Biased BBC

SMART-ARSE SLAPPED

2012-01-27T15:15:00.000Z

Here's Conservative MP Graham Stuart responding to a cheap shot from Nicky Campbell on Radio Five Live's Breakfast show this morning.

GRAHAM STUART/NICKY CAMPBELL (mp3)

Nicky Campbell: For the first time MPs on the Education Select Committee want you to provide the questions when they go head-to head with Michael Gove next Tuesday. They're asking for suggestions via Twitter. LOL. And it's going to be with the hashtag "AskGove". The Conservative MP Graham Stuart is the chair of the Education Committee. Good morning.

Graham Stuart: Good morning, Nicky.

Nicky Campbell: Tell us a little bit more about this, getting other people to do your hard work for you. Great idea - you can go and have lunch in your subsidised canteen. [Smug chortle]

Graham Stuart: Thanks for that low remark. You of course struggle by on a fraction of what MPs are paid Nicky so it's nice to have someone like you standing up for low earners…

Nicky Campbell: Absolutely, well said!

Graham Stuart: … and the unsubsidised while working for the BBC, but never mind - we won't worry about your hypocrisy.

After that put-down Campbell steered clear of the wisecracks and concentrated on the topic at hand.

NOTHING MORE DANGEROUS THAT STUPIDITY

2012-01-27T10:52:00.000Z

With BBC news coverage of the US Presidential race hotting up, it is quite useful to consider what B-BBC's Alan has to say here;

"Nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity"
Martin Luther King, Jr., registered Republican....or to put another way to describe the BBC's news output....'Villainy wears many masks, none so dangerous as the mask of virtue.' I have just been reminded that Martin Luther King was Republican....as were most Blacks of his era. Why would they be Republican? maybe Mark Mardell would like to explain and expand on that...and maybe not?

Possibly because the Democrats were the people that invented the Klu Klux Klan and opposed all anti-slavery legislation...and later were against much of the civil rights legislation as well. Democrats fought to prevent the passage of every piece of civil rights legislation from the 1860’s to the 1960's.
http://images.nbra.info/docs/library/NationalBlackRepublicanAssociation2009/NBRA%20Civil%20Rights%20Newsletter%202Feb11.pdf

http://www.nbra.info/

'History of civil rights - In a nutshell
• The Republican Party - From its founding in 1854 as the anti-slavery party until today, the Republican Party has championed freedom and civil rights for blacks.

• The Democratic Party – As author Michael Scheuer stated, the Democratic Party is the party of the four S’s: slavery, secession, segregation and now socialism.
Slavery – Democrats fought to expand it, Republicans fought to ban it
Democrats formed the Confederacy, seceded from the Union and fought a Civil War (1861 to 1865) – a war where over 600,000 citizens were killed, including many thousands of blacks – in order to keep blacks in slavery because the Democrats had built their economic base on the backs of black slaves.
Democrats enacted Fugitive Slave laws to keep blacks from escaping from plantations
and instigated the 1856 Dred Scott decision which legally classified blacks as property.

The Party of Lincoln
The Republican Party was started in 1854 as the anti-slavery party by abolitionists opposed to keeping blacks in human bondage, and Republicans, under the leadership of President Abraham Lincoln, fought to free blacks from slavery.
After the Civil War, Republicans amended the US Constitution to grant blacks freedom (13th Amendment), citizenship (14th Amendment) and the right to vote (15th Amendment).
Democrats started the Ku Klux Klan in 1866 to lynch and terrorize Republicans -black and white and drive Republicans out of the South.

ROCKET MAN...

2012-01-27T10:45:00.001Z

Yes, well, the minute GOP Presidential candidate Newt Gingrich suggested that there could be a manned lunar base which would be American, then this was going to go disputed by the BBC. I laughed at the blatant way in which the BBC sets up Gingrich in this item Of course when John F Kennedy made pretty much the same sort of speech in 1962, that is hailed by the likes of the BBC as "visionary" whereas when Gingrich makes it then it "delusionary". But no bias, no sirreee!

OPEN THREAD

2012-01-27T10:35:00.003Z

Here you go - it's Friday and time for a new one of these!

A LOAD OF BULL...?

