Here you go, an Open Thread for the next few days. If you have spotted BIAS then this is the place to detail it.
OPEN THREAD
Bookmark the permalink.
Search Biased BBC
Recent Comments
- tomo April 20, 2024 at 2:59 pm on Weekend 20th April 2024Khant's trying to stoke a proper rebellion.
- Fedup2 April 20, 2024 at 2:12 pm on Weekend 20th April 2024Seems like the emir of londonistan wants to introduce pay per mile driving in londonistan - a final nail in...
- Thoughtful April 20, 2024 at 2:08 pm on Weekend 20th April 2024Funny thing is that it's not the same in Manchester where there are two main Jewish areas and they don't...
- Guest Who April 20, 2024 at 1:49 pm on Weekend 20th April 2024Luckily, a new breed is coming. https://x.com/joshxhowie/status/1781618987366822171?s=61 For a joke to work there has to be some truth to it...
- Zephir April 20, 2024 at 1:49 pm on Weekend 20th April 2024He would certainly need that gift now, especially if he dared show his face in London at weekends, which is...
- Guest Who April 20, 2024 at 1:47 pm on Weekend 20th April 2024This is actually very damning. https://x.com/nickdixoncomic/status/1781637011519992017?s=61 The BBC finally does a satire. The audience soun...
- Up2snuff April 20, 2024 at 1:47 pm on Weekend 20th April 2024Guest, at a guess I would say Mr Fox is refering to the aerial attack on the Twin Towers and...
- Zephir April 20, 2024 at 1:42 pm on Weekend 20th April 2024psrty gate party gate party gate week after week after week
- Broadcasting-on-Behalf-of-the-Caliphate April 20, 2024 at 1:38 pm on Weekend 20th April 2024Good advice. Same applies to men being attacked by other men - a good kick to the crown jewels for...
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
For those who missed Eddie Mairs interview of a few weeks ago-Jenni Murray has played it again(with Eddie cut out, of course!) on Womans Hour.
It concerned the problem that is left if a dad just disappears but cannot be declared dead( you`d think Womans Hour might like this!).
I wouldn`t argue that this is thorny, distressing and needs sorting-but I don`t see how Mair gives in ten minutes or so a few weeks back…then nothing happens or no kits are flown…so then Jenni Murray gets her chance to try to inflate the bouncy castle in the hope that Something Will Be Done.
Classic news progression by the BBC-find an issue and nurture said grievances until Someone Passes A Law About It.
Are the BBC able to cut and paste and re-edit previous interviews…would the woman have had to sign a contract to allow this repetition…is this cut and paste hacking and copyright breach…and does the woman get a repeat fee?
Originality…passion…quality and excellence!
That`s our BBC…originality eh?
And another thing.
I first heard the BBC use the words “moral duty” in connection with dear Fred Goodwin.
It turns out now that the private health companies…and yes maybe even the NHS…also have a “moral duty” to replace breast implants with a better slass of chicken fillet.
This word “moral”…funny how it comes round again like flared trousers isn`t it?
When are we to Be moral…as opposed to the default postion of being “non-judgemental”.
I think that I`m a better person for being “tolerant “of Sir Freds chosen lifestyle…as well as the poor and marginalised bankers and cosmetic conjurors of the City or Harley St.
“I hope some day that those at the BBC will join me and the world will live as one”
-isn`t that what John would have wanted now?
You wear flared trousers ?????
Remember the furore over the Tourette’s comment.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-16459651
Balls said in his comments to the bBC he would carry on. However at wednesday’s PMQ he said nothing, did not twich a muscle. Did the bBC report that in fact Balls modified his ignorant actions. So who was really to blame?
Cause. Effect. Result.Telling.
Editorial by ommission, again.
Well done free blogger.
Studied igrorance £4Bpa media monopoly.
Context is all.
Moving on……
I still think Balls should have worn this T-Shirt to PMQ’s
PM Cameron, Saudi Arabia and INBBC.
On ‘Today’, INBBC only allowed Beeboids to voice political policy opinion on PM Cameron’s current visit to Saudi Arabia.
First we had Beeboid E. Davis making some flip pacifist comment about the visit to Saudi Arabia only being about Britain wanting to sell defence equipment; and then we had Beeboid F. Gardner implicitly supporting ‘Arab Spring’ (that unstated Islamising exercise).
http://news.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/today/newsid_9677000/9677049.stm
The last British PM to visit Saudi Arabia was Labour’s Brown, who pathetically went there, dhimmi-like, (unavailingly) pleading for lower oil prices.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7467151.stm
Cameron (and INBBC) should have learnt that as far as Saudi Islamic royal family is concerned: Islamic jihad trumps kafir pleas for lower oil prices.
Cameron should beware of this:
“Saudi Billionaire Prince Al-Waleed Organised ‘Dwarf-Throwing Contests'”
http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/articles/281278/20120113/saudi-billionaire-prince-al-waleed-organised-dwarf.htm
Did my ears decieve me or did Thought for the Day feature Universal Giles Fraser yet again?
I guess that makes the ‘Occupy’ farce the X-Factor for wannabe lefty pundits.
Yes, of course it was Giles Fraser, telling us what Jesus’ thought for the day would have been if he had been in the studio.
It came just after a great crash and burn from Sarah Montague, when tagged onto the end of an interview on sex addiction of all things with the distractingly-named filmmaker Steve McQueen she had two bites at the cherry to get him to do a Loach and go on about how the Government’s film-funding policy was all wrong. Alas, in an uncanny echo of the stance adopted by the BBC complaints department he wasn’t having any of it and said the policy was “about right”. Not sure if he’ll be invited back.
ALERT! Watch out for Giles Frazer on Dancing With the Stars.
I admire the Nostradamus factor of this website. When Giles Fraser was first in the news many of the posters here predicted he would be on the BBC non-stop. How true that became!
Two different interviews: bBC and the Sky have both had Labour’s Twigg on about Gove’s proposals. No hard questions on the bBC news interview, Sky interview completely different. Pointed out the many, probably deliberate, failings of Labour’s teacher sacking procedures. Listen to what Labour proposed, i.e. we will be tough on bad teachers, but then put is sops to the unions to effectively make them unworkable. 17 teachers dismissed in 10 years says it all.
My kids were at the local secondary.
On thew whole, not bad.
But one of their loves, Geography, they were tanking on.
As were all their mates.
Only after a bit of rummaging and ‘playground omerta’ wrangling did we and other parents get to the cause. The teacher. Headmaster pulled a ‘we’re listening.. lessons learned…’ and then nothing changed.
They have been at an independent for a term now. A few B’s, but now A’s or A*’s, including Geography. Go figger.
