Biased BBC

2012-05-15T20:30:00.002+01:00

A reminder - BIASED BBC has a new home. Find us here.

DEEP JOY IN THE SOUTH

2012-04-12T21:44:00.003+01:00

So, while we are awaiting the fix on our server, here's a post from Alan...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/console/b01fjt06
Midweek 27 minutes in.

An amusing glimpse into the mindset of a white middle class BBC penitent, guilt ridden about Empire, colonialism and all that.....Libby Purvis competes to see how often she can mention slavery or black in combination with 'Deep South' and all in a voice indicating shock and her vicarious guilt....'Deep South' being a euphemism for all whites are racist.

Sir Trevor McDonald is on to talk of his film about the Mississippi and talk gets on to Memphis and the murder of Martin Luther King. Purvis quotes MLK saying 'I may not reach 40...they'll get me.'

Purvis adds 'He was in the Deep South'.....code for 'all whites in the Deep South are racist and intent on lynching all Black people.' Sir Trev went on to describe how Memphis was helped on the road to recovery after riots on MLK's death by Fed Ex bringing its business to the city.

Purvis demurs that she had seen a mass of workers there herself but 'whom I have to say were nearly all black and quite low paid'...adding the killer punch...'so we're still there really'.

Still 'There'...where exactly? Oh she means racist America naturally.

However Sir Trevor quickly intervenes to put her right saying 'I think Fed Ex are doing a good job there with their staff.'

Purviss has an embarrassed little choke.....'Yes Huh hmmmm'

Deep Joy.

Earlier in the day we had the spritely John Humphrys bringing us the latest from Liberia....which the BBC will be covering for the next year...unlike the Congo which they pretty much ignored in favour of Israel...despite over 5 million people dying in the wars there over 10 years.

Humphrys again demonstrates the BBC employees ingrained cultural cringe whenever they have to make comparison between a western economy or culture and a country like Liberia....'it's a mismatched country and it just needs somebody to get it by the scruff of the neck and shake it, but that's a European attitude.'

He tells us of the poverty and lack of amenities like electricity and water and sanitation....sewage polluting everything....but recoils at the thought that the solution might be some organisation and energy directed at improving things.....we can't impose a European mindset on these people.

Really? What exactly is a European mindset? I would bet my bottom dollar that they would love to have an electric grid system or piped water and a sewage system and a transport system that works in all weathers. Hardly a European aspiration.

Just how do the Japanese cope? The Japanese industrialised and prospered because a Scottish engineer went there and put there economy on the right track. I don't hear them complaining it's all a European Imperial plot to colonise them by subterfuge and ideas.

Of course Humphrys and co would all be up in arms about a MacDonalds or Tescos moving into Primrose Hill. At least they're consistent in depriving the poor of their pleasures and life improving amenities.

and finally....

At the coal face.

The Independent reveals that all those media talking heads telling us that we must have a fairer society and social mobility have been caught out...the reality is somewhat different for them.....

'The British film and television production industry is dominated by the middle-classes who “hoard” opportunities and benefit from family ties, new research has found.
A survey of professionals in the industry has found that working-class people are discriminated against because they do not have the “right accents, hairstyles, clothes or backgrounds.”'
http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/films/news/film-and-television-industry-discriminates-against-women-ethnic-minorities-and-the-working-class-7630929.html

OPEN THREAD...

2012-04-12T15:54:00.001+01:00

OK, if you are reading this you will be aware that our new site has vanished. We have a technical server based issue and this is now the second day of trying to fix it. I know that ASE is doing all he can to try and resolve but he is in the hands of others. Because I am increasingly frustrated by this situation, I am re-opening this site until we get a fix. My apologies for all this hassle - it is very annoying.

Biased-BBC.com

2012-03-29T13:30:00.000+01:00

Our new site is at Biased-BBC.com

AND A FINAL WORD FROM THE PROPRIETOR

2012-03-28T10:29:00.003+01:00

Hi all!

The sun is shining outside and the world is looking good. Our own world at Biased BBC is about to change however, as you will have read in the post below this from All Seeing Eye. We're moving to our new dedicated server with our brand new comments system and I have to say some thanks to the people who have made this possible so quickly!

First, to the remarkable ASE, a dear friend who works so hard behind the scenes here and does not get anything like the credit he deserves. His dedication, cheerfulness and "can do" spirit keeps me going at times of difficulty. I want to publicly thank him for all he does and yes, one of these days I will get to "The Rock" and buy him that drink (or two) promised!

