The BBC seems to be running a series of attacks on UKIP. The latest one uses the old “bongo bongo” riff from many years ago and does everything possible to demonise UKIP’s Godfrey Bloom. The source for the attack is the BBC’s print arm, The Guardian. One can understand WHY the BBC loathes UKIP and I am sure that ahead of next year’s Euro elections, we will see much more of this sort of thing.

Bookmark the permalink.

105 Responses to UKIP ATTACK..

  1. The Sage says:

    I was just about to send this story to Biased BBC and you beat me to it.
    The Guardian and BBC working as one and as always.
    Where’s the story in this?
    An excellent comment by Mr Bloom. The late, great Alan Clark said the same.
    That great thing is that Mr Bloom hasn’t apologised like most pathetic politicians do when saying something worthwhile.
    The BBC never has undercover filming of Green Party events or seeks to find out if Caroline Lucas and her kind are all secret owners of gas guzzlers, don’t actually cycle to Brussels or Westminster every week or take long-haul holidays, etc.


    • Guest Who says:

      ‘The BBC never has..’
      Always risky, but certainly they seem to make interesting choices editorially on what and who to cover (McAlpine?) and who not.
      Luckily, as James has now been told by the BBC’s Lucy, they can do this without challenge because, well, they can and it’s their secret.


      • Guest Who says:

        Pervasive propaganda backed by unaccountable censorship.
        What could possibly go wrong?


    • noggin says:

      already sick of hearing about it on 5 dead … and panto campbell? sheesh! almost seems to have a fetish about mr bloom this morning


      • noggin says:

        5deads, resident lamebrain r.bacon has an anti racism beebot on,
        you know i think i ll join the very long queue that want to drop kick him


  2. Frank Words says:

    The Progressive (sic) Establishment loves the EU

    The BBC is the mouthpiece of the Progressive Establishment

    UKIP challenges British membership of the EU

    Even if UKIP have next to zero chance of winning seats under the British electoral system they are a real threat to the Conservatives and could force Cameron into a membership referendum that could lead to the exit door.

    So, put the boot in at every opportunity.



  3. ron todd says:

    Ideology over practicality. If UKIP do well they take votes from the Tories (mine for one) and the BBC’s preferred parties gain.

    But they just cannot pass a chance to attack a party with so many policies they disagree with.


  4. Thoughtful says:

    It wasn’t the only phrase which Bloom used, yet the only one really picked up was ‘bongo bongo land’ The thinly veiled meaningless bully word ‘racism’ was straining at the leash just waiting to be unleashed. For anyone who finds themselves on the wrong end of this word – just ask for a definition which everyone can agree on! The point is that there is no actual definition and most lefties disagree amongst themselves, sometimes violently over it’s meaning. One thing is for certain is that it no longer means treatment different to others on account of the victims race.
    The point is that if anyone actually does find out what it means then the word will lose much of its power to bully.
    The only definition I can come to for ‘racism’ is ‘A word which can mean what ever the user wants it to mean for the purpose of bullying’.

    Bloom gave a very good defence of himself with the interviewer desperately trying to find a chink in his armour, and constantly failing.


    • Roland Deschain says:

      Bloom’s interview on Today was comedy gold.

      “I don’t know where Bongo Bongo Land is, you tell me.”

      “If I have offended anyone in Bongo Bongo Land, I shall write to the ambassador at St. James’s and apologise.”

      When Bloom took it as a compliment if he was upsetting the Guardian and the BBC, John Humphrys countered that no, he wasn’t upsetting anyone there, it was very entertaining – but you could hear the gritted teeth.


      • RCE says:

        That was a very telling comment; the arrogant, aloof, bien pensant mindset of the typical BBC presenter: “we, the unelected state-funded millionaire broadcasters, who airily dismiss any criticism of anything we do, find your views, as a white, middle-aged anglo-saxon democtratically elected man who dares speak his mind about a political topic and not repent immediately upon being savaged by the minority cultural Marxists of the BBC/Guardian axis, so ridiculous that we will mock you on national radio.”


        • johnnythefish says:

          Great stuff – but how did you manage to get your hands on the BBC’s mission statement?


