Here you go, on-time and ready for completion. Detail the BIAS here.
As we approach the General Election in May, the greater the menace presented by the far from impartial BBC. It’s clear they want to see Miliband in Number Ten and they are ensuring the daily narrative directs towards that outcome.
£3000 Labour tax bombshell’ yesterday … is his nose growing?
then ‘2 million new jobs’ today … yep! outdoing Pinocchio.
Smearing everyone else, personal attacks, imaginary strawman figures to knock down, doctoring/political pressure to evade debates, orchestrate figures … and still refusing to give a straight answer on cuts,
its only day two! … but no cuts when it comes to faux nauseating presidential, (and unnecessary) photo opportunities, complete with helicopters overhead.
Beneath contempt… Camoron, Osborne, IDS, most deceitful, inept, arrogant, selfserving of idealogues, … only day two
‘Beneath contempt… Camoron, Osborne, IDS..etc etc…’
Well that’s as maybe. But don’t worry there’s plenty of Newsquiz, Have I Got News etc etc around on the BBC to bash these Tory targets in just the way you do dear noggin.
Trouble is I listen to labour’s merry-go-round economics and there’s bearly a word of objection anywhere across the BBC airwaves.
Merry-go-round economics, you ask?
Debt? Deficit? Labour has the answer (C/O Lucy Powell) We’ll just all pay ourselves more and then the state can tax us all more – job done.
Richer than we would like? Don’t worry, the state will tax you at 50% so half the time you’re working for the state. But don’t worry, all those nasty rich people will still be happy to create those millions of high paid new jobs – they will, won’t they?
… then ‘2 million new jobs’ today…
The Tories still spin nonsense about ‘having an ‘aspiration’ to cut immigration, even though they never do anything practical. The figures released at the Budget were clearly based on an assumption that immigration would proceed unchecked. Surely this plan to create 2 million jobs similarly assumes unchecked immigration. It’s not hard to create jobs like this; anyone can sell £10 notes for a fiver. Bernie Madoff got 150 years for his Ponzi scheme, but his scheme was minor compared to Cameron’s. Go figure.
Job creation: There were more workers BORN in the UK employed in Britain in Jul-Sept 2010 , than 4 years later
Job Creation: 70% of new jobs created in the UK under the Tories have gone to non-UK citizens which makes a lie of the Tory claim they’ve created a million new jobs for British workers, of those how many are lowest paid? how many are zero hours, its getting to the stage where minimum wage is getting to be the aspiration, its not right, its detrimental to our society … and its the Tory aim.
Once again its come down to doctored figures
As was pointed out the first time around in reference to Cameroons claim in 2010 ,no-one can
stop immigration unless we leave the EU. Interesting how Milliband has been pilloried over New Labour and immigration when the Tories have been almost let off for the current levels of mass immigration we are currently experiencing.
The rumours of the collapse of UKIP never seem to materialise. We’ll know on the morning of May 8th whether Cameron has been let off.
I can …I ve noticed that immigration is at the top of peoples concerns, yet the kippers are being starved of the chance of justified critique, the Al BBC even mentioned it yesterday, yet where was the indepth interview with Mr Farage, or other kippers.
Put that with the snide propaganda stunt by Camoron, his free Party Broadcast, and how much airtime he had?
… he isn t so keen on head to head debate airtime though, is he?,
(had to laugh, caught lying about the … erm “long term plan” again … which one :-D)
Both parties have let this nation down over immigration.
Vote UKIP.
‘Interesting how Milliband has been pilloried over New Labour and immigration when the Tories have been almost let off for the current levels of mass immigration we are currently experiencing. ‘
That’s because Miliband was in the party that wanted to ‘rub the Right’s nose in diversity’ – you know, that hidden little 1997 manifesto gem?
And here’s how they did it:
https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=uk+immigration+graph&rls=%7Bmoz:distributionID%7D:%7Bmoz:locale%7D:%7Bmoz:official%7D&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=8N8aVa-7N8LxatamgNgJ&ved=0CCEQsAQ&biw=1280&bih=600#imgdii=_&imgrc=JOhmeVL5Q7pS0M%253A%3BT_eoRumof6ZwvM%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.economicshelp.org%252Fblog%252Fwp-content%252Fuploads%252F2012%252F12%252Fnet-migration-outflows-inflows-500×370.png%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.economicshelp.org%252Fblog%252F6399%252Feconomics%252Fimpact-of-immigration-on-uk-economy%252F%3B500%3B370
Notice anything peculiar round about 1997? Ever heard of stable doors and horses?
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-somerset-32017649
BBC – Taunton street preacher convicted for homophobic sermon
Judge Shamim Qureshi, who heard this case, is also a judge at a Sharia court:
“Overd’s case is being heard by a Muslim, Judge Shamim Qureshi, who also serves as the presiding judge at the Sharia law-based Muslim Arbitration Tribunal
http://christiannews.net/2015/03/13/if-i-hear-one-homophobic-word-i-will-arrest-you-street-preacher-on-trial-for-biblical-preaching/
UK: Muslim judge convicts Christian preacher of hate speech
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2015/03/uk-muslim-judge-convicts-christian-preacher-of-hate-speech
“Qureshi complained that Overd “happily shouts out the negative points in any other religion.”
When will he be bringing Anjem Choudary up on similar charges?
R Spencer
Of course, given the rapid Islamisation of British society, enabled by INBBC, inter alia, Muslims who believe in Sharia law will have more and more power at all levels.
Today program Sarah Montague’s atta….interview with Cameron largely preoccupied with the ‘surprising’ news that he criticised Miliband in his electioneering speech. How beastly of him. Noticeable the avoidance of addressing Cameron as Prime Minister by Beeb interviewers.
Cameron should have known this was where the interview was heading…Montague followed her lead from the Guardian which had the same complaint about the nasty Tory.
Surprised?
The BBC are lying about Malala Yousefzai again, claiming that she was shot because she was campaigning for education for girls.
The Taleban have been crystal clear in a number of statements as to why she was shot, and that is because she criticised the Taleban, and they gave theological reasons for that.
The Taleban were never opposed to the education of girls, only mixed sex education, and where single sex education was impractical that boys should be given preference.
The BBCs response is that Malala says she was shot because of campaigning, but lets face it she wasn’t the one who pulled the trigger, and accepting the opinion of someone who is a political campaigner with a career to make and a lot of ambitious people behind her is going to say what ever makes for the most advantageous outcome.
