George is ready for the weekend and wants you to fire away!
OPEN THREAD
Bookmark the permalink.
Search Biased BBC
Recent Comments
- Zephir April 18, 2024 at 4:39 pm on Midweek 17th April 2024@Digg Yes those poor innocent palestinian civilians attacking an Isreali civilian hostage in a mob attack The same sub human...
- pugnazious April 18, 2024 at 4:36 pm on Midweek 17th April 2024You can't fix stupid. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UQv7Tr8HbGE
- pugnazious April 18, 2024 at 4:32 pm on Midweek 17th April 2024Contrast the urgent BBC reporting about allegations about Tory MP Mark Menzies with the total lack of interest in Rayner's...
- pugnazious April 18, 2024 at 4:28 pm on Midweek 17th April 2024The BBC is reporting on the SNP's scrapping of climate targets but it is all very anodyne and accepting and...
- MarkyMark April 18, 2024 at 4:11 pm on Midweek 17th April 2024Comment ... NO - Tobacco for adults YES - Puberty blockers for kids YES - Vapes https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iMwg-Qb0UVM
- Fedup2 April 18, 2024 at 4:07 pm on Midweek 17th April 2024Thanks - heartwarming to see a bbc droid going for the BBC itself …let’s hope it’s bloody and expensive ….and...
- MarkyMark April 18, 2024 at 4:03 pm on Midweek 17th April 2024[img]https://static.timesofisrael.com/www/uploads/2017/12/000_VD8ZV-e1513994260867.jpg[/img]
- MarkyMark April 18, 2024 at 4:00 pm on Midweek 17th April 2024[img]https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/05/Prime_Minister_Rishi_Sunak_chairing_the_first_meeting_of_his_Cabinet....
- MarkyMark April 18, 2024 at 3:58 pm on Midweek 17th April 2024George Galloway interview with BBC's Martine Croxall https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WwIuA2kh3eE “…why wouldn’t somebody vote for Kim Leadbe...
- digg April 18, 2024 at 3:49 pm on Midweek 17th April 2024Just a little insight into lives of the poor defenceless Palestinian "civilians" in Gaza.... https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-133235...
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
The purpose of INBBC Arabic Service:
to provide, e.g., 4 minutes of friendly uninterrupted political propaganda video time to convicted Islamic jihadist OMAR BAKRI.
(Compare this with the hostile treatment INBBC routinely dishes out to Dutch MP, Geert Wilders.)
“Muslim cleric Omar Bakri sentenced to life in Lebanon” (in his absence)
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-11742559
‘Daily Mail’
“Hate cleric Omar Bakri on the run after life sentence for training terrorists”
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1329054/Omar-Bakri-Mohammad-sentenced-life-training-funding-Al-Qaeda.html#ixzz1579JMCSy
Best news of this Sunday (for many British people, if not for INBBC and its ‘Arabic Service’ -see video interview above):
“Omar Bakri Mohammed captured in Lebanon ”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/terrorism-in-the-uk/8132631/Omar-Bakri-Mohammed-captured-in-Lebanon.html
Nauseating obvious bBC bias, even for them.
For the first time in living memory the newspaper review on BBC News 24 did not lead with The Guardian. Instead they claimed it was not available. This stretches your credulity, the bBC would have a paper review of just the Guardian if they thought they could get away with it. But ‘mysteriously’ all the other papers were available. The bBC’s story looks even more flimsy. After all this would be news in itself. But could it be the Guardian had some story on its front page the bBC weren’t too keen on you seeing?
The answer came quick if you switched to Sky, who ‘mysteriously’ had no problem at all in locating all of the newspapers including the Guarian and so led on it. It turns out the Guardian were running an expose (largely including fine research by a Conservative MP) that the Liberal Democrats knowingly lied about their policies and two months before the election dumped their policy on tuition fees but knowingly then made this false policy their number one plank of policy, snatching many university dominated seats (some labour but mostly conservative).
It seems the Liberal Democrats were not just woolly they were woolas.
bBC will spend a sleepless night wondering how they can cover this one up for Clegg and the Literal Democrap party.
Of course, how come I didn’t realise this before; when the BBC reports Guardian stories it’s being biased; when the BBC doesn’t report Guardian stories it’s also being biased.
You may surprise yourself but you’ve got that absolutely right! The bBC is always biased – it’s in their genes.
The difference is whether the bBC agrees with the story or not.
It’s called bias by ommision – it’s in their genes.
Doesn’t it depend upon the Guardian story? Even the Guardian talks sense occasionally…
You’re catching on Dez. It was explained very clearly to you why today’s omission appears to be for reasons of bias. Looks like you wish to avoid uncomfortable facts. How strange for someone who wishes to perpetuate BBC bias.
The BBC disgustingly twist the despicable Muslin poppy burning episode as an attack on the EDL, no honest reporting of these events whatsoever.
Not sure what the BBC coverage was but I happened across an article in the Surrey Herald (as you do…) where they were leading with the arrest of the EDL for trying to disrupt the Muslim poppy burners! The last sentence was “Meanwhile, parents of British soldiers killed in Afghanistan condemned the inflammatory protest by the hard-line group.”…I asked them to” please confirm that the sentence in the article re the arrest during the Remembrance service 2 minute silence concerns the evil inflammatroy hardline Muslim group and NOT the EDL.There seems a national consensus in the media on bad/poor/misleading/no reporting when the EDL are involved.