      • Guest Who says:

        If twitter is any guide, the BBC may not be getting the response it had hoped from this, rather epitomised by comments here:


        • Doublethinker says:

          I agree with Mr Bloom . But the BBC is so distance from what ordinary British people think that they simply can’t believe that many millions will agree with him. If only other politicians were as caring about what ordinary people think and as uncaring about the BBC think as he is, we would have a very different political scene. Tory party please take note , the majority of people in the country agree with Mr Bloom.


      • Roland Deschain says:

        To correct myself: it was, as Mark II points out below, James Naughtie who did the interview.

        They all sound the same to me. Am I allowed to say that?


    • Andrew says:

      You are right Mr Thoughtful, ‘racist’ is an all-purpose PC bully word and term of disapproval (a negative version of ‘nice’ or ‘cool’) which is seldom if ever defined, perhaps because if it were, then the whole construct of ‘anti-racism’ would collapse.

      ‘Bongo Bongo Land’ has echoes of bongo drums and the Congo. So what? Is it really much more offensive than the film title “Moon over Parador”, where a small Central / South American country is satirised, drawing the name from, I imagine, Paraguay and Ecuador? What if the late Jade Goody, instead of referring to a fellow contestant harmlessly as “Shilpa poppadom”, had said of a lady of Italian origin “Maria spaghetti face”? Why the sensitivity over different skin colour, which in any case does not necessarily denote more than sub-racial (rather than racial) difference?

      My guess is that everyone is to some degree ‘racist’, just as they are aware of their gender and the language they think in. What matters is whether they discriminate in their professional capacity. So Robert Mugabe was racist when he said that the British should “keep their pink noses out of Zimbabwe”; but I would judge him more on how he treated White farmers and so damaged the well-being of Black citizens. He is entitled to a gut feeling of aversion to fair skin (“pink noses”) but should not discriminate against the White minority, especially when they could have been useful to him and the country as managers of (nationalised) farms.

      In my experience, those who are ‘racist’ in theory (e.g. pub talk) are often colour-blind in practice in dealings with individuals from ethnic minorities. I suspect that those Whites who are most overtly ‘anti-racist’ are fully aware of racial differences but, living in a state of denial of the reality of human nature, suppress the thoughts and turn them against their own ethnicity. How else can you explain the repeated BBC refusal to join the dots about the sub-racial and cultural characteristics of child-grooming gangs?


    • Cyclops says:

      You raise a good point Thoughtful around the definition. Personally I think the definition is deliberately kept absent or vague.


      In short, it’s a guerrilla tactic. If it has no definition you cannot attcak it to defeat it. It’s users can also use it to mean what they want it to mean, when they want it to mean that. In other words you’re always on the back foot and there’s very little you can do it about it and that’s right where they want you. It serves a political aim and a money aim. The political aim is to keep the the hard left’s opponents in a state of uncertainty and vulnerbale to an attack at any time. On the money front, the huckster get to keep the cash register full from their roles as diversity consultants.

      On the other hand though, Bloom was a fool. Whatever he meant by it he should have been able to work out that the hucksters have no interest in what he really meant by it. To them it doesn’t matter if he is racist or not, they just need something that could be construed as racist and they’ll fill in the gap.

      UKIP has a long way to go to gain serious credibility in a media environment just looking ot hang them out to dry. It was stupid to hand it to them on a plate.


  5. London Calling says:

    Remember the maxim: foreign aid is where you take money from poor people in rich countries and give it to rich people in poor countries. Nothing to apologise for.


  6. George R says:

    Where is ‘bongo bongo’ land?

    To say British aid should not be sent there seems a reasonable, if not sophisticated comment.

    UKIP’s MEP, Mr Bloom’s emphasis that British people should have priority on British government spending seems reasonable too.

    Of course, Mr Bloom’s political opponents, Beeboid and Guardianistas, give priority to those such as Shaker Aamer,* ex-Bin Laden assistant, of Gitmo.



    • noggin says:

      might as well send that aid to “bongo bongo land”,
      which is kind of the point, it would never get to those
      in need, only to the pockets of those erm … “in power”
      … charity begins at home, end of.


    • Mark II says:

      Bongo bongo land was last given a public airing by Boris Johnson in 2004 – although I suspect its heritage is much older than that.


      • Thoughtful says:

        1999 by Alan Clarke and believed to be a catch all term for Sub Saharan ex British Colonies.

