1ST May – be still my beating heart. Yes, it’s International Worker’s Day and I am sure our comrades in the BBC are celebrating. Want to share in their celebrations? Share it HERE…
MAY DAY OPEN THREAD…
Bookmark the permalink.
Search Biased BBC
Recent Comments
- Fedup2 April 19, 2024 at 7:49 am on Midweek 17th April 2024Really looking forward to Croxhall v The BBC . but I fear it will be settled before it gets to...
- AsISeeIt April 19, 2024 at 7:39 am on Midweek 17th April 2024From the sublimely tabloid to the ridiculously hypochondriac edition Custom dictates that one ends a review of the news with...
- Guest Who April 19, 2024 at 7:33 am on Midweek 17th April 2024Luckily Sk… oh… https://x.com/dominicwaghorn/status/1781084937082265852?s=61 Thanks to all those pointing out I misspoke this evening says I...
- Fedup2 April 19, 2024 at 7:25 am on Midweek 17th April 2024PS 377 NW there knows a Jew when he sees one … I’m a bit surprised the man wasn’t arrested...
- Zephir April 19, 2024 at 6:42 am on Midweek 17th April 2024[img]https://i.postimg.cc/0NCjwKHQ/636486806563450630-072914.webp[/img]
- Zephir April 19, 2024 at 6:33 am on Midweek 17th April 2024[img]https://i.postimg.cc/cLndQt6W/mrz110323d-APR-s878x638.webp[/img]
- Zephir April 19, 2024 at 6:30 am on Midweek 17th April 2024Walk Together on 27th April 2024 On Saturday 27th April — the next anti-Israel march — we are asking you,...
- Zephir April 19, 2024 at 6:26 am on Midweek 17th April 2024"“You are quite openly Jewish. This is a pro-Palestinian march. I am not accusing you of anything, but I am...
- Zephir April 19, 2024 at 6:26 am on Midweek 17th April 2024Note for all decent people and the often silent, overwhelming majority in this country: https://twitter.com/antisemitism/status/178103283220...
- Fedup2 April 19, 2024 at 6:25 am on Midweek 17th April 2024Its WAR . The MSM has decided israel has attacked iran . Apparently there was a bang at about 4...
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
No doubt this has been posted already but it is STILL a major link on the BBC news politic page.
“The truth about sicknote Britain”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markeaston/2011/04/the_truth_about_sicknote_brita.html
Can Craig or someone give us details of the number of times the BBC went out of its way to poo-poo government /think tank/ whatever figures during New Labour’s time?
I wonder if the Labour Party holds secret medal ceremonies for BBC journalists for outstanding contributions to the propaganda effort?
Talking of Craig and his invaluable statistics, perhaps he, or someone else, has a record of the constituancies that QT is broadcast from.
I know that the audience is a carefully selected mix of union members, Labour activists, black supremacists (often ones with white skin) and public sector lay-abouts, but on the odd occasion that I can bare to watch it, it seems to be broadcast from some inner-city hell-hole that’s inevitably Labour controlled.
Perhaps holding QT in these places means that they don’t have to bus the audience in from such long distances, leaving the BBC more of our money to spend on coke, champagne and rent boys.
Thanks to the All Seeing Eye’s meticulous noting of locations on our weekly Question Time liveblog, here are all the locations for the programme since the beginning of 2010. There are lots of safe Labour locations, a lot of marginals but not very many safe Conservative seats/areas:
14/4/11 Liverpool
7/4/11 Oxford
31/3/11 London
24/3/11 London
17/3/11 Eastbourne
10/3/11 Edinburgh
3/3/11 Derby
24/2/11 Newport
17/2/11 Barking
10/2/11 Bristol
3/2/11 Workington
27/1/11 Cambridge
20/1/11 Burnley
13/1/11 London
9/12/10 London
2/12/10 Coventry
25/11/10 Maidstone
18/11/10 Swansea
11/11/10 London
14/11/10 Sheffield
28/10/10 Glasgow
21/10/10 Middlesborough
14/10/10 Cheltenham
7/10/10 Birmingham
30/9/10 Manchester
23/9/10 Liverpool
16/9/10 London
22/7/10 Hartlepool
15/7/10 Bexhill-on-Sea
8/7/10 Edinburgh
1/7/10 Ipswich
24/6/10 London
17/6/10 Witney
10/6/10 Plymouth
3/6/10 Brecon
27/5/10 Gravesend
20/5/10 Richmond
13/5/10 London
29/4/10 Birmingham
22/4/10 London
15/4/10 London
7/4/10 Woking
1/4/10 Stevenage
25/3/10 Glasgow
18/3/10 Manchester
11/3/10 Dewsbury
4/3/10 London
25/2/10 Cardiff
18/2/10 Middlesborough
11/2/10 Belfast
4/2/10 Coventry
28/1/10 Basildon
21/1/10 Milton Keynes
14/1/10 Finchley
In reply to myself, Easton’s waffle is still there, nearly 17:30 on sunday and it was posted at 14:45 on Thursday, now I know there has been the odd bit of non-political news since then, some sort of wedding (hehe) but there have been loads of political stories to replace it.
11:02 BBC 5Live news gives Nick Clegg a soundbite and a description of case for Yes2AV but just 2 seconds for No2AV quoting David Cameron. BBC want Yes2AV and they will skew the coverage as much as they can.
So here I am undertaking the Sunday clean-up (vac/wash/clean) and during a coffee break I’ve the TV on and I’ve noticed on the Andrew Marr show that the two voices brought on to debate the AV vote (Cameron and Clegg) are on. While not a bias as such surely protocol dictates that the PM goes first followed by everybody else. I mean if this had been Blair and Cameron (when Blair was in power) would they have interviewed Cameron first? I think not. On that note what is the bBCs stance on the AV agenda?