It must be remembered just how scared the ruling elites are by the EDL.
The reality is of course that the vast majority in this country are on the side of the EDL men who demonstrated against the poppy burning. This is the reality. The MSM has to portray it differently.
The question is how much longer can reality be denied?
Throughout history the ruling elite have been scared of any working class movement. By this I mean the real working class, not the spoilt little pseudo-working-class brats of the Socialist Workshy Party.
It’s only because UAF thugs happened to attack Tory HQ this week that their actions got any attention. Their regular violent attacks, lies and intimidation are usually ignored by the whole of the MSM.
I shall once again be writing to my (Tory) MP and asking some more awkward questions regarding Cameron’s support for organised political violence. Perhaps now they’re not just attacking ‘filthy working/lower-middle class scum’ it’s time for him disassociate himself from them?
In many ways the EDL is a very modern protest movement which has learned from previous ones. For instance it appears to be very decentralised with no figurehead leader. This puts the govt friendly MSM at a disadvantage as there is no one to fling personal attacks at. Likewise with no legal party as such they can’t be sued or threatened by the elites tame legal system. Even worse for the MSM the EDL don’t seem interested in them or using them to the communicate as they realise the Internet serves that purpose now.
As a result apart from the odd sparodic attack (to see what sticks I presume) the EDL is ignored in the vain hope that it will go away. I will predict however that if they continue to grow expect to see the state forming a EDL “counter gang” i.e the states own informers doing things in the name of the EDL in the hope it will blacken their name.
It’s instructive to hear another item on Today showing us European savages how much we owe to Arab (= Moslem) mathematicians, scientists etc and how much of the money we sling at oil states in the Gulf is to be used to replicate that role in the ongoing development of civilisation. No-one, I think, would deny a contribution from that source and, indeed, some of the words still used in that sphere (algebra, algorithm etc) illustrate this involvement. But, in reality, that contribution pales into insignificance compared with that from further East. Also, you know, Europeans have a fairly distinguished record in science and mathematics although there doesn’t seem to be much on Today celebrating that.
The overt message from the BBC is that without those Islamic sages we would still be in the Dark Ages. The subliminal message is that those Moslems who have arrived here in the past 30 years are the representatives of a higher civilisation to which we owe a debt of gratitude so large that we should sacrifice our Christian civilisation and our way of life in an attempt to repay it.
I heard a trailer for this item and turned the radio off. The sun was shining the weekend has started and I really couldn’t stomach more of that cr*p from the Beeb.
Incidentally if anyone at the Beeb wants to make a really interesting documentary or Today item why don’t they look into why the undoubted scientific developments of the Arab world suddenly stopped and never returned.
It’s all bolloks anyway. As you say it began further east. Also many persian polymaths are the most prominent in the timeline of algebra history (and whenenver I have visited Iran they make very clear very quickly that they aren’t arabs) but the suprious claim that these advances were Muslim and Islam etc, it’s like saying medicine or mathematics are thanks to Buddism or that Roman art, architecture, civil engineering advances etc are thanks to Christianity.
Turkish history is instructive. The printing of books in Turkish or Arabic was banned until the 1720s and even this stuttering start was ended by the 1740s and it was not till much later in the 18th century that it started again.
The opposition to printing was from the conservative element amongst Muslim traditionalists. The contrast with the Europe of the ubiquitous printing press is obvious.
The reasons are also obvious. Knowledge is power and those that have power have always tried to restrict the free exchange of ideas lest it threatens their position.
It would have been more surprising if the early vigorous Islamic world had not produced discoveries. But is seems that as power solidified and grew these came to an end.
Nothing seems to have changed and without some form of reformation it is difficult to envisage the Islamic world remotely matching the achievements of the West.
Suggest one reads this review of one of the Islamic eulogisers of ‘The West’s debt to Arabia’ school of historical polemic.
http://www.meforum.org/2005/islamic-science-and-the-making-of-the-european
Seems clear to me that the ‘contribution’ was less than awe inspiring.
The key sentence…..
‘That there is no Arabic word for “scientist,” nor indeed for science itself other than ‘ilm (knowledge), raises the fundamental question of how one can speak of “scientists” everywhere when the basic terms are absent in Arabic.’
The bBC, its continuing jihad against Israel and half the story.
Hard times drive Gazans into perilous ‘buffer zone’
In their small, cramped house in northern Gaza, which they share with 12 other family members, 24-year-old Basam sits in a wheelchair. His younger brother Mustapha sits on the floor, his crutches by his side.Both men have heavily bandaged right feet. They say they were shot by Israeli soldiers while working close to the border.”Normally they give a warning shot,” says Basam, who says he was shot a month ago. “But this time there was no warning. The bullet went right through my foot.”