        If there is a list of words banned by the nutters on the left then it should be published so to avoid them having to suffer the absolute anguish these words appear to cause them.


        • Mat says:

          Sorry but the left have already banned the word ‘lists’ as too conservative they prefer the term ‘loose collective of non orientated assumptions not governed by a fixed stand point ‘


  7. Rufus McDufus says:

    I don’t remember Chuka Umunna’s comments about London being ‘full of trash’ getting reported quite like this.


  8. Thoughtful says:

    And on they wheel a Labour shadow development minister and a spokesperson from ‘show racism the red card’. Both of them screaming left wing pinkos.

    No wonder the BBC is perceived as far left biased.

    Then we are told the Bloom ‘needs to understand’ Well why does he ‘need’ to understand anything of her point of view. The progression of this is the inevitable he needs to understand our point of view or we will send him to the re educations camps.
    The authoritarian nature of the fascist left is breath taking, and yet it’s almost never challenged. When it is challenged they seem dumbstruck as if they hadn’t realised where their nastiness is taking us.

    It is obvious that the BBC are attempting to play the race card, to silence debate which they know reflects the popular beliefs of the people of the UK. Left wing views must be seen to triumph. I wonder how long it will be before the BBC orders one of those unwanted statues of Lenin or Marx from ex Communist countries.


    • Phil Ford says:

      “…The authoritarian nature of the fascist left is breathtaking, and yet it’s almost never challenged. When it is challenged they seem dumbstruck as if they hadn’t realised where their nastiness is taking us.”

      The problem, in a nutshell. Belligerence begets belligerence. The Left cannot fathom any point-of-view that dares criticises their sacrosanct doctrines, least of all those that expose their latent fascism (a fascistic tendency on the Left which a quicky study of world political history lays bare for all to see). The BBC are merely the common purpose ‘customer-facing’ exterior hiding the familiar beast within.


      • Mat says:

        “Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other views.”
        ― William F. Buckley


  9. Roland Deschain says:

    As a matter of interest. Is this racist?


    • Guest Who says:

      From the sound of it, if one person finds it so, then yes.
      At which point the hounds get released, as they are well funded to do.


    • Stewart says:

      Only if this is


  10. Ian Rushlow says:

    The Establishment in this country believes it has an unquestionable right to dish out our money to foreign despots and basketcase countries whilst ordinary people here suffer deficiencies in health, education and housing. Much like the BBC believes it as an unquestionable right to dish out our money on its own pet projects, causes and leftist employment opportunities.


  11. paul says:

    bradford,leicester,foleshill coventry,might be a good place to find the land


  12. Edited Highlights says:

    No moral outrage of course from the BBC, the main stream media, or anyone in the one party by 3 names about the 12 billion of UK taxpayers money being poured down the drain in the name of ‘international development’.

    The viewpoint that this is an utterly unacceptable waste of our money is not allowed to be heard and that is what leads to the frustration that people feel. You see what happens when someone dares to challenge the establishment viewpoint.

    DFID just released a report, corporate style, at our expense glorifying how they have been throwing away our money while the elderly in the UK die in their own homes and in our hospitals, millions are unemployed, and thousands of businesses can’t get basic funding. But the DFID has been throwing our money away like confetti with Justine Greening claiming that she’s been relentlessly pursuing ‘real value for British aid.’ They have been using our money apparently to create jobs, build homes and transport infrastructure and set up bank accounts! No thoughts apparently about putting a line through the whole thing and spending the money on the same things over here.

    They’ve also been spending our money to apparently ‘Support 40 million people to hold authorities to account.’ !!!! You just couldn’t make it up!

    Not to mention the money they have spent on increasing the number of ‘Internet Users’, and spreading ‘access to financial services’. That is of course before you get on to their own salaries, pensions, and all the related expenses of running such an operation.

    An absolute scandal the whole thing but don’t expect the BBC or any mainstream media to be launching any kind of journalistic effort to hold our politicians to account on this matter. Unless you are from UKIP or oppose having the money you earn ripped from your pocket and thrown down the drain.