TV programmes that are garbage: isn’t this the most disturbing aspect of BBC bias? The destruction of all our British, Judo-Christian cultural values and accumulated history by the dumbing down of television into a pre-digested pap that has no artistic or cultural value?
Nothing that’s ‘hard’ or ‘elite’ is wanted, because it is contrary to the BBC leftist agenda, the dumbing down of Britain to the lowest common denominator in its entertainment.
The BBC is at its most effective in marginalising or distorting anything of value. We are left with rubbish like ‘Sherlock’ – so that you have to be shown a nude dominatorix in order to appeal to an audience fed on on a diet of Eastenders and Doctors.
‘Documentaroies’ where a ‘celebrity’ host dominates every camera shot, because you need a ‘celebrity’ talking at you to predigest the material we really want to see.
Take Illuminations: The Private Lives of Medieval Kings – “Dr Janina Ramirez unlocks the secrets of illuminated manuscripts that were custom-made for kings and explores the medieval world they reveal”. Ruined, I turned off. We see more of the lovely Dr than we do of the manuscripts, waving her arms around and being a ‘personality’ in approved BBC style – all that training, at our expense to perform amateur dramatics. It’s not her fault.
Why did the BBC crow about Eastenders being the most watched prog at Xmas? Surely they should feel shame – this tripe where there is constant, unending rowing, fighting, screaming, hating. It has not a single redeeming feature. Heaven help the generations brought up on this, viewed every week as the BBC’s projected ‘norm’ of what is it to be British in the 2000s.
It is the cultural undermining of Britain to a leftist agenda that is the real enemy, even more than biased news reporting
I used to enjoy the music quiz “Face the Music”.
The idea of anything like that now is laughable.
I cannot understand why Eastenders is allowed to be aired. It is a foul influence on our society. For those growing up watching it, I fear the worst — Children and teens growing up in a stable environment of mostly good family and friends will be able to laugh off the negativity of Eastenders For those with few positive influences, what will they learn ? Expect to be miserable for the rest of your life, expect the worst from everyone you meet , survive by violence and aggression, . The BBC has created a vision of hell here on earth, a vision which they are working to make a reality. I honestly think the program says a great deal about the sorry state of the BBC and it is a national disgrace.
I absolutely agree but they have already won the war when East Enders constantly wins the TV award programmes. It is the nation’s favourite after all and I am ashamed to say it is now typical of huge parts of Britain. This tripe must have done untold harm to the children of this country. Does it teach respect for others? Does it teach good manners? Does it promote hard work? Does it promote decent family life? No of course not, IT IS THE BBC.
Cop Ali DIZAEI and black racism.
‘Daily Mail’ (2010)
“A criminal in uniform: Teflon Commander Ali Dizaei used race card to dodge jail for years. Now he’s got four-year term for framing an innocent man”
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1249382/Ali-Dizaei-GUILTY-perverting-course-justice.html#ixzz1jLXLiHUS
And today BBC-NUJ manages:
“Ali Dizaei trial: Met Police commander ‘abused powers'”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-16544613
‘Evening Standard’ today:
“Met boss Ali Dizaei ‘bullied and threatened innocent man'”
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-24027787-met-boss-bullied-and-threatened-innocent-man.do
BBC reports on a surprisingly late example of sexual abuse of boys by a Catholic priest in Salzgitter near Braunschweig.
They go into a lot of detail of the case and report it fully…including abuse before a Mass. This lat detail is very shocking for Catholics and the anger of Catholics is unambiguous.
But on reading the German Press report of the proceedings which show that the BBC reporter had covered the case quite well, an element was missing.
THe omission was surprising because it is given prominence with the other factors in the German Press.
This fact mentions the priest’s homosexuality.
In German:
“Offenbar hatte er mit Anfang 20 erste homosexuelle Neigungen bei sich bemerkt. Längere Beziehungen zu Männern habe er aber nicht gehabt, nur gelegentliche sexuelle Kontakte.”
Translation:
Apparently he had noticed homosexual tendencies in his early twenties. He had not had any long term relationships with men, but occasional sexual contacts.
This is crucial as the homosexual aspect regularly emerges in the German court cases of paedophile priests.
It is predominently teenage boys who are ‘abused’.
Thus is the basis for the Catholic church#s insistence that those with homosexual tendencies cannot proceed to the priesthood now.
Why the BBC left out this salient point, but covered the rest of the proceedings (covered in the German Press they link to), suggests an element of self-censorship.
To understand the Catholic abuse phenomon, and to ignore the homosexual aspect, does not lead to an informed understanding and improve the quality of the debate in this highly charged media issue.
I kind of assumed that the gender of the victims meant that he was homosexual. If the majority of priests are homosexual, the majority of victims – even if the abusers make up a small minority of priests – are going to be boys. It’s basic math, kind of like how stop-and-search in black neighborhoods where most of the crime is results in mostly black people getting stopped and searched. I’ll need more than that to decide this is proof that homosexuals are more likely to abuse children. Unless you’ve got numbers showing that the vast majority of priests are heterosexual who don’t abuse young girls.
I think a significant problem over the last few decades is that sexually active homosexuals joined the clergy, and continued to be sexually active (like at that seminary in Austria). Rather like in centuries past when so many clergy had mistresses, fathered children, etc. That’s probably why the Church has talked about barring open homosexuals from the priesthood.
News Channel having a nice bash at the nasty Tories for “ignoring” the women voter demographic by slashing child benefit for…er…well-off parents. Somehow, cutting the benefit will cost the Government more money. Women “hit hardest”.
Narrative? What Narrative?
Guardian exclusive
“Wealthy BBC women executives hit by child benefit changes”
‘Piracy’ student to be extradited
It would be nice if the BBC, rather than just report the facts, had provided a bit of background analysis.
You Tube is full of copyrighted material. So why is this guy facing five years inside, whereas the directors of Google (which owns YouTube) aren’t facing any charges?
And they could also have pointed out that our extradition arrangements with the USA are woefully one-sided.
There’s also something to be said for the time-honoured legal practice of saying that, if you commit a crime in a particular country, then it’s for that country (and only that country) to deal with the offence…
Jeff
Awww, BBC News full of sympathy for the guy who’s being extradited to the US for running a website pointing people to illegal free movies and tv shows. Mom outside the courthouse in tears, solemn Beeboid voice over.
Will the BBC now be equally sympathetic to getaway drivers for bank robberies?
Note to BBC: enabling and abetting a crime is enabling and abetting a crime. And this guy enabled and abetted hundreds of thousands of crimes, if not millions, and made money doing it. A bit more than “simply linking”, just like Google, which is how the Beeboid reporter just described it.
Yer honor, I was just driving a car, which happened to have bank robbers in it.