I have to ask the question ‘How could the jews shoot innocent Pals in the foot’ No, seriously How could the Jews shoot from 300 metres each brother in the right foot. Even with a good sight you’d be hard pushed simply because out of anywhere to hit on the body the foot is not only one of the smallest places to target, but due to its location one of the hardest. Then there’s the Bullet, a 7.62mm round hitting around the ankle (Look at the bBC photos) would result in splitting the leg/foot in half. Think I’m joking do a search on gunshot wounds. Then there’s the ground situation. The area where both brothers claim they were shot in the right feet is festooned with the debris of the former Israeli settlement of Nissanit. Here are a few pictures of how it looks at ground level. Now imagine trying to make a shoot at 100 metres, never mind the 300 metres the IDF are making. Somebody’s foot just wouldn’t be visible. Leg, body head, yes foot I don’t think so.
But the story gets better. Guess where in the world they have a habit of shooting people in the foot with pistols? Yup Gaza and guess what even Abu Bowen admits to punishment shootings by Hamas.
But the story gets even better The area where they claim they were both shot in their right feet is the one the bBC then cries about stolen land due to the 300 metre rule. But hang on , here’s something the bBC isn’t telling you, that so called apartheid border fence where those innocent boys were shot is set back 200 metres from the actual border. Have a look at google at the northern border of Gaza with Israel. If you want proof of the above.
Now why does the above article get my goat. Because I’ve been Rifle shooting now for 30 years and If I wished to hit somebody at 300 metres with a round, I’d aim for the middle of his body, not his ankle. But then the bBC does like to promote this vision of Israel super soldiers who can hit the smallest part of the human body inches from the ground with the first round.
Here’s an IDF blogger and his article about IDF sniper rifles.
Part 2
But here’s where i debunk the bBCs hate fest, they claim israel has a 300 metres no entry zone around the border (with a subtle hint of 1 km)
Have a look at google and notice how many farms are within 200 metres of the border. As for the northern border there is a 150 metre no entry zone. Seeing as the border fence is set back around 200 metres from the actual border, that would make anybody within that zone as been inside Israel. I wonder why the bBC hasn’t mentioned any of that.
My ref with a good map at the back.
The bBC how it promotes the sayings of Pte Frazer out of Dad’s army by saying ‘We are all doomed’
Afghanistan: Taliban insurgents in attack on Nato base
Taliban militants have attacked a Nato military outpost near the airport in the eastern Afghan city of Jalalabad. The Nato-led International Security Assistance Force (Isaf) said the attack on its forward operating base in Nangahar province lasted two hours. Eight militants, one of whom was wearing a suicide belt, died. The Taliban said it was behind the assault. Later, two policemen and six civilians were killed by a bomb on a motorbike in Kunduz province, local officials said. Another 18 people were wounded in the attack on a crowded market, which appeared to target a local militia leader in Emam Sehab district.
Reading the above headline from the bBC about the latest attack by the Taliban would you get the impression that the Taliban were successful in that latest bold attack. Well you’d think so O mean why else would the bbC insert 2 other Taliban successes you know like killing civys and blowing up a market. The bBC then heads up the next paragraph with the headline:
‘Showered with bullets’
Just so as to reinforce their security experts (Some expert) view that we are losing. But hang on what’s this near the bottom of that article:
It said the assault was repelled by Isaf and Afghan troops, who sustained no casualties..
So the taliban failed yet again in attacking a base. Get that, in fact this year everytime the Taliban have attacked a FOB they have lost. Something the bBC doesn’t want you to know. So instead they clad these failures with other results like blowing up markets and such so as to promote the view that actually the Taliban are wining.
It’s the daily drip, drip drip that becomes like a drone you almost ignore it…
Top of the hour on R2 thsi morning, and the reader-outer introduces something from the government about schools.
Brief mention in passing to the folk who have worked their way up to the top of the profession – headmasters – who seem to feel it is a pretty neat idea.
Then… devote the next few minutes to a vox pop from some young, inarticulate Brummie brain-donor from the NUT who is not happy, and whose insights into the wisdom of such strategic educational decisions have probably been gained during a twitter conversation with a Labour MP or Newsnight producer on the way to the next demolition derby.
Not ‘Panorama’ reports:
1.) ‘The Sun’:
“The Sun finds poppy thugs”
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/3225726/The-Sun-finds-poppy-thugs.html
2.)’The Express’:
“MUSLIM FANATICS: WE’D BURN MORE POPPIES”
http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/211263/Muslim-fanatics-We-d-burn-more-poppies
I wonder was this piece was reviewed before publication or is it so standard a BBC outlook as not to be noticed.
If I was a young British person reading it, I would say this country’s sacrifices should not be commemorated.
Full comment: The BBC might as well not enforce the wearing of the poppy when you read this on their website:
‘Remembrance Day: Where they fell’
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-11743727
The whole tone of the article is as if from a socialist workers party or anti-imperialist outlook, and far from neutral.
Four points of many on bias and inaccuracy:
Egypt – “the burning of Cairo” in 1952 sounds as if the whole city was destroyed, and almost as if our troops were responsible.
The “new villages” in Malaya were a response to the Communists’ rebellion not a cause and regarded as successful. The current Malaysian state is still grateful for our efforts.
The British presence in Cyprus began 45 years before 1923.
Their story about British military deaths since 1914 omits those killed in Ireland from 1918 to 1922. [How many were there?] I wonder why? Maybe the state is embarrassed as well as the BBC and the deaths are to be forgotten.
If I was a young British person reading it, I would say this country’s sacrifices should not be commemorated.