  13. Mark II says:

    Jim Naughtie was in full-on sneering mode this morning showing his liberal credentials as he attacked Godfrey Bloom for the temerity to express an opinion on foreign aid that chimes with many.
    Later on they got some “charity” workers to explain why Bloom was wrong and how most people felt that it was a “good thing” that our money goes to help these people who can’t help themselves and that even if there was no racist intent in the term bongo bongo land it is still offensive to use it.
    I would suggest that many people are beginning to feel the same way about charities as they are about foreign aid – which is that much of the money ends up in the wrong hands and is misspent on either designer sunglasses or funding terrorism.
    Funnily enough they visited the subject of Somalis sending remittances home and how Barclays was trying to ensure that this wasn’t a front for money laundering.
    Naturally the BBC managed to find some more “charity” people to explain how this was all wrong and the poor Somali children would starve to death if we interfered in these transfers.
    Finally they did what was supposed to be a light-hearted/technology bit about internet billionaires sponsoring research into their own pet projects.
    I was expecting the BBC to try and portray them as James Bond type villains – but instead they turned the argument around to say that really they should be paying more taxes so the government could decide how their money should be spent.
    Frankly I might have been listening to a satirical comedy program purporting to show the rabid guardianista/BBC bias – but no it was the real thing!


  14. Old Goat says:

    Mr. Bloom seemed to think that the majority of Radio 4 listeners would agree with him. I certainly do, but I didn’t hear anyone else being wheeled on in his support. I wonder why? (As if we didn’t know…)


    • John Anderson says:

      I think a lot of people would agree with Bloom AND the language he used. And a lot more people would feel that Bloom was being deliberately bombastic to make the very fair point that there should be some cuts in foreign aid rather than ring-fencing it – and would regard Jim Naughtie as an unctious prat.


  15. Arthur Greenwood says:

    Bongobongo Land was allegedly referred to by Alan Clark MP
    during the Major regime of the nineties.


  16. Alex says:

    Isn’t it ridiculous? We now live in a country where the populace seem to respond with more horror to name-calling and harmless, puerile comments than to seeing billions of our money being chucked to corrupt, terrorist-infested countries like Pakistan.
    Think of it. The BBC or the Guardian could have spent all their resources and journalistic ‘talent’ putting together reports on how Muslim grooming gangs are being ignored because of political correctness or why is there such an increase in anti-white grooming gangs in the first place, but instead they spend their time trying to undermine their ideological opponents with reports claiming that they make fun of de ‘bongos from de congos’.


    • Guest Who says:

      ‘We now live in a country where the populace seem to respond with more horror to name-calling and harmless, puerile comments..”
      Take your basic point, but not sure it’s ‘the populace’ responding in such ways, especially spontaneously, and often even after a raft of pushing.
      However, the precedents are legion.
      These pages have listed many instances where the BBC has got very interested and when not, and as James has shared the ‘when not’ requires no explanation as they wheel out the ‘get out of FoI with just six lawyers anything but free’ card.
      MPs of the right (well, left) party ‘caught’ saying naughty things and Naughtie seldom to be heard. Chance to wheel out the £200kpa CEO of… and she’s on the sofa with Dianne Breakfaast to Newsnight.
      The world and his dog pulling a vast yawn at possibly Ketamine-pumped horses ending up in our burgers, but some moppet tells a dinner lady she fancies a bacon sarnie and the world falls in on her.
      Meanwhile ending up in a burger is for some not news to others, who can be terrier-like in their devotion to ‘the story’ when it looks like it suits, and then suddenly get astoundingly uncurious if it backfires or heads in directions that don’t.
      Personally I think this one will end up as latterly described, which means the BBC will give it a few more pokes and ‘move on’ before they self-harm further.


  17. Keith Newman says:

    The only hope of bringing down the BBC is to vote UKIP. The Beeb with be quaking in their sandals!


    • Wild says:

      The BBC will identify whatever strategy suits the Labour Party. When Newsnight last Friday discussed the recent fall in the Labour Party poll ratings they made not the slightest attempt to disguise their voting preferences – presumably because they work on the assumption that since Newsnight is a television supplement to The Guardian it would be pointless to even pretend that they are politically balanced.

      I am sure they are aware that many people view their eagerness for this country to become a one Party State with contempt, but (as always in a Leftist State) so long as we are forced to pay for them it bothers them not one jot.

      Allegra Stratten said she rang her political contacts around the world (in their various holiday homes) and they were uniformly horrified about the appointment of somebody who worked for Obama in his election campaign helping the Conservatives.