Next up, I want to express my thanks to another great friend of this site, Max Farquar. His superb design skills have been brought to bear on making the new Biased BBC site look great. Like ASE, Max just gets on with it, sorts things out, and puts up with me! Cheers, Max, Biased BBC thanks you for all you have done! May I also commend Max's site to all readers, it's a great daily read.

Third, I want to thank ALL my fellow writers on the site. I really do appreciate the sharing of the writing burden. You are all so gifted in your own ways and bring a plurality of view and incisiveness of opinion that really helps! I do hope that you may find time to contribute even more to the new site. Can I also say that I am very open to guest posts - just email them to me. I do my best to publish. Some of you do this regularly but others should not be shy, if you want to get your posy

Above all, I want to thank YOU, dear reader. This site has THE most splendid followers and I remain stunned by your shared appetite to help me tackle the BBC bias. It is your daily visits, your comments, your enthusiasm, that motivates me to keep on toiling.

As ASE says, the new site will have teething issues, of that I am sure. Some things may take a little while to settle down, that's just the way it is. But in terms of stability, room to grow, space to comment and opportunity to become an even bigger on line destination point for all who share our mission to hold the BBC to account - BIASED BBC.com is the future.

Biased BBC Site Upgrade

2012-03-28T10:07:00.000+01:00

We've all seen the serious problems on the Biased-BBC site over the last few weeks.

Please let me explain them and also say what we have been doing to sort them out.

Two separate problems occurred almost simultaneously and you may have assumed they were connected - but they were not.

* Google began a rollout of regional blog identities. This is designed specifically to allow them to control/censor content in different countries. In practice for us that means that we have been commenting on at least 5 different B-BBC sites and so our comments have been scattered. There's no useful fix for this.

* Google also withdrew the Google Friend login facility last month. As our Comment provider, Echo, is no longer being supported by its original developer because they have moved on to bigger, shinier and more profitable things we also lost that ability to log in here and they will not fix that.

As a result it became an unexpected and rapid project for us to move to a new solution.

The response to David's appeal was fantastic and enabled us to organise new hosting with a new comment system. We've chosen WordPress and to use their comment system - which doesn't require registration if you don't wish to do so.

The new address is biased-bbc.com

This will be the last post on the old Blogspot URL although the site will remain here as a reference.

Several things to bear in mind please:

The move to the new site has been rushed through because of the Google and Echo problems. There will be teething problems. Some things will not work straight away. I will be working on these constantly until they are resolved. Please email me with problems or use the Open Thread that I will set up on the new site for issue reporting but I will not be able to respond to everybody instantly or even maybe individually due to the number of comments that I anticipate. Also, technical issues will be given priority over cosmetic comments.

Important: I will not be able to import Comments from the previous site until next week. Please do not report missing past comments as an issue.

I want to say thank you especially to a friend of this blog and a friend of mine MaxFarquar for again designing the new blog graphics. Max did the design for the previous blog too - as a favour - and if you feel like popping over to his place and leaving a small thankyou in his Donation jar then I am sure it will be appreciated.

If you have any error reports, problems, issues, questions...email me here. I can't guarantee to get back to you promptly because I'm expecting a busy few days pulling this all together but as always I'll do my best to help.

AllSeeingEye

SLOUCHING TOWARDS GOMORRAH - PART 2!

2012-03-27T16:34:00.000+01:00

Biased BBC contributor Graeme writes;

"After Jihad, the premier evil that threatens our country is homosexual fascism.

I found it striking that as strongly worded as Cardinal O’Brien’s opposition to homosexual marriage was, it was still confined within the parameters of debate set by the BBC in accordance with the ‘gay rights’ agenda. David Vance rightly states in a recent post ‘It’s as if the BBC is Stonewall’s broadcasting arm’.

Has anyone ever heard Ben Summerskill’s views challenged by Paxman, Wark, Humphrys or Naughtie as grossly intolerant or anti-Christian? Whenever I have heard Ben Summerskill on TODAY or Newsnight, he is fed prompts to give him a platform to present his views, while the likes of Cardinal O’Brien face the Star Chamber.

I’ve heard no churchman simply state: “I’m against homosexual marriage because homosexuality is a perversion and if it is normalised society will become as depraved as Sodom and Gomorrah’.