The BBC as ever is happy to play along as her side supports their crazed diversity, the other Islamic Jihad.
News management/state propaganda can’t be left to the vagaries of commercial broadcasters.
It’s clear the bbc doesn’t exist on quality of output, which can hardly be differentiated from commercial offerings. Nor is it a product of democratic will, since the people have never been asked.
Therefore it exists purely for propaganda and gravy train purposes.
Mind you she shouldn’t have been shot for criticizing the Taliban! That is every bit as bad as being shot for campaigning for education for girls. Its her father the despicable person in this, for putting her in the firing line by using her to write for a BBC blog when she was only eleven years old, and then promoting her as a speaker. Still he got what he wanted – migration of the entire family to Britain, his daughter paid the price.
Thoughtful’s post was an education for me – I’d bought the Beeb’s line that the Taliban were absolutely opposed to education of females and that was the reason for the shooting. No doubt the Taliban are scum, and the real reason is no better justification, but it shows how the Beeb basically lied to best promote their own ‘narrative’.
You need to take your meds with food I think.
This is what we should get from the BBC, simple and unadorned facts.
Robert Peston tweets “Real household disposable income per head, consumption per head and GDP per head now all above where they were at last election”
Except these arent simple or unadorned . What they are are gloriously misleading. You need to check up on basic stats. There’s a whole lot of differrence between the mean and the mode of a dataset.
The wheels on the bus go round and round, round and round
The wheels on the bus go round and round
all the fuckin’ day.
Before they eventually fall off.
Ah, we live in hope.
And your point would be ? If you take exactly the same measure at each point in time (for example, the mean of the set of data), then comparing these two measures is absolutely the correct way to look at the data.
The mode of a set of numbers is the number that appears most often in the data set; the mean is the average of all the data set; and the median is the middle number in an ordered set of numbers. Using a mode to compare two sets of data is, I suspect, rarely done, because it explains very little about most sets of numbers. And if you are accusing Mr Peston of mixing two measures like mean and mode, then he, a supposed expert in his field, and every BBC researcher involved in the process, are just plain stupid. That so many of them are biased, I would not argue with, that they’re all stupid, I would. You have to be quite clever (and biased) to be able to morph every bit of good news into bad news. For once, Peston didn’t.
You can look at the data in any way you want. That doesnt say the data is incorrect. But the real question is whether it has real world application.
Take two people for example a has 10 pounds b has 10 pounds. Nice equal society no probs. Somewhere down the line a has 22 pounds b has 0 pounds the average has gone up but b doesnt quite see it that way. Thus the distribution is key in the argument not the absolute level.
In terms of Household incomes going up this can be in real terms or relative to a previous period. Again the real world scenario can differ widely from this pretty picture as anyone who has suffered a cut to their in work benefits will tell you.
And your point would be ? Nobody said the data was incorrect, but to be able to look at very large data sets in any meaningful way you need to use concepts like ‘mean’. And comparing ‘means’ at two different time points is a perfectly valid and necessary way to be able to understand the mass of data. You wouldn’t use such concepts if your data population is two (like the simplistic example you tried to give) – but if it’s twenty million, you do. Simples !
‘You can look at the data in any way you want’
Kind of you to concede.
Of course, there are some who like to settle things by looking at data they like in ways they like, and calling this analysis, and those who don’t look at data they don’t like any way other than in suppression, and call it… anything they wish, as it is hidden behind a wall of FOI exemption lawyers.
Often they are the same people. Unique ones.
ManonBus Morally moribund. No change there then.
a) should go out and work to earn money, like b) had to do to have his 22 pounds. If b) wishes to help out a), then that’s up to him. Except the MOB and his ‘god’ complex thinks that stealing from b) is somehow justified.
Your principles appear to be. “stealing is wrong, unless MOB perceives an unfairness, in which case stealing is OK.”
The enforced collectivism which the egotistical, materialistic self righteousness of leftists perceive as ‘fair’, is morally corrupt.
You are either supportive of the human farming and divide and rule of LibLabCon, or you believe in self determination and personal responsibility.
Vote UKIP. They believe that humans are good and kind, unlike the consumerist, materialistic corrupted minds of the greedy left (Liblabcon) and their enforced collectivism.
Groundhog Day Magical Mystery Tour Bus says ‘Take two people for example a has 10 pounds b has 10 pounds. Nice equal society no probs.’
That, in a nutshell, is the mentality your are up against. Arguing is like trying to nail jelly to a wall.
How are they ‘gloriously misleading’?
I think in a clumsy way you are trying to say that overall there is more wealth but it is less evenly distributed, but you have no figures to back that up. But who knows what you mean?
If you understood statistics you’d understand the trend matters most.
I’m getting behind the beeb’s ed-friendly coverage, for the following reason.
The country is now manifestly in need of profound reform, the like of which a tory or tory coalition government is unable to administer. The path the country is taking would for the most part continue – with a few concessions – thus exacerbating the already extensive damage.
An ed government, and ed as pm, would be so utterly deleterious to nation and people, that crisis sooner or later would almost certainly be occasioned.
In crisis, opportunity.
Cameron, with the Beeb as his propagandists, will use a PR stunt referendum to lock us into Europe for a generation. Ed does indeed promise chaos with a chance for re-assessment. The only benefit of a referendum would be the Tory party splitting, but it would probably be too little, too late. Let’s try Wallace!
I’m sorry, but how can you even possibly imagine, even in your wildest dreams, that the BBC will do anything but fight, tooth and nail against any chance of a EU referendum whatsoever ? The BBC knows that there’s probably a fair chance that the electorate could be swayed to vote for leaving the EU – and bang goes a hell of a lot of funding to support the BBC’s mindset. The BBC doesn’t like these kind of odds.
Cameron’s propagandist ? On this subject ? When it comes to Europe, the BBC needs no-one else to propagandise with.
For sure, the Beeb will try to stop Cameron being elected. But in the event that they fail, and Cameron sets up the referendum, I predict you will see a pro-Europe propaganda effort from the BBC that surpasses anything we’ve seen before.
Cameron is never going to allow a referendum so it’s pointless discussing a scenario where he might.
Just like he said he wasn’t going to increase VAT, then went and did, and that he would reduce immigration to tens of thousands and then allowed a record number even higher than Labour in !
Anyone who believes anything a politician says needs some serious therapy !
when you speak of EU mindset you do realise that includes the majority of businesses!
Oh dear – if you’re responding to my post, I never mentioned an EU mindset – I talked of a BBC mindset.