      I take it her contact book only has Labour supporters in it then,. At least because she is a public servant (and not one of those grubby people who work for money) she does it for free, I mean those Labour Party hacks at the BBC work for free right?

      What? You mean they are egalitarians who believe in redistributing wealth taken from others into their own pockets? That they despise the free market because it gives people freedom of choice? So how did they get this power in the first place? Has anybody asked me if I want to fund the BBC?


  18. Alan says:

    They appear to have not reported the real story that charity chiefs are earning 6 figure salaries – I suppose the fact David Milliband and Justin Forsyth (Labour) are the 2 biggest earners meant they wouldn’t run the story.


  19. Sir Arthur Strebe-Grebling says:

    I think this is double-bluff by the bBBC. They know that most British people don’t like the Thought Police and enforced control of what we can say. So giving Mr Bloom’s comments a wider platform will probably increase the UKIP vote, much of it coming from the Conservatives and thus making it more likely that the loony lefties will win the next election.


  20. ember2013 says:

    “Bongo Bongo Land” to me is akin to the word: “Timbuktu” – it’s another name for a far off place. A far away place abroad.

    But as usual the BBC/Guardian focus on three words rather than the meat of what was being said.

    I’m not even sure “Bongo Bongo Land” was ever offensive until the media pounced on Alan Clark for using it. Then it suddenly became unusable.


    • Arthur Penney says:

      With the slight difference that Timbuktu actually does exist. (in Mali).

      (As usual the religion of peace is hanging around the area, killing the women and raping the cattle. – as well as burning a couple of thousand historical manuscripts – they can’t stop themselves. I will NEVER forgive them for buring the Great Library at Alexandria condeming the world to 500 years of the dark ages.)


      • ember2013 says:

        Narnia doesn’t exist either but I’m not offended by it, as a word!


        • Arthur Penney says:

          You should be: white public English schoolchildren go to a far off country and meet the Calormenes. “The Calormenes have dark faces and long beards. They wear flowing robes and orange-coloured turbans, and they are a wise, wealthy, curteous, cruel and ancient people”.

          I am sure you agree that the Narnia books should be banned from libraries and schools, the films banned from distribution and that the BBC would NEVER, EVER commission a production about such a racist Author.


    • Beez says:

      It’s strange really. I received a message from my mate with a link about this story from, yep, you guessed it, The Guardian. Now, my mate claims he has no political allegiance although everytime there is a debate on political issues, especially subjects like this, he throws the racist term around like there’s no tomorrow. Anyway, i challenged his vacuous ‘racist’ accusations and awaited a reply. Needless to say, i’m still waiting. That’s your typical leftist right there ladies and gents. They love to sling slanderous terms around like they’re going out of fashion, but when challenged, they hide in the shadows waiting for the monster they’ve created to take care of itself.


      • Andy S. says:

        Your mate isn’t called Scott, is he?


      • will.duncan says:

        Beez you have no friends so you won’t be getting a reply.


        • Mat says:

          Cheap and childish! really is that it ? is that the best your BBC loving brain can do ?
          ‘Ner ner you smell’ ‘ner ner and you’ !
          Will ! really get your parents to get a Nanny you need guidance and a very big stick !


  21. George R says:

    “Bloom unrepentant over ‘Bongo bongo land’ remarks.”


    “Look, my job is to upset The Guardian and the BBC- I love it, I love it.”


  22. GCooper says:

    As I said on the other recent thread about BBC attacks on UKIP, this isn’t just the BBC/Guardian at work – the story has also been seized upon with alacrity by the Left’s favourite hate object, the Daily Mail.

    What we are witnessing isn’t (solely) an attempt by the Left to smear and destroy UKIP, it is a conspiracy by the political class, Left and Right, which resents anything challenging its perceived right to rule.

    The last thing the PPE graduates want is their cozy little faux-democracy shaken-up by the arrival of a new force which thinks (and says) more or less what the vast majority of people think.

    Leaving aside their misogynistic reason for hating her, one of the reasons Margaret Thatcher ruffled so many establishment feathers was because her instincts were a little too close to those of hoi polloi

    And if there’s one thing our political class really hates, it’s the people they pretend to represent..


