Well folks, stability seems to have been restored. It’s been very difficult in recent days seeing all that bias pumped out by the rancid BBC and not being able to provide you with a forum. But things look better now so I am providing you with this new Open Thread as the site begins to move up a few gears.
FRIDAY OPEN THREAD..
Bookmark the permalink.
The BBC is not only biased but VERY close to the Labour party. The emotive and hysterical 8 hour rant about the grade changes is extremely biased towards the Labour point of view, the Shadow Education secretary was invited on to the programme along with meriad other teachers Unions spokesersons etc. after a very amicable chat about the exam grade change he thanks the presenter and called her by her first name, Maxine, do you think they have had more than a fleeting interview? The BBC also interviewed a teacher from the Teaching Union who (and I nearly threw a shoe at the screen) who said, straight faced that this years students are the best they have EVER been and it was unchallenged by the BBC. the presenter just very gently reminded her that Business leaders ae not confident of the educational standards of school leavers, which of course she disputed.
More complaints to the BBC may let them know we license fee payers on the right are tired of being ignored.
Teachers/Labour Party/BBC:
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/peteroborne/100127372/in-every-area-of-our-public-life-the-left-is-losing-the-argument/
“Stephen Twigg, the shadow education secretary, has to move very carefully because teachers comprise (I am told by party insiders) roughly half of the Labour Party membership.”
Some rather sharp (in all senses of the word) comments here, especially on stats, trends and when things suit one narrative but not another…
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/educationnews/9499171/Exam-regulator-announces-inquiry-into-English-GCSE-results.html
A degree of analysis sadly lacking with our market rate national disgrace of a broadcaster, its expert employees and rigged shills from vested interests.
I might add that, year on year, the Telegraph has excelled, in quality and predictability, with the picture of young gels to illustrate our ever-triumphant yoof.
Even the school name is a classic.
Beeboid in the US Daniel Nasaw tweets:
Tampa PD arrested 16 last week in an anti-prostitution sting ahead of #GOP2012. I luv that one of the women is 61 yo!
Yeah, it’s a real hoot. Will Nasaw be tweeting a similar statistic next month regarding the Dem convention?
after the al bbc s crusades nonsense, and its islamic history of europe,
you can see where i m coming from here 😀
“1001 Pieces of Islamist Propaganda: Fabricated Exhibit Comes to D.C., “the disingenuous and misleading 1001 Muslim Inventions exhibit”
http://pjmedia.com/blog/1001-pieces-of-islamist-propaganda-fabricated-exhibit-comes-to-d-c/?singlepage=true
yep! “disingenuous and misleading” and as you can see from the clip, lauded and purported to be “gospel” fact by al bbc. hmmm
where have we seen that before 😀
noggin,
The article you link to is disingenuous to say the least. Ether through ignorance or design it confuses the history of flight with that of powered flight, which is what the Wright Brothers are famous for.
Then it suggests that; “If muslims really invented the camera as the exhibit claims, why don’t we have snapshots of Saladin and Suleiman the Magnificent?”
Makes sense, except that the exhibit didn’t claim that Muslims “invented the camera” – but that they invented the “camera obscura” which was a crucial stepping stone (amongst many others) towards modern day cameras.
Then there is something from “islamic scholar” (sic) Robert Spencer about Arabic numerals originating in India.
Did this exhibition claim anything different? It doesn’t say… or in other words; no.
The whole thing reads like an idiots guide to being an idiot.
You are better than that noggin, surely?
goodness scezz …. wrong side of the bed this morning eh!
camera obscura – Greeks – before that Chinese more than 1000 yrs before the islamic faith
oh and please enlighten me why this flowering culture of scientific endeavour has been defunct for centuries? got a certain arab springy-ness ring to it. hasn t it.
In actual fact, this method of historical falsification perfectly fits the way islamic culture works, it might even turn up parodied on al bbcs latest comedic offering.
sheesh! the wonders of invent everything propaganda
yep if islam couldn t dig money out of the ground eh! produced by the way with Western technology 😀
When the oil runs out, what then?.
oh and i thought the base derivation of those numerals were hindi, so thanks dez ;-D
“Fjordman essay: Alhazen, Kepler and the History of Optics”
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2009/03/fjordman-essay-alhazen-kepler-and-the-history-of-optics.html#more
Dear Dez, I’m intrigued that Islam needs to bolster the confidence of its adherents by looking back to “achievements” a thousand or so years ago.
