text:
« Al Qaeda Has Us In Their sights
Six Ways The BBC Gets It Wrong On the President, Congress, and Syria »
By David Vance | September 4, 2013 - 2:04 pm | September 7, 2013 open thread
Time for a new one.
316 Responses to Open Thread
Roland Deschain says:
If I may indulge, I will repost the last comment in the old thread:
Norway: more BBC lies
"But, as in so many other instances, if you do not tell the BBC what it wants to hear, you don't get heard."
Guest Who says:
Actually, as more than a few have, are and will find out, if you tell them what they can't deal with knowing about, their solution is to shoot the messenger.
It works for a while, but a bunker full of Yes men is a route to ultimate downfall.
And getting nailed for lying, over and over, really doesn't help the reputation for trust when committees are meeting on such things, say, like next Monday.
voiceforchildren says:
Don't complain about the BBC promoting hate-sites. Your concerns will be ignored and you will be THREATENED
This is a beauty:
"I think you misunderstand the nature of Facebook – to share a page and bring it to the attention of journalist colleagues, is not to "promote" it."
Must be an irregular verb. I share, you promote.
It is pretty comical in a perverse kind of way. I complain to the BBC, about the BBC, and end up getting told it's all my fault because I (supposedly) don't know how Facebook works. On top of that I'm threatened not to tell anybody! The BBC still wonders why it has lost all credibility, considering my complaint was also post-Savile.
'I complain to the BBC, about the BBC, and end up getting told it's all my fault'
A bit like their reporting, say, of Sikh girls getting groomed?
Ian Hills says:
The BBC tends to side with the authorities against the victims. In England it sides with social services departments against the victims of moslem grooming. In Jersey it has sided with the perverts of the island establishment against the abused and murdered children's home victims.
It did once run a documentary which mentioned Nazi collaborators in the island establishment during WW2, but that was probably just to smear the "right".
Henry Wood says:
You really could not make it up, no matter how vivid your imagination.
Yesterday I posted about the lack of coverage on the BBC about Egyptian forces destroying the tunnels of Gaza entrepreneurs. I also sent some links to BBC news asking why they were omitting to mention this story as compared to their coverage when Israel was doing the same thing?
Today I've been back and checked and still cannot find anything. So, I put into the BBC News search engine "Gaza tunnels". The results, as expected, still make no mention of the actions from a BBC source, BUT, on the results page is a link to:
http://english.irib.ir/news/political4/item/116663-egypt-razes-gaza-tunnels,-creates-crisis
So, it is not worthy of a mention from our impartial national broadcaster but in case you might be interested, they link to he English section of the voice of the Islamic Republic of Iran !!!!
Who is writing the BBC scripts for this total comedy?
'So, it is not worthy of a mention from our impartial national broadcaster but in case you might be interested, they link to he English section of the voice of the Islamic Republic of Iran'
Can't see what is bothering you. BBC SOP is now to presume that anything covered in part, or not at all, if covered anywhere else can be deemed to have been covered fully.
Admittedly, to now, this has tended to mean a whopping hole in a TV broadcast is atoned by a disclaimer in a Ceebeebies website page, but it was only a matter of time before they decided that if it was anywhere on media estates of 'approved' media it still counts.
VFC – can't seem to post as a reply. Let's try a new post:
Most (including BBC staff, evidently) think BBC Complaints is the end of any complaint.
To some extent it can be in some ways, because even if the attrition can be resisted long enough to see anything through ECU to The Trust, as it conducts its investigations internally and in secret and with no appeal, there's actually no way of knowing if anyone there even saw anything to hand down their judgements.
It's like getting a L'Oreal endorsement from Howard Hughes. '71% of 1 dead fruitcake says it has worked wonders on his split ends, says another un-named spokesperson'.
If what you share is an accurate representation of exchange, it is appalling, and one can see why the BBC still pushes its 'Anything we say is our little secret' (given the topic here, ironic) on written exchanges.
Normally that would inspire outrage and 'bring it on' in anyone. However, looking at the establishment's complicity in such as TVL/Capita searches, stitch-ups and court scattergun block finings, caution is advised.
I am for sure capturing the pages of your site in case the legals move in and we see yet another 'page not found' to do with written evidence the BBC can't redact or FOI away.