    • Simon says:

      so true with that last bit. And this isn’t just a bbc thing but all of the establishment going after them


  23. George R says:

    Are Beeboids-Guardianistas, etc, doing the Tories’ political work for them by picking on individual UKIP members?:-



  24. Cereal says:

    The Beeb, the Guardian, Labour and Leftists everywhere believe they’ve successfully used these comments by some minor unheard-of politician to a handful of people in a constituency meeting, to tar as racists anyone opposing the billions of pounds of tax money poured into the sand as foreign aid.
    They’re dead wrong. What has actually happened is that they’ve given free publicity to the UKIP. They’ve also casually insulted as racists ordinary people (like me) who wouldn’t use that sort of language but agree with the substantive argument behind it. An argument the Beeb refused to even discuss.
    This is how we have become so polarised.
    Whilst eating breakfast I find myself insulted for holding a legitimate political opinion. Instead of doing what the BBC wants, accepting that it is racist not to be in favour of massive foreign aid – the shadow Labour minister actually said this – what I actually do is hold onto my opinion more strongly and hate the Beeb, the Guardian, the Labour party…. This is the normal human reaction they consistently fail to understand. They don’t understand basic psychology.


  25. Corinium says:

    Godfrey Bloom more than held his own with Jim Naughtie this morning. “But the Prime Minister’s elected” said Naughtie. “So am I” said Bloom.

    This will not harm UKIP because, I suspect, a majority of the country agrees with Godfrey Bloom’s sentiments. Even if they support a degree of overseas aid they object it going to nations whose Presidents travel in fleets of Mercedes and run around the world in Gulfstreams.


    • starfish says:

      It is interesting how the BBC and fellow travelers characterise the debate

      No investigation into the fundamental issue – that foreign aid is frequently wasted, stolen or otherwise diverted from the intended recipients

      Every charity working in this area knows that

      I remember being in Africa with a Red Cross worker who said you could measure the level of corruption by the speed with which ‘free’ food aid (usually from USAID) got into the local markets for sale at inflated prices


  26. Guest Who says:

    Sort of OT, but an insight into the offence industry in full flounce…
    That is, IF they are. Hard to tell if it’s a parody of a spoof or not (not many 1’40” slots about)…. lead or followed by the #prnews one.
    Whichever way, publicity guaranteed:)
    Wonder who may grace the breakfast sofas and in what love it/hate it capacity in 3… 2… 1….


  27. The Beebinator says:

    send all beeboids to bongo bongo land. then nuke it


    • will.duncan says:

      It’s a clear warning to UKIP to sort out its MPs. UKIP has had a really easy ride to date, the entire media, not just the BBC, is now doing what they are supposed to do. Scrutinise. The BBC is not supposed to boringly chant PR from parties (one can imagine the Orwellian nightmare if Vance had ever any control!). This guy is an utter twerp and probably unfit for a parish council.

      That’s not bias to expose him.


      • Roland Deschain says:

        It’s not a phrase I would have chosen to use, but you haven’t explained what you find intrinsically wrong in what he said. Your only “argument” has been to call him a twerp.

        Never mind chanting boring PR – I’d prefer more politicians who don’t chant boring PC a bit more often, even if I disagree with them. I have more respect for a politician who says what he believes than one who only says what he thinks he’s allowed to.

        The BBC is at the forefront of trying to put limits on what a politician may say by use of selective outrage.


        • Guest Who says:

          ‘The BBC is at the forefront of trying to put limits on what a politician may say by use of selective outrage’
          Not just the BBC in imposition, and not just on politicians, if I may make so bold.
          There’s a pretty unpleasant, petty bunch of bottom feeders out there now, all feeding off anything they can scrape away.
          Interesting too what, or who they leave alone.
          Professional courtesies? (Confirmation FoI excluded).


          • Roland Deschain says:

            I don’t think the bottom feeders would get far without the BBC doing the cheerleading.


      • GCooper says:

        Oh yes it damned well is, will duncan – when the BBC elects not to similarly expose others, whom it shields and protects. It’s Bias by selection – a technique perfected by the Biased Broadcasting Corporation.


  28. The Highland Rebel says:

    BBC – Bongo Bongo Corporation.


