I know we have had a few problems from a technical point of view on the threads. These have been worked on behind the scenes and so here is a new open thread that I hope runs smoothly.
SUNDAY OPEN THREAD…
Bookmark the permalink.
Search Biased BBC
Recent Comments
- tomo April 26, 2024 at 9:58 pm on Midweek 24th April 2024I was going to stop posting .... but https://twitter.com/aDissentient/status/1783900765309772124
- StewGreen April 26, 2024 at 9:57 pm on Midweek 24th April 2024#LondonVoterFraud is trending However the tweets are not real ..it does seem a bot thing
- tomo April 26, 2024 at 9:53 pm on Midweek 24th April 2024Post Office paid widow in instalments for silence https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c88z431n2v5o
- StewGreen April 26, 2024 at 9:50 pm on Midweek 24th April 2024Catchup link ..you need an account It's easy, I already have one https://talk.tv/popout-player?selectedStation=talkradio&showId=20240425...
- Zephir April 26, 2024 at 9:04 pm on Midweek 24th April 2024"Cult like", almost spelt correctly..... "In the last year, a number of important studies tracking the environmental cost of EVs,...
- Thoughtful April 26, 2024 at 8:44 pm on Midweek 24th April 2024The way the establishment has closed ranks and pointed the finger at Bogerd and Vennels is sickening.
- tomo April 26, 2024 at 8:21 pm on Midweek 24th April 2024https://twitter.com/JamesOKeefeIII/status/1783893674805571829
- Zephir April 26, 2024 at 8:19 pm on Midweek 24th April 2024Now, let us all ingonore the above and sing the bbc mantra, it's simple to learn, goes something like Far...
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
Zzzzzzzzzzzz!!
Oh dear the post I was zzzz about is no longer there. Good thing in a way as it was some sad politically correct victim monger that doesn’t like free speech
OT Here’s an update on news from the USA. The BBC seem to be failing to inform us that Obama is in deep doo-doo on all fronts :
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2014/08/the-week-in-pictures-que-horreur-edition.php
May we have that in English please?
“You delete our posts.”
And there you have it. Confirmation that the trolling posts have one source. A source that has no interest in debate but in shutting it up by use of intimidation and spurious use of “isms”. Who came here solely to provoke a reaction they could use to try to silence opinions they disagree with.
Perhaps we should threaten the companies that use the BBC…
Oh.
(Admins: I hope you don’t take down the original post. I think it’s very important we all know what we’re up against.)
The claimed tribal grouping did (tense deliberate) resonate with me too, as much as in the past ‘you lot’ has been dished out with as much logic as a person who has read the Daily Mail dissing its readers.
Of course, like anything, it could be anyone, and emphasis on the ‘one’, mucking about.
Rather clearly, recent events have caused a disturbance in the Farce, and while the Borg reconfigure to adapt (OK, a few mixed Sc-Fi metaphors there), which I am sure they will do, there has been some spectacular lashing out going on, so it is possible ‘we”ll get treated to more false flags than an ISIS football supporters convention.
I agree with you on the freedom to be self-incriminating, RD, but with the state of law (hoping the admins have access to good advice) in this country now is it’s possible that the site owners cannot afford such things to remain visible, no matter which double or triple-bluffing source it is coming from.
Unless in Glasgow or Tower Hamlets, perhaps.
Gosh, i’m famous, sort of. Who the hell are these idiots? Anyway, good posts in the Mail today….one asks; ‘Why are these stowaways not in a Belgian hospital?’………..good point. My guess is that the guy that died was asked to hang on, wait until we are in Britain, land of plenty, free money and houses……anyone agree?
There’s only one idiot. Calling himself ‘we’ now
Your english is appalling whoever you are. Call me a racist and you will get a writ if i knew where to deliver it. Bunch of cretins.
My thanks to all back room ‘boys’ (dare I use either inverted commas having seen the Cliff thread or the word ‘boys which is unbelievably sexist?) for maintaining the site and I am sure I will get used to the changes in a day or two. I did say this in my last post but somehow it seemed to get caught in the middle of another discussion.
May I also remind posters to stop troll feeding. I usually just scroll down when a troll posting is obvious so that I haven’t a clue what they say. I am seeing far too much of Scott’s photo and I am really sorry (as much for the posters on this site as Scott himself) that he hasn’t really got a new Muslim boyfriend and that he therefore has too much time on his hands. Sorry I do read the odd one of Scott’s posts and wish I had remained firm.
Biased BBC has done it now! Blocking our resident stalker/troll and preventing him from spewing his hate and bigotry has led him to have a mental breakdown. Whoever has posted under the name of “Bring Down Scott ” would be advised to remove his posts. I wouldn’t put it past the troll to make a complaint of intimidation to the authorities and stir up trouble for David Vance, such is his hate for him and this site. It’s been my experience that those who revel in bullying, causing trouble and abusing others are the first to go screaming “FOUL” when people retaliate. I’ve seen a number of street thugs go running to the police claiming to have been assaulted when they have lost a punch up with someone they have picked on. Please don’t let these creeps goad you into doing something daft and getting yourself, and others, into bother.
I agree, some on here are getting obsessed by the trolls, esp one of them and quite frankly it is counter productive
“And so this malignant and clueless clown is calling for strong action against it. What kind of strong action, Mr. Cameron? Maybe ban more opponents of jihad terror from Britain — that will solve this crisis! ”
R Spencer
http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/500408/IS-extremists-pose-a-threat-to-streets-of-Britain-David-Cameron-warns?
Cameron: Islamic State could “target us on the streets of Britain”
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2014/08/cameron-islamic-state-could-target-us-on-the-streets-of-britain
BBC – Cameron warns of IS threat to UK
… Cameron and his bunch of grasping self serving incompetents as well as being inept are utterly hypocritical … what is it going to take?
Another 7/7, worse … mind you they d be straight on assuming the position, bleating about religion of peace.
boko haram, al quaida, hamas, isis, or any others
… what s the link, any ideas
Is this the Cameron who does not want to open his door and see lots of white Christian faces, who gives a paternalistic smile when commenting of the contribution Islamics make to Britain when he gives his Royal ramadam broadcast?
In the photo printed in the Express, link above, is an Islamic looking terrorist with a caption warning that they could be walking down British Streets. I thought it was a British street, possibly somewhere in Tower Hamlets, but it was far too clean, tidy, and not overcrowded.
Of course the first thing would be to say this has nothing to do with Islam. Quote the religion of peace nonsense. If Nick Clegg hasn’t taken his family to live in Brussels, he would come on and quote ‘anyone who takes the life of one person’ yadah yadah yadah. The Police would round up anyone who protested about the incident. Should the Police find the culprits, they would liaise with the ‘local imam’ and ‘community elders’ who will then inform the culprits the police are on their way before making an arrest.
I am sick to death of this “nothing to do with Islam” nonsense. the BBC constantly have people on opining that ISIS, Al Qaeda, Boko Harem et al, are not representitive of Islam. Why are the BBC blatantly and willingly lying like that?
These murderous ISIS thugs are hardly singing “cumbaya” under a banner claiming “Jesus is love” when they are shooting people in the back of the head and dumping their bodies in a river, or hacking heads off, or burying children alive, are they?
The point is, those vile murderous Islamic thugs genuinely believe their actions have EVERYTHING to do with Islam when they are committing those evil acts. In Fact, according to the video I post below, EVERYTHING in the Islamic State is to do with Islam! That is what running the Islamic State under Sharia law is all about!
Been listening on vaguely on the radio this week.
Bacall and Robin Williams…ISIS/ISIL/Islamic State( and the BBC call them what they choose to be known as, that day)…and Cliff of course.
Basically emoting showbiz clutter, sucking up to Islam with absolutely NO context about how ISIS came about or why they do what they do( The Koran says so, being the rather obvious answer-but the BBC won`t be saying that).
Another thing-noted the perpetual begging bowl out this week…for the disabled and their holiday ramps, for the mentally ill(I`d like to thank Robin Williams for my CPN), for the alcoholics in recovery(Robin again).
These whingers (sorry community leaders, experts and authorities) just take turns to wave a stump, don a shroud and hope to get the NHS to fund their excesses, or the stairlift up Ben Nevis.
Had a week of that crap…we just sponge the BBCs effluent and tears up, and call it broadcasting output.
We are dumb aren`t we?…blue badge and free license for all those who self-identify as such eh?
Could Chelsea Manning and Kellie Maloney do a “Snog Marry Avoid “for Red Nose Day?…
May I remind everyone that this is a site dedicated to discussing BBC bias, its roots, causes, examples, and ideas about how to address it. It is not an open forum for personal abuse.
The moderators of this site (of which I am only one) are believers in free speech. I will happily and personally set up an open-discussion site as a forum for everyone to knock holes in each other if that’s what you want. Let me know and I’ll do it this afternoon, gratis.
But this particular bit of the internet is all about discussing our so-called “public service” broadcaster. Please use it for that.
Well Scott….I far as I read Bring down Scott haven’t encouraged any criminal behavior…. just told you were you live… .So it will be interesting to see if Scott will now continue to insult people….now everyone know who he is…shame as would appear Scott is quite bright……… actually he used his own name ..so actually no
St George,
“Well Scott….I far as I read Bring down Scott haven’t encouraged any criminal behavior….”