I’d love to hear about the flowering of the arts, music, poetry, painting, the sciences, medicine, engineering, technology, philosophy, education, empowerment of men and women and the humanitarian contribution Islam has imade over the last 100 years or so.
Any exhibitions showing these?
Not just only people in this country think Owen Jones is villiage idiot
aahhh!
but to the al bbc “village” of vacuous airhead-ery
a “hero” …. its a pity they,(fox) didn t slap them down too for the amount of airtime they give him.
BBC says more than 850 people complain about Harry photos published by The Sun. Wow!!! 60 million people in the UK and ‘more than’ 850 complain…wow
The BBC received 4500 complaints (source:Grauniad) about their jubilee coverage but they still got it “just about right”.
The BBC received at least 50,000 complaints about their proposed screening of “Jerry Springer the Opera”. They would have received more, but their systems “failed” and you couldn’t get through by email, or telephone.
The Beeb admitted it was the largest number of complaints ever, but went ahead and showed it anyway.
Their explaination – it was in the public interest.
I long for the day when the BBC is funded by voluntary subscription because then we will find out just what the British public thinks of the BBC’s output.
Surely a BBC serialisation of the Satanic Verses is called for, in the interests of balance.
So – what do we make of this claim that Question Time’s audience is selected to reflect the local political landscape, rather than the nation’s as a whole. If true, it might explain why so many episodes are broadcast from major metropolitan centres, rather than the traditionally blue rural areas. I’m not sure I believe this latest claim by the outgoing DG, though. On the very rare occasion that the programme locates itself in my area (Norfolk/Suffolk), the audience still seems to be loaded with the usual suspects – those insufferably worthy, comfortable shoe wearers. Perhaps these are the types of people who are most likely to apply to participate – those who are so convinced of the superiority and righteousness of their opinions to the degree that they really must be heard above the ghastly populism of the majority. However, this is the kind of inbalance that the audience selectors are supposed to iron out. The ‘logic’ here seems to be that the programme’s weekly bias is what makes it unbiased. Hmmmmmm.
…but, as ever, the final quote from the article gives us the standard BBC line – that they’re impartial because they say so…
A BBC spokesman said: ‘Audiences are selected in accordance with BBC guidelines on fairness and impartiality.’
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2193652/Question-Time-does-bias-says-BBC-revealed-areas-episodes-filmed-researched.html
‘as ever, the final quote from the article gives us the standard BBC line’
Which renders any further discussion with the BBC or any of its echo chamber acolytes rather pointless.
Especially when, as seems inevitable, the arrogance and abuse on display seems to be getting notched up further, in forums at least, perhaps to provoke as the lack of value of the trolling makes their contributions less and less worthy of note, much less comment.
Frankly from the comments on the piece, the DM , and pols, appear to have handed a further fudge factor over by alluding to an impossible to prove ‘local balance’. There are too many now who have actually participated, or tried to, raising questions on the criteria for selection based on pre-vetting on political grounds. That immediately introduces an element that depends on the impartiality of the vetter and/or those that employ them. The BBC’s record in this is not great even with high profile plants, from Newsnight ‘mums’ to out-of-work ‘students’. What they get up to with ‘ordinary members of the community’ lord knows.
Slightly OT, but I just watched something that really struck home.
I am as critical of the entire MSM as I am the BBC, all of whom treat ‘news’ as a mix of ratings fodder, cynical tall poppy easy targets, no-win hapless pol-baiting plays to the crowd, or naked tribal PR either attacking foes or boosting those they want in.
One exception is SKY’s Tim Marshall, whose reports more often than not come across as pure information framed in a way that let’s you make your mind up.
He just did a report from Syria on the ‘discovery’ of another massacre that really laid out the context in terms that unemotionally presented the options, including what could not be known and hence not speculated upon.