I was supposed to have been born in the Military Hospital, Ismailiya, but with the evacuation of women and children to Cyprus, I saw the light of day elsewhere.
A bit more background (from the BBC itself) as a ‘contemporary’ report.
1952: Britons killed in Cairo riots Reports from Egypt say at least 20 people have been killed and hundreds injured in anti-British riots in Cairo.
Initial figures suggest up to 17 British people may have been murdered or burnt to death during the trouble. About 200 people were injured and some 300 arrested.
The rioting followed last week’s disturbances in the Suez Canal zone.
The Egyptian prime minister, Nahas Pasha, has called the troublemakers “traitors” who were attempting to overthrow the government by stirring up trouble with the British.
King Farouk has declared martial law in the capital. A dawn-to-dusk curfew has been imposed and police have been given orders to shoot on sight.
Egyptian troops in steel helmets and armed with guns have been deployed at all key points in Cairo. They are guarding the king’s palace and the British and American embassies.
Most of the British casualties were elderly members of the exclusive Turf Club, which was almost totally destroyed in the riots. Many historic paintings of former members of the club were also lost.
Shepheards hotel – known to tourists all over the world – was badly damaged.
Anti-British riots
The rampaging crowds also burned and looted Barclays Bank, the largest British bank in Cairo.
Anti-British feeling has been running high. British troops patrolling the Suez Canal Zone have been coming under attack from rebel gunmen.
The final straw came last week when the Egyptian fighters shot dead an Irish-born nun after forcing their way into a convent.
The British troops reacted by seizing control of the town of Ismailia. More than 40 Egyptian police officers were killed in the attack.
The commander of the British forces, Lieutenant General Sir George Erskine, said the action had been necessary to prevent further attacks by terrorists on his soldiers.
The Burning of Cairo 1952 and its ongoing symbolism in Muslim Brotherhood current thinking…..nothing to do with British ‘reprisals’ as that article casually suggests. Bias in action, BBC.
http://www.dailystaregypt.com/article.aspx?ArticleID=16309
‘Nevertheless, the intensity of the social resentment at the time pushed disadvantaged sectors and angered groups to make a link between private property and a regime that was perceived as an agent of the owners of these properties and other private interests rather than public ones.
We can find here a common denominator among broad sectors of society in terms of how they saw the regime in January 1952 and August 2008.
If the 1952 Fire was evidence of a sharp crisis within the regime at the time, the 2008 blaze highlighted the depth of the current regime crisis in Egypt.
If the downtown Cairo blaze in 1952 was an act of sabotage and evidence of the failure of the regime to protect the country, then the 12-hour fire in the Shoura Council (2008)provided fresh evidence of the declining performance of state agencies and public facilities, hence the inability of the regime to assume its main responsibilities in managing public affairs.
Well said. It’s almost as if this was written by the Mohammedans who burned the poppies.
Wasn’t there also limited British involvement in the Russian Civil War just after WW1?
It’s a little bit odd. The BBC claims 233 fatalities in Palestine 1922 – 1948: The bloodiest period was the run-up to Israel’s independence when Zionist underground forces targeted British presence. Yet the Roll of Honour website 914 British Deaths in Palestine 1945-1948. That is, about 4X the fatalities in a much shorter period.
Can someone explain the discrepancy?
They better hide the sharp objects in certain US Beeboid households.
Today’s Washington Post has this Op-Ed piece by two big-time Liberal pundits:
One and done: To be a great president, Obama should not seek reelection in 2012
The really sad part about this piece is that the writers are actually encouraging the President to sacrifice His popularity and the Democrats by plowing ahead with His most radical desires. These two are far Left enough to think that would be best for the country, and make Him go down in history as one of the greatest ever.
How will Matt Frei respond?
You have to wonder if this won’t be the standard BBC meme if Obama looks like going down the tubes?
He wasn’t re-elected not because the people of the US rejected his presidency but because he heroically sacrificed himself for the greater good.
So who runs Britain? Gordon Brown and the Liebour party according to the BBC. With the release of Yang whatever her name is (don’t really care) the BBC give us an extended interview with the one eyed idiot from Fife (like we care what this prat thinks of anything, how come the BBC have never asked him about the mess he made of the finances of UK PLC?) then we get another useless Liebour windbag in Baroness Kinnock….
Why BBC? Why?
Sorry posted my comment below before I saw your comment. In my defence I have been working all day.
I also noticed that Gordon Brown and Ed Millipede were given their full names on the BBC captions. As was the EU President. David Cameron was simply referred to as “Cameron” not even Prime Minister
David Dimbleby is now in the habit of calling him ‘Cameron’ too. He used to call the last prime minister ‘Gordon Brown’.
Oh, dear.
Joe Scarborough: Top Senate Dems have told me privately that Obama doesn’t know what he’s doing
What a shock. Who could have imagined? Strangely, this does not compute with all BBC reporting.
At one point in the video, we learn that the President never sat down for a one-on-one meeting with the most senior Republican in the Senate. Not once did He grant an audience with His enemies. Yet the BBC has always reported every problem in passing any part of His agenda as a case of Republican intransigence.
Barry Obama and Gordon Brown have a lot in common, both hard left wing Socialists, neither had ever run anything of note (both intellectual idiots) and neither up to the job of leading their nation.