Whatever anyone’s opinion about Scott might be, publishing his home and work address is completely disgusting. And yes there is an implied threat in; “we know where you live…”
It might just be a bit of fun and games for you but it really isn’t for the target of such behaviour.
When invective becomes vindictive (as has become something of a norm on this blog recently) it’s time to stop and consider your own actions regardless of what someone else may or may not have said.
As you have picked up the baton so seamlessly passed while new proxies are generated, given the recent flurry of less than helpful (possibly modded now) posts from various quarters (provenance of course unknown), is this offending one still up and around to view? One hopes not.
Certainly I don’t hold with threats implied or otherwise, but how on earth did someone garner a poster’s home address to publish?
Ironically I do recall the use of pseudonyms being held up as reasons not to be taken seriously, but when all that matters is the calibre of the argument perhaps a reasonable precaution?
I’ve always wondered why BBC Complaints needs ‘only’ your first postcode block, given the odds of any others with the same first and surname really makes them locating a complainant simple. Especially as a snail mail version will clearly need the whole thing.
Unless of course someone registers under a false name just to create discord.
This too can happen.
Or imagine if the BBC started trying to track posters on critical sites using staff and resources at their disposal? Do you think the BBC could or would do such a thing?
I agree that the ‘we know who you are and where you live’ line is very sinister, but who is or may be doing it does become relevant when holding those responsible to account.
If it goes further up the line they will request your address any way, as I consider all my complaints are justified I couldn’t really care less if they know my address or not.
Well Dez, seeing how the poster of THAT message was a name previously unknown to this site, one wonders the poster’s motives. Certainly I can’t believe any regular contributor to this site would stoop to posting comments like that, or even acting upon them. My suspicions are that it is someone who knows Scott to have all that information to hand. As we know, he is obnoxious and abusive, so it’s not impossible that he’s made an enemy of someone closer to home who wishes to take revenge. OR it could be a false flag post to try and discredit this site. Only the hosts of this site would be able to discover by checking the IP number, unless a proxy server has been used. Strange though that the “We know where you live” ploy is mostly used by leftie agitators and activists. There have been many examples recently, even the Unite Union uses that ploy.
Please ignore “report” button pressed accidentally….
So while the bBC waxes lyrical about the nasty Jews killing people at war with them in Gaza (1900) over 3000 people have been murdered in cold blood by Islamic terrorists , not Militants bBC, but Terrorists who instil terror into their victims. Here is a video from CNN of Yazidis people being rescued by an Iraqi Mil 17 helicopter, watch the faces of those who have been rescued, are they the faces of people who have been militized or are they people who are terrorised. Well according to the bBC these people have nothing to worry about. As we all know, Militants only want to talk to you.
and yet on news that another 300 innocent people have been murdered the bBC states:
Dakhil Atto Solo said that 300 men had been executed in his village. The report could not be verified independently.
Has anybody ever seen the bBC say the same thing when Hamas,Hezb-allah,The Taliban, Al Q, Boko Haram, Al Shabab ring up the bBC and inform them of the latest attack upon them by the people fighting them and where they claim huge civilian casualties figures. Figures I should add that the bBC headlines straight away.
Spot on Pounce. They take at face value the casualty figures of a political terrorist group allied to The Muslim Brotherhood which uses its people as human shields, yet look for ‘verification’ (and thus casting doubt) when they come from a terror-stricken and traumatised group of innocent civilians who have seen relatives raped, butchered, slaughtered and kidnapped and whose only crime is to belong to the ‘wrong’ religion.
Filthy, stinking bias of the highest order.
“and whose only crime is to belong to the ‘wrong’ religion.”…
… Or the wrong flavour of the “right” religion,… or not obeying the strictest rules of the right flavour of the “right” religion.
Terrorism? The Qur’an has a message to Muslims about terrorism:
When your Lord revealed to the angels: I am with you, therefore make firm those who believe. I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them.
Surah 8:12
In other words Islam itself is a terrorist religion.
It was never in doubt. Just look at what they did to the Teacher who gave me my name
Islam Not BBC (INBBC)’s political line on Islamic State enemy:-
let Muslims in U.K decide on the correct policy: exclude non-Muslim vast majority of Britons from the decision!
-That’s the political purpose which INBBC Asian Network serves, paid for largely by we non-Muslims.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-28772646
This is another example of D.G Tony HALL’s implementation of ‘diversity,’ i.e. the special discriminatory preference given to Muslims in INBBC propaganda broadcasting.
Seriously? That’s what you think it is?
This was a discussion amongst a group of Muslims to hear about their views on IS and a Caliphate. I think it’s particularly pertinent to ask what Muslims think about this, seeing as IS also say they are Muslims.
What ‘decision’ is being made here?
Next up the BBC hosts a discussion with German youth, including members of neo-Nazi groups, to get their views on a Fourth Reich.
Where’s the difference?
Because there is (thankfully) no realistic prospect of that happening. If it did, it would hopefully give the opportunity to show how utterly horrific such a prospect would be, and how the majority of German youth is against it.
There is, sadly, the very realistic prospect (if it hasn’t happened already) of a new Caliphate establishing itself. It seems a good idea to get the views of some members of the same religion. It was good to hear the last two comments in particular.
Why was it a bad thing to have this discussion (if indeed you think it was a bad thing)?
‘It was good to hear the last two comments in particular.’
Presumably anti-Caliphate?
Any who were pro-Caliphate? If so, how did they make you feel?
It worried me to hear those who liked the idea of a Caliphate. But it heartened me to hear those saying they were better off living in this country, and that, although this was obviously a very small group, most were against it.
It ‘worried’ you.
It terrifies me.
It shouldn’t even be up for debate. It needs crushing and any sympathisers need to be rounded up. Time to stand up and be counted.
As I’ve said before: By giving other Muslims, those who worship the same God, the chance to say why they hate the idea of IS and a Caliphate, that surely goes further to delegitimising it (as the BBC should), giving their religious and historical reasons for hating it, than by not mentioning it at all.
I think that showing that there are young Muslims who oppose the Caliphate and IS is a way of crushing it.
How is talking about it a way of crushing it? Do you think IS will take notice of what a handful of Muslims in Britain think? Somehow I don’t think democracy has much of a place in their modus operandi.
Maybe Muslims listening to the debate unsure what to think would be convinced that just because they are a Muslim doesn’t mean they have to support IS.
What can the BBC do to crush IS?
More truthful reporting might help! And the idea that a concept so evil should even be up for debate shows how much the BBC has lost touch with reality.
Additionally I find it unacceptable that the BBC seeks the opinions of just one group of ‘Britons’ on this. By doing so they are legitimising the separateness of Muslim communities in this country and lending support to the idea that somehow, world-wide, they are some kind of homogenous group that deserve special consideration.
You poor deluded fool, ChrisL. Look up the Islamic duty of Taqiyya.
Then look at what ISIS do to any Muslim within their self-styled Caliphate who opposes that Caliphate.
The ONLY way that the Caliphate of IS can be crushed is through overwhelming military physical force. Even the IS members themselves proudly proclaim that weapons are essential to impose Sharia. They cannot do it by pursuasion. They impose it upon the threat of death. Therefore bigger weapons are needed to defeat it. You cannot reach the hearts and minds of those who know that they face execution at the first hint of opposition to the Islamic State.
‘ If it did, it would hopefully give the opportunity to show how utterly horrific such a prospect would be, and how the majority of German youth is against it.’
Good. And did we get that with the Caliphate discussion?
In my opinion, yes.
“…Where’s the difference?”
No difference at all, Johnny. Militant Islam (perhaps all Islam) is the new Nazism – brutal, racist, totalitarian and absolute.
‘…. seeing as IS also say they are Muslims.’
So they could be something else? How very BBC-esque.
Not all Muslims agree with each other, as this discussion clearly showed.
It’s obvious that the Muslim world is not one homogeneous block.
But the IS are Muslims. You seemed to doubt it.
I hope your tiptoeing round the topic doesn’t mean you can’t see the threat posed to us all by a Caliphate.
The BBC’s job is not to give it any validity whatsoever, and not to give airtime to anyone who supports it, which I suspect they were doing in their own inimitable way with the discussion.
I wasn’t doubting it. Neither to I underestimate the threat posed to us, and indeed any other group (the Iraqi Christians, the Yazidis, etc.) by IS.
Was this show giving any validity to IS? Most of the contributors were against them.
And those who were ‘for’? Any suggestions in the discussion as to what should we be doing with them?
There weren’t any suggestions as to what should be done with them. Does that mean the BBC supports those in favour of IS and the Caliphate?
The BBC supports Hamas and the BBC fails to report the extent of butchery, murder, kidnapping, executions, enslavement etc. that the IS has carried out so far, so I’d say yes.
Additionally there have been favourable reports about IS on Today prior to all the slaughter and one reporter wrote on the website that ISIS (as they were then) were getting better at governing (covered in previous threads).
The IS shouldn’t even be up for debate, and the names of those that supported it in the discussion should be handed to the police.
I’d also close down BBC Asian radio – it just serves to promote difference rather than uniting us all as Britons.
INBBC obviously does NOT regard such Islam jihad outfits as the Islamic State as our enemy, and to be treated as such.
