155 Responses to OPEN THREAD…

  1. dave s says:

    Will the BBC news ever lead with anything other than Murdoch etc again?
    It is the biggest incentive to hit the off button I can think of.
    The average person is getting very bored. It just is not that interesting.
    Have any of us heard the check out queues buzzing with nothing else?
    Of course not.

       0 likes

  2. Robert Similar says:

    Gordon Brown a victim? Interesting concept.

       0 likes

    • matthew rowe says:

      Hmm good point! maybe it works if you think of it more as a ‘conceit’ I find it helps!

         0 likes

      • james1070 says:

        I found it amusing that Gordo accused NI of having links to the “Criminal Underworld”. Wasn’t he the one who handed over the Lockerbie Bomber to his mate Gaddafi?

           0 likes

  3. pounce_uk says:

    The bBC, its lovefest with Syria and another story.  
     
    Syria condemns Hillary Clinton’s remarks about Assad  
    Syria has condemned as “provocative” a statement by US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton that President Bashar al-Assad has “lost legitimacy” to rule…Human rights groups say at least 1,400 civilians and 350 security force personnel have been killed since anti-government demonstrations across Syria began in mid-March.  
    The Syrian government denies targeting civilians, saying it is tackling armed groups.  
     
    So when Syrians kill Palestinians (well they are in the same region where Palestinians live) The bBC line is, the Syrians are targetting armed groups, yet when Israel does so they become Palestinians, Militants or even..civillains.    
    Strange that eh? Remind me again how often has Abu Bowen has had tea with Assad. strangley enough his previous vist was following Ed Milliband who had this to say about Assad and Syria:  
    Syria has in the past been accused of helping foreign fighters going into Iraq but Mr Miliband stressed Syria’s importance in bringing stability to the Middle East.  
     
    Notice how forgetful the bBC has become about Labours and its own lovefest with Assad.  

       0 likes

    • hippiepooter says:

      No Pounce, you are completely wrong.  It is not the ‘BBC line’ that the Syrian Government is only killing ‘armed groups’, it is reporting what the Syrian Government has told them.

      The BBC line on Israel is however very clear when the Israelis kill terrorists – they’re headlined as ‘killing Palestinians’, as if its a recreational sport of the Israelis.

      It doesn’t take much digging to see the Hitlerian antecedents of Israel’s Arab enemies, just like with the BNP, yet the BBC makes common cause with Israel’s Hitlerian enemies.  I dont recall the ‘evil’ News International doing so .. in fact, Murdo is very pro-the only true democracy in the Middle East, isn’t he?

         0 likes

  4. David Preiser (USA) says:

    It’s interesting that the BBC has total sympathy for Mr. Brown for allegedly having someone fake their way into getting info on him, while the
    Beeboids had a good long laugh when someone hacked into and stole Sarah Palin’s personal emails.  The BBC’s double standards don’t surprise me at all, but they do disgust me at times.

       0 likes

    • John Anderson says:

      Sorry David – there was a Freedom of I. request that caused thousands of Palin’s emails when Governor of Alaska to be released.

      I do not remember any “hacking” of Palin’s personal emails.

         0 likes

      • David Preiser (USA) says:

        No, John, that’s a different email incident over which the BBC had a collective orgasm.  That was an official release of her government email. Palin’s personal email account was hacked an details stolen back when she was merely the Governor of Alaska and Vice Presidential candidate.  The BBC didn’t spend quite the resources on that one, but they sure did cover it without frowning.

           0 likes

  5. noggin says:

    hi Grant,  
    well you know, it does go right from the top down ,(& i mean very top)  
    from Obama, getting so so concerned &  really, really  involved, over a few settlements,(legit if you take away the spin) on the other side of the world ?  
    but nono NO concern at all …nay wilfull ignorance,

    over a building celebrating the mass murder of 1000s NYers, at 9/11, that is at ground zero…that purposely spits in the face of every patriot, victims & their families….  
    i ask you where is his moral compass?  
     
    truly “the world turned upside down”  
     
    you know from the very bottom, those who REALLY know the impact  
    it is a different story…but they get no voice…so you get the likes of the EDL…& la de da…. immediately vilification  
     
    Appeasement never works……my feeling its worse than that  
     
    & as for our shower of soundbiters, big boy dave n co, i ve seen nothing  
    that gives me any hope…their so busy syphoning off anything thats left of our economy to their millionaires club…  
    sheesh! it comes to something, when an old dear from the lords, shows a bit of the dunkirk spirit, & more backbone than the entire cabinet,(not a vertebrae between them).  
     
    “ragehs nonsense”  on that moh doc …you can say that again πŸ™‚  & it

    hasn t even started yet.  
    & wheres the ability to recourse…on the BBC…..where?  
    i refer back to my first post on this below,…

       0 likes

  6. noggin says:

    well well, ep 1,,,,,,50 mins of (victim),moh, (oppressed),moh    
    (i kid you not….poor little), moh…..    
    followed by a deft change of emphasis, from moh to THE prophet, bludgeoned home at every opportunity thereafter.  (conveniently missing out on his mentioned uncles reading/reciting of previous scriptures) for the last 10 mins.
      


     Rageh is hand picked for harmlessness on this one..very VERY  
    obscure on the meat n potatoes issues…..waxing on,(& on & on)  
    while wistfulling gazing into the ether on debatable nonsense.  
     
    A fluff piece of the worst kind, did i say EXCRUTIATING line up of apologists, sheesh! literally the living end…. one drawling man of peace drone,(they did however shoehorn in R.Spencer for ahem…balance πŸ™‚  don t blink wink wink)    
       
    Omar skirting around facts & anything possibly erm shall we say “difficult” πŸ˜‰    
    handpicking deliberately obscure reasons for hmmm VIOLENCE    
    ie “upset” re VIOLENCE, “offended” re VIOLENCE, “cartoons” re VIOLENCE, “writing a book” re VIOLENCE… oh i m sure you get the picture.    
    a prime example :-    
    Glibly stating “people”… can come from all over the world to Mecca”    
    ….NO THEY CANNOT not if they re non muslim, they can t    
    A  constant drip drip name dropping, from the talmud/bible    
    just like abrahamic faiths etc etc,  
    well no it is NOT, it considers everything    
    non islamic to be a/. perversion of the worst kind..b/.worse still rectified    
    AND you know what that means.    
    Piously bleating out that well used apologist drone “theres no compulsion in religion” (knowing full well this was soon abrogated)..and expects us to believe the Western understanding of it. Not the islamic narrative…ie. the observable behaviour of Muslims over 1350 years.    
    What have Muslims done, when they have conquered, by force or otherwise, non-Muslim lands and peoples?    
    Ans. They offer three possibilities: death, conversion, and, at least to those who can be classified as ahl al-kitab or “people of the book,” permanent status as dhimmis, with a host of political, economic, and social disabilities which together added up to lives of humiliation, degradation, and physical insecurity    
    and…and…AND…    
    there is so much whitewash ALREADY woah! ep2

       0 likes

  7. noggin says:

    well, there has been much obfuscation already, ….  
    just wait for the next round, of verbal contortions, it is following the usual “muslims the great victims” narrative, bludgeoned home in ep 1,(this is still used by islam today) 

    My feeling, this is going to used to maybe “justify”perhaps the wrong word the  later actions, of the ” we come in peace”(shoot to kill…shoot to kill)
    moh brigade.
    We will see if it is a thinly veiled, (if you excuse the pun) excuse for the following murder subjegation..whole plethora of despicable abhorrent acts.  


    The, convenient revelation, the ridiculous aspect of “abrogation”  
    look…If you don t follow the quran, which has no context , which i will get to…no chronology, a third of which is incomprehensible,  poorly recalls old testament stories, and older texts  stolen christian hymns,(most word for word, which have obviously come from mohs uncle). & a erm “god” who kept changing his mind, then you have to trawl through hadith/sira to make some sense, of mohs life,(all very VERY bad news).  
     