  29. Mike says:

    Of course defenders of foreign aid point out that it’s only 0.7% of GDP. My wife points out to me that the £300 she spends monthly on fripperies is only 10% of my net pay. But when I take out mortgage, rates, utilities, food, travel etc. that 10% is actually 50%. I wonder what percentage of non-essential Government expenditure that 0.7% is?


    • George R says:

      Are you sure your name’s not Godfrey?


      • Mike says:

        Afraid not, just a very casual observer of this website and fascinated by the interplay between the regulars. I do have my little obsessions with the BBC though. For example Margaret Hodge, chairman (Non-PC) of the PAC is always introduced as “Labour MP…” (as if we didn’t know) even though such a position should be non-partisan and what she says is invariably A GOOD THING (pace 1066…). Talk about poacher turned gamekeeper!

        Must look up this Godfrey


    • Ian Rushlow says:

      Whether it is 0.7% or any other percentage isn’t important. It is morally outrageous and offensive that even a single penny is spent on overseas “aid”. This is a country in which thousands of pensioners die of hypothermia each winter, hundreds of thousands of children go to school hungry each day and several million people live in sub-standard housing. Until these and several other issues are solved there should be no foreign aid whatsoever; it is plain and simple theft. Charity is commendable – misappropriation of tax revenue is not.


      • johnnythefish says:

        Looking at it another way, it’s 10% of our annual deficit.


        • Andrew says:

          … Or about a quarter of the amount needed to pay the annual interest on the > £ 1 trillion of national debt.


  30. stuart says:

    the bbc and there leftie presenters on 5 live are just loving this,just loving it.the left wing attacks dogs have been on the tails of ukip for years,this is there time to unleach there hatred and bile against ukip and there supporters


    • Arthur Penney says:

      Two quotes “There is no such thing as bad publicity” – attrib: PT Barnum and “There is only one thing worse than being talked about – and that is not being talked about” – O Wilde


  31. Llareggub says:

    Danny Kaye

    Each morning, a missionary advertises neon sign
    He tells the native population that civilization is fine
    And three educated savages holler from a bamboo tree
    That civilization is a thing for me to see So bongo, bongo, bongo, I don’t wanna leave the Congo, oh no no no no no
    Bingo, bangle, bungle, I’m so happy in the jungle, I refuse to go
    Don’t want no bright lights, false teeth, doorbells, landlords, I make it clear
    That no matter how they coax him, I’ll stay right here


  32. DB says:


  33. George R says:

    “Are people really that offended by Godfrey Bloom’s comments?”

    By Ed West.

    (Of course, Beeboids could themselves be refining the art of being offended, learning from their favourite religion’s advocates, and world champions in the art.)


    • DB says:

      West is spot on here: “ostentatious moral outrage designed to display opposition to the sin of racism, membership of the liberal communion, and moral superiority to sinners and deviants”


      • David Preiser (USA) says:

        Pet edgy comedians do this sort of thing every week.


      • pah says:

        It’s also very good for diverting attention from the matter in hand.

        Who is talking about aid compared to ‘Bongo Bongo Land’ ?


    • Stewart says:

      “designed to display opposition to the sin of racism, membership of the liberal communion, and moral superiority to sinners and deviants, an example of how secular politics has developed quasi-religious traits.”
      Glad I’m not the only one that has noticed


  34. Ian Rushlow says:

    The BBC continue to update their website. In a vain attempt to repudiate the words of Mr Bloom, it states that rather than money being spent on jet fighters: “The annual accounts for the Department for International Development show that £203.1m was spent on Pakistan in 2012-13. They state that the largest amount of the money of 31.4% was spent on education, benefiting nearly two million schoolchildren, 21.1% on tackling “poverty, hunger and vulnerability”, 14.2% on humanitarian aid – such as flood assistance, 12.6% on reproductive, maternal and newborn health and the rest on global partnerships, governance and security (including elections), health and wealth creation.”.

    They really don’t get it, do they? If Pakistan is receiving £203.1 million to spend on this stuff it is freeing up £203.1 million of their own money to spend on jet fighters, a nuclear weapons programme, one of the world’s largest armies, destablising their neighbours etc etc.


    • Roland Deschain says:

      Oh, they get it. They’re just counting on everyone else missing it amidst the faux outrage about Bongo Bongo Land.


      • David Preiser (USA) says:

        See, where I live, if you say Bongo Bongo Land, people are more likely to think you’re talking about the hipsters in the East Village and the Bowery Poetry Club.