In INBBC lingo it’s merely an outfit of ‘militants’, ‘rebels,’ ‘fighters’.
‘It’s obvious that the Muslim world is not one homogeneous block’
Very true, which is why they keep killing each other.
From the article:
“But for some Muslims it is what they are waiting for, whether they back Islamic State or not – a state to restore a sense of dignity that many feel has been lost.”
Seriously? It is seriously being asked whether some Muslims find dignity in what ISIS are doing? Do you not find it even slightly unsettling that the BBC thinks this is an appropriate question to ask?
If the majority answer to that question is no, the Caliphate does not restore any supposedly lost sense of dignity (it was) then why is it bad to ask the quesiton? Surely it’s better that these Muslims were given the chance to explain why they’re against it.
Because how in the name of sanity can anyone think there is dignity in that? Would you ask if there was dignity in the Moors murders? Why would the word ‘dignity’ ever occur to anyone to ask? Unless there’s a tacit acceptance that there is a cancer growing in our society.
Am I supposed to be reassured that a majority answered no? If even 1% thought there was dignity I find that deeply troubling.
Some Muslims do think there’s dignity in that, as one of the contributors said. I’m worried by that too. By giving other Muslims, those who worship the same God, the chance to say why they hate the idea of IS and a Caliphate, that surely goes further to delegitimising it (as the BBC should), giving their religious and historical reasons for hating it, than by not mentioning it at all.
The ones who see dignity in it, are usually the ones who end up with the AK47’s, have you tried reasoning with one of those ?
The other contributors to the discussion did reason with them. And the BBC allowed them the last word.
Good comment. They are the ones who really matter.
You cannot reason with them .You cannot negotiate with them. They see themselves as the true interpreters of the truth of Islam.
This is not a new thing at all. Saint Exupery writing in the 1930s. In Wind Sand and Stars.
“When they met us…..they never troubled to shout abuse. They would merely turn away and spit. Not by way of personal insult but out of sincere disgust at having crossed the path of a Christian. Their pride was born of the illusion of their power. Allah renders a believer invincible.”
Exupery cannot be accused of Islamaphobia. He was enamoured of the desert and the people but under no illusions. Those who flock to the banner of Isis are the committed and they would say the truly devout .
They are a minority but history is always made by minorities.
WE never seem to learn.
We really need politicians and media commentators who have a grasp of history and of the ways of men and the world. Not fey and hope ridden fantasists.
You keep saying you’re ‘worried’ Chris.
In time that will turn to blind panic, then terror.
These people will not be reasoned with and need exterminating.
And the vast majority of the non-Muslim British people remain unheard bystanders as Islam Not BBC (INBBC) politically indulges Islamic interests, as described.
Is anyone politically gullible enough to be saying:-
‘Just as in the 1930s, the German people could be left to deal with the Nazi threat, so now the Muslim nation of the Ummah can be left to deal with the Islamic jihadist/caliphate threat against we non-Muslims?’
Surely it’s a given that the non-Muslim British people are against IS? Why would we need a discussion programme composed of a group of non-Muslims to talk about it?
Personally, I found the discussion quite interesting and enlightening. I don’t think it’s ‘indulging Islamic interests’, merely providing an insight into what British Muslims think about IS, with whom they share a religion.
If you think the entire community in the UK deplores ISIS you must be really naive. Where are they demonstarting on the streets about it ? – up to 150,000 of them have been marching in UK cities at demos this month against Israel – but the imams etc seem to have neglected to organise protests against ISIS.
So do you think there are non-Muslims in the UK who support IS?
A demonstration against IS was held yesterday, organised by the Kurdish People’s Assembly. Quilliam were also involved.
http://leftfootforward.org/2014/08/demonstration-against-isis-this-saturday/
It’s a small step for sections of the political ‘left’ to extend their political support for Islamic jihad Hamas to Islamic jihad Islamic State.
Many on the political left supported Islamic jihadists of Al Nusra in Syria and wanted the West to arm them in their war against Assad. Until very recently, the Islamic jihadists of Al Nusra and the Islamic jihadists of the Islamic State were co-operating with each other.
Where does INBBC stand politically in all this? Or is it waiting for the Ummah to provide it with the political line?
I think it’s a pretty big leap you’ve made, actually. Where are the left-wingers who support IS?
I would say those who wanted us to intervene in Syria were far more anti-Assad than pro-Jihad. Naive, yes, to think that there was any real chance of democracy establishing itself there, but not pro-Jihad. My guess would be that that was the BBC’s position.
INBBC’s political position, apparently along with NUJ, certainly until very recently, appeared to one of supporting the Islamic jihadists of Al Nusra in Syria. This should not be honestly presented as merely anti-Assad.
That’s not what it appeared like to me. Supporting the removal of Assad does not mean you share all of the same goals as those trying to remove him. As an example, we supported the Soviet Union in the battle against Hitler whilst being strongly opposed to Communism.
Sections of the political left (inc BBC-NUJ) are politically content to embed with Islamic jihad Hamas against Israel, and with Islamic jihad Al Nusra against Assad, presuming Israel, and Assad to be greater enemies to the political left than Islamic jihadists. But where is the political left’s actions against Islamic jihadists, including those of Islamic State? Let’s face the obvious, there is a political alliance between sections of the political left and Islamic jihadists.
Does that mean that the BBC and the left want to live in an Islamic state though? That they see Assad as a cruel dictator and Israel an occupying power (I disagree with them on that) does not mean they agree with everything about those who oppose them.
Things like this
http://leftfootforward.org/2014/08/why-us-air-strikes-on-isis-are-right-and-why-the-left-should-support-them/
go to show that at least some on the left support taking action against IS.
Kurds in Iraq are under direct attack from ISIS. They are a small minority of the UK Muslim population. That demo was not very large.
Where are all the Muslims of Pakistani descent on big marches against ISIS ? Nowhere. Scores of thousands of them are out on anti-Israel marches.
INBBC gives over entire programmes to Muslims, as on Islamic State. It’s as though INBBC is saying:-
‘Look, let’s not offend any Muslims, let’s give over another entire programme to them on the Islamic State; and in future, INBBC will reflect any Islamic consensus. We don’t need to know, or ask, or reflect the views of the non-Muslim majority. So, we don’t need to have an entire programme devoted to non-Muslim majority opinion on e.g. the Islamic State. The minority Muslims should be the political driving force on this.’
Would most Beeboids be concerned with Britain becoming an Islamic society? Apparently not, judging by their attitude to mass immigration from Islamic countries, and by INBBC’s preferential treatment for, and euphemistic language about Islam.
Of course, there are some people who would describe themselves as political ‘left’ who oppose Islamisation of Britain and tenets of Islam, but how influential they are, or how popular they are with their socialist comrades?
I do not think that was what the BBC was thinking when they arranged this show.
Surely you will agree that it is interesting to hear some of the views of Muslims living in this country on this development, given that it is being perpetrated by other Muslims?
Again – why would we need a discussion group of non-Muslims on whether the Caliphate is a good or bad thing? Their answer, and mine, is obviously no.
Tell me of those left wingers who actively support Britain becoming an Islamic society. You confuse treating Islam with kid gloves (which I think the BBC does, wrongly) with actively supporting it. They are not the same.
And when you say ‘entire programme’ – the discussion was 10 minutes long.
‘Surely you will agree that it is interesting to hear some of the views of Muslims living in this country on this development…’
That hits the nail on the head. They are Muslims first, Britons second. It will be interesting in the next few weeks to see how many other people’s ‘views’ are canvassed by the BBC.
Listen to the discussion, if you haven’t already. Being Muslim first, British second does not mean they are anti-British, or support IS or the idea of a Caliphate.
But they virtually all support Hamas – a terrorist organisation
You seem to regard the INBBC practice of politically
indulging Islam, as described, as normal; which is what INBBC has conditioned us non-Muslims to accept.
INBBC in generally, being part of the NUJ, supports Labour Party policy in opposing Israel, and supporting Islamic jihad Hamas, as well as supporting mass immigration (inc from Islamic countries)- as you know. INBBC censors e.g. views which link e.g. 9/11, 7/7, Rigby’s murder to Islamic beliefs. Why?
I do not regard giving a small group of Muslims the chance to discuss something very relevant to their religion ‘indulging Islam’. I suspect we shall never agree, so I’ll leave it there.
And all this is done under the auspices of INBBC ‘Asian Network,’ which is an apartheid radio station, where people describe themselves as something like ‘British Asian’.
Purely by name that station is racist, and I bloody well object to being forced to fund it because I happen to own a TV set.
Image the uproar if such a thing as The Anglo Network existed, now that who be racist…..
Perhaps the BBC might gather an audience of British Kurds to discuss the idea, followed by an audience of indigenous Brits who are asked what they think of Muslims in this country being in favour of the IS death cult, and what we should do with them.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2726831/Police-officers-attacked-stock-thrown-Gaza-protestors-wreak-havoc-Tesco-store.html…utter scum
Yet again the BBC indulging in mud throwing, fully aware of the old adage that some will stick.
For a couple of days now they have been all over this story, bigging it up well beyond what it actually is. They have, however modified it slightly from their original hysterical reaction and are now including some details, but not all about the accusers. Of course this needs a big health warning that the accused is a Republican Governor, and we all know how the BBC will magnify anything that is perceived as a transgression by a republican.