    The plain reason, he hated jews soooo much, they laughed him out of  
    the joint, with his ” i m the prophet, look at me” routine.  
    They told him he was NOT,(just a very naughty boy πŸ™‚ ), so he must have told them…. “i ll be back”     gulp!  
    and of course he did return. can t wait to see that little nugget explained away.  
     
    So far there is much ignorance, denial, obfuscation, wistful silence  
    how this, can be continued may make hilarious viewing…as the violence  
    destruction, murder RAMP UP through his adult life  

       0 likes

    • Wally Greeninker says:

      While Rageh Omar is presenting the BBC4 three part documentary ‘Life of Muhammed’, (part one shown last night), it was written by Ziauddin Sardar. A reforming Muslim apologist who seems to genuinely detest violence but hardly bothers to conceal his contempt for western culture and society.

      My reaction to the documentary was more or less the same as Noggin’s: while the programme avoided direct lies of fact (but not speculation and myth, such as the idea that he improved a dire and barbaric society – what evidence there is could be taken to suggest just the opposite – also some schools of Persian illustration did show Mohammed‘s face), it practiced bias by omission on an epic scale, particularly on analysis of the text of the Koran, which has never been subjected to the higher criticism applied to the Old and new Testaments and probably never will, because such activity can get you killed – or even worse, lose you your Saudi grant. On the
        Veracity of the Satanic verses incident, Sardar used the time honoured technique by which the ulema have intimidated the faithful for 1400 years – exploiting the incoherent, repetitive and needlessly complex sources to blind the audience with science.The number of people who died as a result of Khomeini’s fatwa waqs understated and, while we were told that it was the first time the Muslim community asserted itself in Britain, the fact that nine actual or attempted explosions occurred in British bookstores in 1989 was not considered worth a mention.

      Sardar originally gained public attention in the seventies with a plan to replace western science with Islamic science, just as Newton’s paradigm replaced Ptolemy’s to be, in turn, supplanted by that of Einstein. At least, unlike his one time literary collaborator , who co-authored ’Why do people hate America?’ with him – the porky, Welsh convert, Merryl Wyn Davies -he accepts evolution because it’s in the Koran, metaphorically,  although many of his co-religionists have got the timescale wrong.  The truth is that anybody who writes an article in the Guardian mocking ‘Christian’ prejudice against first cousin marriages, has  rather shaky credentials in that particular branch of human knowledge, despite half of his degree being in the subject.

       He concluded the article, after claiming that the British should learn from Muslim habits of hard work, with the yecchy wish that Christianity and Islam could be ‘kissing cousins.’ This doesn’t stop him using the phrase ‘Christian gas chambers’ in his spiritual autobiography (one of the only two references he makes to the religion there), and he liked the idea so much, he mentions ‘Christians and their gas chambers’ somewhere else in his voluminous writings.

      To cut a long story short: he’s a somewhat slippery propagandist and, by any normal western standards, a bit of a crackpot whose project to reform Mohammedanism is half baked ( a new, reformed sharia, a Mutazilite revival, embarrassing passages in sacred scriptures  explained away as figurative imagery ) and has not gained any mass following in the wider Muslim world – not that he‘d give you that impression.

      He does, however, believe in the conservation of ancient (Muslim) monuments. Growing up in Britain clearly had some effect. This leads to a rather comical aspect of part one of this televised biography: the way it finessed discussion of the destruction of structures and tombs associated with Mohammed, his colleagues and family, mainly during the last century, by the custodians of the holy places (and fabulously rich) wahhabi house of Saud  – and tiptoed around their loathing for anything to do with archaeology. Having built up to the proposition that many muslims believe that such structures should be destroyed, the documentary moved on to other subjects but at the end, while bigging up the qualities of Khadija (as if widows, left in charge of the family business and marrying an employee hasn’t been a cliché of urban life, probably since cities were invented in the new stone age) the programme makers couldn’t resist showing a photograph of her tomb (in fact the ancient cemetery in which she was buried). Some viewers might have been puzzled by the fact that the black and white pic had a small label saying 1925 in one corner. The documentary certainly didn’t mention that that was the year the Saudis demolished it.

         0 likes

      • Wally Greeninker says:

        My major objection to the programme is that becase it is an all Muslim produion, commentators can do things like referring to Jesus as another of the prophets preceding Mohammed (and not have to point out that they are referring to a radically different Muslim Jesus) or talking about Abraham setting about the sacrifice of Ismail, passing off a deliberate re-writing of the Bible as the real thing. Since this programme will, no doubt, be shown a lot in schools, pupils may well absorb some of this old Mohammedan nonsense as gospel fact.

        A classic example of the truncated quotation occurred with Robert Spencer’s line that many terrorists justify their actions with references to the sacred texts and the life of Mohammed. He invariably adds the statement that it is the task of moderate Muslims to prove that they are wrong to do so, in a way convincing to the majority of Muslims and vigorously promulgate that view: they have not done so yet. Since they left out he second half of what Spencer almost certainly said, they rendered his comment virtually meaningless.

        Some of the talking heads were decidedly dubiouscharacters: how many millions does Esposito’s institute get from Saudi and gulf Arab sheikhs? Karen Armstrong, ex-nun and failed Phd, with her happy-clappy brand of floating monotheism has surely passed her sell-by date as a a convincing pourer of whitewash over Islam and then viewing the result through rosy inted spectacles. Many Scots and Irish cock a snoot at English domination by making all their cultural references to America – Wyn Davies decided that the Islamic world was a closer reflection of her teetotal, puritanical, Welsh non-conformist upbringing: I can’t see it catching on with the valley’s girls, myself – I notice she wasn’t wearing her hijab for this particular TV appearance. As for Tariq Ramadan, the guy is genuinely sinister: an Egyptian agent sent to keep him under surveillance in Switzerland disappeared without trace. Time and again he has been shown to say one thing to non-Muslims and quite contradictory things to Muslims: discredited in France, deprived of his academic post in Holland, it is disgraceful that this Muslim Brotherhood agent of influence is some sort of professor in an ancient British university and it’s a sign of Obama’s stupidity that the ban on him visiting the US has been lifted.

        It’s difficult to prove lying by omission when there are still two episodes to go: I suspect that the spin and trickery with which Mohammed’s consummation of his marriage to a nine year old  will be a wonder to behold ( it’s possible, by making twelve cross references to different sources that her memory was faulty and she really lost her virginity at 14 or even 18 if you take away the authority you first thought of, and then again was her highly specific memory of the event made up by someone else) – who cares if the vast majority of Muslims have always believed that she was nine with disastrous results for countless little girls over the last 1400 years? The series will no doubt be an object lesson in techniques of systematic misrepresentation while (for the most part) avoiding telling a direct, controvertible lie.

           0 likes

        • Wally Greeninker says:

          I made an error in stating the agent watching Ramadan disappeared without trace: the quote I had half remebered was:

          “In 1995, Alaa el-Din Nazmi, an Egyptian Secret Service agent assigned to watch the Ramadan family, was murdered in Geneva. No one has been arrested for the crime.”

          http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/012/800naxnt.asp

             0 likes

        • cjhartnett says:

          Excellent Wally!
          I too noted that quick slip around Ishmael/Abraham and the Ka`aba.
          The Jews and Christian take on it was that he went from Ur to Haran, before the bit about Ishmael and Hagar being abandoned up in Shur.
          Therefore we`re talking about Turkey, Iraq and Egypt here.
          What possible evidence is there that any of them went way down in the Arabian peninsula to Mecc…especially given the distance and those temperatures!
          I prefer to believe that Muhammad just concocted a narrative of his own and based on picking up scraps from Jewish/Christian as he padded up and down the spice route.
          Can`t imagine any Muslim being able to help me out-more than his life is worth!
          So much for the Religion of Peace and Tolerance eh Rageh?

             0 likes

      • noggin says:

        my hat tips to you sir, an excellent post.

        Omar stressed that Muslims follow the message not the messenger – hence there was no reverencing of birthplaces or dwellings of moh …hmmmm?