2012-01-27T10:31:00.001Z

A Biased BBC reader contacted me with regard to what he sees is the BBC's biased attitude to the dog owning community.

The BBC's programme, Death Row Dogs, 24th January has raised several hackles, including complaints from Dr Roger Mugford, an eminent expert on canine behaviour who says:

"The BBC should not have screened this programme because it did not inform, entertain or meet any of the other accepted objectives for public broadcast television. Rather, it mislead the viewer into believing that bull breeds and owners of bull breeds were in some sense inferior to the rest of society. Some of the cases they showed had welfare implications and were not your “average” bull breed owner. They chose not to depict any of the ordinary or more affluent Midlanders who take pride in their Staffordshire Bull Terriers and its numerous cross-bred combinations. Significantly, no dangerous dogs (i.e. Section 3) featured in this BBC film, and this was a massively biased defence of the ill-conceived Section 1 breed specific legislation."

Now, I don't have a dog in this fight myself, but I am always happy to provide a platform to those concerned about BBC bias.

NARY A CAREY IN SIGHT, OR SOUND

2012-01-27T10:24:00.002Z

Biased BBC contributor Alan notes;

"Had the former Arch-Bishop of Canterbury, Lord Carey, said Banker's behaviour was the greatest moral scandal of our time I'm certain the BBC would have trumpeted it like some avenging Herald....but he didn't say that which is why his words have been sunk in obscurity with no fanfare what so ever by the BBC. Although his comments were in the Daily Mail yesterday morning there has been a blanket silence across the BBC despite his powerful condemnation of the Bishop's who opposed the cap on benefits....and not even a peep out of the Today programme."

'Archbishop blasts clerics who oppose welfare reform and declares the REAL moral scandal is our £1TRILLION debt'

HANG THE BANKERS?

2012-01-27T10:18:00.001Z

The BBC narrative is clear. Bankers were solely responsible for the global financial crisis. Go a little deeper and the narrative refines itself even more alarmingly; Capitalism was solely responsible for the global financial crisis. If only the State could control things. Next, seize on every opportunity to nail this in the public psyche. Take this current onslaught against RBS Chairman Stephen Hester. His crime has been to abide by his contract - a contract put in place under the gaze of a Labour Government. Now, the BBC allows Labour spokesman Chuka Umunna to rage against the sheer iniquity of what HIS party facilitated in the first place! Mike Cunningham, one of my fellow writers over on A Tangled Web, tackles the issue here.

Question Time LiveBlog 26th January 2012

2012-01-26T16:15:00.000Z

Tonight Question Time comes from Plymouth.

David Dimbleby is joined by Conservative MP Liz Truss, Lib-Dem Foreign Office Minister Jeremy Browne, Labour's David Lammy, ex Socialist Workers Party member Mark Steel and Mail columnist Melanie Phillips.

A note to all contributors: humour is good, sarcasm is fine, biting wit is even better but direct threats of violence and disgusting language are not acceptable. We will not add such comments. Have fun - but be good now...

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

It's a 10:30pm kick off and we'll be staying open for This Week too. See you here later!

Question Time 26th January 2012

OPEN THREAD

2012-01-25T21:39:00.002Z

A new Open Thread for your edification - in Hulk green just in case you are angry....

GATES OPEN, HORSE BOLTED

2012-01-25T12:57:00.001Z

Anyone catch Bill Gates on the BBC this morning? Quite an interesting interview here. I note that he was asked to choose "between Mitt Romney and Obama" - not that the BBC have an agenda in play when it comes to who will contest the White House, perish the thought! He was also used to help convey the idea that British Overseas Aid is unreservedly "a good thing" and that capitalism had lost track in recent years. He gave quite a good defence of capitalism - understandably. It's interesting to see that even a high profile figure like Bill Gates is actually used by the BBC to advance its own narrative on so many issues.

HOW DO I BEGIN...?.

2012-01-25T10:08:00.001Z

David Preiser has already covered this story but I wanted to put in this little post-script. I think you need to listen to the soundtrack below whilst contemplating Mark Mardell on Today this morning, eulogising Obama's State of the Union address last evening. The love he evidently feels for President Haughty moved me- as I am sure it will move you. However I am worried that if things don't go as the scrupulously impartial Mark hopes, this may yet prove unrequited.