Andrew Marr, giving Labour’s Douglas Alexander the usual easy ride, was still plugging away at an old story: “You were a close ally of Gordon Brown and served through the Blair years as well. Do you think it was a mistake that neither of them was invited to the Royal Wedding”?
And that wasn’t the only free invitation Andrew Marr gave Mr Alexander to attack the government:
“Two young people not in love, the prime minister and Nick Clegg. You’ve seen the battle of words over AV. What do you think that portends for the future of their relationship?”
Predictably, Douglas Alexander had another go at the coalition in response.
Andrew Marr didn’t invite either Nick Clegg or David Cameron to attack Labour (only each other), so why invite a Labour politician to attack the coalition? Couldn’t he think of enough tough questions to put to a senior Labour politician?
Did any one else hear on Broadcasting House Rhona Cameron’s tirade against business during the review of the papers? Can I claim it as bias? She was having a rant against anyone who might be in business to make a profit (I was sitting there demurely thinking ‘get real’) but it was against the Labour luvvie known as Lord Sugar. Yet she still managed to describe business as ‘Thatcherite’ in such a a way as though Lady M was the devil incarnate.
She also got wound up about the EU directive regulating her beloved herbal remedies (“holistic medicine”). Instead of complaining about the EU though (for interfering) she denounced “the pharmaceutical companies”. “Again corporations and companies taking peoples’ rights away from them.” The writer on the panel backed her up with talk of their “lobbying”.
Yes, but what about the EU taking people’s rights away from them? It’s funny how people like Rhona Cameron can doublethink the EU’s ‘guilt’ out of the equation and just blame “corporations” for the world’s ill. Those wicked “corporations” wouldn’t have been able to have their wicked way with herbal medicines if the EU hadn’t passed this directive (and the UK accepted to abide by it).
Rhona Cameron – as funny as the Ebola Virus.
Curious how she can spew out all her student agitprop without Paddy O’ Asfunnyasnecrotingfasciitis ever saying,
‘Ooh we must move on now,’ or
‘Ooh many would disagree with that’, or
‘Ooh there’s a debate to be had there’
ie the standard BBCC kneejerk on hearing an opinion that’s anything other than pretrendy-leftie.
Common tactic by the droids, of course – invite on paid auxiliaries to do our bias for us.
What does Rhona Cameron do for a living by the way?
Rhona Cameron – lefty, Scottish, and lesbian. A few BBC boxes ticked there then. It must really stick in her craw that she shares her surname with a Conservative prime minister.
Maybe she could take a tip from ol’ ray of sunshine himself Morrissey and his fellow-idiot from The Smiths and try to forbid Cameron from using her name.
Money grows on trees !
0745, the morning after The Wedding, and on Raymond Snoddy’s ‘Newswatch’ (was there ever a more ineffectual programme?), two Republicans are whining about not being fairly represented on the BBC’s wedding coverage (Try being a MMGW sceptic, boys!).
Then, at 0800 onwards, old wobblehead Simon Sharma is given 15 minutes to be snide and sarky about the Royal Family.
Off for a haircut at 2 pm, and ‘Any Answers’ is on Radio 4. The Royal Wedding is discussed. Two republicans get airtime, but just one Royalist.
Back home to see that Kate M’s bouquet is resting on the Tomb of the Unknown Warrior – but the BBC spell it ‘Warrier’.
Just another average day In Beebland.
Strange attitude, isn’t it? They can promote their republican views at any time but if they’re not allowed to rain on the parade, they’re somehow victims of bias.
A commenter here noted a couple of weeks ago that Radio 4’s Broadcasting House ran a pre-Royal Wedding feature on the republican response to the wedding which featured only republicans. There hasn’t been any counterbalancing report, either before or since.
This morning’s show featured presenter Paddy O’Connell walking among the crowds on Friday, asking what it means to be British? He talked mostly to members of ethnic minority communities, one of whom answered “multicultural” to the big question. He then trotted off to a republican street party where a couple of republicans attacked us Brits as “class-ridden” and “sentimental”, saying that the people who camped out were “behaving like children” in a way “inappropriate for adults”, and arguing that the Royal Family are “old-fashioned” and that they “infantilise us.”
Then it was back to the studio for Matthew Parris and Mehdi Hasan. Mehdi Hasan was allowed to dominate the discussion. Hasan is (as you’d expect) a republican. Matthew Parris said, “I’m not really a royalist. I’m a swing voter in these things,” though he thought the wedding did the country some good and advanced arguments against the alternatives (do we really want some compromise flunkey like Roy Hattersley or Betty Boothroyd to be our appointed president?).
I don’t think republicans can have anything to complain about with Broadcasting House. Royalists, on the other hand, might feel a bit miffed.
P.S. Paddy O’Connell managed to sneak a mention of “the cuts” into one of his convoluted questions.
A republican neighbour of mine has conceded that the crowd displayed a sense of joie de vivre that is often sadly absent in many public gatherings in the UK. He added that, although he has not changed his views, something “very positive was going on” (his words) and it should not be dismissed lightly.
Quite a good summary, I thought.
I can’t iamgine a more melancholy way of starting the day than to listen to another dissatisfied Muslim telling us of another aspect of our country he wishes to change.
Yes, Mehdi Hasan was given free rein by Paddy O’Connell on BH to put the boot into our royal family and its recent wedding.
“What on earth is happening to my country?” this apologist for Islamism moaned.