Unlike his female colleague yesterday (in obligatory headscarf) who appeared to have been employed as a cheerleader by a mob she was leading down a street in a choreographed homage to West Side Story.
He makes sticking with SKY just about worth it.
I will be interested in how the BBC handles the latest outrage by PR activists whose objectivity may not always warrant the credibility accorded them by an entity that now thinks Twitter is the font of all truth.
The BBC report, on their website, does mention that the claims are “unverified” etc but then goes on to fill a whole page of quotes from the “opposition” Human Rights Watch and (least credible) the UN. I was most amused by the nom du jour of the rebels, guerillas, armed militia, whatever – the BBC have settled on………wait for it….”Opposition Activists”.
I was also surprised to see the BBC referring to a massacre. Surely this was just “violence between” the Syrian Army (protesters) and the Opposition Activists™?
If I see any more `Mo Farah` headlines think I will scream!!! What about the other actual BRITISH athletes? The ones who were born here, the ones who actually live here in the UK? Let`s face it… he lives and trains in the US… Okay, he has a British passport, but that doesn`t mean much considering we give them out to anyone who applies… Also what action did he perform first after winning the races? Each time he went straight to the floor and gave a quick thanks prayer to Allah…. and then thought about the flag as an afterthought… As for his so called `Mobot` …. who is to say it wasn`t an `M` for MUGS??? Why is he the face of the Olympic team?? He won two medals….. Ennis competed in more events for just one medal… Hoye won more medals… as did a few others…. Mo Farah has the ability to run up to 10,000 metres in a time which was actually far slower than existing records, he was just lucky on the day…. He isn`t that fast at either distance… What about that Triathlon guy who did the same distance about thirty seconds slower than him AFTER he had already completed a massive swim and a cycle race??? I fervently hope that that guy does indeed try out the 10,000 metres as another event as I`ve a feeling that he could easily outpace Mo sodding Farah within a year using actual British Athletics coaching etc…. I wish Mo Farah would just f*ck off!!! Why do have a Somalian asylum seeker being used as a poster boy for British Atheletics??? I thought we had an actual team, who between them won nearly forty gold medals….. I also got annoyed when the paralympics got shafted and is being shown on Channel Four, I suppose thier achievements mean nothing as well!!! Or will they wheel out Abu Hamza becouse he is a muslim and has an eyepatch and a hook for a hand??
One of the consequences of having John Gray do “A point of view” on radio 4 every week is that you get good value for money – in terms of propaganda I mean, in terms of the ‘right message’ being heard
.
Though does not always do so, Gray can go on talking very good sense for a while, till suddenly we get the boilerplate:
.
“The far right is on the march in many European countries, using its rights to attack minorities”
More bias at our expense, with the free platform given to John Gray, contributor to The Guardian and New Statesman (surprise!) (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-19372177) – A Point Of View: The trouble with freedom.
‘The far right is on the march in many European countries, using its rights to attack minorities’.
No mention of the left, who suppress publication or expression of any non-pc views, or of those minorities who abuse our freedom and try to impose their medieval ways on the rest of us.
All things considered, a heck of a kick off line for an entity that is pretty strict on which points they allow and whose views they invite on, let alone get expressed…
‘We’ve come to believe’
A career in CECUTT beckons, once he can do something about that ‘coming to’ bit.
‘Belief’ chez Aunty in unequivocal rectitude in all things is absolute from the moment of the Big Bang to the Rapture.
Dodgy Severn barrage: expect high-cost greenie Beeboids to support it.
“The tangled tale of Lord Deben and a dodgy Severn barrage.
“A proposal for the biggest infrastructure project in British history has shaky foundations but some powerful friends.”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/9498568/The-tangled-tale-of-Lord-Deben-and-a-dodgy-Severn-barrage.html
Akabusi on INBBC news, just failed to repeat Armstrong’s famous line as he stepped onto the moon. He hadn’t a clue!
How much do they pay these knobs?
wtf?
I love the smell of a double standard in the morning…
Andrew Adonis @Andrew_Adonis
Ofqual review of GCSE English marking unsatisfactory as Ofqual’s own actions need independent analysis. Review shd be external and fast.