But never mind, let’s pick up on your claim that an EU mindset includes the majority of businesses. There’s a vast difference between having an EU mindset, and not wishing to leave the EU – and especially if it is reformed.
The CBI interviewed 400 companies in late 2013 and, indeed, around 80% of them said they did not want to leave the EU……. BUT…..they also called for reform of the EU. Hardly an EU Mindset.
Around about the same time, the British Chambers of Commerce (BCC) took a far larger survey (nearly 4,000 companies) and around 80% of them wanted a referendum on continued EU membership – the majority of these companies also called for major reforms to the EU.
Just last month, the head of the BCC said his members wanted an in-out EU referendum as soon as possible, but also wanted major EU reforms.
It’s therefore quite difficult to claim from the information around that the majority of British businesses have an EU mindset – far from it, they want significant changes to the EU – and it would appear, want an in-out referendum. Not an approach that someone with an EU mindset would want to encourage in the slightest.
MOCO. Businesses don’t have ‘mindsets’. Only human beings do. Your brain needs repairing.
Businesses are usually run my humans and as such will reflect the mindset of their owners/directors/boards.
Every Unionist Party, in the lead up to the Referendum, claimed that an independant Scotland would have to leave the EU and that this would be bad for businesses.
Surely the UK as a whole leaving the EU would have the same effect on businesses.
Businessmen should not dictate the life and future of a nation. The issue is one of “who has sovereignty”.
It always was and always will be.
I think you’re conflating two completely different mechanisms here, Albaman. The contention about Scotland gaining independence was that this would mean automatically exiting the EU and having to re-apply to join again – with all the additional problems (currency, border controls, etc.), that this would mean for a very small country at the periphery of the EU. Now, you can argue till the cows come home whether Scotland would have been pushed out of the EU, and would have to re-apply for entry again, but that was the position a great many senior Eurocrats were taking.
But the UK leaving the EU bears none of these additional problems, and so the issue then begins to reduce to the mutual levels of financial dealings between the two entities – and since the EU could stand to lose more than the UK – what with reduced net income from UK contributions and a (roughly) £9 billion trade deficit between the UK and the EU, then then the EU has more to lose than the UK, so the contention would be that the UK could force better trade relations with the EU than most other countries.
If the EU were to decide to go off in a huff, then they would lose out big time at a time where the rest of the EU would potentially start to have to become more positive contributors to the EU than they are at the moment. Not going to be exactly to their liking.
‘Ed promises chaos’
Clearly you have garnished the admiration of two others in your ward but would it be possible for you to justify this comment with evidence. I know facts are sooo passe these days but I heard it tell that sometimes they can win arguments. This maybe,is where you are going wrong.
Fact: Borrow and spend has failed every time. As Maggie said: ‘Labour always runs out of other people’s money’.
Why are you supporting Millipeed/SNP now Foggy ? I thought it was kippers or nowt . Anyhow Farage, would have to have a referendum on the EU , which he would not necessarily win.But Millipeed would give you bugger all.
the labour party trades white working class girls for postal votes…chaos.
Lots of BBC bias in A Nation Divided, the Charlie Hebdo Aftermath, where a BBC reporter who describes herself as a Pakistani British Mooslim interviews oppressed mooslims in Paris and extremist opponents. She is wearing BBC approved mooslim uniform to show which side she represents.
Hopefully, some here will discuss the bias.I am short of time today.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b05psc6r/a-nation-divided-the-charlie-hebdo-aftermath
I heard her interviewed in advance on R4. She described how she took offence and challenged French security checks, and got them to say it was because of her hijab. She said she then said ‘What this, half the time I forget I’m wearing it’. How likely is that to be true? And how sensitive of the BBC to send her to investigate.
Still, she probably got less hassle than a Jewish looking reporter would.
She said she then said ‘What this, half the time I forget I’m wearing it’.
If that were truly the case, then she clearly does not need to wear it, but was possibly simply using it to provoke the reaction she got.
There was a lot of barely concealed bias in this programme. Mariane le Pen was interviewed and the reporter acknowledged that she spoke well, but then added her own comments about FN extremism after the interview. Then there was the scouser of Paris who laid into France’s secularism and concept of equality because it was not multicultural enough to support separate identities. But nowhere was it mentioned that the identity of the muslims was incompatible with non muslim culture. It was just a question of why so many French will not tolerate other people’s freedom of choice, their freedom of dress, and freedom of religion, even though they were legally French.
Many UK viewers might not be familiar with Generation Identitaire who featured briefly – a youth movement with a coherent philosophy, a bit arty farty perhaps, but clear in their rejection of the sixties generation who, they say in one of their videos, ‘questioned everything but accepted no responsibility’.
From Wikipedia about Generation Identitaire:
The Bloc Identitaire is a composite of a number of strains of political thought including non-Marxist European socialisms.
Political position Far-right
There we are again! Those ‘Far Right Soclialists ! Who’d have thought it? That socialism can occupy even side of the political sphere from Far right to far left without any space at all being left for those of us who don’t accept socialism as a viable political ideology.
The ‘left & right wing’ descriptions are now utterly meaningless as the Fascists have chosen to use them as more of their tools for bullying and oppression in their own in fighting !
Oh, I thought to myself, I’ve not seen that phrase before ….‘non-Marxist European socialisms’. So I did a bit of delving, and……..not a lot really. Best I could find were ‘anarchist socialism’ (that’ll be right-wing then, I thought ?????) and christian socialism. In some parts of Europe Christian Democrat parties exist, but they are generally regarded as left-wing in any case.
So where are all these right-wing non-Marxist European socialist groups then ?
You are probably right that the descriptions of left and right are way past there sell by dates.
its the truth.
truth is a measure of itself
Your sentence is devoid of meaning (again).
Why not a Jewish reporter?, at least one wouldn t be endlessly lapping up the “poor me” narrative ad nauseum.
and …
Don t forget, when the BBC sent Mishal Hussein to interview the young victims of Islamic Paedo rape gangs?
oops!
BBC is going to review The “fusing elements from the Bible and Qur’an” Ark program … can t wait!
So why can’t Azis wear whatever clothes she chooses to wear? Why should the French object to her choice of clothes? If all beliefs are relative and equal then we look forward to the BBC supporting these guys.
