...and any other matters that take our fancy
This appeared briefly on the BBC News Website this morning:http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-40378533/question-time-host-dimbleby-boots-out-audience-memberI saw this as a glaringly obvious staged publicity stunt for QT, Dimbleby and Gina Miller - perhaps to boost audience figures. It was all so carefully stage-managed. Dimbleby said in a quite voice without any particular hostility, 'I think you'd better leave' apparently straight off the autocue. The heckler looked like a typical member of the bussed-in QT audience. Dressed in a distinctive check-shirt so that Dimbleby couldn't mistake him, he left (head bowed down) without any fuss at all, to the 'spontaneous' applause from the remainder of the QT audience - seeming to say 'Good work - see you in the bar later'.Any genuine heckler would have needed to be dragged away screaming insults as he went with heels dug in. And of course, it was done to protect Gina Miller's finer feelings. She was being oh-so reasonable in what she was saying at the time.
Did they remove that known Labour activist who screamed at Diane James, calling her a "disgusting UKIP woman"? I forget.
Yes, Dimbleby would be the one to buy the drink for our heckler.
Here's what Roger Bolton had to say on Feedback earlier:"Now to Westminster, Manchester and London Bridge we can add Finsbury Park, places which from now onwards will be forever associated with horrific acts of murder ..."That sounded to me very much like the BBC accusing a man of murder before he goes to trial.
The first three are places where Mohammedans committed mass murder, and the last one is where they incited it.
What he means is Now to this years Islamic attacks at Westminster Manhester and London Bridge which we at the BBC will forget as quickly as all the other Islamic attacks in London over recent years we can at last add a non Islamic attack that we will publicise onwards and forever in the same way as the Cox murder
What it means isTime to break out the flowers, the candles, the teddy bears,hashtags and much 'they will not divide us, don't look back in anger' rhetoric. Except it didn't happen this time. The BBC was on the ground in Finsbury Park helping the locals get in touch with their anger.
“Six hurt as car strikes crowd in Newcastle Eid celebration”, reads a headline on the front page of the BBC News website - not technically dishonest, but deliberately misleading in the light of recent events. It was a traffic accident.
Who was at the wheel? Did they make it?This is important, so the correct community starts to live in fear again.
The article goes on to say that the woman at the wheel had been celebrating Eid with her family and had apparently lost control of her car. People are tragically hurt in traffic accidents every day yet the BBC chose to put this one on the front page of their website and attach an inflammatory headline. When I looked this afternoon it was the number one story, so it would appear that it had the desired effect. Now what was that familiar BBC line about stirring up religious hatred…
Odd that such a headline is even allowed, as it was worded deliberately to give permission for prejudice - against people concerned about Islamist terrorism.
Chyron title for a guest on Marr's paper review panel this morning: Henry Blofeld, "National Treasure".The place is run by juveniles.
Tariq Ramadan, BBC favourite "moderate" etc, tries to stamp out criticism of FGM advocacy. Seems to show not a single iota of concern about its poor female child victims. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-MbwyX_CVcA
BBC dishonesty about Trump's travel ban still going.http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-40409490It's about the Supreme Court striking down part of the lower court injunction, which is - horror of horrors - a temporary victory for Trump. Here's the dishonest bit:Mr Trump seeks to place a 90-day ban on people from six mainly Muslim nations and a 120-day ban on refugees.The president welcomed the ruling's qualified authorisation to bar visitors from Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen, which he described as "terror-prone countries".Actually, the Obama Administration described them thus, which was what Trump used to design the ban. BBC lies, spreading influence, paid for by you on penalty of law.
Who decides whether an event is worth a minute's silence in BBC land? At 12-00 noon today, Radio 2, held a one minute silence for victims of the Finsbury Park Terrorist Attack.
The BBC must have paid for the broadcasting rights to Glastonbury 2017 - across the BBC. As a result of this payment, were they able to break with tradition and facilitate the incongruous appearance of Jeremy Corbyn there - at the licence payers expense?
Couple of things...1. What planet is Norman Smith on? Reporting on Question Time in Parliament today on Radio 4, he said "UP TILL NOW", politicians had avoided scoring political points re the terrible Grenfell Tower fire. Up till now? What?! Did he not hear McDonnell saying people had been murdered by politicians and Corbyn blaming the event on austerity, all well prior to today? And let's not forget David Lammy's incendiary comments as well...2. The Prime Minister's comments on "Islamophobia" which she wishes to "stamp out" are very worrying. If we had one decent MP in Parliament (I am afraid we literally don't) she would be challenged to (a) define Islamophobia (b) having defined it to indicate to explain why it had to be "stamped out" more than Christophobia or Buddhophobia or indeed Marxophobia and (c) explain what parts of Sharia she would like to see introduced into the UK (would it be the the ban on alcohol, second class status for women, killing of gays, house arrest of lesbians, amputation of thieives' hands, killing of polytheists, polygamy, beating of wives by husbands, legitimisation of slavery or the ban on representational art?), given there is nothing to fear in Islam.