I wonder if, in precedent, the good Lord would therefore agree such oversight in regulation should apply to all public sector entities?
And with the hypocritterati now ruining a lovely sunny day for themselves trying to prove Rupes personally hid in the Las Vegas mini-bar with his Box-Brownie, like it matters or anyone cares outside their echo chamber… I think the garden beckons….
BBC Radio 4
Paddy O’Connell’s Broadcasting House newspaper review this morning brings us another fine example of just how in touch the Beeb selected reviewers are with the licence paying British public. (Sarcasm)
Now you may have been sojourning somewhere in a cave recently or you may have heard of the middlebrow risque-themed blockbuster Fifty Shades of Grey. Millions of women are quite excited about this.
Paddy’s reviewers (three women) are asked what they think of the book.
The answers they give:
‘The bits I’ve read, I didn’t like’
‘I don’t want to read it’
‘Haven’t heard of it’
Not a very good cross section of ordinary female opinion, I would venture. The snooty, the campaigning feminists, the liberal-Left elite are well represented however.
‘‘The bits I’ve read, I didn’t like’
‘I don’t want to read it’
‘Haven’t heard of it’
Blimey. Phone it in professional competence and objective integrity like that and Nick Robinson better watch out on the BBC Political Editor Front.
When he eventually gets back.
SML – Breivik ” norway – reminiscent of South Africa the conciliation commission” ?
how? … the way they put erm “violence” behind them?, pap! … note the far right inference too … utter babble … off switch
BBC’s favourite President eclipses the moon landing!
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-19384330
“Obama leads tribute to Armstrong, first man on the moon”
“US President Barack Obama has led tributes to astronaut Neil Armstrong, the first man on the Moon, who died on Saturday at the age of 82”
It gets better – Twitter!!!!!
Mr Obama said on his Twitter feed: “Neil Armstrong was a hero not just of his time, but of all time.”
One small Tweet from a man – one giant Presidential plug by the BBC
Obama is upset because Neil Armstrong’s first words on the moon weren’t ‘allahu akbar’
apparently the islamic, “whopper”
is he thought he heard the call to prayer
on the moon? … but as it was he had just passed wind …
oh yeah and he was (yawn) a secret muslim too
.. wait a minute 😀 .. wheres scezz
“who exactly are these secret muslims controlling the food supply and demanding everyone eat halal food?”
For Obama’s enthusiasm for the space program see this:
http://sultanknish.blogspot.se/2012/08/a-small-step-for-one-man.html
What has Islam ever acheived when it comes to science, maths, engineering or anything else. Everything they have is from other cultures. That they conquered or existed before Islam.
This should get you started. For one thing our numbering system went from India, through the Islamic empire. Why? because of their great mathematicians. Look up where the words Algebra and algorithm come from.
.
Quite a lot of classical scholarship is based on texts preserved by the early Muslims
.
Their glory days were long ago but it’s an interesting lesson. I’m no fan of Islam – which seems to have a troubled side to it. But I only scratched the surface with the above. Any culture can have a period of positive, creative energy.
Rubbish. Of course there are connections but it has nothing to do with Islam. There is almost nothing that originated in “Islam” but of course scholars, mathematicians philosophers etc that happened to live in that time or that country did play a part in much development. However, as we don’t refer to anything that happened in ‘the West’ as Christian why should we accept the idiocy that “Islam” gave us this that or the other?
Oh, and the radio 4 news began with “President Obama” has led the tributes to Neil Armstrong” Good to know the Beeb are still working for Obama.
.
We know that one of the more subtle expressions of BBC Obama-bias is to mention his name whenever possible in a good light, whilst republicans are generally mentioned with respect to some scandal or other. If this had happened 5-10 years ago I imagine the news bulletin would have begun: “tributes have poured in round the world to…” and about 5 minutes into the extended news you’d get some carefully selected Bushism
.
What a truly sad day, by the way…RIP to the great man. It feels to me that a hero has died.
Simultaneous landing on this one.
My thoughts exactly. Shouldn’t the correct unbiased headline read something like:
Neil Armstrong, first man on the moon dies, Obama leads tributes.