Note: INBBC gives their Muslima, AZIZ not only 1 hour prime-time Islamic propaganda, post-Islamic jihad Charlie Hebdo massacre (BBC 3 TV last night); but also she gets a page here to label criticism of Islam as ‘Islamophobia,’ in her attempt to deflect away from what Islam is really like, in action-
“Paris Muslims struggle to feel accepted”
By Shaista Aziz
INBBC Presenter.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-32053906
INBBC-Aziz’s Islamophilic message:
-don’t dare criticise Islam, post-Charlie Hebdo massacre.
Flywheel Shaista and Flywheel?
I saw that this program was on and I didn’t watch it, because I felt I’d already seen it. It would probably tick all the boxes I thought, and it seems I wasn’t wrong. Whereas before a program with these sentiments would have left me bewildered and confused, I find it genuinely sickening now that that the BBC would make a program like this so “we won’t forget who the real victims are.” Just like in the direct aftermath of the massacre, the main concern seemed to be stemming some sort of Islamophobia. And this is after the free speech, the cornerstone of free Western Society was viciously attacked with the cold-blooded murder of members of an intolerant evil cult on unarmed civilians. Seems to me there’s a more relevant program there.
Well I know better now. Muslims who believe in Islam can never ever criticise their religion, always find fault in the other. All they seem to want is to debase us all by inflicting their vile beliefs on everyone else and how dare we question that. Shame on you BBC. Who’s side are you on? (rhetorical question)
It’s clear now that the BBC sees May’s election as an existential event – in the (very real) sense that they know if they can’t get Labour into Downing Street on May 7th the game will probably be up for them, too, in due course.
Charter renewal is possibly for the very first time in the Corporation’s lazy history somewhat more complicated than the usual indifferent ‘nod through’ it has always been. Awkward people are asking awkward questions of the greedy Politburo – especially about the moral and commercial validity of its annual £3.5bn tax grab – from whom it still quaintly calls ‘license payers’ (when it’s not attempting to jail them for non-payment).
Unless the BBC can manoeuvre Special Ed into Downing Street at election time those awkward questions threaten to turn into something far more dangerous for the comfy, over-paid bottom-feeders at the Corporation. Don’t say it out loud, but the concept of the BBC having to go find its audience (and its reason for existing at all) out in the realms of paid-for subscription TV (you know, like Sky has been doing so successfully for so long) now seems like a possibility, given the huge changes in broadcasting over the past decade or so.
This next month – the interminable run up to polling day – will be a textbook example of just how ‘unbiased’ our ‘unbiased’ national broadcaster actually is (or isn’t). It’s already clear that the BBC has nailed its colours (quite literally) to New Labour and will be doing all it can to ‘nudge’ its viewers and listeners towards its own preferred electoral outcome, come May 7th.
I hope we’re all taking notes.
The game is up for the BBc anyway. New technology is going to do that. I suppose a labour government might slow things up a bit but that is all.
Phil, I agreed with your analysis almost to the end. You lost me with:
“It’s already clear that the BBC has nailed its colours (quite literally) to New Labour ”
If it was backing New Labour it would be supporting CMD. Instead it’s backing the two Eds, so it’s Old Labour.
Probably true but the new lot are just called Labour . I suppose there is always RT as an alternative to Fox news should the occassion arise.
Mr Omnibus, I asked you the question yesterday ‘what do you see as British values?’
You chose to ignore, but I’m sure many here would like to know.
Would I be correct in stating that one, or even two names on this site are being used by multiple bloggers from a rather large, publicly funded organisation?
It would explain the differing manner, timing, and intellectual replies or blogs from the same non deplumes ?
Just a query from the western shores of this country.
Either that, or we’re in the presence of a remarkably broadly-educated, broadly-experienced individual…
Many seats on that bus.
nope just the one
Plenty of standing (grandstanding) room inside.
‘One’ seat occupied by a driver on each shift perhaps ?
It’s the efficiency that results from socialism.
I have often been surprised how he/they always seem to be able to produce the most arcane “statistics” and “references” seemingly at the drop of a hat – it’s as though they have the resources of a multi-billion pound organisation at their disposal. Mmmmm ………
Its about time UKIP did a poster saying This Country needs you,make this country great again.Down with the EU
What has that to do with BBC bias?
Just noticed that the first half of the post i posted was deleted by me by mistake.Here is the complete post.
The BBC are starving UKIP of oxygen on the airwaves,notice that whenever they cover an UKIP conference or news report the sound is always low or bad quality.
The only way is to bypass the BBC and have a poster campaign.
Its about time UKIP did a poster saying This Country needs you,make this country great again.Down with the EU .
Just seen on Guido that they have just done a poster saying SOD THE LOT OF THEM….
Forget about the bias – it’s the tedium. Last night’s BBC1 10:00 pm news + the following “news where you are” was extended to, what, 45 minutes, mainly taken up with election “news”. I assume this extension will be maintained until after the election.
The problem was that there was, essentially, nothing to report. Reporting (even “analysing”) the rubbish spouted by the parties’ leaders – rubbish BTW which has been spouted since the middle of last year – is not news. To have Jeremy Vine tap dancing on a map of the UK on an image of the Commons is not news. Then the local London news repeated the theme but had the local reporter stepping around London constituencies.
Notable IIRC by its absence was any remark from the BBC’s political experts concerning the skewed constituency arrangements. Under the present distribution of seats the Conservatives are screwed in Labour’s interest both nationally and in London: “neck and neck” polling implies a large Labour plurality over the Conservatives. Of course, this isn’t “news” but, forgive my cynicism, were the position reversed it would have been front and centre in every bulletin from May 2010 until May 2015.
A reasonable alternative to the tedium and the elbowing out of interesting alternative information, would be isolating the normal run of election news in a special 15/30 minute programme to precede or follow the “normal” news. “Genuine” election reports ie actual news (not recycled trash on the lines of “Ed will say”, “Dave will condemn”) would appear on the general news. I fear though that the 45 minute bore-in is now a fixture and will be maintained from now through the post-election jockeying for power between the parties.
Tedium is the right word. I avoid all of it if possible. All I hope is that UKIP’s vote stays solid and that the smile comes off the faces of Cameron/milli/Clegg on election night.
please no ‘normal news’.That’s rubbish too. See how they milked the airplane crash for three weeks.And it wasnt three week ago it happened!!!
Can’t they just shove it on to the Red Button and anyone outside of the Westminster bubble who cares can watch until the votes come home. Thus freeing the ‘news’ room to actually tell us news!