This is the Christian view on homosexuality, yet it isn’t publicly expressed. If you said it on the street you could face arrest, not because it’s illegal, but because a politically motivated police officer is abusing his powers to violate your democratic right to freedom of speech. Yet none of these ‘officers’ ever face discipline. They certainly don’t have to worry about their force coming under BBC scrutiny for failing to discipline them for abusing their authority. The BBC creates the climate that encourages them to do so. Having heard Cardinal O’Brien interviewed both by John Humphrys and Edward Stourton on TODAY and ‘Sunday’, this most outspoken voice against homosexual marriage nevertheless allowed himself to be psychologically hemmed in by what the BBC deems acceptable speech, as much as Stourton and Humphrys implicitly dared him to step outside those bounds so they could slap him down as a ‘homophobe’.

As DV also stated in another recent post, when he was on the BBC a while ago and called race hustlers Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton, well, ‘race hustlers’, he was told he can’t say that. On the BBC conservatives can argue their case so long as they don’t do it effectively.

What was particularly disturbing about the way Stourton covered ‘gay marriage’ a couple of weeks ago was before he ‘interviewed’ Cardinal O’Brien, he ran a lengthy piece featuring 3 ‘independent and impartial’ experts giving their ‘different’ views on the history of marriage. Craig also heard it, and as I recall him inimically putting it:-

Expert one said through the centuries there have always been fundamental changes in marriage, expert 2 said through the centuries there have always been fundamental changes in marriage, expert 3 said through the centuries there have always been fundamental changes in marriage and concluded the piece with ‘gay marriage is just another fundamental change which is nothing out of the ordinary’. Cue the Cardinal ..

Let’s just remind ourselves about Sodom and Gomorrah. Basically, a couple of good looking blokes came to visit Lot and his neighbours started banging on his door demanding to have sex with them. That’s where we’re heading and that’s where the BBC’s been leading us. Until the churchmen and conservative voices (left, right or centre) put the BBC centre stage as the propaganda arm of the homosexual lobby that by force majeure is pushing our democracy to the precipice, opposition to this evil is only ever going to be a feeble rearguard action at best.

If anyone is interested in seeing how the supposed ‘blog of the decent left’ Harry’s Place responds to the simple Christian view on ‘homosexual marriage’, you may wish to take a look here and here.

THE MORMON CANDIDATE [CUE SCARY MUSIC]

2012-03-26T13:01:00.000+01:00

There's a John Sweeney film on BBC2 tomorrow (plus accompanying BBC online article) about Mitt Romney's Mormon background. The BBC has therefore already done more investigative digging into a guy who isn't yet the official GOP choice than it has into the shenanigans of the Obama administration these past three-plus years. Fast and Furious, cronyism, green boondoggles, Corzine... just some of the things BBC journalists have shown no interest in investigating.

If Sweeney's article is anything to go by I think the intent is to create the impression that the GOP frontrunner's faith makes him somehow weird. It'll be interesting to see if Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D) - a convert to the Mormon faith - gets a mention in Sweeney's film. An interview with a powerful Democrat Mormon would be interesting, but might not fit the agenda. We'll see.

And here are some tweets from the film's director James Jones:

IMPARTIAL?

2012-03-26T11:03:00.001+01:00

Perhaps you read this article in The Telegraph concerning Caroline Thomson, one of the front-runners to replace Mark Thompson at the BBC?

Caroline Thomson, who is the BBC’s chief operating officer and one of the front-runners to replace Mark Thompson as director general, said that “nothing is more important” than the BBC’s independence. Ms Thomson joined the BBC as a journalism trainee in 1975 before leaving in the early 1980s to work for MP and SDP leader Roy Jenkins. She then joined Channel 4 before rejoining the BBC in 1996. She is married to Roger Liddle, Tony Blair’s former advisor.

She doesn't seem to like Rupert Murdoch. Impartial to the core. Remember, VOTE LABOUR,

OPEN THREAD...

2012-03-26T10:48:00.000+01:00

I never knew the half of it. Monday morning, sun is shining, and time for a new Open Thread. The floor is yours.....

POSSUM PIE

2012-03-26T10:46:00.001+01:00

Biased BBC contributor Alan asks;

"The Sunday Times has dipped its toes into what could be stormy waters publishing an article that reviews historian Tom Holland's book on the origins of the Koran....'In the Shadow of the Sword: The Battle for Global Empire and the End of the Ancient World.'

The book is a authoritative and serious dissection of the history of Islam and the origins of the Koran.....and its conclusion will put many noses out of joint with overwhelming evidence that the Koran is, of course, a man made concoction and not the word of a God.

Far from being a harmless tract the Koran clearly inspires and indeed approves violence against non-believers....that is non-Muslims.....and it might be noted that Mohamed Mehra, the jihadi killer in France, told police he was radicalised by reading the Koran whilst in prison.