"SO, JUST HOW AWESOME DO YOU THINK EL PRESIDENTE IS?"

2012-01-24T19:10:00.000Z

The name Fidel Castro popped up during last night's Florida GOP debate, drawing this response from BBC Washington correspondent Adam Blenford:

I dread to think what that could mean!

The BBC And the President's 'State of the Union'

2012-01-24T17:13:00.000Z

It's time for the President's third 'State of the Union' speech, in which He addresses the masses from on high, laying out His latest Plan For Us. The BBC will surely be right there to tell you what to think about it. To prepare for the ~~propaganda~~ coverage, a review of the previous SoU speeches and BBC reporting should help set the proper perspective.

His first SoU was greeted with lavish praise and much coverage. Understandable up to a point, I suppose, because it was the first one by a non-white. I have yet to figure out how His policies were supposed to be different or even superior due to skin color, but never mind. At the time, the BBC highlighted His Jobs Plan.

This was in January 2010. Unemployment was already a problem, the economy was in the tank, and yet the President wanted to ramp up the spending of money we didn't have. The BBC noted that Republicans were concerned about that, but made sure to tell you how important His Plan was anyway.

Richard Lister had the gall to tell you that the President was all about job creation and deficit reduction, and his BBC News Online colleagues helpfully pointed out that $20 billion in savings had already been "identified". As we all know, this was utter nonsense, as unemployment is even higher now than it was, as is the country's debt. No savings, no jobs came as a result of his historic speech, or any alleged plans laid out. The BBC did fret, though, that Sen. Kennedy's death and the loss of the Democrat super-majority was an obstacle for the President's "sweeping legislative agenda".

More ridiculous was the way Lister told you the President was trying to be a uniter, to get both political parties to work together. How convenient after losing that super majority, eh? No mention ever on the BBC of His "I won" dismissal of a Republican objection to His Plan. Some Presidents choose bi-partisanship, others have it thrust upon them, I guess.

US President editor Mark Mardell said that, aside from all that, the success of His economics plans would be what "really drive the voters' perception of him." Of course, now that we know His plans have only made the economy worse, Mardell keeps telling us that none of this is His fault. Any lack of progress was due to Republican intransigence, which is basically the Narrative the President set up in His speech. Mardell also enthused to his colleagues at the BBC College of Journalism last September that the President was "the last Keynesian standing", and that he and the British public felt this was the way to go. How's that working out now, Mark?

In the 2011 SoU, we got the same story.

State of the Union 2011: Obama urges co-operation

The anonymous Beeboid who wrote that article could have copied and pasted much of the talk about debt and spending from the 2010 reporting, so little had changed. The only difference was that Congress was now horribly divided thanks to the evil Tea Party pushing the Republicans to take control over the House of Representatives. So of course everyone must work together to advance His Plans For Us, right? Remember, His Plans are correct, and the Republicans just want to block them. You're not permitted to wonder if maybe they're right and He's wrong.

The bit about how He was going to spend money on green energy to boost the economy is particularly aggravating, considering how He actually threw billions down the Green toilet to failed or failing companies mostly run by His Democrat moneymen. The BBC has censored all of that, of course, so those who trust the BBC for their news on US issues have no idea that anything has gone amiss since last year.

Mardell, though, was not inspired. And it made him a little sad. He acknowledged the President's staunch defense of His economic plans, even going so far as to say that the President wasn't really calling for bi-partisanship but was actually throwing down the gauntlet. That's not the kind of soaring rhetoric Mardell was hoping for, so he was disappointed in the speech even though he agreed with its underlying theme. No surprise that the President has since spent the last year attacking His enemies and trying to spend even more money we don't have, with precious little to show for it.

How long, BBC, before we're allowed to blame Him for the economy instead of the excuse that He inherited a bad situation, and it takes a long time to recover? The UK economy is pinned squarely on David Cameron, even though he's been in office only half as long, and also inherited a bad economy. The double standard is glaring.

By the way, how is ObamaCare working out, BBC? Any thoughts on how small businesses are being strangled by the looming cost burden, costing us more jobs? ZZZzzzzzzzz.

As a setup for tonight's SoU, we get another dishonest attack on Mitt Romney's wealth and tax payments.

