Eastenders . the eldest son of the only Muslim family on the square turned out to be gay ,In true BBC style the initially shocked ‘conservative’ mother eventually came to see it was all about love. There’s social realism for you.
I’m not sure they’ve revisited that storyline recently though
until they replace the whole cast with Muslims, the show will be unrealistic.
Guantanamo.
Can Islam Not BBC (INBBC) interrupt its ‘free jihadist Shaker Aamer from Guantanamo’ campaign, to report this?:-
“Report: Ex-Guantanamo detainee and member of Bahrain’s royal family joins Syrian jihad”
By THOMAS JOSCELYN.
Read more: http://www.longwarjournal.org/archives/2014/01/report_ex-guantanamo.php#ixzz2pSGrdF3L
This Shaker Aamer:-
http://www.longwarjournal.org/archives/2009/03/britain_seeks_the_re.php
“I am just a student looking to study”, as he said at Gitmo.
Great. The word “Taliban” is Farsi for “student”.
“Who is behind the ship of fools?”
By Ross Clark.
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2014/01/who-is-behind-the-ship-of-fools/
Clark’s a little behind the times there or just being lazy. Plenty of info on the Spirit of Mawson website to put two and two together.
University of New South Wales
University of Exeter
The Blue Penguin Trust
Landcare Research, NZ
University of Wollongong
Sydney Institute of Marine Science
Google
The Guardian
BBC
New Zealand Radio
(The above “journalists” surely didn’t get free passage, nor did the Google employee. The Google Doodle competition was a sponsor deal paid for and provided by Google. It certainly cost them more to run it, coordinate it, and publicize it than the $16K base cost for the two teachers who won berths. That’s called a “donation in kind”.)
Found elsewhere:
ABC News
A handful of Warmists who ponied up in the failed crowd-sourcing scheme
There’s probably more to be discovered once lawsuits begin, possibly some Warmist private individuals.
Those wacky musli…sorry “French” people –
http://www.france24.com/en/20140102-france-car-burning-new-year-tradition-urban-violence-media/
Every year. Those cads!
“The BBC fucking hate the Jews, don’t they?”
My wife half-way through Silent Witness.
I see that the Hindu and Sikh communities have had more than enough of the BBC and their leftist friends using the term “Asian grooming” when talking about Muslims on BBC programmes..
Hence they’ve started a petition to stop it..
http://nsouk.co.uk/category/current-issues/
They are quite right .
And the petition should be made more widely advertised ,as I’m sure many outside of their communities would be glad to sign it.
About time. Even Asians are sick of Muslims.
#grabspopcorn
No-one seems to have picked up Paddy Ashdown’s comments, presumably because they are behind Murdoch’s paywall in The Times (http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/politics/article3964370.ece).
Trust in society’s key institutions is “crumbling into dust”, according to Nick Clegg’s election supremo.
Lord Ashdown of Norton-sub-Hamdon, the former Liberal Democrat leader who is running the party’s 2015 campaign, has painted a grim picture of national insecurity.
He said that bankers “have their fingers in the till” and journalists and politicians were rightly criticised. However, he reserved his toughest comments for the BBC and the NHS.
The BBC is revealed as an organisation which can’t manage its own affairs, misspends public money and seems to have been complicit in aggrandising someone [Savile] whose proclivities would be rejected by most people.
#andasackofnachos
Yes, I noted the BBC newspaper reviews on Thursday night were pretty hysterical about one of their own going rogue.
Robert Fox(The Times) was particularly exercised about this-as if Murdoch employed BBC numpties as badly as anybody else.
Given the liberals collective concern at Paddy getting a bit of a liability to their ordered worldview, I bought the paper yesterday.
If THAT frightens the left and its elites-they`re due a bat up the kimono this May!
I think this post from this time last year speaks volumes about the print arm of the BBC and it sums up the way they simply cannot see the way everyone else views them, indeed they go so far as to silence all criticism.
http://hurryupharry.org/2013/01/21/guardian-staffer-sounds-off-on-alan-rusbridgers-management-in-a-piano-memoir-thread/
#plusaslurpeepail
When the leader cadre starts pulling comment threads at half a dozen on their own troops, as their allies bail, downfall is imminent.
Tucked away quietly in the local news section – BBC News Beds, Herts & Bucks…
I imagine had these people been white, Conservative, or ever more so UKIP counsellors – the BBC would make much more play of this story – along with the national mainstream media as a whole…
Councillors suspended and police inquiry starts over Facebook comments
Two Labour councillors have been suspended by the party and a police investigation has started over alleged comments made on Facebook.
Naseem Ayub, who was also a prospective MEP candidate, and her husband Mohammad Ayub were suspended before Christmas.
Bedfordshire Police said officers were investigating potential offences under the Computer Misuse Act and Malicious Communications Act.
These cover the sending of malicious messages and/or inciting racial hatred.
“No arrests have been made and the investigation is ongoing,” added a spokeswoman.
Remain councillors
The couple are being investigated by Labour’s National Executive Committee over allegations of making inappropriate comments on Facebook.
Labour has not confirmed the nature of the comments.
An East of England Labour Party spokesperson said: “Following allegations about comments made on Facebook, Councillor Mohammad Ayub and Councillor Naseem Ayub were suspended from the Labour Party.”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-beds-bucks-herts-25593355
You have to wonder what they said, that has forced the hand of liberal inquisition and their lap dogs.
“You have to wonder what they said”
—
You do indeed. Doesn’t sound good, even from what is mentioned:
“These cover the sending of malicious messages and/or inciting racial hatred”
Folk have gone to jail for months for less, if guilty and in front of an arm of the law big on pleasing Dave & Theresa.
As a legal question, given names were not concealed, is there any reason why the precise nature of the alleged comments could not be shared.
I know media can get a bit coy on such things for reasons of faux modesty, but are there more official ones? It’s hard to imagine locating the words used are beyond the most delicate flower in the cubicle garden.
Tonight on R4 a programme about immigration ,sorry migration.
The BBC being very very brave and deigning to discuss a matter of real public concern however distasteful it might have been to the poor tender souls.
If that is what the BBc calls a real debate then it needs to look the word up in the dictionary. Not the 1984 one they use but a real one.
What it proved is just how uncomfortable a liberal feels dealing with reality.
When does immigration become colonisation?.Clue to the beeboids it is a question of numbers. What about white flight from the cities? (This show was from Birmingham) . And before anyone starts I live in an area where the whites are fleeing to so back off if you are a liberal.
Why have we lost control of our borders. Why is the EU so detrimental to England?
Why did the last government open the flood gates.?
Why do the liberals so hate the English working class?
And a subject that was not mentioned even once. I leave you to guess the word. The usual cultural incompatability of one immigrant group.
Finally what is wrong with these liberal people? What is wrong with many of us wanting to keep our land just the way it has always been for over 1000 years?
The BBC makes me sick. It is scared of reality and useless. Like all cowards it cannot face the truth. Get rid .
Birmingham Mail headline from last Thursday. 10,500 extra school places needed in next four years because of immigration and high birth rates. Council does not know how it can cope, an extra 600 classrooms needed.
I watched Midlands Today on BBC to see if it would warrant a mention-guess what?
I blame the Tory Cuts!