YouTube doesn’t post the copyrighted material themselves, YouTube staff don’t post the links themselves, and they take it down when requested. Not the same thing. The ugly reality of the Stop Internet Piracy Act – if it passes – will be a different deal altogether. In this case, there was due process of law. With SOPA, there won’t be. If the BBC is going to wring their hands over the reach of US law, they’re seriously missing the real issue.
David
The BBC article was neutral – I was just pointing out a bit of analysis would have been nice.
I don’t think the guy should be extradited, but IMHO it would have been good if the BBC had pointed out the kinds of arguments I put forward, as well as the ones you advanced, rather than just giving the bare facts of the case. 🙂
Jeff
PS David – It might be an idea to edit your post to include the word ‘allegedly’ in the third paragraph. 🙂
It’s not alleged that he made money. He says he did.
Sorry, Jeff, I was referring to the coverage on the BBC News Channel. I had posted it as a comment on its own at the end of the thread, but as soon as I hit the button I saw your comment and so moved it up as a reply.
In any case, I meant that the News Channel coverage is full of sympathy, the BBC reporter outside the courthouse defending the criminal acts as being “simply” what Google does. He may have been paraphrasing the defense lawyer’s position, but it came across as his own analysis. He did not say “the defense claim is….” The message was that this is not a crime, and that the US is too powerful. This was followed by a brief exchange on that theme with Phillipa Thomas back in the studio.
Same goes for the other segment they produced, complete with video of the criminal working at his laptop while on a train ride with his mother, and another clip of him walking on the street with her. A very sympathetic portrayal, which they wouldn’t do for someone who abetted a bank robbery.
In that case, I agree. I’m all for exploring the issues, but it should be done in a more balanced way…
Jeff
What I don’t get it why kids who post website links or look for UFO’s get extradited right away yet Assange and Muslim terrorists that I consider a real threat to life seem to get away with it.
I wonder how the BBC will treat people who find a way around their putative charges for iPlayer?
Mock the Week.
It’s just a forum for left wing comedians to vent their displeasure at the conservatives. That would be fair enough if what was being said was witty or funny but it would seem that the only prerequisit to get on a BBC panel show is to be a lefty. And I’m paying for that crap, DOH!
I used to watch it but it’s got so bad now I don’t bother. Anyway it was better with Frankie Boyle as at least he pushed the boundries whereas the rest are pretty tame and bloody lefties. Maybe Frankie was also a lefty but he was funny
On the BBC iPlayer site please have a look at last night’s idle chit chat show Question (but no real answers!) Time. I would urge you to fast forward to the time of approx. 45 mins 21 sec, wherein you will find Dimblebum, in response to Kelvin Mackenzie, quoting some idiot as saying “The Daily Mail is Britain’s worst enemy”, to which the audience responds with spontaneous and raptuous applause; here we have it then, an inadvertant outpouring of left wing bias sentiment on our national screen in what is surely meant to ben impartially composed audience. What more evidence does one need to support the fact that the BBC handpicks its audience so as to fit in with its left wing agenda?
Ah well, while the intent was obvious, he was not claiming but ‘merely quoting’, in that 1 degree of separation way the BBC likes to deploy, and the audience merely appeared more than open to his allusion.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b019hc6b/Question_Time_12_01_2012/?t=45m15s
Interesting enough, though. No quotes from other media about the Graun then? Unique.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/greenslade/2012/jan/13/richard-desmond-leveson-inquiry?INTCMP=SRCH
Who covers who, or not, depending. Indluding his paper, or the BBC…or…
Probably as well he avoided interactive comments.
Yes Dame Nikki Campbell does this, he will often want to give his own left wing opinion on something so will give it, pause then add “or so some might say”
The dame got picked up on this the other day by someone, but he still does it.
If the audience or anyone else thinks that the Daily Mail is Britains Worst Enemy (nice that they are so patriotic ) then what are they doing about it ?
Why does the BBC always promote this anti-teacher agenda, this left wing philosophy of ‘teachers are to blame not the scoiety that moulds them’? I am getting a little tired of this. I am a maths teacher by trade and I do agree that there are useless teachers in the system who need rooting out, but I am fed up of Britain’s left wing establishment blaming everything on teachers and schools when in fact it is the direct result of decades of left wing liberal theories such as removing all discipline, equal rights for children in the classroom, inclusion for all bullshit and childline Ester Ranson crap which has made teaching completely impossible for the most part. I would wager that if you go in to most schools in the UK, you will be shocked at the lack of boundaries and appalling behaviour; now, the politicians will blame the schools and teachers but the reality is, if you can’t discipline an unruly mouthy little brat with a clip round the ear, learning will never take place, it’s simply not possible. But of course this admission from the PC lefty brigade would amount to acccepting that their liberal policies are to blame.
Of course I don’t want to stigmatise the many excellent children who are well behaved and want to learn but if you are in a class with 30 kids and 7 or 8 are being little shits, then there is simply nothing teacers or schools can do about it, so my advice to Gove is STOP BLAMING SCHOOLS AND TEACHERS AND BLAME LEFT WING CULTURE AND SOCIETY FOR DUMBING DOWN EXAMS, REMOVING DISCIPLINE AND PROMOTING SINGLE PARENTHOOD!
“…in fact it is the direct result of decades of left wing liberal theories such as removing all discipline, equal rights for children in the classroom…“
I clearly recall a great many teachers supporting these “progressive” measures. Since it all went pear shaped, with teachers being physically threatened in some cases, they’ve been trying to distance themselves from the fads of the 1960s onwards. Very slippery.
Left wing teachers are not difficult to find either.
.
That is fantastic mate! lol 🙂
Stolen fro Max Farquar’s excellent blog.
In a similar vein – in regard to the riots…
Who would be a teacher in todays ‘lord of the flies’ cess pits laughingly called schools? Teachers are being turned into convenient scapegoats, its easy to point the finger of blame at them because the alternative is to question the decades long social experiment called progressive socialist modernism.
Decades of stripping power from learning institutions and teachers and allowing the degeneration of our childrens moral and ethical behaviour. Modernism failed, it was always going to fail and now instead of trying to roll back this grotesque and failed experiment the easy scapegoat is sought and found, its not the system right? Its the teacher who is at the sharp end, who have had their legs kicked from under them, have been grossly let down by the state because the alternative would be to admit the education policies put in place over the last 30yrs was wrong.
“Who would be a teacher in todays ‘lord of the flies’ cess pits laughingly called schools?”
Eh.
Could have sworn I heard a NUT harpie on the radio today saying that
‘the vast majority of our schools are fantastically brilliant’,
and none of the droids gainsaying her.