I’d love to be able to ask if it’s OK with him if we – the vast majority of Brits – decide for ourselves what sort of country we want to live in.
We know that Mehdi doesn’t like our constitutional monarchy. He wants to replace it with a theocracy. That’s his agenda.
Shouldn’t Paddy O’Connel have pointed this out?
One more disgruntled Muslim given a voice by the BBC.
Yes, the British monarchy should be replaced by that great system that they have in Pakistan. Or Bangladesh. Or Saudi Arabia.
Coming up with “Old Wobblehead” is proof of genius! 😀
Chapeau to you, Chuffer.
Curses-missed out on Andrews Marrs return to “front line politics”. All BBc journos regard themselves as such,without the potential risk to their self-regard that putting themselves up for election to anything might entail. Just like their string pullers/mentors in Brussels-hence the BBCs puppy dog eyes and pleading body language for AV at the moment!
Still-I was happy enough to listen to B.S( or Broadcasting House as they like to call it!) on Radio4, whilst Andrew was blathering on. I do wonder if Rhona Cameron is able to call herself a comedienne, but the Beeb will introduce her as such. Is there a new word to be coined for her likes-Henry,Brigstocke,Brand,Howard, Steele, Hardy and Thomas..people who think they`re funny because the BBCs elite would like them to be-and have to be described as such or else the rest of us would never know? That they are called authors as well is typical…”Renaissance guys n gals all!”
Back to Rhona-unfunny as hell,but at least she reminds us all of what Wolfie Smith might have been like,had his garret been above Holland and Barrett. Her dialectical discourse was wonderfuly unreconstitued- the army as a trap for the working classses etc-and the BBC hack that ran the show really could say nothing.
Like Tony Mulhearn on the Moral Maze-the Beeb seems intent on asking these types in for Royal Wedding week shows,maybe to remind themselves what it was they used to stand for before they let themselves be turned into tools that no worker would ever want to use…but the media would employ come the glorious day!
Anyone able to predict what the angle will be when Radio4 does its”The Jam Generation” programme soon?…Hope they quote St Paul of Weller…first conservative punk(or so he claimed before Red Wedgie got to him!)
“What a catalyst you turned out to be-load up the guns then you run off home for your tea”.
This will NOT be aimed at Milibands or Mandelsons..Toksvigs or Marrs…no,we`ll only get the songs title to use against Cameron-and Johnny Marr will be honourable mentioned in dispatches from the front line of the class war-private of course!
And finally two games
1. Count the seconds between the BBC mentioning the word “catholic” and then the phrase “sexual abuse of children(or dynamic equivalent). 89 seconds on the rolling news last night-the BBCs favoured catholic cringe merchant(Clifford Longley) was of course in full agreement with BBCs line of enquiry as ever.
2. Open a book on who we predict will be on such plugged shows as “The Jam Generation” and the like…Bragg, Marr, Weller, Dammers and possibly the curly one from Spandau Ballet are my Top Trumps for now.I
t has now been two days and twelve hours since Polly Toynbee has been on the BBC-got to be a spread bet here surely!
Just ideas to quantify the speed dial pets and their frequency of news reviews…and how come the Indie and Observer get all the news reviews and the Mail and Telegraph get noses held by the likes of Rhona-as if I don`t know!
I really feel for Catholics who come up against the BBC’s coverage of John Paul II’s beatification today. A tiny news bulletin on Radio 3 at 1.00pm today still managed to squeeze into about twenty seconds mention of the sex abuse scandal.
This online report mentions it in the fourth paragraph (the first three paragraphs are very short, so it comes very soon in the article) and there’s the inevitable BBC quote from the National Secular Society. Do the National Secular Society ever get quoted in BBC articles about Islam?
The Editors’ Picks from the comments at the bottom of the article are also strongly tending towards the negative.
I haven’t been following BBC for a few days, but I assume they are making a big fuss about mass murderer Mugabe being invited to the Vatican ?
As my contribution to the Part 2. Sweepstake, I’d like to pick Vince Clark from Yazoo, various Flying Pickets, Annie Lennox and King Kurt of ‘Destination Zululand’ fame.
Oh, and Kevin Rowland, please.
I like my chances, but you HAVE rather bagged the best suspects which is a bit of a mouldy chiz frankly.
🙁
You pays your money and you takes your choice!
What the BBC says:
“Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood has set up a new party to contest up to half the seats in a parliamentary election scheduled for September.
The head of the Freedom and Justice Party says it will be a civil, not a theocratic, group.
The election follows the removal of President Hosni Mubarak in February after a popular revolt.”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-13249434
Meanwhile in the Egyptian daily, Al-Masry Al-Youm.
the following:
“The country’s most organized political opposition group, the long-banned Muslim Brotherhood, has also become more vocal about its plans, drawing on its large network of social groups and followers, which it had for long to operate under strict security oversight from the Mubarak regime.
A senior group leader caused an uproar after he was quoted in local papers as saying his group seeks to establish an Islamic state, imposing Islamic punishments — including amputating hands for theft.
“We can’t sleep anymore, so we give room for this religion to thrive in Egypt. Don’t let us waste this opportunity,” Saad al-Husseini, a Brotherhood leader, said, according to the daily Al-Masry Al-Youm.
Associated Press reporter Haggag Salam, in Luxor, Egypt contributed to this report.”
In the wake of Andrew Marr’s superinjunction, philosopher Alain de Botton delivered a radio essay ‘in defence of hypocrisy’ this morning (‘Broadcasting House’):
“Most superinjunctions are a response to super-intolerance. A moralistic response to the desire for superinjunctions is to ban superinjuctions. A more mature one is to argue against the moralistic atmosphere that makes superinjunctions necessary in the first place.”