Religious historian Karen Armstrong denounces the Bible as 'a dead or irrelevant letter, it is also becoming a toxic arsenal that fuels hatred and sterile polemic.' ....if so how much more the Koran? and how much more important is it to neutralise such a threat?

What will be telling is the reaction of Muslims to this book. They may ignore it so that as little publicity as possible is generated for it...or Tom Holland could be the next Salman Rushdie.

The BBC has shied away from any criticism or historical or intellectual investigation of the Koran and Islam because, as admitted recently by Mark Thompson, there is the distinct possibility that Muslims will react with violence.

The BBC has in fact scurried down a different route, that of praising everything Islamic from the Empire, scientific achievements, art and even its allegedly 'Islamic' curry.

If the BBC feels unable to examine Islam too closely in a critical manner because it fears violence it is strange that it should then alternatively promote it in such a fervent manner as not just 'acceptable' but something to be praised and honoured.

The subject is of enormous importance with huge implications which is why the BBC ducks it.

Read More

Tom Holland says: 'What is interesting about the academic debate is that it is so seismic and yet it has barely been noticed in the world outside academia.'

Seismic is the word.

Islam has a huge and detrimental influence over a vast swathe of the world's population...it generates enormous amounts of violence in its name...but it also acts as a brake on those societies that under its oppressive dogmas. Science, education, arts, politics and social progress are all suppressed in Islamic countries......unless and until that stranglehold on over 1.5 billion people is broken the world is a worse place and often their lives a misery.

The BBC is just part of the 'elite' strata in Western society who refuse to look Islam in the face and admit that it is a threat to our society and the freedoms of thought and action that we enjoy.

In the US the New York Times (the US Guardian) has allowed an advert attacking Christianity...it then refused a similar advert criticising Islam.

The complete refusal of Western media to engage in examining the tenets of Islam and what its Believers are told to believe and act upon commits society to a creeping advance of a doctrine that is implacably opposed to everything those self same 'Liberals' tell us they themselves believe in.

We have three options....reform Islam, accept its beliefs and impositions upon us, or expel it.

Whichever option you would choose it would be nice to think that society actually had some form of informed choice about what is being allowed to infiltrate into our society and what this might mean for us who do not wish to 'submit' to the joys of Islam....rather than being spoonfed soothing platitudes about the 'Religion of Peace.'

Unfortunately the BBC has decided for you....any critical analysis of Islam is shelved because of the hurt and distress such disparaging remarks might cause Muslims and the danger of any resultant violence...better that non-Muslims adapt themselves to Islamic believes and give up their own culture than cause any offence or hurt to Muslims.

What will the BBC do with this high profile book?

I would suggest that the likely BBC reaction will be to invite in the slippery Islamist and BBC/Guardian favourite Tariq Ramadan to take the book apart in a dismissive manner suggesting that because Tom Holland is a non-Muslim he cannot possibly understand the subject and probably has a hidden 'Islamophobic' agenda and that Islam has always been in constant flux and is even now adapting to the ever changing world and is in the process now of becoming the 'neo Islam'. Though what Ramadan really means by 'reform' is taking Islam back to its pure roots...the true Islam...the Fundamentalist Islam....the Jihadi, Muslim Brotherhood Islam.

The BBC adopts that old possum trick of rolling over and playing dead, hoping that everything will turn out right in the end without any nastiness.

I think possums will soon be extinct.

FREEDOM AND JUSTICE...

2012-03-26T10:26:00.002+01:00

I wonder did anyone else catch the interview @ 7.53am on Today with Gehad El-Haddad, senior advisor to the Muslim Brotherhood board of directors and the Freedom and Justice Party board of directors. It's a classic insofar as El Haddad walks all over Justin Webb, continually correcting him, and there is no challenge whatsoever to the repellent attitudes of the Muslim Brotherhood. Webb squeaks at the intro that there is the...ahem...outside possibility that things may not turn out quite as expected in Egypt with "conservative Islamists" doing so well electorally but El Haddad gives sweet assurances that all will be well and, gosh, the "Freedom and Justice" Party would even support a female President. Cool. How about a Jewish one? No mention of the vicious rhetoric directed towards Israel, no mention of the violence directed towards Egyptian Christians....just banality.