Then, of course, there is the latest from the BBC Newsnight ‘special reporter’…
mediaguardian Media Guardian Protesters’s stories: Jonnie Marbles and Rupert Murdoch gu.com/p/34tmg/tf
Stand by for some major RTs from Paul Mason, Laurie Penny, etc.
But there is this… 🙂 :
There are no comments yet for this article.
So much to do… so little reason not to…
Spare a thought for BBC producer/journalist Gemma Newby. Imagine the embarrassment at having a mother who is so stupid she – gasp! – reads the Daily Mail:
@gemmanewby Gemma Newby
just saw a bushytailed fox in my gdn.Told my mum, the Daily Mail reader, who said ‘be careful, Ldn foxes eat babies’ #thankyouAyatollahDacre
Oh the horror. You can choose your Guardian-reading friends but not your family. Poor Gemma.
Wow, first Dimbleby, now this… and they have a #hashtag and everything!
Not coordinated or anything much, I am sure.
Gemma will be getting extra badges from the estate commissar for dobbing Mum in.
“AyatollahDacre”???
That’s not a very on message line to take is it? Surely the girl needs some cultural awareness training?
Has she apologised yet?
Daily Mail reading foxes refuse to pay the telly tax .
R4’s More or Less was an amusing listen today.
Beeboid again on the News Channel doing a new report for the next news block from the courthouse where the decision to extradite the guy linking to pirated content. It was very clear. He read out what the allegations were, but used the modifier “simply” regarding the act of linking. The allegations of crime do not use the word “simply”.
At the end of his segment, after an exchange with Gavin Esler back in the studio, he summed it up by saying that the guy ran a website “which simply directs people” to a website with illegal content. His emphasis, not mine. He raised his voice and stressed those words, and that is not merely my inference or subjective interpretation. This is a biased report on a legal case, in which the BBC reporter tried to sanitize the alleged act.
The BBC is now taking sides in legal cases, deciding for you what is or isn’t a criminal act. Funny how they’re not so sanguine when somebody doesn’t pay the license fee.
I simply forgot to renew my licence fee….
BBC paedophiles?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2086271/BBC-radio-presenter-sexually-assaulted-underage-girls-stash-child-porn.html?ito=feeds-newsxml
I don’t remember the BBC beeing so sympathetic to Jonathan King.
Context. No idea what it might be, but it seems to explain everything.
Good point, one might “simply not pay the License Fee” which of course is not the same as “not paying the license fee”. The modifier “simply” signals the suggestion it is a trivial event unworthy of prosecution. I don’t suppose one could “simply punch Richard Black”?
I think a better analogy would be: “I simply provide a link to an illegal source where you can watch BBC content without living in the UK and being forced to pay the license fee”. I wouldn’t be posting ill-gotten BBC content, I’d “simply” be linking to a way to view it. Is that abetting avoidance of the license fee or not? Would that be abetting people watching BBC content for which they’d normally have to pay (like buying Top Gear and Dr. Who DVDs) or not? Over to you, BBC…..
Remember how many times the BBC told you that George Bush’s Administration was “anti-science”? (Bonus: the Beeboid who wrote that piece borrowed from Matt Frei’s rhetorical flourish when praising Him about something else, “with the flick of a pen”.) Remember how they celebrated when his successor overturned the ban on embryonic stem-cell research, and lauded Him for “restoring science to its rightful place”? I won’t even get into Justin Webb’s behavior.
Well, let’s see the Beeboids complain now when their beloved Obamessiah Administration is recommending that parents not vaccinate their children for meningococcal disease. Why is He anti-science now? Because the risk, they say, is minimal, and not worth the expense. Not enough children die for it to be worthwhile. In other words, ObamaCare, which we were told was wonderful and would give millions free health care, is now going to ration services based on cost and not on whether or not children will die. The idea of Government providing health care is more important than the quality of care individuals get. Screw science: ideology comes first.
But that’s alright by the BBC, I’m sure, as it’s not due to evil Christian beliefs.
INBBC and NIGERIA: perpetual propaganda for Islam.
I am curious about the religious affiliations of INBBC reporter in Nigeria whom British people finance: one Abdullahi Tasiu ABUBAKAR.
He is part of the INBBC deception which tries to deny the Islamic jihad nature of the violence against Christians, and instead tries to deflect the conflict into a mere geographical one of ‘north-south’:
“Is Nigeria on the brink after north-south clashes?”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-16544410
An alternative, non-INBBC historical view of Islamic imperialism in Nigeria and in West, East and Central Africa:
“History of Jihad against Nigeria, Mauritania, Chad, Ghana, Kenya, Uganda, Tanzania and Central Africa (1784 – Ongoing)”
http://www.historyofjihad.org/nigeria.html
Now let’s see:
61% of BBC programming are repeats.
and
BBC Executive expenses have risen by 20%
and now
BBC viewers ‘face new licence fee to watch huge TV archive’
In other words – to watch more repeats.
The executives must need more expenses.
This would be a great idea if the BBC was a private company. But as it is they are charging money on programmes that the public have already been forced to pay for.
Surely their entire archive should be free to Licence Fee payers.
And while we’re at it, why doesn’t the BBC practice what preaches. The Licence Fee should be free to the unemployed, students and the over 65s. Heck even my local cinema gives discounts to these groups. Maybe Mr Cameron can force the BBC to be more ‘socially aware’ and ‘socially responsible’ with a bit more legislation.
They need more travel expenses to Salford and to ramp up the wining and dining of important personalities and celebrities. In order to improve programming, of course.
Mitt Romney lambasted in attack ad for speaking French – http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-16549624
One of the most biased and shoddy pieces of journalism I’ve seen on the BBC website.
The opening paragraph gives you a flavour, and it doesn’t get much better:
‘Quelle horreur! Republican presidential front-runner Mitt Romney has been skewered in a new political attack ad – for speaking French.’
The subtext is clear: Republicans are so dimwitted and backward that you can persuade them not to support someone just by pointing out that the person speaks French!
Jeff
I’m sure Scott can come up with an example of the BBC ridiculing an attack their beloved Obamessiah made on Hillary during the 2008 election, right?
Thin pickings on the cherry vulture front currently.
Lately most swoops seem to have succeeded only in splatting into a hard surface or taking further chunks out of the flock.
Not a species looking too promising, in Darwinian terms.
Notice there’s no byline. Cowards.
strangely enough (or perhaps not), The Guardian’s effort is much more balanced.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2012/jan/13/newt-gingrich-attack-ad-war-gives-mitt-romney-french
It gives context, explaining that Gingrich is fighting back after being subject to Romney attack ads, and that he needs to win the next primary or be cosngined to the scrapheap.
It does not pretend to be balanced, making clear in the ‘How’ section its worldview, but then Guardian readers are presumably seeking this kind of opinion.