US Republican hopeful Mitt Romney pays 13.9% tax

Once again, no mention whatsoever that the majority of his earning is from capital gains, which are - by federal law, whether one agrees with that law or not - taxed at 15%. Which is what he paid in 2011. The figure in the headline is from 2010, and he paid a slightly lower rate because of legal tax exemptions. Sure, they link to his tax return document, but all that shows is income, not the rules. Most people who read this will see only that Romney made an enormous amount of money. But if you don't know the law, the perception you get - the one the BBC wants you to have - is that he's getting away with blue murder. The reason those tax laws exist is a topic for another discussion. Romney, though, is not paying low taxes on regular wage income, which is taxed at a different rate. It's very dishonest for the BBC not to differentiate between the two.

This is all a setup for what they know will be in tonight's speech.

President Barack Obama is expected to highlight economic inequality in his annual State of the Union address later on Tuesday.

Typical BBC. The myth of income inequality is BBC dogma. Is Mark Thompson's enormous salary part of the problem as well, I wonder? Still, the BBC wants to remind you that the President believes that Romney's situation is unfair.

But the issue has reignited the debate in the US over how investment income - in particular carried interest, the profits that private equity managers make - is taxed.

President Obama has said such income should be taxed at a higher rate, and that wealthy Americans and corporations should pay more tax to help trim the country's deficit.

The issue hasn't reignited anything, as we've only been talking about it all over the damn place for the last six months ever since the Occupy Wall Street crowd started their noise. Perhaps the BBC means that it has reignited the Occupiers' message? Either way, it's just a useful cudgel with which to bludgeon His opponents. It has nothing to do with Romney's ability as an administrator or his policies on anything at all. But that's the point of this Narrative, isn't it? By the way, do the President's opponents ever point out that even if we taxed the super-rich until they bled, it wouldn't even put the tiniest dent in the deficit? No, of course not, because taxing them even more isn't really about fixing the economy: it's about revenge.

Will the BBC discuss how the President's Plans haven't worked? Or will they continue to blame others and hope you forget all about the past? Watch out for tonight's speech. And watch out for the BBC Narrative.

What The papers Say

2012-01-24T16:16:00.003Z

Today: R4. Monday 23rd January 2012.
Yesterday, at about 7:45. Evan Davis read out the newspaper review. An item from the Guardian was singled out, which he articulated with passion and a distinct air of disapproval. What was it? A new scandal about Hackgate? Big Ben toppled over? Breaking news about another atrocity in Syria? No, it was Harriet Sherwood’s article about the ill-treatment of Palestinian children in Israeli prisons. The way Evan spat the words out, you’d have thought he’d been imprisoned there himself.
There’s something in internet parlance, or maybe in general parlance, called ‘whataboutery’. I take it to refer to a rebuttal that solely consists of examples of something worse than the original criticism.
You write about the bloody awful conditions endured by stone-throwing children held in Israeli prisons, and I counter with ‘what about conditions for children who have been tortured to death in Syria?” That’s what-about-ery.

That has nothing to do with Evan Davis, it concerns a CiFWatch article about another of Harriet Sherwood’s stories about Israel’s wrongdoings, real or imagined. These she obsessively researches to assuage the insatiable appetite for such things over at the Guardian.

The CiFWatch piece, cross-posted at Honest Reporting, begins with a graphic and gruesome description of the body of a 13 year old boy who had evidently been tortured to death by the Assad regime. It’s there purely to contrast its stark brutality with the allegations in the Guardian’s special report that Evan spat out with such venom yesterday.

Someone suggested this was ‘whataboutery’. But it wasn’t really, because Honest Reporting didn’t stop there. They went on to include the Israeli response, which, needless to say, was not published in the Guardian.
The Guardian’s video stars two Palestinian youths, one of whom looks like a chubby young Mr. Bean. Shall we call them ‘mature children’.
We are expected to take their testimony at face value. Their interrogations sounded tough, though not horrifyingly brutal, and if there is any truth in their allegations it’s nothing for Israel to be proud of.

“It would be naive to believe that there have never been any Israeli violations of those laws specifically meant to protect the rights of minors in detention. If these cases exist, there are authorities tasked with investigating and dealing with such deviations. This is not, however, the norm.”