“So let’s keep being ambitious about how we want to be, even if we can’t get there all the time and let’s not immediately beat up everyone who hasn’t conquered their passions and frailties. None of us have.”
The cheque from Andrew Marr will be in the post!
Yebbut …
Not all super-injunctions are a bad thing. The injunction John Terry took out to stop News International spreading its lies (just before a major tournament – again) was spot on.
When the injunction was lifted NI was free to plaster its lies all over the Sundays. And they were all lies as the big payout to the Wayne Bridge’s ex proved.
Personally I’d go for publish and be fined (say 50% of that years turnover) if a deliberate lie is proved, rather than muzzling the press. But they need to learn that they can’t keep on destabalising the England team before a major tournament without cost. 😎
As to the BBC its ‘comedians’ are still keeping up the campaign against Terry.
That’s an exceptionally dense set of precepts and to think this man is what passes for a philosopher!
Having airily dismissed morality – based on no argument or substance whatsoever, but with a lazy and dismissive wave of the hand – he then goes on:
“… and let’s not immediately beat up everyone who hasn’t conquered their passions and frailties. None of us have.”
In that one part-sentence alone, he has managed to cram in
– begging the question
– straw man arguing
– special pleading
– presuming to speak for people whom he can’t possibly speak for.
Doesn’t say much for the state of philosophical discourse or for quality control at the Beeboid Corporation that they see fit to put out this puff of smoke as worthy of the name “essay”.
There is clearly an approved list of “academics” that are for hire as philosophers in Beebland.
De Botton sounds French and so would appear to be an intellectual to those who don`t check the pop philosphers best seller list. A.C Grayling is the other loose stooge of this curious brand of ” what a thick person might imagine a clever person to come across like”!
Maybe Alain might write his next opus from the sofa in the BBCs Green Room without leaving it-bound to be serialised by the fawning poodles upstairs in Commissioning!
No prizes for guessing now who will get the Start The Week/In Our Time gigs once this recent unpleasantness has been consigned to the “vulnerable martyrs of the Revolution” file!
De Bottom? Oh, sorry, misread it, I thought for a minute I was on a BBC site…
He’s Swiss. He certainly wouldn’t pass for a philosopher in France. How does he get away with it here? If only the Swiss would do us a favour and take him back.
At least Grayling is a philosopher, even if I don’t agree with what he says.
Right. This is how we’re going to really really REALLY prove that Global Warming is real.
Fly to the Himalayas and……..ask all the villagers. Ta daa!
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/richardblack/2011/05/personal_tales_a_climate-cha.html#comments
If there is one thing that farmers down the ages have in common, that is that they are never happy with the weather.
It is always that bit too hot, too cold, too wet, to dry.
They also always refer to the ‘better’ summers of their youth compared with the ‘changes’ which they usually perceive as being negative.
Himalayan peasants are surely no different.
Untangling the ‘bias’ is going to be a gargantuan (and necessarily funded) task.
If there is a sniff of compensation, human nature being what it is, rest assured those glaciers are melting and the himalayan blue meconopsis is flowering earlier than in living memory.
Oh to be a climate victim….
How d’you know I’m a farmer?
There’s a long joke that ends: ‘….and the last prostitute said “You think YOU had it bad tonight. I had a farmer, and first it was too dry, then too wet, then too expensive!” ‘
Recent news bulletin between introducing the Popes beatification and the mention of “chils abuse” was 67 seconds!
The news poppet also said that the faithful over in the Vatican somehow linked the past Pope to the fall of Communism…you might have thought that the Poles might know just how true that is-but not at all-the BBC would no doubt put it down to David Dimbleby or Michael Palin!
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danielhannan/100085767/meanwhile-in-other-news/
Pretty sure that should be ‘news’.
And appending that word to ‘the BBC’ renders this an exercise in tautology..
‘The BBC, in its tagline, unquestioningly described the Directive as “protecting consumers”’
Amazing, and unique, what £4B gets you. Or doesn’t.
The Maldives, for years a BBC favourite. Its petty grubby paranoid nasty little dictator on the make and on the take, a fairly typical grubby dictator and the BBC simply adored him.
Thre was a time when Nasheed was feted around planet ecofascism as a saviour, remember his plan to make the islands carbon free? But hey, being a crooked despot does not mean you dont love the planet N stuff. Not mentioning all the carbon credits he would be cashing into a Swiss account of course.
You may remember Harrabin/Black/Shukman lauding him to the heavens not so long ago as he addressed the UN climate liefest, you may also remember his cabinet meeting under water..hows that for visual impact eh? I would love to go back over old BBC output to see all the toadying and promotion of a grubby crooked dictator.
Maybe the BBC in its haste to pimp its CAGW fraud simply forgot to investigate the man behind the myth? Perhaps the BBC felt they didnt have enough time to investigate Nasheed and his crooked fiefdom because as we all know the Maldives is sinking fast….hmmmm…well maybe not actually sinking…but it might in the future at some point.
It seems the people have had enough of being ruled by the likes of Nasheed, perhaps all that UN bribe cash and carbon credits and aid money that simply and quickly disappeared offhsore annoyed them a little? But hey, the BBC has a narrative to peddle and if crooked scum dictators are supporting the narrative then that is but a small detail.
I dont suppose the BBC will be doing another soft focus interview with this despot where hey piled lavish praise on him and his regime again will they? I dont think the BBC will want to air their previous output about their pet despot will they?
With sea level now doing what it’s not supposed to do, the maldives cabinet could look a bit silly!