         

        oh & the whole ‘Jesus was just a prophet and the N.Tment. is a perversion & forgery’ nonsense will not be aired im sure

         

        It was a somewhat exaggerated picture of Muslim contempt of such things,(like shrines)  It will relieve Omar of the necessity of explaining wahhabi vandalism that has erected a public toilet on the site of the demolished house of Fatima and almost led to the tomb of Moh being concreted over (it’s in the basement of a library now).

         

        oh those saudi s eh…..& the  laughable (fantasist) over emphasis on “bigging up” the women, πŸ˜‰

        makes one envisage he might even out do his delusional stint on

        ” islamic history of europe”

         

        have to wait & see

           0 likes

      • John Anderson says:

        Thank you for that. 

        When I was young,  Islam did not “exist” to me.  I knew about Christianity,  Judaism – and I had a vague idea about the Hindu and Buddhist religions.   Very vague.  But they were the only religions that “mattered”

        Now we are – and more to the point,  schoolchildren – are having this medieval religion forced down our throat.  

        It is an aggressive intolerant cult.   Thanks to Labour we have imported much more of it.  We are beginning to see the results in places like Bradford or Tower Hamlets.  And many other places.

        I don’t think manyBeeboids live in Bradford or Tower Hamlets.

           0 likes

      • Grant says:

        Wally,
        Excellent posts. I remember a devout muslim once trying to convince me that even the detail of evolution was predicted in the Koran.
        I didn’t even attempt to keep a straight face and, to be fair, after about 10 minutes even he was laughing.
        But, I realise under other circumstances, my attitude could have got me killed. That is what is so chilling.

           0 likes

      • noggin says:

        once again sir hitting the nail “squarely”.
        The line up of apologists….goodness me, gut wrenching
        i urge anyone, to look up on T.Ramadans twisty doublespeak,
        the deplorable J.Esposito, K Armstrong & co from objective sources not reliant on a islamic yes man slant, & it will show
        immediately 1/.the most sycophantic appalling bias 2/.just how much red cresent has trawled to get them….
        A word on Mr Spencer, added supposedly to show & i use the term loosely “balance” a very sharp cognitive man, a REAL scholar
        i am certain head to head, the previous shower, would fold quicker than a cheap bedouin tent, if questioned by him.,
        you can be assured, he won t be talking at length, not on this doc.

        Yes on the abhorrent deplorable abuse of Aisha, consumated at 9, but married at 6,( & it appears in this doc the fix has already started)
        i suppose just like all paedophiles, he didn t do anything for 3 years……
        I don t dwell on it, but it has a disastrous effect on the the lives of countless muslim children,(& how they are viewed) ever since.

        This episode was, to say the least deliberately spun drivel.
        BUT the next two, will have to see Red Cesent & Omar spinning
        faster than a Sufi Mystic, to attempt the whitewash.

           0 likes

        • Grant says:

          noggin,
          I would be surprised if there is anything about Sufis or, for that matters, Alevis, in this documentary.

             0 likes

  8. Sres says:



    Rather interesting rant towards the end of this “hilarious” ditty on the now show…

    Impartial BBC?

       0 likes

    • hippiepooter says:

      All jolly amusing stuff in so far as it goes, and raising some very legitimate questions, but yes, very interesting rant towards the end.  Doesn’t seem to believe much in ‘due process’.  Just trying to whip up a lynch mob.

         0 likes

  9. David Preiser (USA) says:

    The BBC is only now asking if the Eurozone debt crisis “might” spread to Italy?  Only now there’s the suggestion that Italy “might get a little bit of help to pay”? Italy needs something like $500 billion to pay off just this year’s debt, never mind the future, and their full debt is more than 120% of GDP, while Spain’s is only half that.  The Eurozone is a disaster.

    Now Matthew Price says that the Euro is strong, and the Eurozone economy is strong.  Is that why it’s dropped again against the dollar and the Euro mandarins are running scared?  Is that why German bond yields are getting screwed because Italy’s are too high?  They’re most likely going to put together a huge bailout fund of more than a trillion dollars, and guess whose pockets that’s going to raid? Call Me Dave will sing the “Our Hands Are Tied” song again.  And the BBC is whistling past the graveyard.

       0 likes

    • Grant says:

      David P,
      You Yankees just don’t understand Europe, the EU and the Euro. But, don’t worry, Stephanie Flanders will explain it all to you in simple langauge . 
      ( Hey, Steph, got that DCF concept sorted yet ? ).
      There is no problem, everything is fine and under control.
      Our charismatic leaders, Barry Rosso, Rumpy Pumpy and “Cathy” Ashton will save us.
      Send in the Marines  !

         0 likes

    • dave s says:

      The possible default by Italy . The chaos creeping up on the Euro. The French negotiating with Gaddafi perhaps. The Syrian crisis.
      And on the BBC? Still mote and more coverage of the Murdoch.
      Have they gone stark raving mad?

         0 likes

      • Grant says:

        dave s,
        For the little children at the BBC, if they just bury their heads under the bedclothes, all the bad men will go away and we can all sleep happily ever after.
        Apart from that naughty Mr. Rupert, who must have his botty smacked.
        There, now , isn’t the World a lovely place after all ?

           0 likes

      • David Preiser (USA) says:

        They’ve been mad since the late 60s, Dave.

           0 likes

      • John Anderson says:

        dave s

        You must be part of the Murdoch conspiracy

           0 likes

    • Jane Tracy says:

      Dont worry remember that Stephanie Flanders the BBCs economic editor assured us when the problems began that Greece and Ireland would get nowhere near default…

      Only two months ago Stephanie headlined a piece with the Greek bailout is going well….

      Could she be more out of touch?

         0 likes

      • hippiepooter says:

        It’s not what the truth is that matters its what the BBC wants us to believe the truth to be.

        It all goes down the memory hole when they  .. (ahem) ‘misjudge’, and there is the gatekeeper of BBC propaganda power to make sure very few will delve in to dredge it up.

           0 likes

  10. Grant says:

    Once Gordon the Moron weighs in you know the well is truly poisoned.

       0 likes

  11. Grant says:

    The news is so unremittingly depressing, unless you are a Beeboid of course, that I was cheered by some light relief.
    R4 “From our own Correspondent ” on Saturday had a Beeboidess in Algeria. She helpfully informed we stupid listeners that Algeria “is a muslim country”  and there ” is very little alcohol”. She didn’t trouble herself with the position of women there , but found an Arab shopkeeper  who was importing foreign beverages.  Wily old Mustafa has discovered the joys of Irn Bru and the wily Scots are selling it to him. 
    Good luck to Mustafa. I have never been able to convince muslims that Irn Bru does not contain alcohol.  ( Beeboidess helpfully informed us that it contains “E-numbers ” ).
    God bless the BBC  !   Slainte  !

       0 likes

  12. My Site (click to edit) says:

    I found this interesting, not least because of the source:

    iburrell ian burrell Am bombarded with calls from BBC press officers and spin doctors “What line are you taking?” Trying to cover phone hacking! #controlfreakery
    Any other news monopolies have endless phalanxes of press officers and spin doctors on staff to ‘liaise’ with other media on ‘the narrative’?

       0 likes

  13. D B says:

    A crumb of nourishment: Johann Hari suspended by Independent .

       0 likes

    • Grant says:

      DB,
      Will be top news story at the BBC !

         0 likes

    • John Anderson says:

      I thought the only crooked journalists were small-fry in the Murdoch press,  not mainstream headlined opinion writers at the Indie ?

      Alfonso – where are you ?  Serious press misbeviour ?

      Or is Alfonso the dog that does not bark ?

         0 likes

  14. cjhartnett says:

    I am cutting and pasting my interviews with Saddam as we stood on the gallows together in silence for five minutes to show my respects to the death of mainstream liberal journalism!
    Maybe Rupert will find him a job!

    On pm tonight I hear that way too many blacks/travellers are getting excluded from schools…clearly the schools have the problem and not the vulnerable and the marginalised!
    Thankfully the Childrens Commisssioner…yes, some flunkie of a social worker from Geordieland…is on her way into sort it….a public enquiry ought to do it!
    Send for Sharon Shoesmith!