Not touched upon at all is the matter of why they were in this situation, leaving the impression that they were completely innocent victims of some random act of vengeance by Israel.

Honest Reporting says that Israel maintains that these allegations are completely baseless.
“The mechanisms of accountability and rule of law actually exist in Israel” So before anyone says ‘they would say that, wouldn’t they’ it does seem pathetic that the lefty Guardianistas and their BBC bretheren are willing to leave aside their critical faculties, and take the words of all accusers, however implausible, as gospel. Film of stone-throwing Palestinian youths is abundant. We know they do it, and we know that slingshot catapults are lethal weapons. We know that exaggeration and faux news is par for the course. Yet people lap up unverified allegations by agenda-driven reporters. They can’t get enough of it.

The Israel Security Agency and its employees work solely within the law and are subject to oversight and internal and external examination, including by the State Controller, the State Prosecutor, the Attorney General’s Office, the Israeli Knesset and Israel’s courts at all levels, including the Supreme Court.”

That response is dismissed out of hand, deemed not worth listening to.
Mark Regev was allowed just enough time on the video to say that representatives of minors who feel they have been ill-treated should ‘come forward’ as Israel knows it is important to treat young people with extra consideration, but this was nullified by what came immediately after. A reiteration of the original allegations, which was allowed the final word.

This unverified report was singled out by some BBC producer as though it was of particular interest to Today listeners, and maybe they’re right.

THE WISDOM OF SOLOMON

2012-01-24T15:11:00.000Z

I always like it when light is cast into darkness. Biased BBC's Alan picks up on this interesting detail not mentioned by the BBC;

"Enver Solomon from the 'Children's Society' has been all over the BBC today. It might be nice to know that the Children's Society' full name is the 'Church of England Children's Society' and that it is essentially controlled by the very same Bishops who are opposing the government's welfare policy.

'Church of England Children’s Society (A company limited by guarantee). Also known as The Children’s Society. Presidents The Most Reverend and Right Hon the Lord Archbishop of Canterbury Dr Rowan Williams The Most Reverend and Right Hon the Lord Archbishop of York Dr John Sentamu Vice-Presidents Bishops of the Church of England Trustee Board Chair The Rt Rev’d Tim Thornton, Bishop of Truro (appointed September 2010)'

Whilst the charity does a vast amount of good for children across Britain its current theme that families must have £30,000 net income in benefits is clearly at odds not only with reality but its own actions. The charity has 728 employees.....do they all get, regardless of whether they are full time or part time, at least £30,000 net income? If not are their children now living in poverty as Enver Solomon tells us they should be below that income level?

It's interesting that the Charity is not above making its own cost savings to suit the economic climate....

'Efficiencies within the charity have helped to create a stable financial foundation.'

It would seem that whilst it seeks to protect children pensioners are not so lucky:

Pension Fund
The Children’s Society operates a defined benefit
scheme that closed to new staff in 2003.
New staff enter a defined contribution scheme.

To maintain this focus, expenditure across our other areas of charitable activity was reduced by £0.2m from last year’s level.

The charity also paid out over £1 million to cover redundancies....so presumably the children of those ex employees aren't quite that important.

The total staff pay costs are £27 million...presumably the many charity shop workers do not get any where near £30,000.....(37,000 x 728 = 27 million).....so somebody must be getting some very high wages at the top of the charity.
http://www.charitycommission.gov.uk/Accounts/Ends24/0000221124_ac_20110331_e_c.pdf

It would be nice firstly if the BBC would give us the full information about what are clearly charity pressure groups lobbying for their own favoured policies...and second that such charities put their money where their mouths are....when the pay their lowliest staff member £30,000 net per annum I might listen.

Sort of connected is the BBC's insistence on telling us of the 'respected' or 'leading' think tank IPPR.....no 'warning' that it is a left wing, essentially Labour affiliated, pressure group.....and Nicky Campbell's continued categorising of government cuts as 'Tory cuts'.

WHEN IGNORANCE IS BLISS

2012-01-24T15:04:00.003Z

Biased BBC contributor Alan notes;

"The BBC is clearly a very busy organisation struggling under the burden of having to make savings on its budget. Perhaps this is why it misses so much of the world's news.