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/04/25/update-on-the-cu-sea-level-page-status/
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-13256676
One wonders how much more ‘analysis’ such as this one can anticipate…
‘BBC security correspondent Frank Gardner says that, to many in the West, Bin Laden became the embodiment of global terrorism, but to others he was a hero, a devout Muslim who fought two world superpowers in the name of jihad.’
While a spread of opinion is legitimate, one presumes Mr. Gardner might wish any other input he might have had may have been at least featured.
Too much to hope.
On SKY, within a few minutes, with no one knowing anything, the ‘presenter’ suggests that he wasn’t given much chance to surrender.
The analyst, to his credit, tells him that such preemptive projecting is premature.
With luck, what we will get from the MSM is more sober, professional, paced assessment of the latter variety.
I rather dread to imagine the guest commentators whose phones are ringing from certain iPhones, however, and which places some researchers are heading for to get vox pops.
Who was this other world superpower?
Soviet Union in Afghanistan. Back then he was one of the good guys.
The BBC have been pimping more lies about the “disappearing Antarctic” lies based on entirely false assuptions and flawed models. So what is the truth then? Wel you cannot rely on the BBC to enlighten you or tell the truth or present any evidence. What they do is travel to a particular tiny part of the giant continent to vies a moving glacier that has always moved, they did this at the height of the Antarctic summer and they somehow forgot to mention the latest evidence of glacier bottom up re freeze where water travels down and then freezes building up ice from the bottom, funny that.
The Antarctic is normal, there is no problem, there never was a problem. The BBC have systematically lied to us, deceived us, misrepresented the reality. Just another BBC fraud?
Take a look at the graph below and tell me the Antarctic ice is disappearing 😉
Oooooh looky here what do we see?
As the BBC would and have claimed: “since records began” Remember that phrase, only since 1979 though. A BBC favourite quote “since (satellite)records began.
Well well well eh? We see the BBC pimping graphs of 30 yrs of supposed sea ice decline but the BBC has never ever and will never ever show the above graph, it shows increasing sea ice levels, a small steady positive trend.
The next time you see a BBC report by pseudo science hucksters like Blackshukmanharrabin about the Antarctic remember the above graph, a graph the BBC has banned from the screens. A graph that has had the BBC airbrush/historical airbrush technique on it. As far as the BBC are concerned this graph is invisible.
Impartial? my arse 😀
We have heard and seen the BBC lies, hundreds of lies. We have heard and seen the BBC propaganda about the catastrophic death spiral of polar ice.
Years of BBC CAGW scaremongering deceptions about the supposed melting of the poles in a death spiral, the ice is screaming we were told, the poles will be ice free we were promised, the models promised this didnt they?
Now the truth. Look at the graph of global sea ice, do you see a death spiral? Do you see the disappearance of the sea ice? Just another piece of actual evidence banned from the BBC screens and ignored by CAGW hucksters employed by the BBC.
Look at the trend closely folks and you see that it would take tens of thousands of years for the ice to disappear. Oooooh Nooooo its a death spiral innit.
Cassandra, there’ll be plenty of ice at both poles, long after the BBC cease to exist, and Blackshukmanharrabin have shuffled off this mortal coil. We have to content ourselves with those certainties, don’t we?
Seeing as it is ‘Unions Day’ on May 1st: here is a story the bBBC did not cover, I wonder why?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1381739/Hundreds-union-reps-bankrolled-YOUR-council-tax.html
Millions of taxpayers money being missappropriated by Labour councils. Surely a pblic spirited body like the bBC would be first inline to keep us informed. (NOT).
I see that Robert Peston of the fraudulent political Fabian charity “Common Purpose”, is in trouble with Al-Beeb for some of his Tweets pertaining to the Royal Wedding.
A snivelling Beeboid belonging to a far left wing charity, mocking the Royals…Who would have thought!
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1382585/BBCs-Robert-Peston-tweets-Kate-Middleton-Prince-William-having-sex.html
If only they could just persuade enough of us plebs to shove the Windsor family aside, then the BBC aristocracy would at last have what they want – free reign to lord it over us and to enforce all their clever right-on views.
Possibly a bit trivial on a day like this, maybe even a little paranoid…but here goes…
The Today website‘s choice of recent interviews features the three pary leaders in an unusual order of priority – Miliband first, Clegg second, Cameron third (it’s like the BBC’s collective vote under the AV system!). Moreover, the chosen photos show a resolute, brightly-lit Ed, a cornered-looking Nick in half-shadow and a worried-looking Dave in darkness. Any subliminal messages being given here?
Surprised they didn’t have our Ed absailing down from the first chopper, now it’s A-ok to take folk out again ‘cos some peace laureates are in the good books with the public, and Labour needs some coat-tails to hang onto after leaping to the defence of Ms. Eagle’s ‘affront’ turned out to be a turkey.
BBC Radio’s apartheid ‘Asian Network’ station, still not closed down (despite D.G. Thompson’s promises), and still full of pro-Islam political propaganda, from Oldham to Afghanistan:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/asiannetwork/news/
In other ‘news’…
http://www.thepoke.co.uk/2011/05/02/andrew-marrs-paper-review/
Well, about as close to it as the BBC usually manages in the edit suite, so why not?
http://www.newser.com/story/117342/most-useless-college-degree-is.html
Shocked I tell you. I am… shocked!
O:-)
Nice bit in the DT today about old superinjunction Marr.
Not being a resolute blogger so it is news to me.
Apparently the female in question was/is a “political journalist”. She became pregnant and Marr paid maintenance until DNA test proved not his.
The female in question also had an affair with Red Ed (before he met present partner) but there is no suggestion Red Ed is the father of the child.