The first man on the Moon, Neil Armstrong has died. I found out from the BBC Radio 2 news at noon. The first word in the announcement was “Obama”. The BBC put the announcement of Obama paying his respects as more important than the death of Armstrong itself. That went down as disrespectfully rude of the BBC with the family, who do not usually see BBC Bias that often.
Because news of his death is not new. Once you have broken the story, which was yesterday, you have to take the story on. It shifts from a breaking to story to a reax story. Obama is the most senior person to have paid tribute so you lead with that.
If the BBC had lead the breaking story with Obama then that would have been wrong.
Nice try at justifying the BBC’s Obamafest, but (i) there are worldwide tributes, which makes a much more effective recognition of Armstrong than just American ones; and (ii) Obama isn’t leading the tributes; he just happened to have jumped on the bandwagon.
I didn’t say Obama was leading the tributes, I said that as POTUS he is the most senior person to have paid tribute, therefore you lead with him.
If some big name dies in the UK and the Queen pays tribute typically you would lead with that.
Obama isn’t jumping on the bandwagon, he is doing his job. He is the president, a very important person in US history has died, of course he will pay tribute; it would be extremely remiss of him not to.
The BBC headline is Obama leads tributes to Armstrong, first man on Moon.
Their report starts with US President Barack Obama has led tributes to astronaut Neil Armstrong, the first man on the Moon, who died on Saturday at the age of 82.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-19384330
Not sure how many times I can say the same thing. Obama is the president — what do you think he should do? What do you think the BBC should report?
Once you have said Armstrong is dead, where are you going next with tre story?
well the article is ALL about other people and Armstrong: however, the headline and the first two sentences are about Obama (and his Twitter feed FFS!). I suspect a BBC article writer would take a nanosecond to find where they could ‘go next’
I realise (a) you all hate the BBC , (b) you hate Obama and (c ) don’t work in news, but this is a bog standard tribute piece. Start with the most important person, work yr way down.
Obama is — for now at least — president. It is his job to do this kind of thing. Even by the standards of this site you are really, really reaching if you think this is evidence of bias.
Reply to Nick (10:02) Not bias, just Obamalove. there is NO NEED to mention him at all but now Sir Arthur (comment 11:53) gives us the main reason they do.
Nick, old chum, ITV 10 o’clock News tonight ‘work in news’ and they managed to cover the passing of Neil Armstrong without the Obama-fest.
And it’s interesting to read Sky News http://news.sky.com/story/977135/neil-armstrong-global-icon-reluctant-hero
in which the only mention of Obama is Armstrong’s criticism of the Sainted One.
However, he stepped back into the cameras in 2010 to voice his “substantial reservations” about President Barack Obama’s space policy that shifted attention away from a return to the moon, with an emphasis on private companies developing spaceships.
Along with more than two dozen Apollo-era veterans, he signed a letter calling the plan a “misguided proposal that forces Nasa out of human space operations for the foreseeable future”.
I agree with Nicked on this one.
The President probably has fond memories of watching the moon landing while eating a nice dog dinner with his family.
The news is about Him, not about Armstrong. He is saying something to the public. The topioc is irrelevant. So of course His name is invoked first. And I’m not even really being sarcastic here.
These Open Threads are really complex arent they?
Which issue do you presume to comment on?…the BBC is as corkscrewed a yardstick for liberal pretentions, assumptions and devious prejudices as could possibly be forged by Satan himself.
They are wrong on every key issue that confronts the British people-they have been since they became the tie-dyed flag of smug, dope addled rebellion since the days of MacMillan and Wilson.
It`s just that the “wisdom of the crowd” as seen on sites like this ensures we all know it now-and won`t be bought off, or told we`re “right wing” or “out of step with the 21st Century etc”…sinister Stalin the Aromatherapist bullshit(with thanks to Anne Leslie).
Take just one thread above-education.
Peter Hitchens puts it pithily in todays “Mail On Sunday”…how is it that the “rise in educational standards” and the “fall in crime” as pumped out by the Government since 1997 are NEVER questionned by the BBC and Guardian etc. And certainly not in the way that unemployment figures or economic growth data is, when THIS Government pumps them out.
