I was intrigued by this BBC headine this morning.  “Iain Duncan Smith calls benefit rises unfair..”.  Cute. IDS did not say that benefit rises were “unfair” but he pointed out that the RATE of increase under Labour was unfair. Big difference and to be fair to the BBC they do go on to point this out in the article below albeit whilst giving Labour lots of space to insist benefits had not risen enough BUT many people grab their new from headlines and in this instance it is at best sloppily constructed or at worst maliciously contrived.


Well, Adrian Beecroft has committed at least two unforgivable sins. First he has donor money to the Conservative Party and…worse again, he has called Saint Vince Cable “a socialist” who has “done nothing for business.” I’ve listened to several BBC interviews on the Beecroft recommendations and the BBC line is to keep repeating the mantra  that he is a donor to the Conservative Party and ..gasp…a pal of Cameron and Osborne’s. On the BBC Nolan Show, Beecroft was demonised as just another Tory donor and his proposals were caricatured as being about wanting to just “sack workers”.


Biased BBC has been contacted by a student atthe University of St. Andrews Conservative & Unionist Society.

“If youhaven’t been aware recently, the BBC have done an absolute assassination onthis organisation over the past few days. You can see here for more details: is the side of the story the BBC avoids giving

“Now, every year, the Conservative Society here holds a tongue-in-cheek”heretic burning”. This usually involves someone from the left-wing,that we think has contributed most to irritating us. It’s usually on 5thNovember, because it’s essentially updating the Guy Fawkes tradition. It hasbeen run, without ‘scandal’ or obsessive media coverage for the past sixtyyears.

The idea of ‘Heretic Burning’ is to be infantile and to let our hair down. Weusually have fireworks, mulled-wine, light-hearted debate, marshmallows andbanter. During the year we burnt the Rt. Hon Ed Milliband, the left-wingsocieties collaborated to respond by burning David Cameron. This was on thesame beach, and everyone treated it as a good laugh.

If you’d listened to the BBC coverage, however, you’d have thought we hadperformed a modern-day lynching. There were lies galore – such as the notionthat we’d wrapped him in an EU Flag [that appeared on the BBC for at least 36hours] (this was to be done separately; however our president forgot to bringthe EU flag in question). Another lie was parroted from our Student President,Patrick O’Hare, that we could’ve chosen Gaddafi. He wasn’t nominated at anystage, and thus wasn’t considered or burnt. The candidates were – as far as Iremember – Obama, Balls, Cooper, Cable and Clegg (and maybe one or two more).


Thereasons we chose Obama were numerous. We’ve disliked his disrespect towardsWinston Churchill, and his silence over the inalienable right of BritishSovereignty to the Falkland Islands. We also dislike his socialist domesticpolicies (i.e. pork-barrel spending funded by equally ruinous quantitativeeasing), which are threatening the UK’s Economic Recovery.

Moreover, we have many republican members from the USA. Being an open andtolerant society, we accept people with a wide-range of views. They voted forObama for obvious reasons. This was done at an EGM (and not at a committeevote, as the BBC also initially reported, before deleting it).

If you’d listened to the BBC, however, the word “racist” appearedcountless times. The accusation was – without the BBC saying it publicly – thatwe were somehow racist for burning an effigy of the US’ first mixed-racepresident. Apparently, Obama isn’t a politician in his own right, to be judgedlike anyone else would be – Obama must be disliked only because people areracist and stupid and right-wing.

Look, I’m not saying that what we did was big or clever, and if we’d have knownthat it would have caused such offence – we wouldn’t have even contemplated it.However, the way that it’s been reported by the Liberal media, led by the BBC, is completelyinaccurate and wrong.” 


It’s been fascinating watching the BBC get itself worked up into a state of moral outrage over the relationship between Liam Fox and Adam Werritty. To listen to the breathless coverage afforded this tale of business card usage one could be forgiven that this was a major international story rather than just another snide little BBC hatchet job, encouraged by Labour,  on one of those Minister’s that they just do not like. Fox may or may not have made some sort of minor error of judgement but to judge by BBC it is verging on a resigning matter.


Nice hatchet job on Cameron by Nick Robinson on the 10 News. In essence, they ran Cameron talking the possibility at least of water cannon and plastic bullets and then instantly used the comments of the BBC candidate for Met Commissioner Sir Hugh Orde who flatly contradicted him. Orde has been weaseling away for some time from his ACPO perch, beloved by the State Broadcaster. Robinson also trotted out the “Don’t cut our resources” line that Orde espouses, backed up by Miliband and the opportunist Boris Johnson.


Conservative backbencher Philip Davies is one of those rare things – a really solid Conservative voice. Naturally the BBC loath him and so everything he says is subject to great scrutiny. Today has a go at him over allegations that he suggested disabled people are disadvantaged because of the minimum age and should accept a lower rate of pay than their able bodied colleagues, you can listen to it here. Davies is talking common sense and showing a sense of humanity towards disabled people. Of course any economist worth his salt will explain that the socialist construct of a Minimum Wage is harmful to the employment prospects of many people but through the prism of the BBC, the Minimum Wage is a good thing and there can be no negative consequences.