Talk about putting it about a bit.
Oh, and Mr Marr’s wife is a columnist of The Guardian, of all papers.
All a little incestuous on the left then!
Gerald: Talk about putting it about a bit.
Indeed, and he a married man and father of children. Sleazy creature.
Something else just chimed faintly in my mind…ah, yes:
‘However, writing in The Guardian, he said “And the final answer, frankly, is the vigorous use of state power to coerce and repress. It may be my Presbyterian background, but I firmly believe that repression can be a great, civilising instrument for good. Stamp hard on certain ‘natural’ beliefs for long enough and you can almost kill them off. The police are first in line to be burdened further, but a new Race Relations Act will impose the will of the state on millions of other lives too.” ‘
That old Presbyterian background doesn’t always work, does it, Andrew?
I am not naive enough to think it does and perhaps it is mean to mention it to a superinjuncted / un-injuncted rich and influential man caught out with his keks about his ankles but…he did invoke his background when it suited some leftoid, Beeboid agenda for the promotion of sacred cows and the corresponding crushing and labelling of harmless ordinary people as lumpen raaaacists if they fail to comply on demand with the required thinking of their betters.
I expect he will cope, somehow, with the occasional reminder of his own words about his worthy background and his worthy and superior knowingness about what is good for the proles.
Noticed most of the Beboid news presenters are wearing something with red on it…..must be Elections coming up !
I didn’t catch the Today interview with Nick Clegg, but perhaps those who did could comment on whether he was treated to the same sort of attack regarding the AV “Yes” campaign as David Cameron was subjected to regarding the “No” campaign.
What astonished me in David Cameron’s interview was John Humphrys’ apparent ignorance regarding the way AV works. Mr Humphrys seemed to think that the second preference vote of a Labour supporter was just as likely to be counted as that of a Monster Raving Loony supporter. Either astounding ignorance or wilful bias.
Actually, I think the best advert for the No campaign is Guido’s cartoon.
http://www.politicshome.com/uk/article/27194/cameron_tells_humphreys_go_back_to_school.html
A tad dangerous for a publication to invoke education when proofing can err so easily in headlines, but loved this:
‘That’s quite wrong if the lead broadcaster on the BBC doesn’t understand the system.’
Of course, lack of comprehension on their own part has seldom been a barrier to Aunty & her minions having an opinion on what is correct and presuming to tell others how to think.
“It isn’t just an embarrassing mistake by John Humphrys. It also shows AV’s fatal flaw: that it’s hard to understand. If even someone as highly intelligent and eloquent as Humphrys doesn’t understand it, the system is doomed.”
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/culture/harrymount/100053251/if-john-humphrys-doesnt-understand-av-the-systems-too-complicated/
Humphrys “highly intelligent”? Maybe just a chippy, pompous ass. His ignorance on the mechanics of AV is disgraceful. He also reveals his preference to change the voting system, a decision based on knee-jerk anti-Conservative bias?
Will: Maybe just a chippy, pompous ass.
He’s certainly that (I call him the man who positively rinnnnnggggggggggs with self regard). That episode is a typical example of his overweening arrogance and chippy manner.
I enjoyed seeing him put in his place by the PM and falling on his arse through his own ignorance.
Spectator_CH Coffee House Fraser Nelson listens to John Humphrys making the case for voting No to AV: http://is.gd/FuNj7h
And not really his remit, for any ‘side’. Unintentional or not. But effective, one must say and, especially given the narrative enhance du jour, funny, especially as he blunders on in the ‘anything the Tories do must be attacked no matter what’ regardless.
Webb was just as bad.
Just listened to Humphrys/Cameron and Humphrys told the exact same lie about US primaries being the same as AV that Evan Davis told last week. The exact same lie. Different presenter, different week, same lie.
Come see the bias inherent in the system. OfCom needs to look into this before they bother with complaints about the pro-royal noise.
Yes David, Humphrys was insistent that primaries & AV had some connection & the existence of primaries somehow compensated for the US using the “inferior” FPTP system in elections for office. Do you understand his point, I don’t?
Will, I understand that both Humphrys and Davis either don’t understand what US primaries are, or they are both – with the approval of the Today producers and BBC News management – lying. Either way this is a disservice to the license fee payer and poor journalism and bias, all wrapped into one.
US primaries decide who the ultimate candidate will be within one party. They have no relevance at all to the “fairness” BS with the actual elections the AV deal is about. It’s quite disgraceful that the BBC keeps pushing this lie. And how ironic that US primaries are also FPTP (with the occasional run-off if it’s too close and within the margin of error). Oops.
The New York Times on US Congressman Col Allen West:-
>>Mr. West’s place in the Democratic crosshairs stems, he said, from the fact “that I scare the liberal establishment.”<<
I guess if Col West accused Obama supporters of inciting opponents to kill him by using this ‘incendiary’ rhetoric Mardell would be quick to accuse him of a ‘blood libel’.
Fortunately, conservatives have far too much self-respect to sink to this whiny level of gutter politics as the Democrats. We don’t have to play silly games, we have confidence in what we believe in.
You can imagine what my first thought was…
http://order-order.com/2011/05/03/washington-post-tells-twittering-hacks-to-stay-objective/
Luckily, Mr. F seems to have incorporated it fairly quickly into a neat view of the BBC’s penchant for not doing what it says, or if so, selectively.
Which is what makes it so… unique.
http://zmarter.com/science/we-need-to-try-harder-to-get-more-women-presenting-science-on-tv-%7C-kim-shillinglaw.html
Ah, that’s what the problem has been… not enough women.