“Texas Governor Rick Perry vows to fight ‘farce’ indictment” Note the use of inverted commas around the word farce, for in reality that is what it is.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-28824083
Here Is what is exercising the BBC:
“He faces two counts of abuse of power and coercion over a funding veto he imposed last year, seen as a bid to force a local prosecutor to resign.
The possible Republican presidential hopeful has denied any wrong-doing.
A grand jury indicted Governor Perry on Friday after months of investigation into his motivations for cutting funds amounting to $7.5 million (£4.5 million) to a state anti-corruption unit run by District Attorney Rosemary Lehmberg.
Special prosecutor Michael McCrum said there was evidence Governor Perry had threatened to withhold funding unless Ms Lehmberg, a Democrat, resigned over drink-driving charges.
The indictment said Governor Perry “intentionally or knowingly misused government property…with intent to harm another” namely, Ms Lehmberg and the Public Integrity Unit of the Travis County District Attorney’s Office.
Now the reality:
“Political Payback: Rick Perry Indicted in Power Struggle with Democrat-Controlled DA Office”
http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-Texas/2014/08/15/Political-Payback-Rick-Perry-Indictment
So a Democrat district attorney is arrested for being drunk whilst driving a motor vehicle. She becomes belligerent and abusive and has to be restrained. Because of the circumstances and her behavior she is sentenced to 45 days in prison.
It then comes out that she is a chronic alcoholic.
Here’s the killer for the BBC’s narrative:
“The Texas Local Government Code, in Chapter 87, allows public officials like district attorneys to be removed from office for “incompetency, official misconduct, habitual drunkenness, or other causes defined by law.” The 1987 revision to the law added a single incidence of intoxication on or off duty as a potential cause for removal.
However, because Lehmberg is a Democrat, elected in Travis County, one of the most Democratic-heavy areas of the state, and Governor Perry, a Republican, would be able to pick her replacement, other Democrats quickly rallied to her defense. Other prosecutors who worked under Lehmberg publicly supported her remaining in office, as did State Senator Kirk Watson (D-Austin).’
Frustrated with Lehmberg’s refusal to resign and maintaining his position that someone who had committed her offenses was not fit for office, either as the district attorney or as head of the Public Integrity Unit, Perry then announced plans to veto funding for the Public Integrity Unit unless Lehmberg resigned. Texas law clearly grants the governor the power to veto funding for the Public Integrity Unit and many other agencies, but Democrats supporting Lehmberg howled in protest.
The Travis County District Attorney’s office has a long history of politically-motivated prosecutions, including the 2005 indictment of former U.S. House Majority Leader Tom DeLay for alleged campaign finance violations. DeLay’s convictions were completely overturned and he was acquitted after an appeal to the Third District Texas Court of Appeals in 2013—too late to save his political career.”
Well done BBC, yet another example of highly misleading reporting whilst totally ignoring the true facts especially this – The democratic controlled Travis County District Attorney’s office has a long history of politically-motivated prosecutions.
Of course the BBC has absolutely no intention of ever letting you know that the Democratic Senator for Louisiana in on the hook for misappropriation of large sums of taxpayer money when chartering flights over a 18year period for electioneering purposes.
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2014/08/16/Charter-Flight-Company-Owner-on-Landrieu-Controversy-We-Can-t-Keep-Kicking-That-Dead-Horse
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2014/08/16/High-Flying-Landrieu-Orders-Review-for-18-Years-of-Her-Chartered-Flights
A Democratic senator has stolen money from the tax payer to such an extent that even CNN and ABC are reporting it.
From the BBC, a deathly hush.
More from the US.
If you follow the BBC you’ll know, ad nauseum, that a white police officer shot and killed a black thug in Missouri.
Gradually it has to be dragged out of the BBC that the thug had towered over a tiny shop assistant and hurled him around the convenience store just prior to trying to grab hold of a police officer’s gun.
What the BBC probably won’t tell you is that a recording has surfaced of two blacks discussing what they have just witnessed whereby the thug, having shoved the police officer back into the car and wrestled with him to get his gun, then gets out of the car and seems to run off only to change his mind and charge back at the police officer to physically assault him again.
What the BBC definitely won’t tell you is that the day after the shooting, Eric Holder, the US Attorney General, a man whose tenure as the highest legal authority in government has been tainted by illegal action and a failure to prosecute or investigate whenever a democrat is at the heart of a scandal tried to stop the video of the thug in the convenience store from being aired in public.
No you’ll have to wait for hell to freeze over, or for the BBC to become subscription only, before the BBC reports the full, unvarnished, facts.
And what another great excuse to go a-lootin’.
Will the bBBC show this?
https://twitter.com/robcrilly/status/501060761204969474/photo/1
But just in case anybody might be starting to suspect that all might not be what it seems they have now just announced that …”but the officer did not know that he had robbed the store until after he shot him”
Phew, for a moment there was I starting to worry that this might not have been evil right wing police inspired racial strife !
What did he think he had done then? Or was he simply arresting him for being caught in possession of curly black hair and thick lips?
By the way, having been away on holiday in Montana I think I must have missed something.
Has there been a kerfuffle (nice flamboyant type of word that) involving the one who likes to come here and throw abuse around.
Anyone kindly fill me in on the details please???
you didnt miss much, just queenie started hijacking the threads, they all seemed to rotate around her. A thread was even created in her honour
As we all know, Scott has her mental health problems, and whilst we should all be sympathetic to her needs, there comes a point where she should be banned and sent to the Coventry branch of the blue oyster bar
Thanks for the info – there is a limit to freedom of speech especially when there’s no substance, just invective – long time coming.
Are you talking about me?
Oh, right, you are talking about Scott of this parish, who I understand from his postings is a gay man. I can’t comment on his record of misbehaviour in his comments but use of words like ‘queenie’ and the female pronoun does rather suggest hostility based on an unsympathetic and stereotypical attitude to his sexuality rather than concern for his perceived behaviour! “Mental health problems” is also a subject not to be taken lightly either. Perhaps a sharp and carefully-targeted thrust might be more effective than a blunderbuss approach? Just a suggestion.
Sorry I’ve been missing for a few days. There was a Test Match on, although it did end prematurely. 🙂
‘Are you talking about me?’
Very Travis Bickle. Like it.
‘Oh, right…
So, rather clearly, not. Still it all serves as a useful intro to discuss… nothing to do with lack of BBC accuracy, objectivity or integrity but yourself. And one other, about whom you tongue seems more than planted in the cheek as you skirt around matters.
Even after a welcome break, that does seem familiar.
You make the move. It’s your move. Try to avoid any more bad ideas in your head.
It’s not so much that the BBC tells lies – though it has a habit of allowing others to do so without challenge – it is more it chooses to be ‘economical with the truth’, thus imbuing stories with the BBC world view and lending support to favoured causes.
Bit of an embedding problem here – this and the post below were replies to TPO’s Perry post above.
It’s not that the BBC tells lies…. Except when it declares that chopping people’s heads off is nothing to do with Islam, of course. Because one thing is for sure, those thugs holding the swords certainly are not singing “Jesus is love” when they do that grissly deed. To them, EVERYTHING they do is to do with Islam and is for Islam.
Just because some Taqiyya spouting Muslims in this country CLAIM to oppose ISIS and claim to be peaceful, even in the unlikely event that they are defying their own religious duty to deceive the “unbelievers” by telling the truth, the peaceful majority of Muslims are IRRELEVANT when a very powerful and extremely violent minority of world Muslims are imposing a strictly sharia enforced law within a self-declared Caliphate, which they are fully and with extremely violent zeal, intent on spreading and imposing worldwide. As far as the IS Caliphate is concerned (and the millions living within it) They ARE at war with the non-muslim world, now, today and they are not going to even begin to listen to any diplomacy. They have ONE rule for non-Muslims. You can choose between converting to Islam and sacrifice your life for the Caliph as a suicide bomber, or pay Jizya to be a slave, or die.
Those are your options under the Caliphate and no amount of peaceful taqiyya pleading from supposedly peaceful Muslims in this country will change that!
Why is a peaceful majority irrelevent?
Most Germans pre 1939 were peaceful and they were irrelevant to the history of millions of deaths.
Most Russians were peaceful and were irrelevent to the millions of Soviet caused deaths.
Most Chinese were peaceful, yet millions died under Mao.
The peaceful majority of Muslims are IRRELEVANT, when there is an extremely violent, hateful minority intent on killing millions, in possession of the oil wealth and weapony required to do so.
Having a few Taqiyya spouting Muslims denouncing ISIS is an utter waste of time that stops NOTHING!!!
The Islamic state MUST be destroyed. Not contained, not pushed back. Utterly destroyed, before it attacks us.
Well researched TPO – thanks.
We have Muslim groups all over the world causing mayhem and murder in the name of Islam, Mohammed and Allah. They even scream “Allahu Akbar” while beheading their victims. Yet we are constantly told that their behaviour has nothing to do with Islam or that they have misunderstood its teachings. What I would like to know is how, and why, can it be misunderstood in the same way by so many different factions in so many different countries? If it is a genuine misunderstanding, then why haven’t the relevant passages in the Koran been modified for modern understanding by Islamic scholars so there could be no such dangerous mis-readings of the text? Or am I asking daft questions?