GROOMING

2012-03-26T10:05:00.003+01:00

The print media has been awash in recent weeks with stories concerning the arrest/conviction of gangs of young men who have been involved in the the most vile sexual exploitation of young white girls. Rape, grooming and trafficking are some of the horrendous crimes that police have been investigating and the sheer scale of these incidents will alarm all right thinking people. Which brings us to the BBC and it's curious reluctance to give these stories the sort of attention they deserve. Might this be related to the awkward detail that the overwhelming number of these cases seem to involve young Muslim men, many of whom seem to be related? Is the BBC scared to ask some tough questions lest it upset the community cohesion and multiculturalism narrative? When I have raised this point before, BBC apologists tell me that the religion of a criminal is irrelevant to the crime and that the media should not report it. But I think this entirely misses the point since in the case of Islam, it may actually be part of the driving force that sustains such abuse and contempt towards girls, especially white girls. Your thoughts?

OPEN THREAD....

2012-03-24T21:56:00.000Z

Saturday and bumping the Open Thread!

TRAYVON MARTIN

2012-03-24T10:33:00.000Z

I see that "America's first black President" (to quote Mark Mardell) has decided to weigh on and heaven forbid, gain a little political capital from the killing of the black teenager Trayvon Martin. Naturally this is reported with bated breath although even Mardell admits that "These remarks are rare and deliberate, and some will find them controversial." I guess the "some" Mardell refers to might be the parents of all those non-black teenagers murdered and sent to their graves without a word from "America's first black President"?

Here's the sort of analysis that the BBC would run a mile from allowing on their channels;

Why should the leader of the free wold dive head first into a racial controversy that has been blown far, far out of proportion by those who seek to use the death of a young black man for their own personal agendas?

A Hispanic man shoots a black kid where no one knows the exact circumstances in which the shooting occurred and where we are likely never to know what happened. Instead of waiting for the facts, narratives have replaced truth and we have a full blown racial incident when it isn't even clear that race was a factor. Obama could have said - should have said - "no comment." Instead, he sought out an opportunity to stoke the fires of race hate:

Obama as a stoker of race hate? Surely not? I can remember being admonished by the BBC for referring to Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson as race hustlers so I can but imagine the reaction if I included their President of choice in the same category.

THE GENE GENIE

2012-03-24T10:17:00.001Z

Just because you are not interested in "gay marriage" does not mean the advocates of "gay marriage" are not interested in you. The BBC has been a relentless propagandist for the gay lobby and a good example of this was an interview with the highly divisive American cleric Gene Robinson on Today this morning @ peak hour 8.17am. Robinson was given such a soft interview and even got away unchallenged with suggesting that Christ may have slyly hinting that he was in favour of Gay Marriage at the Last Supper. It's clear that the BBC sees Robinson as a hero and so happily provides him with this platform disguised an interview, a platform that his critics - and they are many - are denied. I have no problem with the BBC covering the topic (although it does so with much enthusiasm, entirely disconnected to its relevance to the overwhelming of people) but it sets the debate up in such a way that those who suggest it is unBiblical and morally wrong are then presented as bigots. It's as if the BBC is Stonewall's broadcasting arm.

I HAVE KILLED MY JEW...

2012-03-23T22:35:00.001Z

Biased BBC contributor Alan observes...

"In 2005 political commentator (and DV favourite) Mark Steyn asked this:

'In five years’ time, how many Jews will be living in France?'

The BBC would like us to believe it is the anti-immigration comments of Sarkozy or Gueant that have stirred up anti-Semitism resulting in these recent attacks....they would have preferred you to believe it was an attack by the Far Right. Events of course failed to follow the narrative.

If you did not already know about anti-Semitism in France a 5 minute session on Google would enlighten you....it is perhaps a shame that the well paid professionals of the BBC do not bother to do a proper investigation and instead fall back on lazy stereotypes and the prejudices of its ill informed 'journalists' to provide us with informed comment.

Why did Steyn ask his question in 2005?

Anti-Semitism is rife in France...some by the Far Right but mostly by immigrant Muslims. Jews are fleeing France for the 'safer' haven of Israel.

In 2003 'a 23-year-old Paris disc jockey called Sebastien Selam was heading off to work from his parents’ apartment when he was jumped in the parking garage by his Muslim neighbor Adel. Selam’s throat was slit twice, to the point of near-decapitation; his face was ripped off with a fork; and his eyes were gouged out. Adel climbed the stairs of the apartment house dripping blood and yelling, “I have killed my Jew. I will go to heaven.” '

This was just one of many vicious attacks on Jews by Muslims.

The BBC has studiously ignored these attacks and who perpetrated them.

The BBC has also ignored the exodus of Jews from Europe as a whole.

In 2010 a Dutch politician urged Jews to 'emigrate to US or Israel'.....