Has Barry got a wonky eye by chance? Oh they both have slightly barking mad wives as well.
They both have the BBC’s full support as well.
If you fast forward the iPlayer to the 23 minute mark of ‘The Week In Westmisnter’ you’ll hear Caroline Lucas getting a real grilling! The poor woman was hardly allowed to speak, she was constantly being interrupted and challenged about the dubious science behind the theory of man made global warming, how uneconomic wind turbines are etc. etc.
It reminded me of Nick Griffin’s appearance on Dimbleby’s Loony Left Road Show!
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00vv0dv/Week_in_Westminster_13_11_2010/
Your link points to something entirely different: a light touch interview with Lucas in which she is allowed to expound uninteruppted on every issue. No mention at all of science or turbines.
ho! ho! her training in speaking at a thousand mile per hour in order to prevent interuptions is all a waste of time. Is there another broadcaster who would not be as compliant as the BBC?
BBC 5Liive 8pm news and after quoting David Cameron’s one phrase reaction, they play a long piece of Gordon Brown talking… The BBC just can’t let go can they…
‘Daily Star’:
“Poppy burning scum: two arrested”
http://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/view/162725/Poppy-burning-scum-Two-arrested/
INBBC:
“EDL founder charged with Muslim poppy protest assault”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-11744811
‘Gates of Vienna’:
Burning Poppies to Celebrate the English Caliphate
I noticed on HIGNFY that Gordon Brown was continually called “Gordon Brown” and David Cameron continually called just “Cameron”
Seems to be a defective gene at the BBC.
Our Narcissist-in-Chief:
Does President Obama really expect a reporter to ask about his compliments?
At his November 12 press conference in Seoul, President Obama was asked the following question by CBS’s Chip Reid: “What was the number-one complaint, concern, or piece of advice that you got from foreign leaders about the U.S. economy and your stewardship of the economy?”
Whereupon the president began his response with a complaint: “What about compliments?” he asked. “You didn’t put that in the list.”
He should have called on the BBC if He wanted to hear about compliments.
Yes but did he really want to hear compliements about his tight cute butt?
On a lighter note, could you ever feel sorry for a beeboid?
Search Legard on Twitter while the F1 GP is on today. It’s a constant stream of criticism and I must admit I join in.
Although he’s a sports commentator, he is typical bBC. He doesn’t seem to understand that TV involves pictures so we can see what is happening for ourselves. He must interpret it and tell us what to think – over and over again.
I like Formula 1 but since it went back to the BBC I’ve hated it. I know ITV were never popular (they have to have advert breaks to make money) I personally used to watch F1 when it was on Eurosport.
Now the BBC concentrate on the rather boring ‘politics’ of F1 or the ‘personalities’ rather than what interests me which is the racing and the technology.
So the Chandlers have been freed, I only found out by turning on Sky News, on the BBCzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
Why? The BBC have ignored the Chandlers for a year or more, only ITV and Sky ever covered this story. Why might that be? Oh hang on two likely Tory voters (white and middle aged) who got taken by barking mad Muslims and the one eyed jock didn’t give a toss.
I’m not suggesting that our new Government got them released, but why is the BBC ignoring it?
It seems as if their ransom was paid privately, according to several news sources (including Sky). Today’s non-reporting of this by the BBC, as you say, is par for the course for the BBC’s coverage.
As detailed on the Steph post (OT, sorry Clameur!), news sites from Fox to Australian Network News, from CNN to Kent News, from Aljazeera to Sail World, from the Telegraph to the Guardian, have reported the story, some for hours now. The Sky News Channel has been reporting it since 7.00am at least. Absolutely nothing on the BBC website or News Channel though (as of 10.45am). Absolutely nothing.
When are the BBC going to report it? If they do they shouldn’t flash ‘BREAKING NEWS’ across our TV/computers screens but ‘BROKEN HOURS AGO BY SKY NEWS’ instead.
What a joke they are are a news organisation.
Well, maybe not.
The News Channel is now going strongly with the story, and Frank Gardner has explained why we’ve been hearing nothing from the BBC this morning:
“And I know a lot of people are probably saying about they media, “They’re just forgotten. How can you just forget these people.” It’s because we had to. There was a legal superinjunction preventing us from reporting from it. We we allowed to report historically…What happened today is that our competitors, who shall remain nameless, decided 5 hours ago that they would just go with it anyhow, even though the Chandlers weren’t out of Somalia. We decided, my bosses decided we would stick with the superinjunction and not report until they’d taken off and were safely airborne and off out of Mogadishu.”
That sounds like a good explanation to me & I think a :-[ is needed on my part!
Sorry but I don’t think the rest of the worlds media take any notice of some UK judge, the BBC forget we live in a global media, this is the same nonsense that tried to ban Spycatcher years ago and footballers who don’t want to let the world know who they are screwing behind their wives backs.
“Why did BBC use this man as expert on spending cuts …and why did they spend licence money on his bizarre bike tour of Germany?”
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1329352/Why-did-BBC-use-man-expert-spending-cuts–did-spend-licence-money-bizarre-bike-tour-Germany.html#ixzz15FazzLqX
It happens so often, so casually, that it’s almost too easy to let it pass.