The Daily Mail is currently reporting this racist attack in Birmingham against a Sikh. So I suppose it won’t be long before the bBC pick up on it. However here is the Local coverage on the story. I’ve watched the story and it seems to me as if a coloured man (Pakistani?) gets stuck in attacking the Sikh.
Brutal attack on man in Broad Street as crowd looks on
Funny enough unlike the DM the Birmingham Mail doesn’t call it racist at all, just an attack, the police report it as:
“It has been suggested the attack was religiously motivated.
Anybody else presume its our followers of the peaceful religion at work?
The thing is when you see the stats of racial attacks they just wouldnt have enough time to stick it all on the TV. I wonder whether this is just selective reporting or something to fill column inches.
The main attacker looks white, so less likely, but not impossible, that he’s RoP.
Alternatively, thicko who dislikes Muslims (can’t imagine why anyone would) and thinks that they wear turbans.
Anybody’s guess at the moment.
The main attacker looks white, so less likely, but not impossible, that he’s RoP.
Have a look again he has a very good tan, also why is he being supported by..Brown skinned thugs.
Still looks white to me.
“also why is he being supported by..Brown skinned thugs.”
Don’t know the answer to that.
Says on Liveleak he was a Sikh defending his cousin from harassment by Muslims
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=505_1427753124
That’s a microcosm of why Sikhism began.
Beeboids seem enthusiastic to advance a Labour Party-SNP alliance, as a way of protecting the licence tax.
But do Beeboids really expect e.g. SNP to be politically ‘hands off’ in any future control of Beeboids’ political operations?:-
“Let the SNP run the BBC, says Salmond:
“Anger at ominous threat by Scottish nationalists to place the ‘biased’ Corporation under state control .
“Salmond accused of naked attempt to interfere with BBC’s independence.
“Former SNP leader said Corp had ‘metropolitan bias’ against his party.
“Also said SNP would form a left-wing alliance with Labour at Westminster.”
By JOHN STEVENS
FOR THE DAILY MAIL.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3017265/Let-SNP-run-BBC-says-Salmond-Anger-ominous-threat-Scottish-nationalists-place-biased-Corporation-state-control.html#ixzz3VxxvmFhW
Sad thing is, its already under state control.Id be wary anything the Mail says about anything. It wants to cast doubt on all things SNP for obvious reasons.
‘Id [ego & super-ego a given] be wary [of] anything the Mail says about anything’
No problem for any reliant on the BBC; they clearly have a special selection procedure that ensures what folk hear from the Daily Mail is strictly filtered.
This is especially true when the DM mentions the BBC or those the BBC are associated with closely, or stories the BBC is less keen on.
In this case, in terms of wariness, is the DM factually wrong?
Yes, it is factually wrong in that Salmond’s view is that BBC Scotland should be answerable to a cross party Scottish Parliament Committee in the same way that the BBC (as a whole) can be called before the UK Parliament.
The Scottish Parliament (as opposed to the Scottish Government) is not the SNP.
Anything written by the DM in regards to the SNP should be taken with a pinch of salt. For example, their recent story about Nicola Sturgeon’s salary which omitted a few key facts:
* MSP’s salaries were set at 85% of the UK MP’s salaries by the UK government;
* UK MP’s voted to give themselves a 10% salary increase which would automatically apply to MSP’s;
* MSP’s rejected the increase unanimously and set their increase at 0.7%; and
* Nicola Sturgeon declined to take any increase and has her salary pegged at the 2008/9 level.
So despite the DM claim that “she would earn more than the Prime Minister” she actually earns less and refused the 10% increase taken by the Prime Minister.
Thank you for replying so promptly on behalf of MOCO.
‘Anything written by the DM in regards to the SNP should be taken with a pinch of salt.’
Just the SNP? Or, like the BBC, if a DM story suits it is to be afforded the full bells and whistles but, should it not suit, only the sound of whistling?
Why is that?
Will INBBC report whether it is the following which is attracting so many Muslims who go to support the Islamic State?:-
“ISIS Cuts Off 4 Kids’ Hands, One for Stealing Toy; Executes Starving Child for Stealing Food”
– See more at: http://pamelageller.com/2015/03/isis-cuts-off-4-kids-hands-one-for-stealing-toy-executes-starving-child-for-stealing-food.html/#sthash.1COx1GB4.dpuf
Saudis still cut of hands and behead people. They are our friends. How do you feel about that.
They may be your friend MOCO. But then again, you are an islamophile devoid of a moral compass. The Saudis are no friends of mine, or of any right thinking people.
Is Manon covering for that barbaric treatment of children? It’s bad enough to do that to adults but to children ffs??? Manon you are completely odious. How do you live with yourselves!
We need to cut ties with Saudi Arabia to the bare minimum. The only reason we creep round them is oil and money. Contemptible.
For INBBC-
a consequence of mass immigration from Somalia to U.K-
‘Daily Mail’-
“British woman’s shock at learning her mother is a top jihadist who helps suicide bombers and is known as Mama Shabab.
“Amal Farah was born in Somalia and moved to UK with her family aged 15.
“Her mother Faduma Jama became a strict Muslim as Amal was growing up.
“5 years ago she ditched Islam and was forced to cut off contact with family.
“In 2012 police revealed mother had become a pivotal member of Al Shabab.”
By JACK CRONE
FOR MAILONLINE.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3018611/British-woman-s-shock-learning-mother-jihadist-helps-suicide-bombers-known-Mama-Shabab.html#ixzz3VyBFDZ6C
In other news (unfashionably with a slight bearing on the BBC), I have missed this learned source for a wee while:
http://tradingaswdr.blogspot.co.uk/2015/03/dramatic-exit.html
‘He’s off to make a new life in Los Angeles, after a steady number of trips funded by Auntie’
That left of centre heading does not come cheap.
http://tradingaswdr.blogspot.co.uk/2015/03/gnashing-of-teeth.html
‘Compare and contrast that with the financial fortunes of the man who bit Anthony’s arm in 1988’
It was a different time.
http://tradingaswdr.blogspot.co.uk/2015/03/business-card-bonanza.html
‘Where this leaves James Purnell, Director of Strategy and Digital, is not clear’
Wherever it is, ‘in the money’ surely a given. Even if he bites someone, as that is clearly excused at market rate levels. Speaking of which…
http://tradingaswdr.blogspot.co.uk/2015/03/scrutiny.html
‘The joy of an increased salary for new BBC World Service boss Fran Unsworth…
Like BBC pensions, they seem unique, going either up, or stratospheric, as austerity bites. Good job Lord Pantone is wielding the knife on top tier numbers. At least, as he and the BBC keep telling us, while the exact opposite seems the case.
http://tradingaswdr.blogspot.co.uk/2015/03/pop-will-eat-itself.html
‘From Monday to Sunday, I counted 16 opportunities to see programmes about property, and 24 slots devoted to antiques.’