'Former European Commissioner Frits Bolkestein says there is no future for Orthodox Jews in Holland because of 'anti-Semitism among Dutchmen of Moroccan descent whose numbers keep growing.''Bolkstein backed up his statement by saying that the increase in anti-Semitic incidents in the Netherlands over the past decade had led him to have limited confidence in the ability of the government to fight anti-Semitism.'

'....Benzion Evers believes Amsterdam is not a safe place for Jews. The son of the Dutch capital's chief rabbi says he is planning on leaving the country next year together with his wife and infant son.

"You constantly need to hide, to be careful and to carefully examine which neighborhoods to go into and which not to go into."

He also told of how recently, he is careful never to leave the house wearing his fur hat and hides his skullcap under a baseball cap when going through neighborhoods with high concentrations of Moroccan and Turkish immigrants. Five of his brothers and sisters have already left Holland, and he already has his bags packed. He estimates that "60% of Amsterdam's orthodox community intends to emigrate from Holland."'

We know that Jews in Sweden are being forced to emigrate to escape violence from the incoming immigrant Muslims.

But to the BBC there is 'No problem' with anti-Semitism in France.....

A report on 'Traumatised French Jews'....
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-17456582
'No problem'
The media have reported calls by some Israeli politicians for French Jews to emigrate to Israel to escape anti-Semitism in France. But many Jews in Paris disagree. "I think we have to stay in France," Nicole said. "I've never been in Israel and I'm Jewish." She says she does not feel threatened at all in France. Guy agreed with her. "I love my country, France," he said. "We have extremists, like everywhere, but France is a beautiful country." 'No problem'

A Muslim named Mehdi states....
"There is no problem between people," he said. "You have to make a difference between extremists, terrorists, who can be from any community, and you should know that most Muslims are not like that."

So there you go...the BBC tells us that no Jews want to flee from anti-Semitism and that in fact Jews and Muslims get along like long lost brothers....I'm certain the BBC could have found a Jewish person who did want to emigrate if it had tried just a bit harder...than it wanted to.

However 'Der Spiegel' paints what is likely the more realistic picture of what is happening in France....

'Daniel Ben-Simon, a member of the Israeli parliament, the Knesset, examined the phenomenon of Jewish emigration in his book "French Bite." "Jews in France fear the day when the Muslims become a determining factor in French domestic politics," Ben-Simon told SPIEGEL ONLINE. "They fear that the country will no longer be safe for them at that point."

Even today, there are already "hundreds of anti-Semitic incidents" a year, committed mainly by Arab immigrants.

...many Jews in France feel that they are a threatened and increasingly excluded minority. Every year, these feelings prompt thousands to take a dramatic decision, namely, to pack their belongings and move to a crisis zone: Israel. They feel safer there.

http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,822928,00.html

Curious what a different view of the world one gets when you don't have to rely on the BBC for it.

BACON TROLLS

2012-03-23T21:52:00.001Z

Biased BBC contributor Graeme writes;

"Richard Bacon produced a very good programme on internet trolls broadcast on BBC 3 a couple of days ago, The Anti-Social Network.

Firstly, I’d like to say, on the basis of what was broadcast about the internet troll stalking him and his family, who updated his anti-Bacon Twitter id with duplicate photos of Bacon after he’d got beaten up and fantasised about killing him, I’m glad he took expert advise to make a complaint to the Police and I wish them every success in finding the evil creep.

He interviewed a supposedly repentant troll who lied to him about not posting offensive messages on an RIP tribute site. He admitted this later to Richard Bacon in writing, claiming to regret what he did but saying he found some of the responses “hilarious”.

Quite rightly, Richard Bacon questioned how sorry this person is when he still finds reactions to his trolling on RIP sites ‘hilarious’.

The same question might be asked over how sincere Richard Bacon’s ‘apology’ was over referring listeners to youtube of Doug Stanhope mocking Sarah Palin’s Down’s Syndrome boy, Trig. Does a lie accompany a sincere apology? Surely his ‘apology’ should have been to Sarah Palin and Trig? According to 5Live Richard Bacon was not endorsing the Stanhope clip he referred his listener’s too. Here’s what Bacon said during his interview:-

00:57:12 [To Stanhope] "I'm genuinely a really big fan of what you do".

00:59:43 "If you want a flavour of what he's like go to youtube now and type doug stanhope sarah palin [snigger]"

01:04:50 "A remarkable standup comic, one of my favourte (uninteligible)"

01:18:25 "I can't recommend it enough, you go and see Doug Stanhope at Leicester Square Theatre".