    • regag says:

      I love Bongo Bongo land! Save Bongo Bongo land from annihilation by the PC idiots at the BBC!


    • richard D says:

      Well said, Mr Rushlow, sir. That is precisely the point.

      You should never look at where the money given in aid is ‘said’ to be spent…. you should always have an eye on the pea under the shell, which is where the government of the country in question is spending its OWN money…. and that is beneficially released to them by having so-called ‘AID’.

      ButI’m afraid that you’ll continue to provide sage advice like this until you’re blue in the face, before the BBC will give even a hint of the truth of what our so-called ‘AID’ actually supports.


  35. kfr says:

    if he said all politicians live in bongo bongo land no big fuss by the pc brigade and the bbc,he did not mention nobodys race,religion or country,what is the problem in the heads of these politacaly correct idiots on the left


  36. CCE says:

    The story that Nauchtie* bleated about – the £50m funding for the Polio campaign in the Sudan is interesting one.

    Anyone remember the great success of the WHO when the World was on the verge of completely eradicating Polio? Things were going well but certain religious fanatics in northern Nigeria decided that such vaccination campaigns were anti [insert faith] and part of a CIA/Zionist [delete as appropriate] conspiracy to break the faith of recipients [a la pig fat on Enfield rifle cartridges 1857]

    “While vaccinators have not previously been killed in the country, there is a long history of Nigerian Muslims shunning the vaccine.

    Ten years ago, immunization was suspended for 11 months as local governors waited for local scientists to investigate rumors that it caused AIDS or was a Western plot to sterilize Muslim girls. That hiatus let cases spread across Africa. The Nigerian strain of the virus even reached Saudi Arabia when a Nigerian child living in hills outside Mecca was paralyzed.”

    More recently 9 nurses were murdered in Pakistan for the crime of preventing Polio

    And health workers have been murdered in Angola and elsewhere.

    So perhaps the BBC could explore WHY vaccination and £50m of funding for the Sudan is necessary when the disease could have been eliminated from the planet, or is that inappropriate and counterprodutive?

    *Nauchtie is, as all Scots know, a word defined as meaning “good for nothing, worthless, mean, insignificant, petty, trifling, frivolous”


  37. Reed says:

    This seems to be quite a common sentiment. Perhaps there’s something to it…

    It’s a cunning plan. If Bloom had used the moderate, non-committal language of the typical modern politician his statement would have been ignored. The BBC would happily never mention UKIP.

    By riling the BBC he gets massive coverage; most of the population probably agree with the sentiment (and the language, when not cowed by the thought police) and therefore wins more support.


  38. Shoot the messenger if you will, but had Bloom not behaved like a juvenile prat the Graun and BBC would never have had the opportunity to attack.

    Bloom is a drunken idiot and he’s far from bright. He could have made the point without saying what he did.

    What the majority of comments above show is the desperation of people to leave the EU and to be rid of the political class. It’s a shame that such an objective means people will accept just about any stupidity and ignorance, as long as they are ‘on side’.

    Bloom is the kind of person who will undermine the Eurosceptic cause and prevent UKIP from making a genuine breakthrough. Perhaps some people should stop and think before engaging in kneejerk reactions in support of an unpleasant and incompetent fool like Bloom. Demand more.


  39. John says:

    Don’t worry Autonomous, we are encouraged not to shoot messengers. It is a shame that your felt the need to include the terms: Juvenile prat, Drunken idiot, Far from bright and Unpleasant and incompetent fool. It would have been perfectly possible to make your point without resorting to insults.

    In my opinion the previous poster (Reed) has absolutely nailed it. By riling the BBC Godfrey Bloom has coerced them into reporting the substance of his concern – something which they would otherwise never have mentioned.


    • Cyclops says:

      Maybe that was his plan, but judging by the comments on here(and from what I’ve seen elsewhere)it failed somewhat because those that want it to be seen as racist have still by and large made that meme stick. Heck even the DM have been painting him that way to a degree.

      In a world where people tend to take a shallow approach to news, often relying on only the headline he was always going to get hung out to dry. If it were a deliberate plan, maybe he should have thought through stage two as to what he was going to do with the BBC when he’d lured them in to his trap.