The BBC article OTOH makes no attempt to educated, explain context, inform readers about the significance of this to the next President, it’s just a cheap shot at silly ignorant Republicans/Americans designed for easy web hits.
‘The BBC article OTOH makes no attempt to educate, explain context, inform readers’
This seems to be a bit of a meme. Maybe they have seen the future in Abbott terms, and it works… at least, in getting away with stuffing up and blustering any accountability away.
Not exactly subtle:
“Millionaire businessman Mr Romney also spent more than two years living in Paris and Bordeaux in the 1960s working as a Mormon missionary.”
Here’s a bet if anybody wants to take it – no BBC journalist will ever describe Obama as a millionaire, even though he is.
Whoop… see… you do get ‘context’ from the BBC… sometimes…depending.
Unique.
They always described Herman Cain as a (pizza) millionaire, too. But I don’t see them describing, say, Polly Toynbee as a millionaire.
If Romney’s being a millionaire is directly relevant to his campaign, it’s only from a very Left-wing perspective. It has nothing to do with his politics, really. But he gets the label, which one can interpret as a pejorative. Toynbee’s wealth is directly relevant to her career as a Left-wing, Progressive pundit. Her politics have everything to do with wealth.
Same goes for The Obamessiah, as DB says. How much of His wealth is he going to spread around, I wonder? His family vacations certainly are of the Tuscany Polly variety. Never mind the “apparently lavish” parties.
I wonder if we should start referring to Him as “millionaire President”?
They could balance things by saying that certian politicians have been state funded , either in the past or at present , or union funded , or charity funded or special interest group funded .
Or Daddy funded , in the case of public school educated Blair , Cameron etc .
Mind you if Dianne Abbotts offspring enter politics they will have to mention Mummy`s priviledged by Parliament expenses state funded education ,
I wonder if we should start referring to Him as “millionaire President”?
How about “Wall Street favourite and millionaire Barack Obama”? I’m up for making that reference at least once every time I blog about him.
BTW, DP – did you hear the Today programme’s take on Jodi Kantor’s revelations about Michelle Obama? Sarah Montague was joined by a women from Time magazine and a black feminist blogger, all three of them determined to defend poor Michelle (and, in turn, Hillary Clinton) against such misogynistic accusations (never mind that Kantor is, er, a woman). How very different from the BBC’s pile-on-and-join-the-kicking attitude towards the likes of Palin and Bachmann; funny how liberal media women have a blind spot where the treatment of conservative female politicians is concerned.
“…Millionaire, black non-American president and his angry (and much hated wife) said today that hopey-changey was a busted flush, and yes we fucking can’t when asked about his chances of inflicting a further four years on the pissed off American people, a spokesman said today on…”
… and remember if you see a humorous clipping in your newspaper do send it in to
news.quiz@bbc.co.uk
Or if you don’t see a humorous clipping, but would nevertheless like to tell the programme’s ‘top talents’ what a shower of funny-as-a-pitbull-attack, terrorist-hugging, pretrendy-hard-leftie, canned-laughtered, Guardian-reading, right-on, hopey-changey, Jew-hating, one-term-barry loving, group-thinking, scum-sucking puss-buckets they are… you can probably use the same address
😉
‘if you see a humorous clipping in your newspaper do send it in to news.quiz@bbc.co.uk ‘
Must say I found, though they might not, this French front page funny:
S RKOZY
A
Guess that’s how they reflect the humour of the UK so much better:)
And this report is simply pathetic:
US President Barack Obama has laid down the gauntlet to Republicans by asking Congress for the power to shrink the federal government.
He told business leaders that he wants to close the US commerce department and merge six agencies.
The White House said the plan would save $3bn (£2bn) over 10 years and cut 1,000 to 2,000 jobs through attrition.
$3bn over ten years? Wow! The US currently adds about that amount to its national debt every day, but hey – let’s not mention any of that because this is the BBC, campaigning for Obama’s re-election.
Obama 2012 – supported by UK TV licence payers (thanks to the unique way the BBC is funded)
“Laid down the gaunlet to Republicans by asking Congress”? Which Party controls the Senate again? I forget. The BBC just whitewashed and entire House of Congress.
They really think we’re all stupid. And I do mean “we”, as the BBC’s US section of the website is geared towards drawing in a larger US audience.
“Why the BBC is a disgrace and should be closed down”
http://www.vernoncoleman.com/closeddown.html
No sign of our Steph (must have several failed Greek bailouts stuck in her craw by now) but Robert Peston on Beeb One News at 10 was clearly pretty glum about the bad day for the Euro. I’m laughing, but Pesto was so off his usual game he was speaking in an almost normal voice.
Standard but poor politics, and how reported.
Some interesting political insights abounding this morning, especially now on the French downgrade.
Seems some can only think in terms of dragging all down to a level… then, having got there, their first thought is to seek to drag others down with them. Not the most creditable (or worthy) of dogmas.
Watching a French pundit (love the paper dropping the A from his name) on SKY explain that Pres. Sarkozy is one who ‘thinks’ he has saved the world without perhaps much evidence of so doing.
Now, what happened the last time we had one of those?
How Mr. Mason, Mr. Peston, Ms. Flanders et al ‘report’ this will be… interesting.
Paul Mason is STILL defending his leftist mates.
“Austerity isn’t working” was his opening pile of vomit on Newsnight. Really? Our austerity seems to be working as does Ireland who have kept their rating.
The Countries that los their rating Mason are the ones fiddling at the edges of cuts or who have basket case economies due to left wing Governments.
And this twat is supposed to be an economics expert?
Even Ed Balls has finally admitted he’s wrong.
I still await an explanation from my new chums at the BBC ‘we get it about right’ department(s… when they can’t answer on behalf of others, which happens here too) on how his tribal opinions seem to be deemed acceptable to broadcast on Newnsight nationally as factual reporting from an impartial expert.
He isn’t, they aren’t… and the BBC has some more explaining to do.
Which may explain why it can’t, and often doesn’t.
How they are allowed not to… not so much.
Spot on, the unstated analysis is that Europe’s Left Wing parties in Goverment have been financing all their lunatic Socialist rule on borrowed money. Sovereign Sub-Prime lending has snared lots of European banks into buying their debt, on the promise of higher rates of return for thre risk of default. These are just national Ponzi-schemes. Greece’s PASOK (Labour Party, not that the bBC often identifies it as such) has borrowed money to pay interest on previous loans, to the point when they will probably default on those loans. Its a Ponzi Scheme by any other name. A Socialist Ponzi Scheme. All I ever hear from the bBC is “Prime Minister Papandreou said” or “ruling party PASOK said” never Greeces Labour Party said…
Narrative narrtive narrative. Not news, but lies and ommisions.