Brexit 'will blow hole in budget', EU commissioner warnshttp://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-40433450Discuss the BBC editors comments - Biased? misleading?
The rebate, negotiated under former Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, is a complex calculation which sees a sizeable proportion of the UK's net contribution to the EU each year returned.Isn't it actually the case that 'rebate' is a misnomer, as the money is never handed over in the first place and it's more of a reduction in how much is sent in the first place?Mr Oettinger said each euro spent must have a positive impact on people's lives, as he presented a discussion paper on the EU's future.Oh, the humanity! The UK leaving will cruelly harm the poorest and most vulnerable of Europe!
Quite a relief on today's Daily Politics. As PMQs overran, there was hardly any time for Laura K and her buddies to express their opinions. We heard the cut and thrust of PMQs and made up our own minds as to which party came out on top. For once, we were not told what we should be thinking and we were spared the regular ordeal of having BBC opinions thrust upon us.Lets hope they overrun in the weeks to come.
One thing that wasn't commented on - the unparliamentary behaviour of the Speaker in telling James Cleverly to "take a tablet". Extraordinary!
Maybe he and Jon Snow share the same dealer?
I can’t help but notice that the change in the BBC’s position towards Jeremy Corbyn has coincided with that old communist Alexei Sayle gracing the airwaves once again. The cheers and whoops from the studio audience that greeted his eulogising the Soviet Union and spitting bile over Israel were sadly predicable. Worrying times.
Perhaps the change in attitude is also due to the recent election results solidifying Corbyn's and the extremists' grip on Labour, and the upper echelon Beeboids no longer see opportunities to point out how he's a drag on the party's future.
Well said Terry! I suspect that the BBC's previous hostility to Corbyn was because they felt he was unelectable, rather than because they disagreed with him. They will no doubt change their minds when their own fat-cat salaries are endangered and the tumbrils start rolling.
Yes, I agree that now, after the GE, the BBC have changed their outlook in the hope that Corbyn might be electable after all. It will be interesting to see whether the perceived BBC anti Corbyn bias as reported by his supporters prior to the election now disappears. Again, before the election the BBC seemed acquiescent in their dealings with Corbyn supporters - that the BBC together with the MSM were right wing. Will this continue as it was an easy route to the 'complaints from both sides' defence against bias?
Yes, that was pretty clearly the case.
Just an aside, but there is a way to post with a name of your choice without registering with Google, thus avoiding the propensity of 'anonymous' postings without compromising the privacy of the poster.When you've written your comment, use the 'Comment as:' drop down window and select the option 'Name/URL'.Simply fill in your name of choice and leave the URL blank then press continue.The 'Comment as' box will then show your chosen name, and you post as normal.
Like that you mean?
Sorry, 'Enough', but there's a snag with your method: I just followed your procedure, & sent the message 'Testing', but called myself 'Enough' - as you see from the above, I was able to steal your pseudonym, when I am, in fact, Sisyphus!
Egads Sisyphus, maybe you're right. It never crossed my mind that a fellow would think to tarnish the 'nom de plume' of a poster here by assuming their identity. I was trying to help, but have unwittingly revealed potential for chaos. What monster have I made !!
A thousand pardons Real Enough! Methought 'twere better you find out the flaw from me, rather than some knavish troll!
Sorries are not necessary, Sisyphus. Tis better to alert the community to the potential for skullduggery than to avert ones eyes from the realities of trollish underhand behaviours. Good day sir.
Great for all I know I've been talking to one troll all these years!
From News-Watchhttp://news-watch.co.uk/evan-davis-cranks-up-bbc-anti-brexit-rhetoric/Here is a display of incredible arrogance from Evan Davis.
I saw that...it was another Paddington Bear moment for Evan Davis...:) Ironically, Michael Bond having died, he had later to announce his love for the Bear yet again and I detected the faintest of blushes non his cheeks as the child-man confessed his passion for a "bear".
Good to see balance and impartiality on QT tonight, three left wing panelists (four if you count Dimbleby) and an audience who can barely wait for the lefties to stop talking before the wild applause and whooping.
It looks like we all need to register and sign in in order to watch content on BBC i-player. Previously, there was a box to tick to say that your TV Licence had been paid. Now, there is a photo of the hoped to be acceptable face of Big Brother, Attenborourgh, patronising you as you click in details like date of birth (I didn't get any further than this before I felt a red mist descend). The explanation is that the BBC Thought Police will be able to provide content more relevant to you! This is terrible. Before long the BBC will have profiles of the law-abiding people of this country, and they will be deciding for you what will be most appropriate for you to watch.
There is no requirement to provide the BBC with accurate details....
What was Spartacus's date of birth?