Interesting the way our politicians seek to separate the Jihadist Muslims and the more peaceful sort, all of course aided & abetted by the BBC.
When did you ever see or hear a BBC program which explored the writings of Islam which lead to young people travelling to foreign lands to wreak havoc, or worse doing it here!
There’s never an Imam invited to tell the audience why these verses are either not to be acted on, or why other verses over ride them. This is despite the corporations constantly babbling about the need for ‘moderate’ Muslims to do exactly this.
Maybe the BBC has actually tried to do this, and has failed to find a ‘moderate’ Imam who is capable of countering the so called ‘extremists’, or possibly they are too frightened to go on air and confront the more violent factions.
I’ve seen Anjem Choudary on TV being prepared to air his true version of Islam, and personally I’d like to see more of him, just so people will be able to see through the BBC and politicians lies about the religion of peace.
Trying to portray Muslims as somehow separate and separated by Jihad is in itself bias. There is no separation, it is an artificial construct of the terrified and left wing groups who know there’s a problem and believe the solution lies in buying their heads in the sand.
‘…..left wing groups who know there’s a problem and believe the solution lies in burying their heads in the sand.’
I reckon the opposite and they’re part of the problem, judging by the active support they lend to the extremists in word and deed.
Never any question whether any programs are enacted to prevent this hate and death being preached in mosques up and down the country.
This pm the BBC News Channel showed an interview with an author (a white middle aged man) the Beeboid expressed doubt that the author could properly imagine a character from outside his direct experience. Would such doubts ever arise if the author was from a different pigeon hole?
I’m struggling to find any BBC coverage of “the community” trashing a Birmingham Tesco in furtherance of support for Hamas
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/11039210/Tesco-store-trashed-by-Gaza-protesters.html
Or the protester in ISIS gear protesting outside the KEDEM Israeli store in Manchester, although Greater Manchester Police are looking into the incident.
There is no story about this in the local press, and no returns with a Google search. Please would you give a link to the story where you found this information?
I think you may be able to find a reference to it on Breitbart London.
The local BBC evening news ran an item a few weeks ago about Jews and Muslims both peacefully protesting outside that store in Manchester, and they interviewed one of the policemen who now have to be stationed there permanently to prevent the store being destroyed.
But BBC Midlands Today evening news did lead with a story about Tesco; it is the one off Farmers’ Market they allowed to take place in their car park at their Hereford store. Had a BBC reporter on the spot (with camera crew), interviews with shoppers, stall holders and Tesco’s branch manager. No storming of this branch by shoppers demanding an end to the sale of foodstuffs from Israel.
Earlier, elsewhere (unless deleted in the crossfire of the latest denial of service assault) someone (Thoughtful, I think) raised the pertinent question as to what happens if the BBC is caught bang to rights, can’t weasel, delay or institute an attrition attack or person-playing counter, and actually admits error.
Because I just read this from the ever forensic BBC Watch:
http://bbcwatch.org/2014/08/17/orla-guerins-parting-shot-breaches-bbc-editorial-guidelines/
Nothing we have not seen raised and discussed here, but simply neatly laid out, with quote, fact and URL for all to see.
Under the headline that summarises the story:
“Orla Guerin’s parting shot breaches BBC editorial guidelines”
Well, were they breached, or not?
And if so… what then?
A grudging, muttered, insincere apology of sorts, a claim a line manager will have a word (sending her off to twitter to scream persecution and seek solace from the groupies), and then… what?
The same again. Over and over over.
Look at what has been clearly outlined.
If this goes as a complaint I would dearly love to see the initial blow offs from the droid bots who first try and kill it off, then the ‘beliefs’ of the ECU directors getting ever snarkier as their final word is shown not to be so final, until the Trust quietly backs them up and closes it down months later.
It is a catalogue of professional incompetence, lack of objectivity and integrity, and flat out deliberate propaganda backed by editorial by omission and/or downright mendacious abuse of the term, with at the very least astounding uncuriosity if not lying to deceive.
How low does the BBC need to sink before it is recognised the quagmire it has embraced too often has now claimed it?
A superb article from BBC Watch. You couldn’t wish for a better example of the BBC’s Orwellian coverage of Gaza.
I can on.y assume that Radio 4 5pm on a Sunday is a graveyard slot as I listened to most of a Robin Aitkin report on why the Police hate the Conservatives. Informative and stuffed with facts and explanations. Now I did miss the end so maybe Mr Aitkin had to put in something to please his left wing masters, but otherwise a refreshing change.
I heard this and I also thought it was less biased than the usual output.
It was an attack on the Police for the corrupt state they fell into – common with a lot of the public sector which simply gets MPs to legislate the corruption into law for them.
Having had time for a think about this, can a program about Police reputation, and corruption be a coincidence given that they have recently complained to the BBC about their professionalism as journalists, and possible blackmail?
This morning on the Today program there were further allegations by the BBC about South Yorkshire Police not being truthful, and changing their story ‘several times’.
Did a droid really describe the police force as….
‘The last great unreformed public service.’
😀 😀 😀 😀 😀 😀 😀 😀 😀 😀 😀 😀
I can think of one public *service* that certainly hasn’t been reformed. Hint – it burns up four billion of our quids a year and delivers ‘Cash In The Attic’.
In fact can anyone name a ‘reformed’ public service?
I can’t.
I love cash in the attic and antiques road trip etc. There can never be too many antique related programmes on TV.
I still shed a tear over the demise of all the home makeover programmes that took over our TV sets in the 90s.
Especially the ‘Jason King’ of makeovers Laurence Llewelyn-Bowen.
I was gobsmacked to read this in The Telegraph today:
‘By 2050, Germany’s population is projected to have declined from 82 million to around 70 million – less than in 1963.’
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/eu/11039025/Theres-no-end-in-sight-to-Europes-woes.html
Does that mean they aren’t taking their fair share of immigrants?
If so, why are we taking so many? Why are they queueing up at Calais to get over here when they could hop over the border to Germany? Is it because they’ve worked out the lights will go out even faster in Germany than here?
Perhaps the BBC could run a piece on why there is no EU-wide strategy for coping with the I-problem.
“Romanian ‘crime gang’ accused of theft” – Ulster Television (UTV’s) headline.
“’Dublin gang’ in court over Belfast burglary” – BBC NI’s headline.
Which is news and which is attempted deception?
Just a thought ; I have been working in the garden all day listening to the radio , none of the Scots accents appear to have a decent sun tan ! There must be a joke there about double brownie points ………………. But it was hot !
Ho hum. Apparently the Tilbury illegal immigrants are ‘victims of people smuggling’.
Really? Were they seized at gunpoint and forced to come here? Or did they conspire with gangsters to sneak into the country illegally then get betrayed by their co-conspirators? And if Ronnie Biggs had been killed by one of his fellow blaggers would he be a victim of the Great Train Robbery too?
Why is Rita Chuckmybutty on permanently on BBC News ?
Why is Rita Chuckmybutty on BBC News permanently ??
Beeboids, of their TV news channel, convert the container illegal immigrants from Afghanistan into ‘migrants’ and get an ‘immgration lawyer’ to speak on their behalf.
However sad the circumstances of that case, the Beeboids’ political treatment of it reflects their political agenda of:-
1.) always terming such people ‘migrants’;
2.) always representing the ‘migrants’/ illegal immigrants, but not representing views of British people who do not want such people to gain residence in U.K;
3.) never talking about the problem of the numbers of such illegal immigrants getting into Britain over the years;
4.) not recognising the continual flow of increasing numbers of such illegal immigrants here as a growing future problem to British society;
5.) presuming that there should be an ‘open-door’ policy of mass immigration into Britain.
George R,
“1.) always terming such people ‘migrants’”
AFAIK, “migrant” refers to someone it transit where as “immigrant” is someone who has gained residency in a particular country. So those in the container were migrants but are now immigrants. As such the BBC are now referring to them as “immigrants”:
“Thirteen children aged between one and 12 were among 35 Afghan Sikh immigrants found in a shipping container…”
http://bbc.in/1pV88hS
“2.) always representing the ‘migrants’/ illegal immigrants, but not representing views of British people who do not want such people to gain residence in U.K”
Oh, let’s see – six days ago BBC1 9.15pm:
“A large percentage of illegal immigrants in the UK are believed to be working here unlawfully and costing the economy billions of pounds year. It’s a situation the public aren’t happy with.”
http://bbc.in/1pV9vx8
“3.) never talking about the problem of the numbers of such illegal immigrants getting into Britain over the years”
Covered above.
“4.) not recognising the continual flow of increasing numbers of such illegal immigrants here as a growing future problem to British society”
By “not recognising” you mean; “not representing as fact my own personal opinion that I have as of now.”
“5.) presuming that there should be an ‘open-door’ policy of mass immigration into Britain”
On the contrary, there is a constant stream of views from all the political party spokespeople that immigration needs to be reduced. When is the last time you heard someone on the BBC arguing in favour of unlimited “mass immigration into Britain”?
Who from insidethe BBC is feeding you all this stuff, dez ? They seem to be working overtime for you this weekend.