On a day when any Beeboid should really just hunker in a bunker for their ‘support’ for the armed forces,the odious Marrshamallow was ‘interviewing’ the Head of the Armed Forces.
What struck me was the number of times that Mr. Marr made a clear assertion which the General had to correct, on more than one occasion with ‘that’s not true’.
Since when was the national broadcaster’s ‘news’ shows predicated on pumping out untruths on the basis that guests may be too polite to make a fuss and/or some may stick.
If this jug-eared clown is so woefully ill-informed and/or does not make a correction, if shown to be in error in this manner… he should be fired.
Yes and funny that when the one eyed mong was in power generals speaking out were seen as ‘betraying’ Brown, now the BBC seem to enjoy it.
As I pointed out in one of the other general threads the Sea Harrier was scrapped by the Liebour government several years ago yet not a word was said at the time by the BBC or the generals or should I say the BBC didn’t go around looking for a anti sound bite. Yet now the Tories can’t cut anything without a full on argument and a rent a general giving us his view every 30 seconds.
And IDS either told a lie or put the lie to the BBC’s reporting on Boris Johnson’s “Kosovo” statement on changes in housing benefits. That’s a pretty big deal, but I don’t know who’s lying: IDS or the BBC.
Instinctively censored out of existence by Islam Not BBC (INBBC):
Abu Hamza avoids spending cuts (and deportation) –
“Jailed hate preacher Abu Hamza’s home has a £40,000 makeover… paid by taxpayers”
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1329276/Abu-Hamzas-home-40k-makeover-paid-taxpayers.html#ixzz15Fs6lbZN
Ah, irony…
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/nov/14/peter-preston-strictly-come-dancing?CMP=twt_fd
Graun luvvie finds democracy doesn’t appeal so much when it inconveniences the mindset of a minority ‘who know better’.
Speaking of not letting the (wrong kind of) people have a say on stuff…
I empathised a lot with the recent #iamspartacus hashtag on twitter, with many folk showing solidarity in the face of an archaic and unjust legal imposition on the basis that if enough folk also break an idiotic law it becomes meaningless and collapses.
In this, I was also at one with many in the creative establishment.
Hence I was pondering what their reaction might be to a similar deal (maybe beyond the scope of just twitter) where a campaign was kicked off to refuse on principle to pay, say, the licence fee?
But I am sure there would soon be one of those ‘differences’ pieces so often conjured in defence of multiple standards. Probably in the low-circulation Graun and the elevated to top of the news with ‘guests’ invited on in support for all major ne..views shows shows for a week?
Or, failing that, maybe just hide, again, behind ‘unique’?
RupertRead BBC Politics Show, 3.30 this afternoon, shld make interesting viewing. Looks like Beeb may be finally about to expose FibDem dirty politics
Well, yes, interesting. And if fully supported in fact, entirely justifiable political news editorial.
However, ignoring the potential for selective smearing by spreading gossip as the more common new…views method du jour (h/t Crick et all), one might ponder a decade or more of editorial by omission when it comes to certain parties that can ‘do no wrong’.
For instance, I can imagine where the term ‘Liebour’ may have been inspired. Or when Greens go off message in other countries that may not be so appealing to the electorate outside of Islington or Brighton.
Careful what you ‘expose’ Aunty, less the spotlight swing back on what guides your motivations.
Just back to catch the last gasps of this bizarre show.
It seems to be a Beeboid Sunday wet dream.
‘Anyone but Labour’-bashing, yet more hate crime in areas that resonate chez Aunty, etc.
If there was a Harrabin-to-melting-ice slot early one I think they’d managed a weekly round-up of what matters most… to them.
Sometimes, dots get connected for you..
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/greens-and-nus-to-mount-electoral-assault-on-lib-dems-2134195.html
Must be nice to have a PR department with a £3.6B budget, and is prepared to use it.
Viewed Remembrance Day at the cenotaph on the BBC online. Not only is the BBC a national institution but so is David Dimbleby. His commentary was flawless. You could tell he’d worked on it to provide such seamless eloquence in paying homage to our fallen. Sophie Raworth also lent the occasion the gravitas it deserved in the interviews she conducted. Having lived 8 years in Spain it serves as a reminder as to why it is unthinkable I would ever surrender my allegiance to the Queen and the Union Jack and Cross of St George.
Rembrance Day coverage at the cenotaph is one facet of the BBC that remains an unblemished jewel in the Crown.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hampshire-11751268
I wonder which “Poppy Protest” the BBC is saddened by: The Burning Poppy Protest, or; The Painted Poppy Protest?
Watching hundreds of people going to my nearby mosque on Friday – I did not see a single person wearing a poppy. Where’s all the inclusiveness ?
A couple of senior Democrats in a Washington Post Op-Ed declare that Obama is toast :
http://dailycaller.com/2010/11/14/one-and-done-to-be-a-great-president-obama-should-not-seek-reelection-in-2012/
There have been a flurry of such comments on the Dem side. Not just from Republican critics. The BBC line seems to be “Obama is in mid-term-difficulties” – reciting all the White House excuses. Nowhere have I heard BBC reporters entertaining the perfectly sound argument that Obama has shown himself to be arrogantly partisan, with a tin ear, totally out of his depth. And now roundly rejected by a heavy proportion of the independent “swing” voters.