You just have to check out Newsnight’s Susan Watts’ body of work to see what is possible, if only they are given the chance.
What is the point of John Humphrys? I’ve just listened to this ‘harangue session’ of the Prime Minister. It’s just an overgrown spoilt brat trying to catch the PM out, no interest whatsoever in edifying the public.
Humphrys’ purpose is to demean Tory politicians in the eyes of voters. I think Cameron dealt with him quite well. Unfortunately for Labour politicians Humphrys does need to maintain some plausible deniability over his bias so needs to conduct a semblance of this geriatric brattiness with Labour spokesmen from time to time as well.
This rude, ignorant individual wouldn’t be able to conduct himself like this on a professional news channel.
Interesting on a variety of counts…
bbc5live BBC Radio 5 Live RT @richardpbacon: On your radio now: The BBC’s heroic Security Correspondent Frank Gardiner on Bin Laden.
See… they must be ‘getting it about right’…
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/royal-wedding/8489285/Royal-wedding-BBC-under-attack-from-anti-monarchists.html
Well, if ‘abandoned journalistic integrity’ on all counts is a measure, well, perhaps. Otherwise, I rather trust this will not be in the ‘balance’ file.
When they announced that AV was going to be talked about I turned it over to LBC. Missed the furore caused by Humphs, but not surprised as the only thing worst than a ‘blinkered lefty’ is a ‘senile blinkered lefty’.
Justin Webb was at his absolute worst this morning interviewing Nick Clegg. He clearly had a pre-determined agenda to pursue, because he didn’t accept any answer Clegg gave on any question. On three separate occasions ol’ Justin kept interrupting Clegg by claiming that he either wasn’t answering the question or was saying the exact opposite of what Clegg had just told him. It was as if he wasn’t listening to what Clegg was actually saying and was just waiting for a pause to read out his prepared attack lines.
Webb came very close during the A/V discussion to calling Clegg a liar, but it sounded more like ol’ Justin was the one trying to push a lie down the audience’s throat in spite of what Clegg was saying.
The main goal of this interview was clearly to highlight a Coalition Split at any opportunity, and to goad Clegg into making a personal attack on Cameron. Very transparent.
The two Today presenters had the chance to quiz the ‘No’ campaign (Cameron) and the ‘Yes’ campaign (Clegg) about their respective cases for and against AV. That’s what listeners would have expected – for John Humphrys to have put lots of questions to David Cameron from the devil’s advocate position that ‘AV is a good thing because…’ and for Justin Webb to have put lots of questions to Nick Clegg from the devil’s advocate position that ‘AV is a bad thing because…’. Very simple and possibly enlightening (if the presenter gets his facts right, of course).
Instead, though John Humphrys did put lots of questions to Cameron from the ‘AV is a good thing’ standpoint (though with staggering ineptness), Justin Webb failed to ask a single question from the ‘AV is a bad thing’ standpoint to Nick Clegg. Not one.
Instead (as David says, very transparently) he concentrated on getting Clegg to criticise Cameron/the ‘No’ campaign and then briefly touched on another side issue about whether Clegg would like to go further.
In no way was this a balanced debate on the merits of AV and FPTP.
Moreover, and this was the strangest part of the Webb-Clegg interview, though Justin relentlessly interrupted Clegg throughout most of the interview, the interruptions suddenly stopped each time Mr Clegg began making the case for AV. It’s so blatant when you hear it that it raises real suspicions in me of pro-AV bias on Justin Webb’s part here (conscious or unconscious). Humphrys, in contrast, kept badgering away at Cameron while he was trying to make his anti-AV points.
Again there’s no way this can be considered a balanced treatment of the two sides of the argument.
Also both interviewers asked many questions from the starting point that the ‘No’ campaign was behaving badly. Neither asked any questions from the starting point that the ‘Yes’ campaign might have been behaving badly too.
That’s surely outright bias.
Wouldn’t it be nice just to hear an appeal from both sides of the debate without any interuption from unprofessional and discourteous “journalists”? I,like most, can use reason to make up my own mind on any issue.
JHT – It would be equally nice to have the next couple of days go by without a BBC ad promoting their coverage with an explanation of AV from the “Yes” perspective.
JHT,
No you can’t ! We are all thickos who need brilliant-minded journalists to guide us in our sad little lives. We need experts on voting systems like John Humphrys….. er…..
Now, just do what you are told and stop making trouble.
I just learned from the BBC News Channel that the five men who were busted for casing the joint at Sallafield are “Bangladeshi”. I didn’t realize Bangladesh was at war with Britain and their nationality was relevant to the story. Surely there’s some other angle, BBC?
Au utter masterclass in Beebspeak from old Humph as he fearlessly tried to lay a gum on Posh Boy,regarding AV this morning!
That Cameron tried to inform our rabid rottenweiler about it was his crime-how dare Dave try and put a fact or two about the votng system to the Peoples Friesler?
In any sane world of reason-that one Dawkins etc get free rein to urge upon us all-Humph would be offered his ermine and told to keep feeding Prescott with pretzels forthwith. His monumental display of ignorance was astonishing-is no one at the Beeb actually HIGHLIGHTING his scripts any more for him?).
In Beebland though, it`s another brass medal and a stiff`kit for “stickng it to the maan!.
Now we know why Naughties questions are longer than any answer he might get-because if he too were actually to “get embroiled in facts” as opposed to the left-liberal shibboleths that old Humph had to read in large print -then HE would look as stupid and in need of that fat pension that Humphrys clearly needs as matter of urgency.
We now need to get little Justins wage reduced to a carers allowance and let him lead John out to grass-believe there`s plenty of that available for the Beebs staffers if they look behind Nutts high horse!