Progress in ever increasing brilliance of the kids of the plebs…and their innate refusal to riot, maim, rob or kill is non-negotiable and not ever to be addressed or discussed by the liberals…because rubbing their faces in what they`ve done would destroy their ever-present hope of IslamoSocialism( they`re shit scared of Islam, and still pine for a Sino-Soviet world government under an EU/UN pretext of niceness and tolerance).
But-I`m only saying the same thing in a different way as others have done…from Kenneth Williams to Douglas Murray…WE are the mainstream, not right wing at all.
It`s the craven surrender monkeys that STILL squat over all our State-funded monocultures that are the nutjobs, that won`t let all the evidence of their malice, complacency and sheer indifference that are the “problem in need of a solution”…since the 60s `twas ever thus.
Let me roughly quote Michael Frayn and his words on “The Herbivores”
“These are the “radical middle classes, the do-gooders, the readers of the Guardian etc, signers of petitions and the very backbone of the BBC. They look out from the lush pastures which are their natural station in life with eyes full of sorrow for less fortunate creatures, guiltily conscious of their advantages, though never so much as to actually cease eating the grass”.
I`m guessing he had already met Polly Toynbee, Tony Benn and Will Hutton….he really has no need to meet Owen Jones, Laurie Penney or Stephanie Flanders.
Yet-thanks to the compulsory Poll Tax on edutainment that is the BBC…he has no other choice.
Why should he-why should WE-have to pay to get his face rubbed in the liberal squits and incontinence from mini-Toynbees and Heath-lites?
God we`re dumb…but not for ever, surely to God!
Mouchel mystery? No doubt as I am posting on the Open thread a new Open thread will open within the hour.
Anyway, regardless off what you think of the appalling management failure that led to the bankruptcy surely the BBC would be pleased so many Liverpool jobs were saved?
Much as tried there was no link to the story about Mouchel except if you did a search: I have screenshots of whole pages of:
UK News: No
UK Politics: No
UK Business: No
UK England (region): No
Not even smaller links. Finally in “Liverpool” I found EXTERNAL links. Yet the story is there, when you search it bring up the news page.
Liverpool: http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c61/SpanOws/Owsblog%20other/BBCNews-Liverpool260812.jpg
Search: http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c61/SpanOws/Owsblog%20other/BBC-SearchresultsforMouchel260812.jpg
Story: http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c61/SpanOws/Owsblog%20other/BBCSearchMouchel260812.jpg
…just if you don;t search you won’t find it.
Here’s a bit of reflexive White House propaganda at the end of this BBC article about Romney’s recent joke about where he was born.
Overall, the piece is pretty balanced, although it does seem to come from the perspective that Romney was wrong to make the joke. While the headline says that the joke upset the President’s campaign, the headline in the link to it from the main US & Some Country You Rarely Hear About page at the moment reads: “Romney rebuked over ‘birther’ remark”.
Rebuked by the President and His supporters (like Katty Kay), yes. Not in general, or by the country at large, which is the impression the sub-editor wants you to have. But that’s not actually the reflexive propaganda I’m talking about.
At the end, the BBC also mentions Romney’s critical remarks about corporations using off-shore tax havens. The last line of the article is:
The Republican’s remarks were also a reminder that he himself has kept some of his personal fortune in low-tax foreign accounts.
No. It can be called a reminder only if that’s how he meant it. What it should say is that the remarks are being seized upon by the President’s campaign and Democrats to remind people about Romney’s own off-shore tax shelters. The Romney campaign says that these offshore accounts don’t actually provide any tax benefits for him. But never mind that. It’s a White House talking point thrown in reflexively, and the BBC sure as hell isn’t going to give you Romney’s side of the story. The Beeboid who wrote this doesn’t realize what he/she has done here. It just came naturally. Calling them “low-tax” just might be a little white lie, but what’s a little white lie between friends, eh?
Yes, Beeboid ex-Director-General, M THOMPSON will be politically
at home at ‘NEW YORK TIMES’:
“FORMER NEW YORK TIMES EDITOR SAYS NEWSPAPER ‘BLEEDS’ A PROGRESSIVE WORLDVIEW”.