       0 likes

    • Grant says:

      cj,
      Have you ever seen the Woody Allen film “Zelig”  ?

         0 likes

      • cjhartnett says:

        Indeed!
        Woody might be to blame for this ” I say I`m a comedian/journalist; and therefore I am” mentality.
        The intention seems to be enough-Brigstocke, Hari clearly have made careers in this way!
        We are all Mr Benns these days….in and out of closets ad infinitum.

           0 likes

        • Grant says:

          cj,
          I don’t think even Zelig claimed to have interviewed Saddam. Did you “salute his indefatigability ? ”   πŸ˜€

             0 likes

  15. Deborah says:

    About a month ago the BBC had a programme about the charedi Jews of Stamford Hill which on viewing seemed rather to centre on one character – who had served time in one of Her Majesty’s establishments.  I can only assume that the BBC had to search very hard to find such a person.  The man also seemed to have a drink problem which is probably even rarer amongst Jews (not just the ultra-orthodox) than possibly being detained in clink.

    What a difference a month and change of TV channel makes.  Last night ITV had a programme about the Jews of Manchester.  How much more sympathetic (or perhaps realistic).  Jews were not painted as crooks or drunkards.  OK – the lady that gave the greater amount of opinion/explanation was a bit dipsy – but reassuring to know that not all Jews are university professors.

    Antisemitsm on the BBC? Couldn’t be – some of their best friends are Jewish.

       0 likes

    • John Anderson says:

      …………as you say, Deborah – “some of the BBC’s friends are Jewish.”

      The old sick and evil cop-out,  it has been going on for many decades.

      Out of 100 BBC “journalists” – how many take the Palestinian narrative as gospel ?

      How many take the Israeli narrative as gospel ?

      I would say 95% v 5%.

      And they call themselves “journalists” ?

      I would not mind so much if – maybe – a big “middle” of BBC journos were “Not sure,  Undecided”.  Say 40% ?

      It suggests to me that the anti-Israel approach is in the BBC genes. 

      In their genes.  Boaden is a lier if she denies this.

      The whole BBC approach sickens me – as a lapsed Christian. 

      The world has seen this all before,  the demonisation of the Jews. 

      The BBC was pacifist before WW2,  refused to let Churchill on the airwaves to warn against Hitler.  

      I doubt if most BBC “journos” know the sick and criminal track-record of their employer in the 1930s.  But then they mostly regard Churchill as some kind of loonie.  Out of step with public opinion.

      But when does the BBC give a toss about public opinion – it is the BBC group-thinkopinion that matters.  Inside the BBC/Guardian bubble.

      …………….

         0 likes

      • Grant says:

        John,
        Yes, some people need to be reminded that the BBC’s political stance is nothing recent.

           0 likes

    • Grant says:

      Deborah,
      Yes, I saw it. They managed to focus on the one individual they could find who was not typical. Blatant BBC anti-Semitic bias.

         0 likes

    • noggin says:

      hmm amazing how we ve all moved on since Fagin,
      apart of course from beebo & by a quirke of fate, a large number of cartoonists from Gaza,(maybe its  twinned with broadcasting house)
       “some of their best friends are jewish” ….Deb… just check the christmas card list πŸ˜‰

      strange but true

         0 likes

  16. Grant says:

    Whatever happened to Vince Cable  ?

       0 likes

    • All Seeing Eye says:

      He actually died seven years ago from an overdose of self-importance.

      There’s only a limited budget to thaw him out at Christmas and for every other episode of Question Time.

         0 likes

      • David Preiser (USA) says:

        Hey, maybe St. Vince wil be resurrected to continue his self-declared war on Murdoch.

           0 likes

    • Buggy says:

      Whatever happened to Vince Cable ?”

      Shhhh ! He’s like The Candyman: say his name three times and he’ll reappear from his lair

         0 likes

      • Wally Greeninker says:

        Too late!  -he got an extended intervew wih Eddie  Mair on radio 4’s PM  today- along the lines of ‘how does it feel to be a totally vindicated man?’

           0 likes

  17. Jon S says:

    Paxman on Newsnight being a complete wanker again

       0 likes

  18. Jon S says:

    how can an organisation that’s full of gays and dykes be impartial?

       0 likes

    • David Gregory says:

      Well as a rule of thumb being gay doesn’t usually impact on my reporting on peregrine falcons or windfarms. But you know, it’s a struggle obviously.

         0 likes

      • Grant says:

        David,
        But your reporting on gay falcons may be biased ?

           0 likes

      • deegee says:

        Can’t think of a more gay name for a falcon than Perigrine.

           0 likes

      • hippiepooter says:

        There again David, I’m sure being homosexual didn’t do you any harm in gettng a job at the BBC, what with its huge imbalance in the number of homosexuals who work there, which I’m sure has absolutely nothing to do with discrimination.  ‘Hideously homosexual’?  Forfend.

           0 likes

        • David Gregory says:

          It didn’t do any harm (but then why should it?) or any good I would have thought. I guess when looking for a Science Reporter my PhD and body of work carried more weight. Do you think I should wear a tighter shirt for my next interview?

             0 likes

          • John Horne Tooke says:

            “I guess when looking for a Science Reporter my PhD and body of work carried more weight.”

            Can you swear to that, after all the other environmentalists in your BBC comune are Arts graduates. Seems science doesn’t have much say at the BBC in the environmental department, but then again why should it , environmentalism is not science.

               0 likes

          • David Preiser (USA) says:

            No offense, David, but your BBC bio mentions that “shameless flirting” in an interview got you your first job at the BBC.  I would submit to you that similar behavior by a heterosexual male would have been considered sexual harrassment, and there is a double standard for homosexuals.

               0 likes

            • John Horne Tooke says:

              If the BBC employ a scientist, he has to be one who treats science as a political activity. I could not trust anyone who thinks that a small trace gas can cause all the ills in the world.

              http://www.numberwatch.co.uk/warmlist.htm

              When it comes to science the BBC is a dead duck. The only person who comes close to using science as science is the “amateur” astronomer Patrick Moore, and for his enthusiasm he was relagated to the dead zone.

                 0 likes

              • hippiepooter says:

                Good point DP.  Oh, here’s the link

                http://www.bbc.co.uk/midlandstoday/content/articles/2007/04/24/davidgregory_feature.shtml

                At least DG can debate on here with more grace and coherence than Dez/Scott – oh, and doesn’t – as far as we know – have the hots for Islamic terrorists.

                   0 likes

                • David Preiser (USA) says:

                  hippie, I didn’t bring it up to insult homosexuals or to cause any offense to DG.  I am merely pointing out that there is the appearance of a double standard.  I will gladly admit to being wrong if there’s evidence of a similar statement for a heterosexual male.

                  Knowing the general animus on this blog towards homosexuality, I suspected it would cause more trouble than it was worth, and the only reason I even mention it now is because DG brought up the hiring issue himself.

                  I agree that he is fully deserving of our respect here because of the way he engages with us, and don’t want this to open the door for general critical digs at homosexuals.

                     0 likes

                  • hippiepooter says:

                    No need to be so tetchy DP, you’ve raised a very valid instance of BBC hypocrisy and the homosexual mafia that exists at the BBC.  That isn’t ‘animus’ towards homosexuals per se, it is animus against hypocrisy and unfair discrimination.

                    A composer friend of mine went into one at a dinner once at the way homosexuals discriminate in the music world – and he lives in a threesome with 2 lesbians!  Always best to avoid over-generalisations in all types of situations.

                    We all have our prejudices but most of us dont let them interfere with how we treat people as individuals, as I’m sure is abundantly clear to any fair-minded person in my previous post.

                       0 likes

                    • hippiepooter says:

                      Besides, as is a well known fact in the United States, all limeys are fags! :p

                         0 likes

            • David Gregory says:

              Ahhh the early days of the internet when we didn’t know throwaway jokes would follow us around forever! Although my finance would I hope disagree I doubt me flirting with anyone would get me a table at a Wimpy bar let alone a job. 