Care in the community NOW-someone ring in and tell the news boys that ther`s a shortage of retsina pine and would John care to get iut there again seeing that the weather is nice and he`s not let us pay for a trip. Just this once it would be cruel to cavil
BBCPolitics BBC Politics Humphrys could be ‘clearer’ on AV http://bbc.in/lA9SIg
Well, yes.
But maybe he could also be a smidge less totally wrong and rampantly, unprofessional partisan too?
Just askin’
INBBC ‘Newsnight’ tonight:
Comrade MASON, Father of the Chapel, BBC-NUJ branch, has been spending licence fees in CAIRO, participating in some utopian socialist -Muslim Brotherhood May day event in Egypt.
Mason will censor out any Marxist references to Islam being the opium of the people, in the interests of forging a Marxist-Islam phoney political alliance.
INBBC’s Ms McDermott suggests (naively) that Islam may have been nasty in Egypt up till now, but (with Mr Mason’s political guidance?) may not be so nasty in the future:
“Where is the Arab world facing politically now and might a less brutal face of political Islam emerge?”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/newsnight/fromthewebteam/2011/05/tuesday_3_may_2011.html
(Try telling that to Egypt’s Christian Copts.)
+The invisible election+
The election the BBC would prefer to forget? How about a clue, it lays to the north of the USA…it has just seen its separatist party crushed and its leftists defeated and its grenshirts reduced to the status they deserve.
The BBC are getting very good at airbrushing entire nations from the the record with more and more nations joining the BBC blacklist, at some point the BBC family of nations will get smaller and smaller till it disappears.
Cassie,
The BBC ignored the Canada elections last time round and also NZ.
The BBC simply doesn’t report anything it doesn’t approve of.
PS To be fair it is on the website !
resident newsnight dhimmi-trot Paul Mason shilling for the muslim brotherhood tonight
still no mention of Ham Ass though……
and now Matt Frei is having a verbal orgasm over “warrior king” O’Barmy
FFS
Yes;
For Comrade MASON, Father of the Chapel of BBC-NUJ ‘Newsnight’ branch, and his utopian socialist jaunts (at our expense) to set up meetings of fellow Marxists, and Muslims in Cairo:
ANALYSIS: Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood Reaction To Bin Laden Death Classic Example Of Brotherhood Deception Strategy
The Queens idiot son a hypocrite? Surely not.
http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/2011/05/prince-of-hypocrits.html
“Traditionally, the heir to the throne would go straight into the military after finishing school. However, in a break with tradition, Charles attended university at Trinity College, Cambridge where he studied anthropology and archaeology, and later history, earning a 2:2 (lower second class degree).”
http://www.biographyonline.net/royalty/prince_charles.html
Mmm – a bit too over qualified for understanding a chaotic system that is the earths climate.
“Prince Charles can attack climate skeptics all he wants. But he is the one using absurdities, pseudo-science and deception. For a 1 degree rise in global temperature over the last 100 years, we must tax a life giving gas that makes up only 3% of the atmosphere, destroy the middle and lower classes, and exterminate a percentage of the world’s population?
Who’s more dangerous?”
http://wideshut.co.uk/prince-charles-attacks-climate-deniers-again/
Just like his idiot father. Long live the Republic!! 😉
“For a 1 degree rise in global temperature over the last 100 years, we must tax a life giving gas that makes up only 3% of the atmosphere,”
Atmospheric CO2 content is just a shade under 0.040%
It is a harmless trace gas essential to life on earth, we need more, much more for the greening of the earth to feed the growing population, no wonder then the BBC ecofascist axis is so desperate.
“Atmospheric CO2 content is just a shade under 0.040%” Is that not the man made bit?
“Total atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) — both man-made and natural– is only about 3.62% of the overall greenhouse effect”
http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/greenhouse_data.html
Rather enjoyed today’s Dilbert: http://www.dilbert.com/
In frame 1 simply swap profitable with ‘dogmatic’ and billing with ‘reporting’.
Start as you mean to go on?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/bbc/8490775/Lord-Patten-defends-costly-on-screen-BBC-stars.html
As to whether it is a good one, that depends on you perspective.
I’ve only ever seen bits of two episodes of Junior Question Time or whatever the programmes are called. The first one had Ken ‘Everybody’s Mate’ Livingston and Egregious George Galloway on the panel, the second one, last night, had some vile little tit called Laurie Penney (sp?) of whom no-one has ever heard but who seems to fancy herself as the spiritual leader of the ‘Yoohoo Everyone It’s Me Me Me, I’m On A Demo !!!!’ movement.
All in the interests of balance you see, the BBCC droids get to invite their pet Trots on.
Still it was still nice to get the opportunity to see David Starkey repeatedly telling the BBCC Speed-dialled Jeremy Tristram Hunt to ‘shutup.’
And also nice to see Richard Bacon, chairing (after a fashion), demonstrating his complete inability to chair, and his lack of knowledge of the subject.
Now as I was writing that I couldn’t remember Bacon’s name – he’s not very memorable. Still, Google ‘BBC, presenter, cocaine’ and what do you know up it pops.
You can get all kinds of interesting stuff if you google BBC and presenters.
😎
These Beeb-droids live in a state of permanent hipocrisy.
Thanks to the Western elite’s taste for cocaine, the poor and honest people of South America live under a drug-gang-ocracy. The sort of people who murdered the policemen who shot their gang-leader, then blew up the policeman’s grieving family by planting bombs at the funeral.
Next time anyone from the elite sniggers about what they put up their noses, remember how many decent people died to get it there