Clearly Richard Bacon directed his listeners to this clip because he loves hearing conservative Christians being subjected to sick vitriol and wanted his listeners to share his twisted pleasure.
The question arises, is Richard Bacon’s mentality that far removed from the trolls he exposed this week?

Bacon did not carry the moral authority needed to present this BBC3 programme, but nevertheless, what I’ll end with Regard to the assault he suffered a couple of years ago is to note that a number of commenters here revelled in that and I did wonder if his stalker could be someone who posted here. If that is the case, well, I end as I started ..

BBC Opens With Dishonesty About ObamaCare

2012-03-23T15:44:00.000Z

ObamaCare, that most controversial law forced on the US by the former Democrat super-majority in Congress, and which was a main impetus for the meteoric rise of the Tea Party movement, is being challenged in front of the Supreme Court next week, and the BBC needs to tell you what to think about the domestic policy of a foreign country.

They open with a bit of dishonesty:

At stake is one of the most far-reaching US laws of the past several decades: President Barack Obama's landmark healthcare reform law, aimed at providing health insurance to the tens of millions of people who currently lack it and at curbing runaway growth in healthcare costs.

The bit in bold is false, as even the BBC's own explanation tells you afterwards:

The keystone of the law is a requirement that Americans who lack health insurance from their employers or the government purchase it on the private market.

So it doesn't actually provide anything, does it? Yet the BBC opened this with a bit of White House propaganda, claiming that providing health insurance is its intent. Why? Instead, it requires citizens by law to purchase a product, and fine them if they don't. Come to think of it, that should sound familiar to you....

Don't bother reading the rest of it, because there's nothing about the law itself, but rather an explanation of the hearing process: how long will the arguments take, when does the Court decide, etc. Oh, and of course the President says He can force people to purchase a product if He sees fit because the Commerce Clause can, according to accepted interpretation, give the government broad powers to regulate commerce across state lines and tax people for the pleasure. Which is about regulating commerce, not forcing people to buy a specific product That's all going to come out next week, and Justice Scalia will be the key to all of it, as the White House is cleverly gearing their defense along the lines of one of his past rulings on another issue. Don't expect to get honest reporting on this from the BBC, though.

The BBC has form on misleading and cheerleading on this issue. You can read more about the BBC's failed coverage of ObamaCare here, here, here, and here. (NB: Due to current Blogger/Google evil issues, comments on linked posts won't appear for most people until the new site is up. Will amend at that time.)

A BIASED BBC

2012-03-22T16:37:00.001Z

It's always nice when BBC bias is picked up and neatly dissected by others and in The Mail today, Stephen Glover makes the following points regarding the successor to Mark Thompson.

"The choice is between BBC apparatchiks: Caroline Thomson, Helen Boaden, George Entwistle and Tim Davie. I’m told Ms Boaden may lean fractionally more to the Right than the others, but none of them could be fairly described as conservative with a big or small ‘c’, and it is unimaginable that anyone of such a persuasion could become director-general of the BBC.

Mark Thompson himself admitted 18 months ago that the Corporation was guilty of a ‘massive’ Left-wing bias in the past, while contending it is now a broader church. I don’t see much evidence of that. Sceptics will say the BBC is so innately Left-of-centre that it wouldn’t make any difference if a full-blooded Tory were put in charge.

And before we run away with the idea that its quite recently installed chairman, Lord Patten, could be so described, let it be remembered that he was a leading ‘wet’ and anti-Thatcherite who resided on the far reaches of the liberal wing of the Tory Party, which was several degrees to the Left of what used to be called ‘Right-wing Labour’."

Glover places the blame on the gutless Conservatives for allowing the likes of the BBC to get away with their visceral bias. He surely has a point as has been discussed in these pages.

SAY TOULOUSE BUT THINK GAZA ?

2012-03-22T16:31:00.002Z

I'm sure you will have read that the Toulouse terrorist, Mohammed Merah, has finally met with justice. And a good thing too! However why does the BBC website report keep repeating this...

"He had said he was acting to "avenge Palestinian children" and protest against French military interventions overseas."

Ok, I do understand that other odd people, like Baroness Ashton, shared (to a degree) his perverse world view of what is allegedly happening to the "Palestinian children" but why do we REALLY need to read about the motivation of this grotesque Jihad assassin so upfront in the article? Is there the suggestion that those like the BBC who oppose a/ Military invention overseas and b/Israel are happy to flag up Merah's madness up as a badge of honour, almost?