Martin wrote:
“Austerity isn’t working”. Why don’t you think it’s working Martin?
can’t you read?????
if you’re going to troll,at least make a stab at basic understanding of what it is you are attempting to waste your time over
ltwf,
What Paul Mason actually said on Newsnight was; “The world’s leading rating agency says austerity isn’t working”.
According to Martin this means that Paul Mason said; “Austerity isn’t working”.
Exactly the same as me quoting Martin as saying; “Austerity isn’t working”.
Get it?
What Standard and Poor’s actually said was:
a reform process based on a pillar of fiscal austerity alone risks becoming self-defeating, as domestic demand falls in line with consumers’ rising concerns about job security and disposable incomes, eroding national tax revenues.
This is not the same thing at all as saying “austerity isn’t working”. Especially since none of the countries getting downgraded has actually done much proper austerity for very long at all. S&P’s statement is about a future based exclusively on austerity, where the problem countries don’t also ease collateral requirements, i.e. allowing money to move more easily to where it needs to go. Again, this is not even close to saying that austerity isn’t working, present tense, full stop.
Mason seems to be grossly misrepresenting the statement. Unless Dez is misquoting him?
Futhermore, the full context shows that S&P is judging only the scattershot decisions made “in recent weeks”. Their judgment is, for the second time in a year, almost as much about leadership as it is about actual policies.
It looks like Martin was right to laugh at Mason, and that Dez missed Mason’s dishonesty.
Not all Dez is probably missing.
But selectivity is somewhat a genetic failing in the hive.
What Paul Mason actually said on Newsnight
Oddly, the BBC have remained very quiet on what he actually said last week (now sadly no longer iPlayer) when ‘reporting’ on the EU/ro crisis, being somewhat keener to invoke his speaking for the UK in trashing government actions on the country’s behalf. Actions that were very much supported by the UK public, at odds with the personal beliefs of the economics editor.
That the BBC employs and promotes the views as such folk, doubtless while claiming that their views in news reports do not actually represent the BBC, is getting a bit out of hand.
Thanks, Dez, for highlighting this again.
Yes, Paul Mason really does seem to have grossly misrepresented what S&P had said.
His exact words in the programme‘s introduction were, “The world’s leading rating agency says austerity is failing”.
No, it didn’t – as David’s link to S&P’s statement shows.
Mason goes on in his report to quote out of context the paragraph that mentions austerity from the statement and editorialises by shoving the word ‘damningly’ in front of it.
Very naughty, Paul.
‘Mason goes on in his report to quote out of context’
Crops up a lot that word. Especially in and around the BBC.
Dez is to be congratulated for highlighting Mr. Mason’s latest foray into misrepresentation.
Craig/David, I’d say you are well placed at least for a tricky set of questions to ask the BBC complaints system to answer… unless they don’t see it as their patch.. or opt for the ‘BBC Economics Editor Paul Mason does not speak for the BBC in matters on Ecomonics when on BBC progammes’ approach.
Which is.. unique.
Ed Balls also thinks austerity is the way to go now. Although he says nasty Tory cuts will be necessary now because of Osborne’s mistakes, but never mind. Mason contradicting Labour policy now, eh? Oh, dear. I await the BBC to challenge Redder Ed on air and tell him that S&P says he’s wrong.
No point listening to Newsnight if they can`t even introduce their guests correctly.
Shriti Vadera was one of Browns shrieking goons…the one who thought it a bit of laugh if a few grannies lost their cardis on the Railtrack scandal of 2001.
Anyway-for tipping pensioners unnecessarily into the care of Southern Cross-Brown made her a Baroness or suchlike.
Maitlis introduces her as a G20 Adviser as opposed to one of Browns goons who supported Byers etc in the Railtrack scandal…and is largely responsible for much of what went wrong with our economy.
Just the gal to tell us all about how the French downgrade can be dealt with-or “presented appropriately” as the BBC/Labour All Stars would prefer.
For after fifteen years of the likes of Vadera etc…the BBC can say what they like-they don`t have a clue, nor a hope in hells chance of being listened to again.
Vanity cameras- seedy home movies for themselves only as afar as I can tell!
‘introduce their guests correctly’
It’s not just context… it’s BBC context.
Oh the joy of seeing the BBC scum having to report that Ed Gonands is agreeing with the Government, no wonder Testicles didn’t do his usual Tourette’s crap at PMQ’s on Wednesday.
The BBC are not happy.
Don’t worry Martin, the Ministry of Truth airbrushes will be out soon enough…
As the reality of the financial situation is being laid bare in the Euro-zone, how long will we have to wait for the BBC’s Stephane Flanders to tell us that the likes of S&P are fools ?
And why the bloody hell has the BBC’s Peston decided, now of all times, to go on holiday ?
Answers on an Abacus please.
All good questions. Being asked, as it were.
Luckily for the BBC, if not its credibility, they are only configured to ask them, not answer.
Why does the BBC, on our behalf, continue to ask this Paul Mason for his insights into the Euro meltdown? ‘So tell us Mr Lenin, what do you make of the Bolshevik Revolution?’
It is surely time for some conservative voices on the BBC.
Newsnight is only good for unintentional comedy these days.
The Beeb report excitedly tells us that the French Left are ‘declaring war on the Credit Rating Agencies’.
Really? Well, I’ll watch out for their surrender in about a fortnight.
Touché.
Actaully , they surrendered on News Years Eve when their top brass confused a few fireworks from near the Chinese Embassy with an attack on the Presidential Palace.
It`s easily done
“Newsnight is only good for unintentional comedy these days”
And Emily Maitliss’ wardrobe.
Newsnight did a talk on the “balancing the economy/ Manufacturing vs services” question on Thursday I think. Actually it wasn’t too bad, though this American woman gave a tedious speech about govt spending, not really in touch with what’s going on here.
They threw in some Steve Jobs//Apple worship as well, which is another bit of BBC bias less mentioned here – and which can probably also be traced back to the Guardian
Maitliss then asked if the govt had “overstepped the line of British decency” (on some employment & disability issue). They live in a strange muddled world.
Woke up this morning to hear Balls on Today at 8.10 am with Naughtie – not a nice experience. But lay there and wondered what the Craig co-efficient of interruption was ie very low. Shorter questions from Naughtie in a non-confrontational voice with very few interruptions and gentle questionning when ‘trying’ to hold Balls to account.
Thanks for listening Deborah.
I heard all of thirty seconds…as far as I could tell, Jim was gently guiding Balls through the tulips and tiptoeing for fear of stepping in something unpleasand and rubble-like.
The state of the economy after thirteen years of Balls, Vadera and assorted Milibands is how I`d call it-but Jim would rather like to tickle the dangleberries of Nu Labour in the hope that he won`t have to go to Salford.