[Excerpt]:
…”developments like the Occupy movement and gay marriage seem almost to erupt in The Times, overloved and undermanaged, more like causes than news subjects.”
(-Just like BBC-NUJ.)
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/former-new-york-times-editor-says-newspaper-bleeds-a-progressive-worldview/
Sorry, George, I didn’t see this before I posted the same on the new open thread.
No problem: glad you extended the case.
Richard Branson once again allowed free rein, all over the BBC media, to spout his bile at anyone who dares to oppose his ambitions. He must have been banking on the extension of the rail franchise to buy a new Caribbean island or two, or perhaps a big balloon, or a space-ship, or any other of a number of personal self-aggrandisement projects. Diddums.
He gets so many free rides from the BBC that he really doesn’t need to charge anyone for seats on his trains.
However a Radio 4 interviewer pretty much had him spluttering by reminding him that the very complaint he was levelling at an opponent (which actually competes already in the market) i.e. that when he first bid for a franchise, he had no experience whatsoever in rail operations, and everyone thought that he wouldn’t be able to deliver what he’s promised. This perfectly fair question was allowed by the interviewer to be turned into the same old rant by Branson about how everyone was being beastly to him, and it was so unfair he’d lost his train set.
Get over it, Mr Branson – you bid, you lost, you don’t get to nibble away at the opponents’ bids afterwards. I don’t remember you asking for re-analysis on bids after you won any.
And, right on cue, the Labour Party of Prudent Band-wagon Jumpers leaps into the fray. Angela Eagle manages to sit through an interview with a completely straight face , calling upon the government to delay the award of the contract till MPs can scrutinise the bid process in detail, because, to paraphrase her, …’after all, it should be an open process, since we’re talking about a long-term and very large value contract’.
Hmmm, so that would be the same level of scrutiny that her government was constantly providing for the multi-billion, 30-year, PFI contracts a certain Mr G Brown dealt with, by deliberately hiding the costs and the effect on our National Debt.
Hypocrite ? Much ?
might have to re post on new open thread but.
al bbc 5live – your call … obama sez!? …
re – neil armstrong
oh brother ….. actually he, (armstrong) did speak about the space program under
obama, leaving behind a shadow space agency: “embarrassing and unacceptable”.
ooh yes! … were talking about the space race and ittssssss panto dame nikki :-D.
so much reverence to armstr… – obama this morning wetting his pants whilst lauding that
apparently he had actually .. phoned nasa? … hurrah!,
(but its not quite the same nikki 😀 ).
wait a minute … wasn t it c. bolden – obama appointee who declared that, “diversity and inclusion are integral to mission success at nasa”… because how can we possibly reach the stars unless there are mandated diversity targets among the launch crews and the conflict management specialists? … and had declared that the agency’s chief goal was outreach to the Muslim world?
Its says everything that is wrong with obama/nasa not something to be lauded.
Here come the McLoons…
I reckon that to some extent a broadcaster will gather and develop an audience that suits what is broadcast.
Nicky Campbell reappears on BBC 5 Live this morning to host a phone-in about space exploration.
Sadly we already know that the 5 Live core callers are a pool of cave dwelling celtic warriors, ‘ordinary-bloke’ campaigning socialists and Yankie-go-home boys who can be relied upon to banker bash, defend the NHS and whinge about so called Cutz.
So rather than celebrate the life, achievements and legacy of Neil Armstrong the 5 Live callers are more keen to take a pop at what they see as US exploitation, bemoan the passing of Celtic civilization and – at least two of these McLoons – maintain the hackneyed conspiracy theory that man never really went to the moon.
Disrespectful and idiotic broadcasting. There is an added irony for the SNP flavoured McLoons in that Armstrong was descended from an English/Scottish border Reiver family.
But what can we expect from the crowd that hangs on Dame Nicky’s every word – these are the same people who opine daily and favourably on the economic policies of Ed Balls, the wonderfulness of EU and on just how great our education system was under Labour.
I just wished to take a couple of seconds and tell you that I appreciated the article.
I truthfully don’t believe that most people know the amount of hard work that gets put into the making of a good web page. I know this is sort of random but it bugs me sometimes. Anyways awesome site.