                 0 likes

              • My Site (click to edit) says:

                throwaway jokes’

                Tricky things, especially in print.

                There other day you made a cracker that was funny and made a point, that I applauded.

                However, not really the first time that what was apparently ‘just joking’ seems to have not been appreciated as such until explained. My teens have realised that this seldom digs ’em out of a hole, especially on social networks, and even if true. So they don’t go there.

                One can however now see how the likes of Mr. Brigstocke have risen to the top.

                   0 likes

          • Grant says:

            David G,
            But how many Beeboids have PhDs in science ?  I would not be surprised if you are alone.
            How many Beeboid “science correspondents” have a first degree in science , let alone a PhD.
            How many Beeboid “correspondents” have any qualifications in the subjects they report on ?  Economics, business, defence etc. etc.
            Do you see the point ? 
            I salute your academic achievements, but I resent being lectured to by Beeboids who know far less about a subject than I do.  Peston and Flanders spring to mind, but the list is endless. 
            Why am I paying for this garbage ?

               0 likes

            • John Horne Tooke says:

              The BBC has steered us back to the time of the Alchemists. The age of the Enlightment seems dead.

              “History is full of people who out of fear, or ignorance, or lust for power has destroyed knowledge of immeasurable value which truly belongs to us all. We must not let it happen again.”
              — Carl Sagan

              Too Late

              “SCIENTISTS at the University of East Anglia (UEA) have admitted throwing away much of the raw temperature data on which their predictions of global warming are based. ”
              http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article6936328.ece

              “When I asked Oxburgh if [Keith] Briffa [CRU academic] could reproduce his own results, he said in lots of cases he couldn’t,” Stringer told us. “That just isn’t science. It’s literature. If somebody can’t reproduce their own results, and nobody else can, then what is that work doing in the scientific journals?”
              http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/07/07/quote-of-the-week-cru-is-now-a-candidate-for-publication-in-the-journal-of-irreproducible-results/

              And if the data has been destroyed how can we know how and why it was “adjusted”?

                 0 likes

              • Grant says:

                JHT,
                Oh , so true.  Carl Sagan, a candle in the dark.
                But, I suspect we are seeing the end of the Enlightenment. I am just glad I saw it.

                   0 likes

            • David Gregory says:

              Hi Grant. Well of course Dr David Whitehouse was probably one of the first Science Corrs and he has a PhD in astronomy. Pallab Ghosh also has a Doctorate as I recall.

                 0 likes

              • My Site (click to edit) says:

                Dr David Whitehouse was probably one of the first Science Corrs and he has a PhD in astronomy. Pallab Ghosh also has a Doctorate’

                A much appreciated set of answers. As we’re on a roll, one more as I am not so familiar with these current household names.

                Where do they carry out their roles now?

                I just ask because, given the importance of factual reporting in science & tech, especially with areas such as (A)GW, energy, etc, the ‘analysis’ of such as Mssrs Black, Shuckman & Harrabin often seem poorly informed, either in choice of source, or what interpretations are made. This may be simply due to their ‘experience’.

                In a £4Bpa multi-national news entity the extent of the team does seem a bit sparse, possibly due to the cuts.

                But I do go beyond qualifications, as you can have a Professor with an agenda who is either partial or an idiot, or a media grad with an ‘O’ level in metalwork who is simply a superb journalist.

                Let us also not forget the great contributions of Justin Webb and the highly-qualified Ms. Watt (no relation). But the forays into science of the former with Mr. ‘Science is settled’ Miliband on Newsnight, or the latter’s role in the ‘reporting’ of Pres. Obama’s speech on such topic were not stellar.

                http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/newsnight/susanwatts/2009/01/restoring_science_to_its_right.html?postId=76489472#comment_76489472

                   0 likes

          • Millie Tant says:

            PhD from which university?

               0 likes

            • David Gregory says:

              Liverpool University. It should still be in the library!

                 0 likes

              • John Horne Tooke says:

                Since you are answering questions can you give the link to or the names of the 2,000 scientists who say AGW is proven and non-debatable. 
                http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/special_report/1998/10/98/global_warming/213547.stm 
                 
                Or is it 3,000 
                http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/1435009.stm 
                 
                Seeing as the BBC always check their facts before printing news it should not be too difficult to go to the archives for the names. 
                 
                Or would you agree that these numbers are meaningless as AGW theory is based on only 62 scientists say so. 
                 
                “In total, only 62 scientists reviewed the chapter in which this statement appears, the critical chapter 9, “Understanding and Attributing Climate Change.” Of the comments received from the 62 reviewers of this critical chapter, almost 60 per cent of them were rejected by the IPCC editors. And of the 62 expert reviewers of this chapter, 55 had serious vested interest, leaving only seven expert reviewers who appear impartial.” ” 
                http://climateobserver.blogspot.com/2009/08/ipcc-2500-climate-scientists-and.html 
                 
                By the way I don’t expect an answer as it is an impossible task unless you start making names up or including such eminant scientists as Prince Charles (who is probably slightly less qualified than Captain Black of the BBC)

                   0 likes

  19. Hugh says:

    I wasn’t quite sure what I’d come across when in 1996 I decided not to go with my wife and younger daughter on a tour of Universal Studios, but to wander down Ventura Boulevard, looking in the shops and spend an hour or so talking to the Democrat activists at one of their Clinton re-election campaign shops set-up in short-lease premises. Like most people in the UK I was familiar with door stepping candidates at election-time, but had never seen political lobbying up close. Since then I’ve encountered backwoods activists who argue that the government is the enemy and arm themselves to the teeth and most recently I’ve given financial support to the Taxpayers’ Alliance, the Back Boris campaign and Eric Odem. Which I suppose is a way of saying that my political interest is recent, partial and weak.  
       
    But in reading the analyses here, on Guido and other places I’m inclined to think there’s now a sustained attack on our liberty from the left and I’m beginning to wonder if going on a Countryside Alliance or Back the Cuts march is going to be enough to preserve the freedoms I value. So whilst there’s a lot of political chatter on here about the damage the BBC are doing to the fabric of the UK, there don’t seem to be too many people with suggestions about what if anything is to be done about it. To me it’s a bit like standing looking at a road traffic accident with people dying in front of my eyes and saying ‘ … yep, he’s choking on his vomit, you can see his rib-cage sucking in as he desperately tries to beathe, or she’s almost certainly going to bleed to death from that severed artery in her arm.’ It really doesn’t seem right not to do anything, but what?  

       0 likes

    • John Anderson says:

      Hugh

      Yes,  much of the time we are pissing into the wind.

      But I have seen stuff taken up from this minor blogsite and broadcast elsewhere,  in the UK and also the US.

      Ande we all spread the word that the licence fee is pernicious.

      In the meanwhile this site RECORDS,  day by day,  the bias of the BBC.    At some point,  by whomever,  the outright and blatant bias over many years will be summarised – with the sort of detail that people like Craig have documented.

         0 likes

    • Grant says:

      Hugh,
      I think that is a good summary of the situation.
      Years ago I was quite active in various pressure groups etc. without being affiliated to any political party.
      I am afraid that now I am so disillusioned, I do very little which I know is a cop-out.
      And John Anderson is right, some points on this site are picked up and appear elsewhere.
      For me, B-BBC is a form of therapy !  But, in your case, good luck with your efforts.

         0 likes

      • NotaSheep says:

        Therapy seems to sum it up for me too. I am managing to stay calmer now becasue of my blog and commenting here than would have been posible without either. The problem is that the quantity of provocation has increased and so I am probably no less stressed than before!

           0 likes

    • hippiepooter says:

      Excellent point Hugh, and sadly, after going so long this site without anything being generated in ‘reality’, I can’t see it ever happening.  From time to time I think what goes up here does a bit of good, but overwhelmingly it’s just a form of therapy for us, and it’s all its ever going to be till the jackboots kick down our doors and haul us away for that ‘political re-education’ that we’ve failed to avail ourselves of from the BBC.

      I think Fraser from Dad’s Army coined a good catchphrase for this site over the lack of will to take ‘real life’ action.

