Looks like Dame Jenni Murray is about to join Germaine Greer in the unwanted by the BBC list.

Broadcaster Dame Jenni Murray has been criticised for making “hurtful remarks” after suggesting men who have had sex-change operations should not claim to be “real women”. Writing for the Sunday Times, the Woman’s Hour host said “it takes more than a sex change and make-up” to “lay claim to womanhood”. LGBTQ campaign group Stonewall called the comments “reductive”. But Dame Jenni said she was not “transphobic or anti-trans”. The Radio 4 presenter, 66, questioned whether someone who had enjoyed the privileges of growing up as a man could really be a woman.

I think Germaine Greer put it more succinctly when she noted…

 “Just because you lop off your d**k and then wear a dress doesn’t make you a ******* woman. I’ve asked my doctor to give me long ears and liver spots and I’m going to wear a brown coat but that won’t turn me into a ******* cocker spaniel. “I do understand that some people are born intersex and they deserve support in coming to terms with their gender but it’s not the same thing. A man who gets his d**k chopped off is actually inflicting an extraordinary act of violence on himself.”

Such common sense is unwanted by the BBC.

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Email this to someone


This erudite article is worth your attention

“When it comes to inaccurate, hopelessly biased “reporting” on immigration, Americans are spoiled for choice. Advocacy journalism is now more the rule than the exception and so rebutting and correcting the deluge of crooked immigration “reporting” is something of a Sisyphean task. Consuming a steady diet of mainstream media immigration “reporting” is akin to relocating to a toxic waste dump — after a while, you barely even notice the stench.

But every so often, I stumble across an immigration piece or segment so odious, so egregious, so hopelessly partisan in nature and execution that I can hardly digest it without retching. Sometimes, dear readers, journalists distinguish themselves with something so foul that they deserve to be named and shamed. This nine-minute, 16-second propaganda piece on the origins and impact of the sanctuary city movement in San Francisco, broadcast on the BBC “Witness” program on February 10, is just such a creature.

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Email this to someone


Seen this?

The BBC has appointed a second Muslim executive to be in charge of religious television programming after attracting criticism previously from those who thought the job should go to a Christian.

Gosh. I never seen that one coming…

The corporation has appointed Fatima Salaria, a BBC editor who commissioned Muslims Like Us, a reality-style show, and a series of programmes about radicalisation.

She attracted criticism last year by giving Anthony Small, the convicted fraudster and former boxing champion a platform on Muslims Like Us. Small, now known as Abdul Haqq, was a member of the inner circle of Anjem Choudary, the hate preacher. He had previously expressed support for Islamic State but was cleared in 2015 of trying to join the jihadist group.

The BBC seems determined to ensure that a Muslim oversees its “religious programming” output.

Here are a few retweets from Fatima. Her account is now protected. Shouldn’t the BBC investigate?

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Email this to someone


You have to hand it to the BBC, they do have chutzpah! How else to explain them doing their level best to portray notorious race hustler Diane Abbott as a role model for women entering politics?

Women may be deterred from entering politics because of abuse suffered by female MPs, Diane Abbott says. The shadow home secretary said she was speaking out about her own experiences after recently receiving a series of threats and insults. Last week Brexit secretary David Davis was branded “sexist” for reportedly sending a text saying he would not hug Ms Abbott because he was “not blind”.

Now to be fair, David Davis was wrong to say what he did. I don’t believe that a blind person would want to hug the odious Abbott, not for her looks but for her vile political views.  The BBC may be seeking to confer Sainthood on Abbott but I am convinced the more she speaks the more she destroys Labour.

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Email this to someone


I’m old enough to remember when the BBC took a very sympathetic line to the old USSR. But things have changed and the BBC now leads the charge against Putin. They have worked themselves up into a frenzy over the resignation of General Flynn, delighted that a scalp has been obtained so early on in the life of the Trump administration. They aren’t bothered about how it came to be that Flynn was hung out to dry by Obama era operatives still within the US intelligence services – the “Deep State’ as some refer to it. No, the BBC angle is that Trump is colluding with Putin in ways that they can’t quite work out, and so endless hours are being given to examining the issue.  Russia IS the BBC bogey-man, the nation that they would quite like us to go to war – and their visceral hatred of Putin shows,

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Email this to someone


Another day and another instance of poverty hustling from the well off given max publicity on the BBC.

Nearly a third of the population of Britain is living on an “inadequate” income, according to research by the Joseph Rowntree Foundation (JRF). In 2014-15, it said that 19 million people were living on less than the Minimum Income Standard (MIS). It said the problem was that household costs have been rising, while incomes have stagnated.

Now the Rowntree Foundation specialises in this kind of specious clap trap, continually whining about just how awful life is and how dreadful the inequality is that afflicts our Nation.  I was amused at this new “measure” of what constitutes “inadequate” income – yes, the sexy new MIS.

The MIS is set by experts at Loughborough University, and is based on what members of the public think is a reasonable income to live on.

“Experts” at a University and based on what “the public think” – utterly risible and yet allowed to generate BBC headlines.  It’s a toss up between the Resolution Foundation and the Rowntree Foundation as to which can get the most mileage for their left wing agenda from the BBC.

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Email this to someone