Vital.
Was listening to R4 at 11.30 this morning. There was a programme on Jazz in Pakistan. Interesting that Pakistan had such a music scene. Unfortunately, according to the narrator, music has been more difficult in modern times. She attributed this to something called “socio-economic issues”, which somewhat begs the question. Always good to be introduced to a new BBC euphemism.
I always thought that Pakistan had a thriving music scene judging by the number of fiddles that seem to emanate from the place.
Coat. Get.
Coat. Got. Lobster has left the building!
And the number of fiddlers.
‘Costing the Earth’ Tuesday afternoon, Radio Four. Very interesting. And funny in many ways . . . Give it a listen, then decide if it’s biased, and if so which way. Ha ha ha!
It’s on iPlayer.
Bill
I heard most of the programme as it went out this afternoon. My takeaway was that – as they used to say about the movie business – ‘nobody knows anything’ about climate science. It was actually a bit more skeptical in tone than I had dared hoped for. Tom Heap is a die-hard CAGW zealot, but even he had to concede that the science is very far from settled – and most of the scientists contributing seemed to agree.
Quite refreshing to hear the IPCC described as a political organisation specialising in ‘risk assessment’ rather than unbiased scientific analysis!
Who knows? After nearly 18 years of ‘hiatus’ perhaps even the BBC can sense the game is almost up..?
If there are one or two people who still think there is no bias at the BBC, look at this advert that appeared recently on BBC 2 for the TV Licence.
Was that an advert for the black and white licence?
The BBC and left wing MSM and our Guardianista moral guides have made it clear that violence in the work place is a sackable offence. They have educated me recently following the actions of Jeremy Clarkson and his workplace ‘fracas’. Unacceptable (I am advised). He must be sacked, end of, (I am told).
However, the BBC show a video of a workplace assault, or fracas.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/32124698
I can’t see anywhere the demonstration of moral consistancy in the MSM, the Guardian or the BBC, calling for the sacking of those involved in this work place violence (which, evidently, is a sackable offence, end of). Can anybody provide links, because the calls for Karen Bardsley’s sacking must be somewhere?
BBC. Morally corrupt. Misandrist. Hypocritical. Mind cancer to our young.
Good job there was video, because beyond the teams and officials there did not seem enough people present to offer witness testimony.
FWIW, I thought I saw an elbowing from the blue forward start it off, which in the new world order is surely still a blow, so justice clearly kicked in on a now familiar basis. Maybe Freda claimed she was unused to drinking and was cut some slack not afforded the tall person?
Quaint Karen had to see what she did in replay before apologising.
Almost seven people watch women’s football.
Millions and millions around the world watched Top Gear.
The BBC culled Top Gear.
Where’s the logic?
..
It may well be a rhetorical question Dover but it’s anyway worth spelling out.
More than anything, the BBC are most interested in gaining power within their agenda. They don’t need to make money or worry about audience figures since they are guaranteed an income.
Getting rid of Clarkson and Top Gear has removed one of the last of the free thinking presenters who were unaffected by the PC agenda desired by the BBC, and made themselves appear ‘ethical’. Now they can pursue it with even more vigour with fewer ‘hiccups’.
They’ll be working out how to get rid of Andrew Neil next.
Andrew Neil is the one remaining beacons of hope at the Beeb. But after taking to the cleaners Labour’s Lucy Powell who had a bit of a hissy-stamp-her-feet-sixth-form-tantrum at his continued school mastery questioning (Daily Politics) about Labour’s economic figures he won’t be around for long when/if the second-kitchen-fauxcialists get in.
So the BBC is responsible for the behaviour of football players now?
For your argument to work, you’d have to say that the BBC should call for every male footballer who’s been involved in a fracas on the field to be sacked. It doesn’t do that, so there goes your misandrist argument.
Furthermore, there are big contextual differences between the high-pressure situation in a football match and what Clarkson did. Footballers can very often get away with pushing and shoving and some swearing at officials because everyone is aware of the pressure they’re under and that emotions run high during games. Clarkson physically assaulted the producer for 30 seconds. Even if he were angry about not having food, such action is not justifiable and he was not provoked in the way that footballers intentionally rile each other up.
And Dover Sentry: it wasn’t an either/or decision between women’s football and Top Gear. Top Gear was pulled because Clarkson assaulted a producer. If he hadn’t done so it would still be going and would probably have continued for a good while yet.
Perhaps you’d care to explain why non lefty Angus Deayton was fired from HIGNFY for taking cocaine and going with a prostitute, but children’s television presenter Jamie Theakston who was exposed for visiting a prostitute had his misdemeanour dismissed as “a personal thing” by the BBC.
Not to mention Nigel Wrench, who though eventually had the charge of sexual assault dismissed, admitted to taking cocaine, yet the BBC saw it fit to keep him on.
I think I might have answered it for you with what I highlighted.
I agree that Deayton shouldn’t have been fired, but on what grounds do you say that it was because he isn’t a lefty? And moreover, how do you know what his political leanings are? It’s worth noting that he survived one round of allegations, carrying on as HIGNFY presenter until a second round of allegations came out. Not massively unlike what has happened to Clarkson. Deayton has appeared numerous times on the BBC since his sacking, amongst other things hosting radio quiz It’s Your Round and the first two series of Would I Lie To You, which suggests that it’s not his supposed political leanings that saw him fired from HIGNFY; if it were, surely he wouldn’t have appeared at all on the BBC since then. The BBC said at the time “”It was felt by all concerned that continued stories about Angus’s private life made him the subject of headlines, rather than commentating on them, and made his position as host of the topical satire programme untenable.”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/2373711.stm
None of what you said is evidence that Clarkson was sacked because he didn’t toe the lefty line. As I say, if he hadn’t assaulted the producer the show would still be going.
I’m glad to hear you say that Angus shouldn’t have been fired, though I believe Theakston should definitely have been given the heave ho as a children’s presenter.
My ‘grounds’ for saying he wasn’t a lefty is purely on impression, it was before I actually started examining views in those terms.
Worth noting on another BBC article where they asked
Should the BBC have sacked Angus Deayton?