I would also be interested in A. Nother Lawyer or A. Nother Journalist's view on this as quoted:
'..to share a page and bring it to the attention of journalist colleagues, is not to "promote" it.'
Given sharing twitter pages seems to get lone posters in all sorts of hot water for promoting all sorts of 'isms, I'd have thought 'sharing' a page with journalists was in fact a step significantly higher up the ladder for plod to get interested these days?
Span Ows says:
no, some sort of moderation in action…
Okey-doke.
I was also getting pre-modded too for a while.
Thought I was back on the norty step.
All well (for) now.
Aerfen says:
Richard Bacon has been discussing the question of whether young 'English' are lazier than immigreants (I take it from the unusual choice of the word English that he intended to exclude British citizens of foreign descent).
Although he has studiously avoided claiming they ARE, even to discuss this, involves horrific racial stereotyping that would be intolerable to the BBC if applied to any other ethnic group!
Are young 'black British' 'lazy? Are young 'British Asians' 'lazy'?
Typical BBC hypocrisy.
He's back on the subject again, keeps taking one step back from the racist stereotyping by quoting Jamie Oliver!
There's a BBC Rule in there, I think. If you can't get away with saying it directly, find someone else to say it for you.
It's a poltiicians trick too, which the Nulabour leadership employed to great effect when they spread the urban Myth that only 13K Poles would emigrate from Poland to Britain. They repeatedly referred to the fact that they "had been advised/told", while not quite going so far as to endorse the figure. They clearly knew all along that this figure was a lie, a 'minimum' number not a maximum likely figure.
Llareggub says:
So the immigrants work harder than the British, and produce wealth, performing tasks that locals will not or cannot do. So now we can see a reason for war in Syria. Already there are two million potential immigrants just waiting an opportunity to enrich us. Just when I thought I might not be able to retire in comfort.
Apologies. I was unaware that my rather trivial point required moderation. Please feel free to remove it as it is only marginal to the topic.
David Preiser (USA) says:
What about Scots or Welsh? It would be offensive if Bacon was conflating those nationalities with the English.
We all know that it's now unacceptable for anyone to criticize the minority nations of what's left of Britain; it is, though, different concerning the English. Of course, those English who've still a brain left intact from the years of relentless Labour and Left-wing brainwashing, know all too well that the English have been the target of New Labour's multicultural Marxist experiment, an experiment that has made English identity and national pride taboo. This cultural genocide has also meant that we, as the majority nation in these isles, can be slagged off and racially abused by the other nations without so much as a spilled latte mug in the trendy coffee houses of west ends up and down the land. Scotland, Wales and the Irish can say and do what they want: they can be overly nationalistic, even aggressively so, and the Left/BBC celebrate. The English do the same and the sandal wearing textiles fraternity declare war.
TBH I don't think it was the Welsh or Scottish he was intending to exclude, he was simply slyly nurturing in the listeners mind the image of the 'lazy' white person, not brown or black.
johnnythefish says:
Yet more unsubtle undermining of the English. News items on immigration are almost invariably pitched as a 'British' issue, so how can they single out the English without some kind of justification e.g. 'Is there a perception that the young English are lazier than their Scottish or Welsh equivalents and so can't compete with harder-working immigrants?' (rhetorical question – we all know the answer)
No, it's not racist, because according to Auntie the English don't exist. You might as well say that the Martians are bastards.
nofanofpoliticians says:
I only had one ear open whilst my wife was watching an episode of the Hairy Bikers last week and I could have sworn that they were talking about "Recession Food". I only just checked and it seems I heard it correctly.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b017lb62/Hairy_Bikers_Best_of_British_Series_1_45_minute_versions_Recession/
I have no idea how long ago these programmes are recorded but please can someone remind me how long ago it was when this country was last in recession?
The BBC never stop using the entire range of their programming to inflict their message.
Silly me, I always thought Recession Food was what you found in that wonderful left-wing propagandist construct – food banks.
Seems to be a BBC theme. There was a similar short series not long ago featuring some of their Great British Menu stars visiting various people (including a classic nuclear family with both parents working, the proverbial struggling single mother, and a lone male pensioner) to experience how the lower orders lived during the recession. Their task was to shed a few tears over the humanity of it all while driving the Audi over to the high street and help the family come up with a menu of healthy meals that would be possible on their tight recession budget.