The token visit from the RSC to Little Beirut once a year will not do for gentleman Jim will it?
Stupid to ask-but Jim would not have got Balls to admit to ANYTHING that he and his fellow-Treasury Turds did to drop us in the brown stuff-would he?
Still, it`s nice to see the BBC have to incorporate these new Nu Labor bits into their pieces as if they`re part of a progessing narrative…like Ed Miliband isn`t all they `ve said he is…and maybe that Plan B crap isn`t quite right after all.
On reflection-Balls and BBC are in a suicide pact, and neither will admit to having ever been wrong.
A Never ending dance of the lemons! Pity to disturb them.
My wife and I were in the kitchen when Ed Balls was being introduced on Today. Almost in unison we dashed over to the radio to change stations.
She suggested that thousands of people up and down the country had done precisely the same thing. I reckon she is right. I think even the most apolitical people find him rather shifty and just a little creepy.
‘Greenie’ BBC propaganda, Mr Black and ALASKA.
1.) Mr Black, July 2011:
“Huge Arctic fire hints at new climate cue”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-14306781
2.) BBC report, January 2012:
“Why snow in Alaskan town is causing such a problem” (inc video clip).
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-16511235
“Global warming: red-faced climatologist issues grovelling apology ”
(by James Delingpole)
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/100129892/global-warming-red-faced-climatologist-issues-grovelling-apology/
A nice off-guard moment from Stephen Nolan on BBC Radio 5 late last night.
Labour MP Gisela Stuart was defending Ed Balls’s volte face and explained how UK Plc ‘…had to become more more competitive’.
Naturally Mr Nolan was disconcerted and felt obliged to ask a question right from the heart:
‘….but what do you say to public sector workers who vote for Labour because they expect to get pay rises?’
Gisela Stuart is one of the few Labour MPs who was not lobotomised under Blairs surgery in 97, so am dismayed by this.
She knows far better-and will lose her credibility if she tries to tell us that Labour didn`t stick us into this mess.
People have voted for her BECAUSE she`s her own woman…so any more of this and she`ll be dumped next election.
I beg to differ, being of long enough memory not to forget the row caused by the German Gisela’s Stuarts expressed concern of a few years ago that more of her constituents were describing themselves as English, not British.
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/192182/Labour-attack-on-English.html?print=yes
http://www.birminghampost.net/news/west-midlands-news/tm_objectid=16385637&method=full&siteid=50002&headline=being-english-is-bad-for-you–insists-mp-name_page.html
This she perceived as a threat to the nation or democracy, apparently. More likely her anxiety was about a threat to Labour’s grand project to abolish England and Englishness as an obstacle to the creation of its own peculiar vision of hell. This I might add was an anxiety also shared and voiced by such lobotomised apparatchiks as Prescott and Straw.
While searching on Google for the above references to the row that I vaguely remembered, I was intrigued to see that the German Stuart is still opining about our identity. In an article in Dec 2011 she is telling us that there are few people who are actual Brummies (have they all died or what?), that identity only attaches to our institutions (so not our place, our land, our ancestors, our soul or anything that pertains to our flesh and blood, then) and…wait…the German market in Birmingham saw off an English one and a councillor even had to resign. Wow.
When, in 2004, Birmingham City Council tried to replace the German Christmas market with Ye Olde English Christmas Fayre there was an outcry. The decision was reversed and the councillor responsible had to resign. The city now hosts the largest authentic German Christmas market outside Germany.
More Wow! But she wouldn’t be crowing or anything like that, about a German market, what with her being German an’ all. Hm…
Oops! Link: http://www.giselastuartmp.co.uk/identity-not-history-divides-my-two-countries-i-was-born-in-germany-and-live-in-britain-the-euro-crisis-reveals-a-fundamental-difference/
She’s a maverick, of sorts. I’m a German-English dual national and I can’t quite place her.
This from 2004 shows how ‘unpredictable’, or stupid the woman is. Clearly, in private, the Blairites were committed to their Iraq policy. Publically, being ‘Labour’ they could not let this run.
Stuart did stick her head above the parapet.
“A leading supporter of Tony Blair has made an extraordinary intervention in the United States presidential election by saying that a victory for John Kerry would herald a surge in terrorism and suicide bombings.
The comments by Gisela Stuart, the former health minister, run the risk of severely embarrassing the Prime Minister on the eve of polling in America.
Mr Blair has instructed all ministers and members of his inner circle to remain strictly neutral and to say nothing to suggest that Downing Street favours either candidate.
Yet Miss Stuart claimed that a Kerry victory over President George W. Bush would prompt “victory celebrations among those who want to destroy liberal democracies”.
Not really , in the article in the Times (and on her website) that you link to about the Euro mess. It showed that she is as attached to her home country as to the country of her birth*
She concludes “the peripheral countries will take the pain and, rightly or wrongly, Germany will be blamed. Yet again, Britain is likely to have a big role in sorting out the mess.”
doesn’t sound too much like crowing
*born in Munich, I think, now holds Neville Chaimberline’s old seat
How on earth can the BBC report on Ed Balls and take him seriously?
Also had to laug when fat ugly female beeboid called Fabien Society “left leaning”, sounds so nice and cuddly, unlike being called “RIGHT WING”
At least the BBC is doing labels for the Left. At last. I wonder what prompted this sudden change of policy? Is there another review in the offing?
It’s not as if Fat Ed has changed an iota of his position on the economy.
He has merely moved his stated position to one which his w*nky focus groups, his w*nky pollsters, and his w*nky advisors believe ‘plays better’ with the electorate.
This is a man that would shoot his granny and do a UMC on her corpse if it got him/ his party one point in the polls.
Not that there’s anything wrong with ‘doing a UMC on a corpse’ of course.
Eleven Muslim men to go on trial in Liverpool on Feb. 6th, for the organised gang-raping of little girls
Have you heard about this in the Press or TV or Radio ?
It seems this story is being suppressed in accordance with “British National Union of Journalists guidelines on race reporting”
The 11 men: Abdul Aziz, Abdul Qayyum, Abdul Rauf, Adil Khan, Hamid Safi, Kabeer Hasan, Liaqat Hussain Shah, Mohammad Amin, Mohammad Sajid, Qamar Shahzad, and Shabir Ahmed were committed to stand trial at proceedings on the 3rd of January just a few days ago. Did you hear about it ? No. You’ll not find a single reference to their crimes or their upcoming trial anywhere in the British media.
Could this possibly be true ?
Yes it’s been discussed on here before, it’s not the first time the BBC have ignored Muslim rape gangs.
‘Muslim paedophile rape gangs’, Martin.