In Norway last week the head of intelligence tells us that:

Reuters , Tuesday 17 Jan 2012
'Radical Islam remains the most serious threat faced by Norway despite the attacks by an islamophobe terrorist who killed 77 people last summer, the chief of the security police said on Tuesday.' "The number of violent right-wing extremists is still low," she said.
http://english.ahram.org.eg/NewsContent/2/9/31939/World/International/Norway-says-Islamists-still-main-threat,-not-the-f.aspx

Wonder why the BBC doesn't want that known?

Or in Germany what are their security services up to?

'More than one-third of the far-left Left Party's parliamentarians are under observation by Germany's domestic intelligence agency, SPIEGEL has learned. Germany's opposition far-left Left Party is under more intense surveillance from domestic intelligence than previously thought. Information from the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution (BfV) reveals that 27 Left Party parliamentarians are being observed -- more than one-third of the party's 76-strong parliamentary group.'
http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/0,1518,810773,00.html

The Left a threat to democracy? Not enough to make the BBC report it.

How about in the US where the sainted Obama has this to say about abortion:

'President Barack Obama says the 39th anniversary of Roe v. Wade is the chance to recognize the “fundamental constitutional right” to abortion and to “continue our efforts to ensure that our daughters have the same rights, freedoms, and opportunities as our sons to fulfill their dreams.” '

Charming that abortion is merely a lifestyle choice for Obama like choosing a new car or a good university.

The BBC tells us nothing about anti-semitism in Sweden or Holland or indeed Britain...because it is driven by Islamists and the Left.

But anti-Semitism in Germany? That's bad sort of anti-Semitism....as it's done by skin headed fascists not lovable Muslims: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-16678772 They mention 'extreme islamists' once but the main thrust is it's all the fault of the Nazis.....'It is necessary for politicians and the education system in Germany to deal with the National Socialist past'

Just astonishing that there is no mention of Maggie Thatcher in the story...surely they missed a chance there...must be able to tie her and the nasty Tory Party into that story somehow?

THE WAR ON WEALTH

2012-01-24T14:55:00.002Z

It seems to me that the BBC cannot get through any current news programme without informing us how evil "big business" really is and how the bankers, in particular, broke Britain. They know that repetition of this meme rams it into the heads of those listening and this is one of the things that is most dangerous about the Corporation. With Comrade Vince Cable doing his best to slay the capitalism "red in tooth and claw", the BBC brought on Nicola Horlick who agreed that "something" must be done about "excessive pay" for "executives. I suspect that the BBC probably support the ravings of George Monbiot over at The Guardian and his demand for a "maximum wage" as well as a "minimum wage". At no point is anyone allowed to turn around and say that it is NO BUSINESS of Government to tell private businesshow much it should pay those who work for it. And if Nicola Horlick thinks that excess pay is such an issue why not bring up the massive £800,000 that Mark Thompson earns, care of those of us forced to pay for the BBC?

SALAMI SLICING THE COALITION?

2012-01-24T14:42:00.001Z

Been a busy day, which started with me debating the Bishop of Hulme, Stephen Lowe, on the BBC this morning here. Go to 30 minutes in here and listen for half an hour, if you dare! Meanwhile, back on the Today programme, Justin Webb was on the attack against the very well spoken (if a tad dripping wet) Andrew Lansley. Yesterday it was IDS who got the treatment and today it was Lansley - same tired BBC meme, namely that reform of any part of the Public Sector is just, well, impossible. I though the hectoring and interruption by Webb did him no favours and I liked the way the parroting of Stephen Dorrell's comments by Webb were nicely countered by Lansley. Don't get me wrong - there is nothing wrong with a Government Minister being robustly challenged on the BBC - that is fine by me - BUT during the long hard Labour years, there was a stunning silence from the BBC when Brown and co went about building up a bloated and inefficient NHS. Now, they go on the attack when the Coalition try to do something about it! The pro-Statism meme is always in play and it just surfaces in al kinds of places!

THOMPSON ON LEVESON

2012-01-23T12:37:00.001Z

Perhaps you may wish to comment on this from BBC DG Mark Thompson to the Leveson Inquiry this morning?

"The BBC is not a business and it might well be that someone running a media business might take a different view from the view that I took as director general of the BBC.