         0 likes

      • David Preiser (USA) says:

        Not entirely true, I think.  This site has affected real changes a couple times at the BBC, and drawn wider attention to things a few times.  Even if it’s very minor, they know someone is watching, and others know it as well.

           0 likes

    • dave s says:

      The communist regimes eventually collapsed when the conflict between reality and the world became unsustainable.
      The collapse was unexpected, swift and complete.
      The way of the world can only be denied for a time and those who , from whatever strange motive, try to re order reality to fit a wished for and  unreal world always fail.
      In the process terrible things happen and great harm is done to millions.
      The current situation cannot last. What we call the educated elites in the West , having lost the battle for communism and a re ordering of our economic activities have indulged in a grotesque attempt to re engineer us – social re engineering if you like- to make us worthy to live in their dream world. All many of us complain about here is this  imposition of unreality which the BBC so assiduously promotes. Fom multiculturalism through to militant environmentalism always remembering there are no absolute truths, no moral truths and all judgements are personal.
      It is a deliberate attempt to destroy the truly conservative forces in our society and start again with a new type of man.
      The forces are far far stronger than they know and will inevitably re assert themselves. It will be unexpected, swift and many of us will not be entirely happy about it. But it will happen and it will be real.

         0 likes

      • Hugh says:

        The post was my way of trying to find out if there was something I should be doing other than what I do already. When I post on here I’m aware there are people posting who are much better informed then I am about the politics of media, and I was trying to tap into that expertise. I get the feeling that this blog probably is read by heavyweight opinion formers and if can make a cogent contribution then I will. There was at the time of posting, also a sense of helplessness that the Coalition was dying on its feet, but then Brown stepped in with his absurd allegations, which the BBC swallowed hook and line and sinker, and the pressure was off for a while. Thanks all.

           0 likes

      • dave s says:

        2nd line; their instead of the .

           0 likes

  20. Lloyd says:

    What a spineless twat Cameron is. Will somebody please put him out of his misery, he’s not fit to lead this once proud nation – I fucking despise him.

       0 likes

    • Roland Deschain says:

      What?  You’ve only just realised? =-O

         0 likes

    • Grant says:

      Lloyd,
      Quite. He is pathetic. But not as bad as Willets !

         0 likes

    • NotaSheep says:

      When he beat Davis, assisted by the BBC don’t forget, I was suspicious but willing to give him a chance. Well anyone would be better than Gordon Brown (Ed Balls excepted). Unfortunately Cameron has proved to be a CINO and a coward. It is probbaly too late for the UK as the Labour party, their friends in the BBC and of course the EU have all but destroye its soul, its independence and its future.

         0 likes

  21. hippiepooter says:

    Well might Ed Miliband look smug and satisfied that his tail is wagging Cameron’s dog.  The proper position of Her Majesty’s Government is to let due process take its course, but instead Cameron has let himself be railroaded by the propaganda power of the BBC.  Wither Baldwin’s ‘power without responsibility – the prerogative of the harlot throughout the ages?’  All we hear from Cameron is a squeal and an abdication of the responsibilities of Government.  This Coalition cannot last for much longer.  The propaganda guns of the BBC have their sites trained firmly on the heart of British democracy.

    Its the BBC wot won it!

       0 likes

    • Grant says:

      Hippie,
      You are right. Cameron has handled this with all the experience and maturity of a 14-year old. To be outsmarted by Ed the Muppet who is not much older is quite pathetic.

         0 likes

      • hippiepooter says:

        I wouldn’t even say he’s been outsmarted by Ed the Red.  Not at all.  Its just that the BBC has been acting as Ed Miliband’s press officer and Cameron has funked it.

        Still, there’s all those Christian families who want to foster but wont accept homosexuality as normal that he can take it out on.  Hang a few Christians in Whitehall Dave, that’ll get the BBC adoring you!

           0 likes

  22. As I See It says:

    For some reason the phrase ‘poor Cameron’ pops into my head. And it’s in the voice of that mocking parrot from the Robinson Crusoe TV series (made in Europe, dubbed into English) that use to say ‘poor Robinson’.

    I hold no particular brief for Murdoch but now there is only one media bully our PM is scared of….shhhh…it’s the BBC….

       0 likes

  23. George R says:

    More INBBC propaganda for ‘Arab spring’ trying to link some INBBC utopian: ‘Islam-Arab spring-Revolution’, not the reality of: ‘Islam-Muslim Brotherhood-Repression’.

    Alternative view from Glenn Beck which INBBC censors out:

    (2 min video):

    http://www.glennbeck.com/2011/05/25/graphic-content-brian-sacks-horrifying-arab-spring-commercial

    AND:



    Ironically, INBBC’s blurb for more on Islam appears on BBC webpage indicating mass Muslim exodus from the ‘Arab spring’ and Maghreb, as unstoppable Islamic colonisation of E.U. speeds up, and E.U becomes Eurabia.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-14103752

       0 likes

  24. George R says:

    BBC-Democrat: pushing its ‘get Murdoch’ political agenda globally.

    What’s BBC-Democrat’s top headline on its America newspage?

    -Obama and Syria? No.

    -Debt with China? No

    -Unemployment? No.

    -US and Libya? No.

    It is, of course:

    “US senator requests hacking probe”

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world/us_and_canada/


    And Beeboid Peston, in his publicly provided political column, discards his fake economist hat and puts on his Labour political hat, like his Labour peer father:


    Who is more powerful – Murdoch or Parliament?

    Next question?:

    Which is more powerful – BBC or Parliament?





       0 likes

    • NotaSheep says:

      That’s an easy one; the BBC is way more powerful than the UK parliament. The BBC has the reach that parliament can only dream of. The BBC can mould public opinion in ways that parliament canoy conceive of being able to do. The BBC are the masters now. My only hope is that this defeat of News International will make them so sure of themselves that they will over-reach, the trouble is who will be there to catch them out?

         0 likes

  25. cjhartnett says:

    With all this Murdoch stuff, you`d think that the Eurozone wasn`t an issue.
    On Today this morning Humprys just happened to have Romano Prodi on the dog n bone to give us the benefit of his dispassionate wisdom from Mt Olympus( 65Euros I believe from Sothebys!).
    You`ll not be surprised to hear that there`s some stroppiness from our Vespa riding chums. These deluded pasta munchers seem to think that the Euros is crap and why the hell should they have to pay for Prodis bonuses for some Brussels legacy windfarm…it was all such a blur!
    Upshot is and was-blame Silvio! But of course!…
    We know Humph is an expert of all things Greek what with his holiday homes and all…where was Polly Toynbee or any one of the other Tuscan tosspots to give us the real flavour of Italian thinking?
    Would trust Paolo Di Canio over Prod in all matters Italian.
    Not all bad news though-I note Libby “bloody” Purvis didn`t do her usual misery memoirs from the salon this morning in Midweek. I have been praying for quite some time that this sinecure to cultural slops would get a holiday…maybe Libby was sent to Tuscany?
    In any event thanks to all the interceeding saints of Rome to spare me Purv -if only for the one week!
    Bungee jump or not-at least she can be prised from the conversation stone at Bush House!
    Maybe measuring up the Salford Penthouse for the Venetian Blinds?…the answer my friend…

       0 likes

  26. Grant says:

    BBC News at 1 headline “The number of people in jobs has gone up so why have benefit claims increased ? “.  

       0 likes

    • Cassandra King says:

      Hmmm its a right bleedin mystery innit? Couldnt be anything to do with the rule that any EU immigrant can now cash in on the benefits gravy train from day one could it?

         0 likes

    • hippiepooter says:

      Under Labour BBC headlines addressed this anomoly thus:-

      ‘Job Figures up but so is unemployment’

      They didn’t try to infer anything adverse to the Government of the day.  Well, that day at least.

         0 likes

  27. My Site (click to edit) says:

    As a bit of an enviro-type, I am not the greatest fan of unsolicited mail, though as a media-type i can see DM has a role in the marketing mix.