Question Time LiveBlog 22nd March 2012

2012-03-22T13:06:00.000Z

Tonight Question Time comes from Grimsby.

On the panel tonight we have former Shadow Home Secretary David Davis, Business Secretary and serial leaker Vince Cable, talentless BBC favourite Chuka Umunna, Telegraph writer Melissa Kite and Lefty novelist Marina Lewycka

Your Moderators line-up consists of David Vance, David Mosque, TheEye and John Ward.

It's a 10:30pm kick off and afterwards we will suffer the maddess that is This Week.

Don't forget to look for Blue Nun Bingo updates on David Mosque's website dedicated to the game here.

<p>&amp;lt;a href="http://www.coveritlive.com/mobile.php/option=com_mobile/task=viewaltcast/altcast_code=5eca5b56e5" &amp;gt;Question Time 22nd March 2012&amp;lt;/a&amp;gt;</p>

See you here later!

A TANGLED WEBB?

2012-03-22T09:35:00.000Z

But a few days ago, BBC presenter Justin Webb was engaging in wild speculation concerning the motivations that lay behind the killings in Toulouse. Here, B-BBC contributor Alan captures his thoughts.

20th march

Justin Webb

'There are some who wonder that some politicians, including perhaps Mr Sarkozy must bear some responsibility, not necessarily for what happened, but for the context in which it happened. They are accused of creating a climate of suspicion about, possibly even hatred, of minority groups.'

Agnes Poirier:

'We couldn't make a link between the killing of the soldiers and little kids...what is emerging is that these are the faces of diverse France and obviously it becomes then extremely apparent that the killer should want to assassinate diverse France.'

Webb:

'That is the point...do we accept it is possible at least that this killer seemed to be motivated by wanting to attack the way that modern France looks and that of course has been part of the presidential campaign. French Interior Minister Claude Gueant became a very controversial figure a few weeks ago when he said 'For us not all civilisations are of equal value.' Do you think these kind of remarks should not have happened? Is it acceptable for people to talk about subjects of political controversy?'

Agnes Poirier;

'The constant stirring of stereotypes is unhelpful and is an unhealthy debate in France.'

Interesting that Webb thinks any talk of immigration and integration makes for 'controversial politics'....and perhaps should not be spoken of....but that has always been BBC policy and look where such lack of moral fibre and backbone and failure to challenge cultural beliefs and activities leads us:

http://www.nationalobserver.net/2009_81_glees.htm

'The British public have not got their teeth into any of this, not least because it is so hard for the full facts to be put to them.....vested interests discourage too close a scrutiny of the evidence.

It is a matter of the gravest concern that Western democracies are not only failing to monitor properly the activities of radical imams but allowing the Islamic studies centres to mushroom, totally out of control. They are making radicalisation and ideological transfer easier, not harder, and increasing the security risk rather than containing it. In Britain, it is actually official government policy to expand the teaching of Islamic studies so that every single Muslim student in the UK will be able to take this subject. Wherever Islamists go on the attack, all are driven by the same malign and violent hatred of the West and its current foreign security interests.'

BBC TAX AVOIDANCE

2012-03-22T09:18:00.000Z

Say it isn't true?

"More than 300 staff at the BBC avoid paying income tax, an MP has revealed. Tory MP David Mowat, who represents Warrington South, said he discovered 320 "non-talent based" employees earning more than £50,000 avoided income tax. Mr Mowat said it was "not acceptable", adding it was the BBC's Newsnight programme which had sparked the row about senior civil servants avoiding tax when it revealed head of the Student Loans Company Ed Lester had been paid via a company.

And the BBC response?

"A BBC spokesman said: "These individuals are not permanent members of BBC staff so do not have their tax deducted at source in the way the vast majority of employees would. "In the main they are hired to do specific jobs for a fixed period of time such as directing, editing and other craft skills. When a person is contracted in this way it is their responsibility to organise their tax arrangements directly with the HMRC. "This is entirely in keeping with HMRC regulations and is standard practice across the broadcasting and many other industries."

BBC NEWS KILL JEWS?

2012-03-22T09:01:00.002Z

Biased BBC's Alan suggests...

"The BBC approvingly quote Sarkozy demanding we don't demonise Muslims for the action of one 'deranged Islamist' as the BBC might put it. However isn't it true that the 'deranged Islamist' killed these Jewish school children and their teacher precisely because organisations like the BBC have constantly demonised Israel and dehumanised Jews and incited anger and resentment towards Jews around the world.

BBC News kills Jews.

Can there really be any doubt about that?"