Whilst the adjectives to describe our vibrant, multicultural utopia can get tiresome, let us not also become selective in our reporting…
Did you hear the one about a dozen Muslim men in a Northern town? No? You must get your news from the BBC.
Hey HIGNFY! You can have that one for free.
INBBC and Islamising Europe.
Of course, INBBC enables this, via propaganda for mass Islamic immigration into EU/UK, and preferential treatment for Islam.
Egyptian Muslim cleric: “After a while, Europe will become a single Islamic state, which will know nothing but ‘There is no god but Allah, and Muhammad is His Messenger.'”
ALL QUIET ON THE WESTERN afFRONT.
The BBC were very quick to rush to judgement over U-Tube footage showing naughty US Marines “dissin / pissin” over heroic but dead Taliban Freedom Fighters.
It started off as outrage and ended up as hysterical reporting, even by their standards.
So why have the BBC now gone quiet on this story ?
To plagiarize David P. ( should the footage not be all it seems )
The BBC – Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
Probably because they’ve finally realised that we’re all pissed off with it.
This was a story, but one around which little was known, if slowly coming out. Hence if ever watertight oversight was called for, and not imposed, this was it.
Which was/is the point.
I still have an unresolved complaint with the BBC on the ‘reporting’ and subsequent stealth editting of her ‘report’ of one of their number (and her editors’ actions) of a tragically unsuccessful hostage rescue by US forces a fair while ago.
She leapt right in, bereft of any known facts, making wild accusations and leaping to worse conclusions which, as the actual facts came out, were quietly dropped from her story without any acknowledgement.
As with subsequent complaints I make, I was hence taking the BBC to task over not justthe story, but subsequent cover up. Their ‘it was an evolving story’ was a risible excuse for ‘we made stuff up and, when called on it, changed our tune whilst erasing the evidence’.
I wonder if this is shaping up the same way? Sadly, as totally irresponsible broadcasters, if the story turns out to be more nuanced, or even flawed, they will not care, be held to account, but the damage is done.
Par for the course for an ‘anything for a rating’ gutter tabloid or propaganda outlet like PressTV, but the ‘most trusted national treasure’ representing the ally of the US… not really the remit.
It’s truly amazing how long it can take them to come out with the most pathetic excuses for sloppy journalism and far-left bias.
Anything rather than admitting it.
It takes the BBC a long time to reply to your piddling complaint because they’re understaffed. They have to spend enormous amounts of time responding to all those more legimitate complaints about the BBC being pro-Israel and pro-Tory. 🙂
EGYPT.
INBBC censors reporting Islamic supremacists as book-burners.
Nearly 200,000 books in Egypt reduced to ashes at the hands of Islamic supremacists
[Extract]:
Yet another nail in the coffin of the dangerously delusional idea that the ‘Arab Spring’ is a step forward for freedom, democracy, human rights, et cetera. Earlier this month, in a development nearly two weeks old (as of this writing), approximately 192,000 rare books and manuscripts belonging to the Institute of Egypt in Cairo went up in flames, destroyed by rampaging Muslim mob.
This wanton destruction is a fresh reminder — as if we needed another — that the ‘Arab Spring’ does not just equal an Islamic winter for Muslims and any unfortunate non Muslims in the vicinity. This self-inflicted Islamic-inspired lobotomy equals a massive setback for the human enterprise and a victory for the forces of ignorance and darkness. In the wake of the silence from the West and other supposed voices of liberty and freedom, such forces can only grow stronger.”
Instead, INBBC only has this today:
“Saving Egypt’s precious fire-bombed books”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-16534331
Took the BBC long enough to cover this. The only hopeful thing is that some Egyptians are trying to save the books. I hope they succeed. We should be all aware that under Sharia most of our art and literature would suffer a similiar fate. Mozart consigned to the flames along with Botticelli, Rembrandt ,Durer and all of our once glorious past. That alone is reason enough to fight to the end against such a fate for Europe.
A nice article about the BBC’s ‘friends’ the Taliban.
Afghan boy suicide bombers tell how they are brainwashed into believing they will survive
Funny no outrage by the BBC.
Arab Spring Chronicle.
All the news that’s ignored by the BBC….even though it is available virtually on the doorstep….
”
A leading female figure in the Muslim Brotherhood’s Freedom and Justice Party (FJP) has accused the women’s march to condemn military brutality against female protestors in December as being funded from abroad.
In December, Egypt witnessed its biggest women’s march in history as 10,000 women marched through central Cairo to protest against soldiers who dragged women by the hair, stomped on them, and stripped one half-naked in the street during a fierce crackdown on activists.
“The [FJP women] refused to participate in the march because participants were funded and had a particular agenda,” said Manal Abul Hassan, the FJP women’s secretary.
Speaking to the London based Asharq Al-Awsat newspaper Saturday, Abul Hassan argued that “When a woman marches to defend her rights, this affronts her dignity.”
She added that “Does she [female protestor] not have a husband, a brother or a son to defend her?”
“This march was a sectarian one, because all the groups of Egyptian society should defend women. She should not defend herself on her own. The man should stand beside the woman because on her own she will not be able to get her rights,” said Abul Hassan.
In the interview, Abul Hassan said Tahrir Square, the epicenter of the protest that toppled long-time president Hosni Mubarak in February, is no longer the same square.
“Tahrir is no longer purely for revolutionaries. Other elements infiltrated them; the same elements which caused the [violence at the] Balloon Theatre and Maspero tarnish the image of Tahrir.”
Abul Hassan continued that “They stay in dirty tents [in which one can find] acts against the ethics of the revolution. It became a fertile atmosphere for the spread of all irregularities, and the revolution is innocent of them.”
Things moving along nicely as often predicted on this site since the get go.
What IS the thing at The Head Of The Thread © exactly ?
Is it the result of a genetic experiment involving beloved children’s character WizBit and a Dominos pizza ?
Two reports on English Defence League march in Barking today:
1. by someone who was on the march:
http://www.newenglishreview.org/blog_display.cfm/blog_id/40001
2,) by BBC-NUJ, which opposes EDL, and supports UAF and Hamas:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-16563365
Initially, the BBC “journalists” used to report from within the confines of the UAF areas on these marches, but when people started to wise up to those tactics, the BBC now do little else than report a one sided view from the sidelines without video or links……These days, the UAF probably write the peice for them and send it back to Comrade H.Q. where-by it goes out as “fact”.
That BBC report is chock full of details, isn’t it? How many people marched? No idea. How many anti-EDL people showed up? No idea. Who were the “youths” involved? Nada.
All I can tell is that, according to an MP, the EDL was there to provoke the locals into a fight. That’s the story the BBC wanted to tell.
If an EDL march happened and there was no fight for the BBC to report, would anyone hear it?