    Hence I followed Panorama’s latest outing with some interest.

    http://www.printweek.com/bulletin/printweekdailybulletin/article/1079797/bbc-defends-junk-mail-panorama-criticism-mounts/

    The point where educating and informing strays into industry-damaging advocacy based on selective editorial (and, possibly, not very accurate reporting) becomes key, as various media monopolies try and put others out of business.

       0 likes

    • Lloyd says:

      I wonder how many times Panorama has to be criticized, complained about or forced to apologize before it’s taken off the air?

         0 likes

  28. Millie Tant says:

    At least one good piece of news today – the unbearably smug and biased Anita Anand is leaving The Daily Politics.  Two cheers! Andrew Neil, while presenting flowers and planting kisses on departing presenter, asked what she is going to be doing (you’d think he’d know). She mentioned that she is going to do a programme on Radio 5 – good; I don’t listen to that station – and will also be doing things on Radio 4. Groan…That station is bad enough already without another Obama-worshipping creep.  I do wonder whether the blatant hat-wearing cheerleading antics for Obama, which of course have often been noted on this blog, have had anything to do with her leaving The Daily Politics.  Was that too blatant even for the Beeboid Corporation? They didn’t include it in the clips highlighting her time on the programme. Maybe it has begun to hit home that their over-the-top Obama-promoting antics haven’t gone unnoticed and will continue to be highlighted on here and elsewhere as exposing the myth of Beeboid impartiality which it continues to benefit from and hide behind.  

       0 likes

    • Grant says:

      Millie,
      Careful, gorgeous pouting Anita’s replacement may be even worse. But you can be sure it will be a BBC “girlie”.  Time for a blonde or maybe it should be a “black”.
      I’ll

         0 likes

      • Grant says:

        I’ll put my money on an “Asian” muslim.
        Certainly no chance of a white, middle-aged male !

           0 likes

      • jarwill101 says:

        Talking of blondes, Grant, the smart money’s on Geert Wilders.

           0 likes

      • Millie Tant says:

        Fear not, Grant! Your trusty sleuth has found out that it will be presented in future by Andrew Neil and Jo Coburn. I can only say that’s a relief. No more high-pitched bossiness – well, apart from Andrew, that is!

           0 likes

    • sue says:

      Ms Anand was hosting Midweek R4 this morning. (It could be permanent, not quite sure.)  Near the end she and assorted guests had a jolly scornful laugh and snigger against Sarah Palin and Pres. Reagan.
      Obviously completely confident that the R4 audience would enjoy it too.

         0 likes

      • john says:

        Sue
        The BBC couldn’t care less if the audience enjoy their output.
        If some hapless listeners do, then it will have been unintentional, as they broadcast to themselves these days.

           0 likes

        • David Preiser (USA) says:

          If Anand is moving to radio, she’ll be free to wear her Obamessiah hat and nobody will see.

             0 likes

      • cjhartnett says:

        Still she`s a tenacious barnacle alright!
        I thought nothing short of a bomb in my turban would have got Libby Purvis to vacate the studio on a Wednesday!
        Hats off to Anand!

           0 likes

  29. My Site (click to edit) says:

    Well, a barge load of ordure has hit a windmill.

    I wonder, outside ‘the bubble’, which seems to comprise a bunch of Ritalin-charged kids rather than serious pols or professional news folk, is this a more sober account…?

    http://gordonsrepublic.brandrepublic.com/2011/07/13/latest-on-the-news-international-hacking-scandal-2/

    And the author is not noted for his shrinking violetism.

       0 likes

  30. George R says:

    Another ISLAMIC JIHAD massacre in MUMBAI today:

    -a mere secondary story for Islam Not BBC (INBBC).

    For reports, from Indian TV, NDTV (much in English language), politically unfiltered by INBBC, go to NDTV:

    http://www.ndtv.com/

       0 likes

  31. John Horne Tooke says:

    “An overwhelming majority of voters want Britain to withdraw from the European Union – with support draining away thanks to the economic chaos surrounding the single currency.”

    Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2013831/Majority-voters-want-pull-EU-economic-chaos.html#ixzz1S0Jda5XVNow

    I’m sure David Gregory is pushing the BBC to represent the nation in this. The nation wants to get out of the EU, and as with the nations outrage with Murdoch which was the reason the BBC took up its anti-NI stance, this must be the headlines all week. All those pro_EU MPS should be shamed into resigning from Parliament.

    “B-BBC understimates how the nation feels about a newspaper deliberately trying to hack the phones of dead children, the families or our war dead and victims of terrorism. ”

    http://biasedbbc.org/2011/07/pulling-whose-strings.html#comments

    The BBC underestimates how the nation feels about the EU

    Maybe someone from the BBC can tell me why they represent the nation only when it suits them.

       0 likes

  32. David Preiser (USA) says:

    The BBC reports that Bernanke is threating yet another round of printing money for a “stimulus”.  Because he’s speaking as a representative of The Obamessiah Administration, the BBC gives his point of view straight up, with no mention whatsoever that the previous two attempts didn’t work and basically threw vast amounts of money down the toilet, adding considerably to the nation’s debt.  More than half the debt now can be attributed to specific Obamessiah policies, yet the BBC won’t tell you.

    No critical voice allowed through to wonder at how pathetic it is for him to cause the dollar to actually drop against a euro which is on seriously shaky ground itself.  It’s a monetary own goal, but the BBC thinks it’s only worth a news brief setting out the Keynesian viewpoint.  Stephanie Flanders will be on hand to approve any minute now, I’m sure.

       0 likes

    • Jane Tracy says:

      I am afraid that Stephanie ” I see no signs of a pick-up in inflation” Flanders is at a party to celebrate the end of inflation after it dipped from an annual rate of 4.5% to 4.2% where she is comparing useless forecasts out until 2060 from people who get the next year wrong….

         0 likes

  33. George R says:

    It seems that Russia TV (‘RT’) presents a fairer case on Murdoch debate than does BBC-NUJ (26 min video):

    http://rt.com/programs/crosstalk/voicemailgate-murdoch-empire-scandal/

       0 likes

  34. David Preiser (USA) says:

    Oh, dear, BBC favorite source HuffingtonPost has just suspended an editor for plagiarism, except there’s a problem:  apparently it’s standard practice at the HuffPo to re-package other people’s work as their own.

    The move has sparked widespread criticism that founder Arianna Huffington is seeking a scapegoat for a controversial practice that her site has long condoned — repackaging others’ work as its own.

    Critics contend that only outside pressure and bad publicity forced Huffington to react, and that there are few internal checks and balances to govern how and when to pick up others’ material.

    “I think [Lee] has been thrown under the bus,” one ex-HuffPo employee told the New York Post’s column Media Ink. “There were people who took much, but they never reacted — unless someone from outside said something.”

    The blowup was triggered this week when HuffPo Business Editor Peter Goodman summarily suspended Lee after AdAge columnist Simon Dumenco complained that she buried the link to his original story that formed the basis for her post.

    All part of the culture of churnalism, I suppose.  And the BBC does this often with AP wire service pieces and White House press releases.  But seeing as how the BBC feted Arianna for a full day when she launched the UK version, and especially considering the current calls for journalists to be the cleanest of the clean and be of the very highest moral standards, this had better be a featured story on the BBC immediately.

    For now, though:  ZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

       0 likes

  35. Jane Tracy says:

    I have radio fivelive on right now on the Tony Livesey show. Having been editor of the Daily Sport you might think that Tony is a man in a glasshouse throwing stones!

    However it gets better as he is interviewing Greg Dyke ex-Director of the BBC who is talking of media organisatiosn with too much power meaning Murdoch and completely ignoring the BBC itself. Will they find anyone else from the BBC to join in this orgy of nepotism?

       0 likes

  36. George R says:

    Phone-hacking and the political Left.

    Media Matters’ Hacking Charade

       0 likes

  37. Jon S says:

    Syrian School, why don’t the BBC do a documentary called Israeli School?