"The BBC is a public service broadcaster. It is committed to be the most trusted, trustworthy source of news in the world and we want to maintain the highest possible standards in all matters, including matters relating to privacy."

OPEN THREAD

2012-01-23T10:41:00.002Z

Monday morning and a new Open Thread to start the week!

THAT WELFARE CAP

2012-01-23T10:40:00.000Z

Did you catch this VERY hostile and interrupting interview by Evan Davies of Iain Duncan Smith on the BBC this morning? How very dare Government try to limit Welfare! I'll be on the BBC myself later today (BBC Birmingham around 12.40) discussing this topic. My view is that whilst the principle of a cap is a good one, £26,000 seems an excessive amount. What about those many people who earn so much less than this? Why did Evan Davies not pursue this line?

THE NIGERIAN NIGHTMARE

2012-01-23T10:29:00.002Z

In the wake of further acts of Jihad by the Boko Haram Islamists in Nigeria, I was somewhat surprised to hear the Bishop of Durham on the BBC this morning pointing out that the "conflict" there is not really about religion but just as much about the lack of job opportunities for the young. Amazing - the BBC must have dhimmified clerics on speed dial!

IPPR A DAY...

2012-01-23T10:22:00.003Z

It's becoming an almost daily feature on the BBC. I refer to the "left-leaning" IPPR getting high profile for one of their "reports." This morning it was all about voters living in England placing more emphasis on their English rather than British identity. Whilst one absolutely welcomes the wishes of English people being giving attention (at last) one also must be careful about where this leads. The EU, for example, would love to see the UK break apart into a mass of small controllable regions, and the encouragement of this via an IPPR study is surely a watch out. The other point is that this study claims most English people would like to see "Devo Max" for Scotland but this is surely a misrepresentation by the IPPR and BBC as to what exactly "Devo Max" actually constitutes? As I understand it, Devo Max will ensure that the taxes from England will still continue to flow north of the border but in addition Scotland can then vary taxes even further.

UNEMPLOYED MAN STRUGGLING TO FIND WORK

2012-01-22T11:58:00.003Z

In today's Independent on Sunday:

It's just after breakfast time and Giles Fraser is smoking his third fag of the day. Clad in faded black jeans and a baggy black T-shirt, he flicks haphazardly into a full ashtray on the floor and scrolls down the Twitter feed on his computer. As a morning ritual it is pretty familiar to scores of the jobless. Then again, the Reverend Dr Giles Fraser, to give him his full honorific, is unemployed...

Tomorrow he starts working shifts on the leader desk at The Guardian, which he plans to do for the remainder of his notice period. He also has a documentary planned with the BBC and will continue to do his regular slot on BBC Radio 4's Thought for the Day.

In the past month on the BBC:

19/12/11 Start The Week with guest Giles Fraser.
23/12/11 Thought For The Day with Giles Fraser.
24/12/11 Saturday Review with guest Giles Fraser.
25/12/11 Constantine - the man who invented Christmas presented by Giles Fraser
1/1/12 Sunday with guest Giles Fraser.
5/1/12 Newsnight with guest Giles Fraser.
6/1/12 Thought For The Day with Giles Fraser
13/1/12 Thought For The Day with Giles Fraser

During his recent appearance on Newsnight one of the programme's producers - Sara Afshar - tweeted "Giles Fraser is great" and "I actually cheered at one point". With his adoring lefty fans at the Guardian/BBC, one thing the Reverend Dr need never worry about is being unemployed.

WALK LIKE AN EGYPTIAN?

2012-01-21T14:35:00.001Z

Well, I think that more than few of us forecast this but because the BBC narrative insists that the "Arab Spring" was a "good" thing, our concerns were swept aside. It was all going to work out swell ;

The final results in Egypt's first post-Mubarak parliamentary elections confirm an overwhelming victory for Islamist parties. The Muslim Brotherhood's Freedom and Justice Party (FJP) won the largest number of seats under Egypt's complex electoral system. The hardline Salafist Nour party came second.

Is this suggesting that the MB are not "hardline"? Really? Is this the next phase in the odious contortions the Dhimmified BBC performs. First the prospect of Islamic supremacy was dismissed. Now we are being told that the MB are not hardline! What next - blowing up the Pyramids is showing cultural sensitivity!!?