According to the BBC’s man in Kenya the Chandlers haved not been held by pirates or kidnappers, but by the more benign sounding “hostage takers”.
Anyone notice this nostalgia-piece for Soviet Communism? http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/from_our_own_correspondent/9184718.stm
Sadly I did!
BBC’s Joe Lynam reporting this morning on the potential bail out of the Irish economy stated most categorically that any EU intervention would be at absolutely no cost to the UK. The Telegraph see it differently –
” The EU rescue package, seen as “very likely” by European officials, could cost the British taxpayers as much as £7billion following a deal agreed by Alistair Darling when he was still chancellor in the political limbo following the general election in May. Under its terms, Britain agreed to underwrite EU plans to rescue countries in difficulty. “
I wonder who is correct.
Gratuitous al-Beeb ‘Shilling for Islam’ Pic O’ The Day, in this piece about a, ahem, ‘Government-backed educational charity..’
(BTW does anyone know what happened to the excellent ‘fakecharities.org’ site?)
‘Asian Network’, the apartheid radio station, part of INBBC, run by ‘British Asians’ for ‘British Asians’, is earmarked for closure, BUT expands its role!
‘Asian Network’ has decided to spend a week in Pakistan reporting on the floods.
“BBC Asian Network Revisits Pakistan for Week of Special Flood Reports ”
http://www.newsonnews.net/radio/5497-bbc-asian-network-revisits-pakistan-for-week-of-special-flood-reports.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+newsonnews%2Fukradio+%28News+on+Radio+-+UK+Radio%29
No doubt ‘Asia Network’ will report on:
1.) discrimination against non-Muslims in flood areas of Pakistan. e.g.:
Muslim relief organizations discriminating against Christian refugees in Pakistan
2.) lack of generous reponse from Islamic nations:
Generous donations stream from wealthy Islamic nations to their desperate brethren in Pakistan — no, wait…
As posters have constantly noted the bBC always makes The Guardian prominent and usually leads with it in its press review.
The Guardian has a liberal bias, that does not bother me, I do not have to buy it and anyway yes even The Guardian sometimes talks sense.
What I pointed out was that on the one day the Guardian does not have a pro liberal agenda but in fact exposes their dirty tricks and deliberate falsehoods the bBC mysteriously can’t get hold of a copy at all. Needless to say the next day as with all the previous day normal service was resumed and they were able to get hold of a copy and lead with it again.
To my shock and surprise posters greet this not with the outrage at clear bias it deserves, but attempt to excuse it, some even make positive statements about The Guardian.
I can only imagine this sudden change in posting is because the Fibdems are propping up the Conservative coalition, and you would take party advantage over clearing up bBC bias.
Presumably too many of you still think that getting rid of bias in the bBC simply means replacing liberal (in particular Labour Party/Liberal Deomcrat Party) bias with conservative (in particular Conservative Party) bias.
That is not getting rid of bias it is changing bias.
And many of you advocating the current Conservative government need to understand it is not conservative but a liberal led coalition and you are in for a very rude awakening.
If all you want is a Conservative Party biased BBC rather than a Labour Party biased BBC please let me know and I will take myself off somewhere else, it holds no interest to me.
KS
I don’t know how long you’ve been reading this blog but, by now, I would have hoped you would have sussed that most commenters – well this one anyway – do not want a taxpayer-funded broadcasting entity at all. However, if we must have one, I would rather it broadcast (insofar as it is possible) genuinely impartial programming. This means that I do not wish for a lurch from the left to the . . er . . left (ie from Labour-supporting to coalition-supporting) but, rather, an outfit which recruits broadcasters – particularly journalists – not from a self-regarding class of bien pensant metropolitan “progressives” but people of all political persuasions whose personal beliefs do not unduly (or even duly) affect the facts – or the choice of facts – which they report. Furthermore, transparent and efficient complaints and comment monitoring procedures would be nice.
Actually I’m asking for the impossible. Simpler by far would be to stop funding this crowd with taxpayers’ money altogether. The few good bits could be funded by subscription: the rest, along with Jeremy Hardie, Marcus Brigstocke, Roger Harrabin, Simon Schama, John Simpson, Matt Frei, Jeremy Bowen and all the other parasites who populate Newsnight, Today etc etc. would disappear (or be taken on by the Guardian) to the country’s enormous benefit.
I simply want the BBC to revert to the standards of many years back – when it was impartial. Is that too much to ask ?
Was the BBC ever impartial? Going back to the 70’s it was always pro IRA, pro EU and anti Tory.
BBCLauraK Laura Kuenssberg Cameron has taken seat in Commons for statement post G20. Wonder if he ll give away any of case he ll make tonight denying UK is decline
Translation… anyone? I’m pretty sure it’s not meant to be good.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-11749511
Glad the BBC are on the case of this dire situation.
Maybe there could be some additional compulsory tax ,a unique one just for being an income-generating Brit, so that the money can be doled out to support those who contribute nothing but want so much.
Oh, and if there’s any left over, they could donate it so their umemployed mate who warrants such as story.
.. such a story can get his dream trip. Maybe with a crew in tow?
Like Jim’ll Fix It, only solely for beneficiaries.