       0 likes

  38. Jeremy Clarke says:

    Apologies if this has been posted previously, but my attention was caught by this extraordinary report, courtesy of the BBC’s David Lewis:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-14048648

    ‘[Sheikh Raed Salah] is from a mainly Arab town in Israel and is the leader of a branch of the Islamic Movement.

    ‘The movement, whose stated aim is to advocate Islam among Arab Israelis, offers education and social services and promotes a Palestinian nationalistic stance.’

    I am sure Sheikh Salah loves ickle fluffy bunnies, too.

    He is also a poet:

    ‘You Jews are criminal bombers of mosques,
    Slaughterers of pregnant women and babies.
    Robbers and germs in all times,
    The Creator sentenced you to be loser monkeys,
    Victory belongs to Muslims, from the Nile to the Euphrates.’

    ( http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/andrewgilligan/100092424/extremist-ife-sponsors-a-man-who-calls-jews-germs-and-monkeys/ )

    More on this educator, philanthropist and all-round good egg can be found here. He is plainly not a very nice man.

    http://www.haaretz.com/among-the-believers-1.72844

    Yep. He is an activist in the same way that Adolf Hitler was a political activist.

       0 likes

    • Grant says:

      Jeremy,
      But, he doesn’t really mean it, it is just a form of words. You know arabic is a very flowery language   πŸ˜€

         0 likes

      • noggin says:

        yes come off it…..you know that arabic can have at leasst 6 meanings for every word,?(really helpful in the bullsh-t stakes)
        wait a minute…
        AND over 90% of those who recite the Quran can t speak arabic anyway??.
        AND, the earliest Quran found wasn t in even in arabic  anyway???,( excuse me while i scratch my head)

        …… in the valley of the blind  πŸ˜‰

           0 likes

        • noggin says:

          hey does it go to the tune…
          Im H,A.P.P.Y, i know i am im sure i am πŸ™‚

             0 likes

  39. David Preiser (USA) says:

    Here’s one for you:

    Obama warns Cantor: ‘Don’t call my bluff’ in debt-limit talks

    Say what?  (*smacks forehead*) Dude.  You’re not supposed to tell them you’re bluffing.

    Is this another nuance of His “finely-tuned brain”?  Or is it another shining example of the President’s “sophistry in the matter of confusing His enemies”?  It’s getting really hard to tell these days.

       0 likes

  40. NotaSheep says:

    5Live’s coverage of PMQs and David CINO Cameron’s statemnet on the hacking inquiry was as expected. An interview by a left-leaning BBC presenter with the BBC’s political correspondent and a journalist. So which journalist was chosen? Regular listeners to 5Live will need no clues; it was Kevin Maguire of The Mirror. That’s right, 5Live’s go to journalist, from the newspaper that supported Labour even when Michael Foot was its leader and Labour’s policies were even less popular than a News International investigative journalist is now.

       0 likes

  41. Bupendra Bhakta says:

    Of course it has been impossible to turn on any of the BBCC’s plurality of channels this past fortnight without getting the Murdoch story in yer face even before the echo of the on switch has died away.

    And so it proved again this morning.  The very first words I heard when I switched on Radio Pension Plan For Favoured BBCC Employees (or as they call it ‘Two’) were…

    ‘It reminds you of the mood when let me think oh yes when the Berlin Wall came down’

    Only at the BBCC, mate, only at the BBCC.  (Edit… and The Guardian, Independent, and Labour Party).

    The ‘presenter’ was the halfwit’s halfwit, Richard Madeley.

    And as for his daughter, Zoe, I’d like to give her a good spanking.

    No reason – I just would   πŸ˜›

       0 likes

    • Buggy says:

      It’s Chloe Madely, Bhupendra. She probably won’t let you spank her if you don’t have her name right.

         0 likes

      • Buggy says:

        Oh, and was it perchance a Murdoch publication of some sort which outed “Sticky Fingers” Madeley as a shoplifter ?

        That’d be a shock, huh ?

           0 likes

  42. My Site (click to edit) says:

    In other ‘news’…

    Seems the BBC has found some time spare for one of its periodic purges, and most of The Editors’ threads that were going off message have now been closed, including the latest.

    I mourn this one especially…

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/2011/05/our_next_step_in_news_blogging.html

    The promised answers never, surprisingly materialising. 600+ more pretty ticked off commenters (readers unknown).

    The irony of last posts on most not lost.

       0 likes

  43. George R says:

    Appeasing the Islamic Republic of Iran.

    “BBC TV channel jammed from Iran<!–sec1, 1rt–>

    http://www.tradearabia.com/news/MEDIA_202001.html

    Perhaps if Islam Not BBC (INBBC) is even more appeasing of the Islamic Republic of Iran, and more hostile towards Israel, then Ahmadinejad may reconsider.

    And, remember, INBBC (as I am sure you will), not to oppose the continued political propaganda presence of Ahmadinejad’s state TV, ‘PRESS TV’, from broadcasting its anti-West material, 24/7, from its London studios.

    After all, for INBBC, Iran’s ‘PRESS TV’ presence here must be politically desirable, whereas that of News International…

       0 likes

  44. Lloyd says:

    Even the deaths of 5 people in the Boston explosion wasn’t sufficient to budge Rebekah Brooks from her headline position on the 5live news this morning.

       0 likes

    • Deborah says:

      I knew jsut as soon as the deaths in Boston were announced last night that there was something the BBC were not telling me.  We were given no names – no company name – and no mention of families rushing to the scene.  My knowledge of Boston is limited to what I hear on Look North – but my guess proved correct – the dead people were not born and bred British.  But there was a delay telling us anything – I guess whilst the BBC decided on what they were going to report.

         0 likes

      • Millie Tant says:

        Ah, they’re immigrants! er…migrants. Sorry about that little slip at the beginning. I suppose they had to hold a case conference to decide whether the proles should be allowed to learn anything that could possibly dent ever so slightly the carefully constructed image of er…immigrants built up by the Beeboid Corporation and the “right-thinking” Labourites over so many years.

           0 likes

      • Buggy says:

        First thing Mrs Bug said when she read the story on Ceefax this A.M.:

        “Lincolnshire ? It’ll be a Polish still that’s blown up, then.”

        I can’t believe she’s the only one to have worked that out straightaway, so who do the Beeb think they’re fooling ?

           0 likes

  45. My Site (click to edit) says:

    SKY now doing a ‘review’ on twitter.

    Seems the thing to bear in mind is that what twitter dashes out may not be true.

    The MSM doesn’t do irony any more.

       0 likes

  46. My Site (click to edit) says:

    On my morning surf when, suddenly, another one of those odd banners appears, at least here…

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/correspondents/stephanieflanders/

    Like the last time, will this be a few minute job?

    And if such things are now to go across the BBC network, what will be deemed ‘critical’ and what ‘usual world stuff’?

    Oh, Ms. Brooks has quit.

       0 likes

  47. My Site (click to edit) says:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/2011/07/bbc_social_media_guidance.html

    Going well so far, all seem to agree.

    Not on the thread as such, but in meetings the length and breadth of the BBC new media empire….

       0 likes

  48. Millie Tant says:

    An unexpected and very interesting revelation emerged yesterday during an interview on Woman’s Hour yesterday with opera singer Christine Rice.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/console/b012fs69

    She explained (at 5mins 10secs)  that she had been doing a PhD in Physics but had taken a gap year during which she gone to the  Royal Northern College of Music and ended up as a singer.  What was of particular interest, though, was what she said when she was pressed about why she had given up Physics.

    This part of the conversation starts at 5mins 44 secs,  with Jenni asking her about having been working on global warming. 

    She said it was a buzz subject, mentioned the time span of climate change over tens of thousands of years compared with scientific research over twenty years and explained that while waiting for some satellite data, she had spent six months reading all the research to date.  What she had to say about climate change and the scientific data is at 5 44 – 7 00.

    I can see why the programme would want to put the subject of global warming on the question sheet for Jenni but the answer may not have gone down well in certain parts of Beeboidland. It is amusing that Jenni appeared to stumble over the words “global warming”. Had she not been schooled properly in her employer’s favourite cause or had she not peered over her glasses well enough to see?

       0 likes