Yes 24.52%
No 75.48%
10122 Votes Cast
but as we know all too well the opinion of the licence fee payer is unimportant to the BBC
Worth reading the comments below the article itself. It was mostly the constant haranguing by Hislop and Merton, particularly the latter, who it’s said was jealous of the salary Angus received, that created so much of the ‘flak’ that led to his dismissal.
There’s so many inconsistencies related to where the BBC decide to keep those who break the law it shows that there are other motives at stake for them.
Are we sure Deayton isn’t a lefty?
Who can forget his performance in ‘UKIP The First 100 Days’ ?
Jasmine & Co. have clearly been busy beavers, and now they are not supposed to campaign on behalf of anyone, have come up with a new wheeze in complement to the carefully selected vox pop route…. and appear to be channelling a popular HIGNFY segment to do it:
BBC News (UK) @BBCNews
Quiz: Who’s announced a living wage for all employees by 2020? http://bbc.in/1IMQUMd #GE2015
Who got it right?
Always fun to see what happens when comments enabled:
4. Posted by willythewombat
Welsh and Scottish nationalism both have the same ethos….what’s mine is mine and what’s yours is mine as well.
22. Posted by MaddestMax
Anyone else think it odd that we are being allowed to comment on the launch of Plaid Cymru’s campaign while not allowing us the same with the major parties? Why is this publicly funded body denying us our voice?
Too much of that kind of thing and there’s usually a closing on the horizon before quitting time.
‘Too much of that kind of thing and there’s usually a closing on the horizon before quitting time.’
You’ll never guess what just happened as the majority of the UK working stiffs are on the way to logging on to the forum…
ps: I wonder what saw the plug pulled?:
Comment number 234. Posted by thesilentmajority
It is cringworthy watching the BBC try to trash or play down the constant good news on economy, jobs, living standards, because their Labour party is being shown for what it is, English hating, working person hating. Immigrant and work shy loving which results in the tax payer paying more and English identity eroded further under Lab, the BBC just dont know how to spin that, but are trying hard
It is possible more was on its way, so best really to nip such things in the bud.
BBc 18:00 the assault on oldies continues. Asking old people if they feel better off. Of course these oldies are on a golf course any idea what their answer might be? Yes of course they do. Now a young person who is having trouble getting a job. So there you are folks black and white old people have an easy life the youth don’t.
Nigeria has voted in a new president;
Nigeria election: Muhammadu Buhari wins
Funny enough, the Muslims who voted in the Christian candidiate this time appear to have voted for the Muslim one. The bBC appears to be wanking itself silly over how a Muslim has been voted in.
Goodluck Jonathan, has conceded defeat and called Gen Buhari to congratulate him on his victory…a spokesman for Gen Buhari’s All Progressives Congress (APC) party praised Mr Jonathan, saying: “He will remain a hero for this move. The tension will go down dramatically.” “Anyone who tries to foment trouble on the account that they have lost the election will be doing so purely on his own,”
The thing is, after the former President won power last time (2011), For some strange reason the terrorist outfit Boko Haram stepped up their killing spree., I’ve always said the new president has been the hand behind Boko haram , which may explain this little snippet at the end of the bbC article:
Many voters have said that they believe Gen Buhari is better positioned to defeat Boko Haram.
I wonder why nobody at the bBC could see that, they see lots when it concerns the UK/US and Israel, but never when it concerns a Muslim country. (In this case half of one)
Analysis: Will Ross, BBC Nigeria correspondent, Abuja
Finally the long wait is over. The opposition’s Gen Buhari has won this pivotal contest. This is a hugely significant moment in Nigeria’s history. Never before has a sitting president lost an election and it feels as though Nigeria has turned a corner.
Wow, what ground breaking news from the bBC, so how many free elections have there been?
Five, There have only been 3 peacetime president of Nigeria in recent times
The first President Olusegun Obasanjo had to step down in 2007 as he tried to rewrite the constitution to serve a third term.
The second President Umaru Musa Yar’Adua died in 2010 whilst in office. He was succeeded by his vice president Goodluck Jonathan who won the next election in 2011.
The bBC, we give you half the story all the time.
Free Speech election programme on BBC3 tonight 8:00pm
Tonight Lib Dems and UKIP – Nigel Farage?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b05pl8g6
A lengthy report on BBC1 6pm News about abandoned horses. They looked more like ponies to my uneducated eye. No indication was given of who was abandoning them, or why. So who owns lots of ponies? Are we to blame for their redundancy due to objecting to having to eat them?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsround/32131504
I suppose to the bBC, its just another Pony and Trap story for the masses.
Another bulls**t reply from the bunch of ***** at BBc **** ****
Thank you for contacting us regarding BBC One’s ‘News at Six’ as broadcast on 27 March.
We understand you feel that in the feature on the powers of local government in the north east the word ‘mackem’ should not have been broadcast.
This word was spoken by a member of the public when giving her view on proposals for the North East Combined Authority area in which seven local authorities put aside ancient rivalries to form a super council. There was no intention to cause offence in our broadcast but merely to reflect the strength of local opinion regarding the proposals.
We value your feedback about this issue. All complaints are sent to senior management and programme makers every morning and we included your points in this overnight report. These reports are among the most widely read sources of feedback in the BBC and ensure your complaint is seen by the right people quickly. This helps inform their decisions about current and future reporting
However they did broadcast it and it did offend. Imagine if they had used the n word or the sl*** word. mother*****
The scummy Palestinian the Fascists are Oh so fond of, and the way they thank Britain
http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/thief-who-stole-flowers-jack-8955851
Just seen the labour party broadcast after the news. So this comes as no surprise.
http://order-order.com/2015/03/31/labours-martin-fairness-freeman-sends-son-to-private-school/#_@/KqYcmA8WiowmGQ
Bollinger Bolshevik.
Ha Ha….. you just have to laugh at the Labour hypocrites, if it was not so shameful, duplicitous, but entirely what we have come to expect:
Even their very own Mirror reports this:
“she lives in a £900,000 house in leafy Hertfordshire and has two young children with her actor partner Martin Freeman.
Oh, and Martin is thought to be worth around £10million after his leading roles in movie blockbusters such as The Hobbit and Nativity.
I’m guessing this isn’t a family that is saving up their money-off coupons for Tesco right now.
So how come Amanda has just been pretty much let off a £120,000 tax bill by declaring herself bankrupt? It is an absolute disgrace. ”
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/alison-phillips-rich-tax-avoiders-1759478
She says now that her actions were wrong and she is paying back the money bit by bit…yeah right.