I’ve yet to hear any coverage of mass immigration on the BBC that doesn’t conclude it’s a good idea – and I’m talking TV and radio here where they reach millions rather than tens of thousands who might read some poxy little ‘get out of jail’ article on the news website.
Last blatant example: Nick and Margaret a few weeks ago – but from what I remember you chose not to get involved with that thread.
I prefer to refer to all of them as “economic migrants”. One has to wonder ( a rhetorical question) why most asylum seekers, economic migrants, etc. make a beeline for G.B. when they pass through most of the European countries on their way here. As part of the E.U. all member countries are subject to the same human rights legislation and conditions. So tell me Dez, why do they all seem to want to come and live here? Please, no obfuscation of diversionary tactics. Just give me a straight answer.
Dez,
Check how National Union of Journalist policy on immigration concurs with that of Beeboid broadcasting output.
“John Humphrys: BBC not sufficiently sceptical about Europe or immigration.
BBC coverage of the EU and immigration issues has been biased to the Left,
admits Radio 4 Today presenter John Humphrys.”
(March, 2014.)
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/bbc/10688000/John-Humphrys-BBC-not-sufficiently-sceptical-about-Europe-or-immigration.html
‘We made a mistake but it’s too late to do anything about it now’.
The Bolshevik Brainwashing Comintern’s treatment of this story has been a textbook case of how the BBC dissembles, obfuscates and lies by omission in order to re-craft the news to suit its common purpose multi-culti agenda.
Perhaps only too aware of how badly this tale of immigrant stowaways would play out in the Home Counties if it were left ‘unspun’ by the BBC’s cultural awareness Commissars, the hateful Corporation quickly set about rewriting the script to match up with its ‘cohesion’ and ‘multicultural’ agenda – and it has been doing so, ever since.
We are to view the illegal immigrants not as the criminals they are, but as ‘victims’. Any other interpretation is to be outlawed. No dissent to this proclamation is to be brooked. Anyone who disagrees with this is a racist bigot.
News – BBC style.
One storey hitting the newspaper headlines is the demonstration, leading to invasion and damage to goods and fighting with police at a Tesco supermarket in Birmingham. One arrest but more threatened over the call by the mob to ban food from Israel. No surprise, this is the general area of the Trojan Horse schools and child indoctrination.
Couldn’t wait to see today’s BBC Midlands Today early evening news to see how they treated the violence.
Shock horror; Tesco Stores is the very first item!…hang on, its about Hereford Tesco giving local farmers and the like a one off chance to set up market stalls in their car park!
Over to the ‘red button’ no nothing there either, what a surprise.
On a lighter note, Weekend Wogan on Radio2 today provided the usual BBC fare.
Wogan’s guest was Ali Campbell from the 1980s reggae band UB40.
Terry asked him how the band decided on that name, as if we wouldn’t know.
Can you guess the reply?
Well, says Ali, we were all unemployed, victims of Thatcher’s Britain, so we used the number of the unemployment benefit card as our name.
Cue the BBC return invitation!
The thing is, Ali’s memory doesn’t match the band’s Wiki page.
The band formed in 1978, and their first official gig as UB40 was in February 1979, three months before Mrs Thatcher won the 1979 election.
Never mind, job done for the BBC.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p024ytbh
9 minutes in, to go straight to the question.
Good spot, sir. Yozzer Hughes and Boys from the Blackstuff is usually described as a critique of Fatcher’s Bri’un despite being written, produced and (mostly) broadcast before the Great Lady came to power.
Loved that series, watched it religiously ever week.
Now a quick quiz question; what was that series that depicted the then Deputy Leader of Liverpool Council Derek Hatton, played by Robert Lindsey?
Don’t remember – didn’t watch… it though I did catch a snippet where Wolfie and Lindsay Duncan were ‘getting down to it’ and Wolfie said,
‘Yer not ready’
to which Lindsay replied,
‘Go ahead anyway, I like a bit of pain’.
Ooh err. 😀
G.B.H.?
Briliant spot Mr Deeky.
Doesn’t that also mean that they all made their millions under a Conservative government?
The story of UB40 that sticks in my mind was that they worked as labourers until they had enough money to buy their gear, at which point they went on the dole so they could spend their days practising and their nights gigging until they became good enough to get a recording contract.
I thought that they got the money for their start up gear from some “compo” claimed for an injury or an attack, something like that?
Truth is…you never know with the Left, seeing as they tend to say different things depending on who they want to endear themselves to.
Voguers all…Madonna had them all painted as “striking poses, there`s nothing to it”…certainly no cost to themselves.
Ali will be off to live in a haze of weed in a nice, safe part of Jamaica when the clocks go back, unless he can preach the good rebellion in Big Businesses Arenas instead.
Lefty hypocrites all-but, a great voice nonetheless.
I heard that, Campbell, smugly after his dissing of Thatcher claimed it automatically gave than 3 million fans. Having just left school in 1982, I could claim to be one of Thatcher’s millions, but I always thought UB40’s music was shite and still do.
I thank Mrs T for the life I have today, never forced to be a member of a scummy union and achieve fully what my abilities allowed and I own my own home despite the interest rates of the 80’s, I only spent what I could afford!
Just watched the 10 o’ clock news. Another report on IS, another report that made no mention of the murder, mutilation, rape, kidnapping and enslavement their joyous Caliphate has brought to Iraq.
How different to their reporting of Gaza, where the BBC left us in no doubt with every bulletin how the brutal Israelis apparently kill civilians for fun.
About two years ago I complained to the BBC about their Children’s BBC programmes (CBBC). One of my kids then was of age for these programmes.
I complained about the over-representation of visible ethnic minorities (PC term for black and brown) compared to the UK population. I also complained as to how the kid who was brown or black always won the day in a drama and that white males over 35 were regarded as buffoons and good for a laugh, especially if in positions of authority.
And how in one lecture, the audience of 5-7 year olds were advised to not eat meat as cow farts were damaging the environment!
I had an interesting exchange of emails with the Head of ‘something’ at the BBC but they were curtailed when he left for employment elsewhere than the BBC.
Today, if you complain, you receive a bland cut-and-paste reply with no option to respond.
Why??
Because there seems to have been a massive increase in complaints. The BBC Editorial Complaints Unit received over a quarter of a million complaints in 2013. The complaints were sent to a team of about 400 people in Belfast, and the more serious complaints were passed on to around 30 people at the Units HQ in London. It seems that the Culture, Media and Sport Committee’s inquiry into the Future of the BBC has received some extraordinary submissions which have set off further investigations into the people at the BBC’s Editorial Complaints Unit. The rumours are that there are both Police and MI5 investigations. Lord Lawson’s experience with Fraser Steel gives us a clue to what is going on in this department. Anyway, its not just me and John Whittingdale in Mensa who are trying to destroy the BBC, but I am usually only emailed about the science.
Did you spot it? Did you? Did you? I sneaked it in. I like to remind people all the time that I am in Mensa and they are not and because of that I am better than you. You are inferior to me.
But Richard Pinder doppelganger troll, there has not been anything on the BBC about superior Mensa member John Whittingdale, Mensa or Daily Mail articles about the BBC, or the fact that Daily Mail readers are better than BBC employees who buy the Guardian, because they are better informed.
so they can receive a quarter of a million complaints and nothing apparenly changes in their ethos or agenda… Yet one complaint of them not being liberal progressive enough can result in sackings and apologies and entirely new directives imposed BBC wide.
I’ve said this before.
Can’t we have an ‘ignore’ option on this site that would allow us if we choose, not to be informed of posts from a nominated poster?
This function is available on other discussion sites.
It stifles trolls.
On the 13th August the BBC ran an article: Gaza conflict – Allegations of war crimes.
A video is shown with a commentary by Orla Guerin. The beginning of the video shows a man apparently ‘shot by an Israeli sniper’, according to Guerin, after which she has an English woman from one of the aid agencies vilifying Israel for this dastardly act.
The video footage looks suspicious to anybody watching it, even if they had never heard of Pallywood.
Now it’s been proven to be a complete hoax, by the same blogger, Thomas Wictor, who has exposed quite a few others.
The only thing is he showed it was a hoax on July 21st, over 3 weeks BEFORE the BBC ran their article.
BBC Watch also has more on the commentary given by Guerin in this article
Teddy Bear,
“Now it’s been proven to be a complete hoax, by the same blogger, Thomas Wictor, who has exposed quite a few others.”
That’s ridiculous, one person obsessively searching for anomalies in a poor quality video does not constitute “proof” in any sense of the word, especially when it contains “evidence” such as; “he has a beard with no mustache, which means he’s a Hamas operative” and; “You can clearly see the plastic squirt-tube here in his right hand”. Erm, no you can’t, unless…
“Why do people see the Virgin Mary on a cheese sandwich?”
http://goo.gl/ySU2ZX
Of course you do have form with this sort of thing, such as the case of Jehad Misharawi’s 11 month old son.