They could call it ‘The Hajj Luck Story’
We can expect Islam Not BBC (INBBC) to put out even more pro-Islamic propaganda, given INBBC’s political propensities, and the fact that INBBC’s Head of Religious Broadcasting is a Muslim:
“BBC’s Muslim head of religion says Christianity shouldn’t receive preferential treatment, despite 75% describing themselves as Christian in last census.”
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2010/02/bbcs-muslim-head-of-religion-says-christianity-shouldnt-receive-preferential-treatment-despite-75-de.html
And, of course, INBBC Director General Thompson has explicitly said that in fact INBBC should give Islam preferential treatment; and that is, of course, exactly what INBBC does:
“BBC boss says Islam should be treated more sensitively than Christianity”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/religion/3198804/BBC-boss-says-Islam-should-be-treated-more-sensitively-than-Christianity.html
Thompson should be sacked for this statement and policy precept alone.
I don’t suppose oil-rich, devoutly Muslim states can be called upon to subsidise?
Actually religion shouldn’t be on the BBC at all. There are plenty of free god/Mohammad channels on digital TV.
However, the BBC need to start treating Islam as it really is, a barbaric ideology.
It looks like Kevin Connolly, who insulted hundreds of thousands of people in the US on air and online with a sexual innuendo, is going back to Britain. Bye-bye, Kevin.
That’s one less biased Beeboid to misinform you on US issues. I wonder if his replacement will take us from bad to worse.
The BBC manage to report – http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-11543589 – that ‘A complaint about former Labour minister Denis MacShane’s expenses claims has been referred to the Metropolitan Police.’ but oddly I cannot see the story on their politics home page. If it wasa Tory MP I think it would have been somewhat more prominently displayed.
Israel ‘risks chaos without peace’, official warns
Actually Palestine risks chaos. Israel is doing fine.
Who says? An anonymous source.
BTW We have a new BBC meme. Jews are extremists but Palestinians are militants. Will someone explain the differenc?
BBC News 24 HOURS.
Breaking news at home and around the world.
Really ?
I know we report and discuss the bias of the BBC, but this is a difficult one as there is no bias, actually there is nothing to report / nothing to see.
I had been at a neighbour’s, who for reasons of her own, the TV was tuned into BBC24.
Returning home I put on Sky and they were reporting that an 18 year old student was been questioned about throwing a fire extinguisher off the top of Millbank House during last week’s students riots. This 18 year old prat from the Southampton area is to be taken to London for further excuses in front of the Met.
My neighbour phoned to say that I had left my tobacco, I went to pick it up and lo-and-behold the BBC24News had no idea about this breaking news, instead just the FAT one now liberating Burma and George on the cat walk in Afghanistan sporting a rather nice “North Face” jacket was the breaking news.
So, no bias, well not yet anyhow.
But who knows how and when it’s all the Tory’s fault, sometime tomorrow ?
And yes, I did tell my neighbour that £145.50 could be spent on more worthwhile causes.
INBBC has great interest in the welfare of Islamic jihadists:
“Guantanamo prisoners payout due”New
But INBBC has less interest in the welfare of Christians in e.g. Islamic Iraq – and doesn’t report this:
“Christians attacked again in Iraq as gunmen kill two”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/religion/8135615/Christians-attacked-again-in-Iraq-as-gunmen-kill-two.html
The LINK for above INBBC’s Islamic jihad welfare-Guantanamo-Binyam Mohamed- payout- Christian-free zone – is here:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-11762636
The BBC told me Guantanamo was going to be closed by now. Why is there no investigation into the US President’s use of illegal rendition and holding people indefinitely without charge or trial?
I see the BBC is very quiet tonight on the Irish crisis. Bit too awkward for them.
Much safer to have Simpson going on and on about Burma.
The British banks nobly saved by Gordon are in to useless Irish debt for billions. My bet is it will spill over here and require us to bail out RBS and the rest yet again. The only sure thing is that Ireland is going to have to really cut spending and soon and state spending is an article of BBC faith so best not to mention it.
The other unmentionable is the disarray in the EU and the mess the Euro has landed them in. Best not to mention that either.
The rest of the world thinks this is a big story but not the BBC.
Well its late and I’ve heard the news about how the bBCs security experts are all getting paid off by the government because they can’t be bothered to fight their case. Talk about angry and pissed off. I wonder how many people will gravitate towards the EDL tomorrow when they hear the news and feel that not one major party is willing to fight their case. But you have to admit the bBC has played a big part in how the UK now bends over backwards towards Islam and radical Islam at that. The thing is if I was to speak my mind I would have the old bill knocking at my door with the likes of the bBC calling me a racist. The thing is as an apostate from Islam I have to look both bloody ways when walking down the street as both non-muslims and Muslims (As well as the bBC) see me as a traitor.
Funny enough the CPS has this to say about a rightwing thug caught out in Dewsbury.
““Publishing something that is abusive and insulting and that is likely to stir racial hatred is against the law and the CPS will work with the police to prosecute robustly anyone who does so.”
Yet they (and the bBC) remain very silent when muslims do like wise.
Reeta Chakrabarti is given free reign on the news channel to catagoricaly state that GB is lieng about waterboarding saving british lives and robust interrogation is never good. She is not corrected at any point & given every opportunity to spout her biassed crap. No wonder she suffers from haltosis with all that rubbish coming from her mouth.