I believe that as much as I did Hazel Blears sending the famous cheque for expenses. Does anyone know if that was ever sent?
I wonder if the Mirror realised it was this Amanda Abbington they were reporting on, “The partner of Martin Freeman, the Hobbit and Sherlock Holmes actor, has tweeted “f*** the Tories” after he appeared in an election broadcast for the Labour Party.”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/11504745/Hobbit-star-Martin-Freemans-partner-says-f-the-Tories.html
Free Speech programme with Diane James of UKIP currently on BBC3. Outrageous bias. Huge non-representative percentage of ethnics. Looks like a QT audience on a bad night. ‘Why are you racist’? Why do you continue to deny you’re racist? Ad nauseam. All sound like activists. Insufferably smug. Diane James, as usual, brilliant. UKIP’s top performer after Farage.
Lib Dems coming up… presumably the same audience. Outrageous.
For anyone interested, the programme will be broadcast again at 2am. BBC3.
Free Speech BBC3 – Kippers and Libdeds
Hostile teenybop, audience (as expected) …
2 points :-
1. Though teenybop, same old tired diatribe,
you re waycist … (explain in the negative),
yeah! … but you re waycist … (reiterate in the negative)
but …but you re waycist though …… Yawn!
Diane James smiled and dealt effectively
2 . The presenters were even more hostile … oh! and it looked like they had The UKIP Diversity Cabaret, and Bunny La Roache organising the tweet screen.
I refused to watch it as it was clear that anything coming from that part of London would be heavily slanted. And this is BBC3 after all.
Won’t make any difference .All those UKIP voters are solid and will remain so.This is what gets up the noses of the elite and it’s tame press.
When a programme is called ” Fwee Speech ” then you know it isn’t going to be.
Meanwhile in other news, SKY was reporting on the Nigerian election, lots of effniks, women in burqus, etc etc for a moment I thought it was Britain !
Nigeria goes Islamic in elections.
The new President-elect is-
Muhammadu BUHARI.
He’s a Muslim.
He’s 72, and a former military dictator of Nigeria, after a coup in 1983.
In his concluding sentence(below), Beeboid ROSS asserts:-
“Many voters have said that they believe Gen Buhari is better positioned to defeat Boko Haram.” Really?
– We can expect more pro-Buhari Islamic propaganda from INBBC’s Islamic, Radio Hausa, which we pay for, of course.
“Obama’s Nigerian election jihad: Muhammadu Buhari set for victory”
– See more at: http://pamelageller.com/2015/03/obamas-nigerian-election-jihad-muhammadu-buhari-set-for-victory.html/#sthash.YVUDN971.dpuf
“Nigeria vs. Islamic Extremism”
http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2015/03/nigeria_vs_islamic_extremism.html
“Nigeria election: Muhammadu Buhari wins”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-32139858
Have you noticed on Nigeria how the BBC likes to interview its Hausa language service? I have no idea why. It’s a language spoken in the mostly Muslim North of Nigeria, but that can’t be anything significant.
I was unfortunate enough to listen to ‘The life scientific’ this morning on R4. Although it had some interesting moments interviewing Jane Francis, the director of the British Antarctic Survey, of course Jim Al-Khalili had to spoil it all with the inevitable global warming propaganda.
The worse part here was where she described how in the worst case sea levels could rise by a metre a century.
Jim’s [totally unscripted I’m sure] response was to say “That’s very scary. Several metres of sea level rise would put most of England under water“.
Of course this is complete tosh. Several metres (call it 3) by the year 2300 does not mean ‘most of England’ under water at all. Parts of low lying areas such as East Anglia would be flooded but otherwise the coastline would remain broadly the same. This is in 300 years time for Christ’s sake!
The ‘scientist’ he was was interviewing didn’t challenge his ridiculous assertion – surely she/he must realise this was total nonsense?
Never mind, I’m sure many listeners would absorb the right ‘message’ even if they didn’t think about the figures themselves.
Just laughing out loud at that woman from plaid it wasn’t on the BBc but Sky news. Yep she can’t speak Welsh, what a joke. Has BBc released that little gem yet. Apparently she’s learning.
For the record my Father in law is a Welsh speaker and hell would freeze over before he would vote for plaid. I was actually in Wales today as we went over to see Mrs Daves’ Grandmother, who was telling us how bad her recent experience of the Welsh (run by liebour) NHS has been.
RT @iankatz1000 Morning: Mail reports PM to toughen data protection law. Tonight: @nickhopkinsnews reveals PM vetoed same law change yr ago
***
Seems the BBC has decided the Daily Mail can be quoted again.
O.T.
I’ve just watched Sky Press Review Featuring the Politics Editor of bthe Sun and some dozy lefty cow who used to work in Liebore’s press office.
Final item – from the Sun – MILLIBAND WANTS THE NEXT 007 TO BE A WOMAN.
Cue the expected response from the aforementioned lefty cow – PLUS – a completely straight face from the Sun journalist, complete with a reasoned discussion – hook, line and sinker.
Comedy Gold!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Dhurr – What’s the date??????????????????
Jenny Kleeman and Tom Newton Dunn.
For information.
Just took a closer look at the photo of Miliband. Idiotic lefty policies aside, the fact that he is the opposite of photogenic must surely work against him. He habitually has a weird expression on his face when photographed. And in the photo on this page he appears to be scowling while waving. And if that’s his wife, she appears to be patting his bottom, which might have made him scowl.
Appearances are important for a leader. There must even be some Labour supporters who are reluctant to have a PM who looks like a schoolboy who’s continually being reprimanded by his teacher.
BBc Breakfast non story. My heart bleeds.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-32142139
Given the date I read on, but with the BBC every day’s ‘has learned’ reporting reads about the same.
‘A Palestinian man says he was tricked into selling a mural by the artist, Banksy, that is estimated to be worth hundreds of thousands of dollars.
Rabie Darduna told the BBC he was given less than $175 (£118) for the image drawn on the only remaining door of his house in Gaza.
It was one of thousands of homes destroyed during last year’s conflict.
Yolande Knell reports.’
Can’t wait to access my PC to view Yolande’s doubtless anguished ‘report’.
Someone on North West mid day telling us there is a link between immigration attitudes and the level of acceptance of immigrants. Apparently they tell us in areas where there is already immigration they are more likely to welcome more immigrants. Hmmmmmmmm! Nothing to do with white flight then? Full report on North West tonight on election issues tonight immigration. Sounds spectacular.