When it was suspected he might of been killed by an Israeli rocket you suggested the report was entirely false:
“Is this what a father does just after his child has been killed?… This wouldn’t be the first time the Palestinians manufacture casualties to suit their agenda”.
http://goo.gl/y1ahNP
But when it was later revealed he might have been killed by a Palestinian rocket, then suddenly the report became entirely truthful:
“Clearly, confirmation that Hamas is responsible for the deaths of its own people”.
http://goo.gl/iAMI2c
That’s rubbish. Guerin knows damn well that she was fed this story by the ISM. The ISM have serious form – they are not some sort of innocent NGO. Their record includes the Rachel Corrie affair – another piece of Pallywood.
And Guerin must have known that the current video footage has been widely claimed to be a Pallywood fake. I have read all the posts by Wichter – and they are far more convincing than you suggest. He brings a whole list of allegations based on frame-by-frame analysis of the footage.Were I a journalist, I would be thinking “I am not gonna touch that with a bargepole, it could well be tainted”.
But Guerin does not appear to be that sort of scrupulous journalist.
Dez wrote:
Of course you do have form with this sort of thing, such as the case of Jehad Misharawi’s 11 month old son. When it was suspected he might of been killed by an Israeli rocket you suggested the report was entirely false…..
Well Dez, when I can post pictures of the father carrying his poor infant son around in two different tops, that tells me something, seeing as he went direct from the hospital to the mother of the child directly. (Its what the bbC reported)
Now who was it who came out with the phrase: “Somethings afoot?”
Caption for the first picture: Father’s grief: BBC journalist Jihad Masharawi weeps while he holds the body of his 11-month old son Omar, at Shifa hospital
Caption for the second picture: Respects: Today was the funeral of 11-month-old Omar al-Masharawi killed probably by a Palestinian rocket
Two pictures on two days. The grieving father, who just lost his son, changed his clothes.
Do you think I just arbitrary pick statements out of thin air without looking into the background. The house was struck on the evening of the 14th, the funeral was on the 15th, yet the worlds Newspapers were airing pictures of both sets of clothing on the 15th . So if he was wearing the new set of clothing on the 15th how come he made the papers on the morning of the 15th.
Oh and by the way here;s a video that the bBC man is in. (Its in arabic) he’s first on at the funeral of a Hamas terrorist here is what he has to say:
“Thanks to Allah, the Lord of the Universe, who chose him [i.e. Ahmed] to be a martyr, from all the people. What was done by the Jews is a shame for the entire Umma [Islamic nation], a shame for the West, a shame for the Arabs, who are silent. The entire war struck only the children and the innocent. They didn’t hit a single muqawim [resistance fighter], nor anyone who works for the government, or whatever.”
Err Jihad that dead body wrapped in the green flag of hamas behind you is Ahmed Masharawi. Somebody whom Hamas described as a shahid (A fighter who died carrying out jihad)
Watch him carry the body of the Hamas figher from the front. Strange as how he was killed outside Jihads home.
Then he walks around his burnt out house showing the world somewhat calmly where his child died.
Oh yes regards the funeral photo can you point me in the direction of any as in over 2 years I haven’t managed to find any.
Pounce
I expect dez will be apologising profusely for having contradicted you
If you use Inspect Elements you can see that the images were taken at different times.
The top image accompanies an article which states that:
“Jihad Misharawi, a BBC Arabic journalist who lives in Gaza, carries the body of his 11-month old son, Omar, through al-Shifa hospital in Gaza City.”
The lower image is from a different source and is captioned:
“BBC cameraman Jihad Misharawi at his funeral of his baby son”
The photographs are of different occasions which explains the different pullovers.
Dez, nice to know you are taking the same side as the oppressed in Gaza, you know, all those who kill rape victims, kill homosexuals, force children to labour under slave conditions building tunnels, in which over 160 children have died, and force women and children into and onto buildings which they know are about to be bombed, and who execute peaceful protestors, and who pray for the return of Hitler to finish what he started
Dez – you don’t seem to know if you’re ‘shot, fucked, pistol whipped or snakebit’.
Everything about the Misharawi story stank from the word go. If it looks like shit, smells like shit, and tastes like shit, it’s probably shit.
You identify that it was shit in what you write, although it wasn’t ‘might have been killed by a Hamas rocket’ – BUT WAS, even confirmed by the UNHRC who as we all know – are no friends of Israel, yet you write as if I was wrong.
You’re seriously confused.
Why don’t you hunt around for something that I was wrong about, and then use that as an example to try and show me up. That would be my suggestion.
It really hasn’t occurred to these trolls that if they really cared about dead children being killed, among others, they should be vilifying Hamas for causing it, and the BBC et al for enabling them.
Like we can’t see their hypocrisy, and real insidious agenda.
We live in dangerous times.
The BBC are not helping and trying to censor us, since they appear to have their own, ‘left’ inspired, agenda
It is tantamount to aiding and abetting the mainly Muslim problems in this country when our state broadcaster hides from us incidents like the Birmingham Tesco Gaza protest havoc yesterday – which is still not being reported on the BBC – but is everywhere else one looks:
https://www.google.co.uk/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=birmingham%20gaza%20protest%20tesco
How can we pile pressure on our MPs and others that can address the problems if we are being censored – unbelievably we are being taxed for this censorship?
Another prime example is their own Pedophile problems.
The BBC are by now very self aware of the exacerbation of the problem when it is hidden and consequently not acted upon.
In the same way they tried to hide from us the spates of UK Pakistani gangs grooming and abusing underage non-Muslim girls.
It is well passed the time the BBC had their wings severely clipped so we are not inhibited in addressing such issues.
Searching what is happening about Chilcot, I came upon this interesting, but lengthy Lords debate:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/democracylive/house-of-lords-28118192
I personally accept that even without the Bush/Blair disastrous radicalisation of Muslims, (which in my view, led to the Arab Spring and current insurrection of ISIS), the free world would, at some future date, militarily have to face up to radical Islam.
Such are the brutal medieval fault-lines within that religion which make that conclusion inevitable.
That time though has come now.
The battle lines have been drawn with the attempted Caliphate now upon us.
Unfortunately free democratic countries willpower has been drained and we are now sadly unable to timely redress the problem of the disastrous 2003 Iraqi incursion.
The following Prime Minister Blair memo to Johnathon Powell prior to the invasion, is very informative.
Click to access Blair-to-Powell-17March2002-minute.pdf
Blair: In all my papers, I do not have a worked out strategy, how we would do it. The US do not either.
I have been trying to figure out how, supposedly intelligent people, could possibly be so utterly stupid as to launch into such a war, in such a region, based on lies, but without any strategy, WHATSOEVER, for what was to happen next.
It may seem like I am donning a tin-foil hat a bit, but the only conclusion that I can arrive at, is that they have done it on purpose, deliberately to create as much of a destabalising force in that region as possible to deliberately stir up a global clash of civilisations.
This seems a brave can of worms for the BBC of all people to be opening up:
—-
@BBCBreakfast: Last year more than 35,000 people were remanded in custody then acquitted or given a non-custodial sentence. Is it unjust? #bbcbreakfast
—-
Justice been put through the ringer of the UK legal system? I wonder what will be covered, and what will fall under ‘not news’ ((c) A. Newsroom Tealady) or ‘watertight oversight’ (reasons FoI excluded)?
“Britain’s professional campaigners are growing in number: sending emails around the country, flocking around Westminster, dominating BBC programmes, and usually articulating a Left-wing vision which is neither affordable nor deliverable…….
Mr Grayling was particularly critical of “campaigns that hide behind a veneer of neutral non-partisanship”, singling out 38 degrees, which campaigns on a variety of issues through online petitions.
He said that 38 degrees was “an anti-Government pressure group” while the Howard League for Penal Reform was run by Frances Crook, “one of the most prominent Labour-supporting pressure group leaders”.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/11037088/Half-of-Gordon-Browns-spads-work-for-charities-lobbying-Coalition-as-Tories-condemn-revolving-door.html
Have to laugh at the bBC, they are currently running an article about the perils of being a lesbian in Pakistan
Gay Pakistan: Lesbians’ lives on the line
For a woman from a low-income, conservative background in rural Pakistan, Azra Ahmed had built a potentially hot career. But then it went right off the boil. Ms Ahmed, 29, is in a lesbian relationship – and in a country where homophobia has wide social and religious sanction, that may not help your job prospects
Job prospects bBC? How about life prospects, I honestly can’t see Gay Muslims singing and dancing about the joys of love in any Islamic country never mind Pakistan which is one of the one polarized. But yet, two of the side articles linked to this sad story from the bbC suggest exactly that:
Gay Pakistan – ‘less inhibited than West’
Throughout South Asia, homosexuality has been a taboo subject. But there are signs in some areas that gay people are now becoming more open in their behaviour. In this column a gay man in Pakistan talks about the advantages of being gay there compared to the West. , He prefers to remain anonymous.
I take it the author of the above bBC article failed to see the irony with that last statement.
Gay Pakistan: Where sex is available and relationships are difficult
Pakistan is not the kind of place that most people would associate with gay liberation. But some say the country is a great place to be gay – even describing the port city of Karachi as “a gay man’s paradise”
So Pakistan is a great place to be gay is it.?
Something tells me, that a swinging lifestyle for homosexuals takes on an entirely different meaning inside Pakistan. But according to the idiots at the bBC, Its the place to be.
A friend of mine once got flashed at by a young girl in Saudi. She opened her abayha and said if you like what you see follow me. He didn’t because he thought their might be ‘others’ waiting for him to follow her. I went down the following week in the hope to have the same thing happen to me. Instead a Pakistani guy followed me around and back to my car! GUTTED! Of course I declined his generous offer and left.