I can see how the BBC intend this will work:1. If you watch lots of conservative material harking back to a more pleasant Britain in the past you will be bombarded with recommendations to watch pro-mass immigration and pro-Corbyn programmes. 2. If you watch lots of pro-mass immigration and pro-Corbyn programmes you will be bombarded with recommendations to watch pro-mass immigration and pro-Corbyn programmes.
If that's he case, one wonders if they need go to the expense of running the database and focusing the content....that's basically the Beebs day to day output.
Linked to on Biased BBC by Mice Height..https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/3898725/the-bbcs-love-in-with-jeremy-corbyn-has-major-implications-for-britain-and-needs-to-stop/It comes to something when it takes the Sun to speak some sense on this subject! Damian Thompson has it about right I think: the Soggy Left BBC has had a nervous breakdown over the Brexit vote and is now behaving like a catatonic patient sleepwalking towards the ledge, shortly after which they will meet the unyielding tarmac of the Hard Left down below.
The scenario described above might be happening already. Last night on East Midlands Today, the local news contained a feature about some new investment of £150 Million into Rolls Royce for improved aero-engine testing facilities. We heard from the RR management about this being a global business and how the investment would secure jobs etc for the works at Derby.But then, we were treated to a lecture from the Unite Union Official, who was harping on about how damaging Brexit was to British industry, and how he looked forward to the 'softest' of Brexit. He spoke as though now, after the GE, the Unite Union would be central to investment negotiations. The BBC appeared to conduct the interview as if this official was a party to RR's investment plans. I wonder where that idea came from!
A nervous breakdown is a good diagnosis. It's fair enough to say Theresa May no longer has a mandate for anything, but Brexit was voted on long before she was Prime Minister or pulled the election stunt. That mandate still comes from the people, regardless of who is in charge.Of course, Theresa May and the BBC might feel that following through on the people's wishes is just one more foolish David Cameron promise she doesn't have to keep.
BBC WATO today...standard fare.Kicked off with a five minute softball interview with a prominent Labour Anti-Brexiteer on their manouvering in Parliament. No hard challenges - nothing from the Corbyn, pro-Brexit side. Followed by a sympathetic "analysis" from a pro-Remain inhouse journo. As always the Fake News nonsense about leaving the EU but still staying "in" the single market was allowed to float around as though it was a constitutional possibility, when it is not (as set out clearly on the EU Commission website). Next up, a Fake News item on the recent epidemic of appalling acid attacks. I say Fake News, because it avoided one of the key factors in the rise of acid attacks, namely mass immigration. Instead we had one of those sociological detours...yes, there were a few acid attacks in the Victorian era according to a lefty sociologist. So we can avoid the all too obvious causal factor that this method of attack has largely been imported from Jamaica, the Middle East and Pakistan. The other Fake News dimension was of course limiting the permitted responses to this epidemic. There was no suggestion that either exemplary sentences (e.g. life without parole) might work some magic or that we should have much stronger criminal vetting of asylum seekers and other migrants. Nope, you can only pursue the same of educational and purchase control measures used in relation to knives.
Fair play...the BBC is nothing if not assiduous in following the progress of a relative unknown looking to stand in the leadership election of the UK's fifth party (by general election percentage of the vote)- a party which generally they prefer to keep out of the spotlight...http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-40442878Over 800 words devoted to this contender...what possible reason could cause the BBC to allocate so many precious words emanating from one of their finest brains to this potential candidacy? Oh yeah, she considers Islam a threat to the UK constitution, values and culture. WOOOOAAAHHHH!! Time to pull out all the stops, change the habits of a lifetime and start representing the UKIP leadership as statesmanlike, rational and responsible moderates not fruitcakes and closet racists...anything to stop this mad woman. As always it's the little things that give the game away. Anne-Marie Waters is referred to as "Waters" throughout the article as criminals were of old. Paul Nuttall becomes a respectful Mr Nuttall. We are told "Anti-fascist campaign group HopeNotHate has branded Waters a "toxic figure"..." The naive and unwary reader might assume that Waters is therefore a fascist. If so, where is the evidence? Everything I have heard from her suggests she is anti-totalitarian,a feminist, pro-freedom of speech and not someone who defines a person by their ethnicity. None of these are the hallmarks of a fascist.
The use of her surname alone is very telling there. Disgraceful.
I, too, like the nervous breakdown analogy. The BBC gave the last election but one all they'd got - and they lost; then they pulled out all the stops in support of the Remain campaign - and they lost; then they put all their weight behind Corbyn's campaign and they lost yet again. What we're seeing now, I think, is a relentless corporate tantrum in which they are grubbing up any dirt they can find, or invent, to throw at the Government. It would be quite funny except that it's damaging the Brexit negotiations and making the country look foolish. Tonight's 6pm news was typical: the tragic deaths of some immigrants who drowned off Hastings were attributed to lack of lifeguards, due to 'cuts.' Just a minute, though, they drowned at 8.30 pm - my wife and I spend the Summer months in France and, here, lifeguards, when there are any, usually go home at about 6pm. Fake anger, synthetic rage and fake news!