If the BBC do not recognise that as BLATANT Taqiyya, I do not know how they ever will recognise Taqiyya…
But then thinking about the number of Mozlems in the BBC, I guess they are happy to commit Taqiyya against this whole country.
This all sounds a bit like those reports we had from the BBC a couple of weeks back where we were being told that life under ISIS isn’t so bad after all – in fact, it’s better than it was before.
Drugs, it’s got to be drugs….
Beyond the forensic skill in quote and URL, damning the BBC with its own words (or where mysteriously omitted, given topics that clearly would demand the attention of any but the most committed propagandist), another tour de force by BBC Watch
http://bbcwatch.org/2014/08/18/bbcs-kevin-connolly-in-gaza-high-on-pathos-and-sunsets-low-on-accuracy-and-facts/
My only concern is that these pieces are so regular (given the source material no fault of theirs) to almost become the norm.
Certainly given the factual nature of the analysis, where surely by now they must be tearing their hair out at the relentless bovine calibre of BBC output, I really think they deserve a wider audience.
‘It is as though Gaza is a kind of junction box where the dysfunctional neural wiring of the Middle East fused a long time ago.”
(Kevin’s mum) ‘Ooooh, our Kevin, you are clever with words! But what do they mean?’
The BBC have now gone on the attack against South Yorkshire Police, for raising a complaint against the corporation – how unreasonable of them, it can’t possibly have any merit!
So, after denying any kind of culpability the BBC on it’s premier news program, ‘Today’ on Radio 4 they suggested that the Police had no case and had raised the complaint the defend themselves, the implication being that the Police were running a damage limitation PR exercise, and there was a implication of mendacity.
They alleged that the Police had changed their story, which is code for lying.
I think we will see the BBC turn more of its guns on what it perceives as a threat, and I think this just illustrates something rotten at the heart of the corporation which cannot accept criticism, valid or not.
Crikey, the week has only just opened its sleepy eyes, and two of the state’s most venerated and trusted institutions are at it like… rats in a sack.
One can only hope that from the fog of spin and pr ( who has more to deploy… On the public purse?) some facts and maybe truth will emerge.
Could be interesting… popcorn worthy even.
I wonder if the BBC will suddenly find need to retreat behind ‘purposes of…’ Or FoI exclusion doors again, as it does so often?
Or the police?
It could be ironic the BBC making demands of other institutions it sees itself as exempted and immune from.
These are two pretty hefty public sector beasts, and accusations of lying are no small thing.
Equally, given past and recent history, neither has great call on moral high ground when it comes to honesty or transparency.
So while the nation’s broadcaster and those tasked with enforcing the law drag each other and any shred of public sector trust through the mud and into the gutter, our nation’s leaders continue to enjoy the summer hols above… and away from the madding crowd.
Looks like the technical issues have returned again !
Will BBC-NUJ report this about immigration?
“Primary classes of 70: Labour reveals crisis in schools… caused by its own immigration policy.
“Shadow education secretary has ‘real concerns’ with ‘crammed’ classes.
“Those in classes of more than 30 pupils has risen by 200% since 2010.
“Nearly 450 pupils are in classes of more than 70 people, figures show.
“But critics say Labour’s ‘out of control’ migration policy caused pressure.”
By JACK DOYLE, POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2727465/Primary-classes-70-Labour-reveals-crisis-schools-caused-immigration-policy.html#ixzz3AjWe38kh
Highly predictable.
You could have put money on it.
Just as one has come to expect from the BBC they have not even mentioned the stomping elephant in the room, (millions of immigrants under Labour’s open door policy), the BBC have at least included:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-28835509
“The government said it was Labour who cut primary places during a baby boom.
The Education Secretary Nicky Morgan said: “Tristram Hunt seems to have forgotten that it was Labour who cut 200,000 primary school places in the middle of a baby boom – at the same time as letting immigration get out of control.”
Mrs Morgan said the government had doubled funding to local authorities for school places.
“As part of our long-term economic plan, the difficult decisions we have taken have meant we have been able to double the funding to local authorities for school places to £5bn, creating 260,000 new places.
“But Labour haven’t learnt their lesson. Their policy of not trusting head teachers would create more bureaucrats, meaning more resources are spent on paperwork not places. Children would have a worse future under Labour.”
Oops …my error …apologies…the BBC have included the immigration statement by Education Minister. I should have gone to Specsavers!
One more for connysewers of BBC “quotes” in breaking email and linked article:
—
Assange ‘to leave’ Ecuador embassy
Wikileaks founder Julian Assange says he plans to leave Ecuador embassy in London “soon” after two years of refuge
—
Note the ‘to leave’ in a single, but the “soon” doubles up for good measure.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-28834849#%22
“The Australian said the reasons for leaving were not those “reported by the Murdoch press” – but did not elaborate further.”
Luckily not tasked by the BBC as the magic words were enough to nod and move on?
I watched Simon Reeves jolly along another tropic last night which was spoilt by his desire to say ‘climate change’ every thirty seconds. Must be the basis of a drinking game like the one based on a shot every time Jenni Murray says her name on Woman’s Hour.
Another case of BBC Tourette’s.
Amazing how not one of the BBC’s 5000+ journalists has managed to get a picture of Hamas firing a rocket, yet get one of Ukrainian separatists doing so.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-28832873
Almost as remarkable as how little trouble BBC news crews had in finding a Kurdistan military squad (street fighting ISIS at the time) to film, yet – for some unfathomable reason (and I really can’t think why) – during all the weeks of the Gaza-Israeli set-to they simply couldn’t film a single Hamas ‘militant’ (that’s ‘murdering fascist thug’ to you and me).
Baffling.
And even though Jeremy Bowen spent a lot of his time at the Al Shifa hospital he didn’t once notice the comings and goings of Hamas, who use it as a base.
And I bet all the BBC’s picture editors have been scouring the globe of photos from other sources of rocket launches from civilian areas – but have drawn a complete blank.
Rufus wrote:
Amazing how not one of the BBC’s 5000+ journalists has managed to get a picture of Hamas firing a rocket, yet get one of Ukrainian separatists doing so.
According to that report dozens of people have been killed by the use of Russian made Grad missiles. I wonder if the Grad missiles used by Hamas are a more people friendly sort seeing as they never kill anybody and always explode in deserted areas according to the bBC.
Maybe Mishal Hussain has been consulting on defence measures that properly facilitate bbc casualty requirements?
I would just like to say how much I am sick to death of hearing about Scotland on the BBC.
I would also like to take this opportunity to encourage all of you Scots to vote Yes in next month’s referendum.
And one last thing – FUCK Scotland.
Beeboids, who are anti-fracking, again give propaganda to illegal anti-fracking disrupters today.
“Above all the speakers brought home the gravity of the situation we face: the grim reality of the global jihad that Obama is determined to abet and our other politicians are determined to ignore. Predictably, the mainstream media ignored this groundbreaking event. CBS Local interviewed me, but their piece on the rally didn’t use a single word I said, and characterized the rally as solely pro-Israel, without any mention of our stand for persecuted Christians, Yazidis, Hindus, etc. And the main information CBS’s report gave was how many “Palestinians” have been killed in the recent conflict. Typical and egregious. There were speakers from all over the world, representing minorities at the front lines of Islamic State persecution, including the Yazidis and the media carried not a word — this wasn’t newsworthy?”
AFDI. P Geller
She is banned from the UK, as reported here
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-23064355
This report is actually from the CBS, could so easily have been the BBC, who by the way have no space to report it …
but lots of space for this … SeaWorld to redesign its whale tank
Supporters of Israel and persecuted religious minorities stand together
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2014/08/supporters-of-israel-and-persecuted-religious-minorities-stand-together-at-afdi-rally.
Miranda going to host the new Generation Game on the BBC. Is there no depths to which the BBC won’t stoop?
A dizzyingly balanced report on Assange on the lunchtime news: his ‘political asylum’ has cost the taxpayers (yes, ‘taxpayers’ – on the BBC!) £7 million, very secretive person though he likes revealing the secrets of others, nowhere to go legally after the last Supreme Court ruling etc.
Totally ruined by North West News. Yes, folks, it’s fracking again. Interview with some pimply post-adolescent protestor, fresh from her CAGW-brainwashed years at school: ‘We need to have a discussion on investing in renewables, that’s all we want’. Well, why not have it on the BBC? Go on BBC, ask her: ‘If all we had were renewables, what would we do when the wind isn’t blowing and the sun isn’t shining?’ Go on! Go on!! Um, nope. The BBC maintains its 100% record because, as we know, it doesn’t want to bury the eco-myth worshipped by its 28gate mates.
Then we were told about the protests outside the Ministry for Energy and Climate Change in London, some enviro-tossers gluing themselves to fences (know what you’re thinking….). Nice one BBC, but wtf has that got to do with us in the North West?
And amazing that the BBC thinks a handful of the usual suspects from the ranks of the great unworked and unwashed who protest anywhere and everywhere against anything and everything non-Marxist or non eco-fascist are somehow representative of the opinion of millions in the region.
Biased leftist eco-wankers.