I don't remember such concern when Labour was still in power during the worst of the financial crash.
Bob Nelson says:
Amusing comment by 'george' on Trending Central blog:
'The Guardian has refined its tribalism so finely that they now only appeal to the residents of two streets in Islington and BBC staff'
George R says:
The following is not an item about BBC bias, it is only about some information from a BBC source which can supplement a BBC report.
This BBC report refers to Tory MP, Jesse Norman:
"Tory MP Jesse Norman sacked as adviser over Syria vote"
Recently, BBC Parliament interviewed Jesse Norman about his recent book on philosopher Edmund Burke (inc 15 min video- I hope it is obtainable for most people)-
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b02x62t9/BOOKtalk_Jesse_Norman/
To lose Mr Norman's abilities because of a Syria no-vote seems to be a case of Cameron shooting himself in the foot.
He's my MP and has gone up in my estimation after a few 'national treasure' fob-offs on the BBC, which I put down to the DP sofa-addiction.
Be interesting how he gets treated by, and reacts to the BBC now.
And given his book subject, who had a few nifty notions, this one appeals:
'The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing."
http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Edmund_Burke
Of course, it was a different time, before BBC CECUTT and FOI Exemption lawyers.
"'To sack Jesse Norman over a moral issue like whether to support war is outrageous'"
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2013/09/to-sack-jesse-norman-over-a-moral-issue-like-whether-to-support-war-is-outrageous/
frk says:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2411152/Lucy-Vallender-Former-male-TA-soldier-UKs-transgender-Muslim-woman-MARRIED.html…if only more muslims were as peacefull as this nice young lady it would be a much better world he he
'In a different time' this would have been a Monty Python sketch.
'But she has run into trouble with her local mosque in Swindon, Wiltshire, as they would not let her pray with the other women.'
Is it me or do I detect a note of surprise in there?
But then, maybe as an ex-squaddie, he/she is out to prove some kind of point?!
Crazy, man, crazy……..(pass me that joint)
Stewart says:
Its a f#cking wind up surely?
Ian Rushlow says:
No cause and effect… the BBC website continues to report on the shortage of places in primary schools (see http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-23932030 last updated 11.32am). We are told that "In the east London borough of Barking and Dagenham, a 50% rise in the number of under-fours since 2001 means its primary schools are bursting at the seams." However, we are not told why there has been such a rise. Must just be one of those mysterious things that happen then, with no obvious cause or explanation. Certainly nothing to do with the hyper-immigration programmes of the BBC (that's Blair, Brown and Cameron in this case).
uncle bup says:
Partly immigration and partly the increase in childbirth.
Two dots there.
Anyone believe the droids will ever join them?
"EDL keep moving their kids to different schools to provoke immigration scare", claims UAF teacher who wishes to remain anonymous.
Banquosghost says:
Sweet Jesus, is that really a quote from a teacher? I knew they were mostly swivel eyed pinkos but that kind of insanity is brain revolving!
Ha! You believed it.
Doh! Its late, blame Mr Magners for a lack of cognitive ability. That and it actually sounding like the kind of thing a teacher would say!
I knew it was a joke. Members of the EDL aren't allowed to have kids in case they grow up waycist. They are taken off them by caring social services at the moment of birth.
http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/327086/Why-try-to-take-baby-from-EDL-mother-but-not-from-terrorists
The Poltergeist says:
By Durham Council's logic, all unborn children of Labour supporters should be taken away from them in case they end up warmongers like Tony Blair.
Maturecheese says:
The UAF should be treated in the same way as they treat the BNP, in other words there is no way a teacher should be allowed to be a member of the UAF.
Well said Mature Cheese about UAF
Demography is destiny and so the destiny of that part of England is already clear.
Esconced in their Islington district enclaves and their country cottages the liberals can but nod their agreement and reflect how pleasurable it is to change the nature of a nation and all so easily and what fools these old English conservatives are.
Maybe or maybe not. Who knows what lies ahead.
Yes but the report yesterday morning on Breakfast News showed a school in Bristol with a predominately white attendance, thus implying the increasing birth rate was down to the indigenous.
But we know different don't we boys and girls….
The white children could be Poles, Lithuanians, Latvians, Russians and Ukrainians. Don't seem to be any other type of white children at my local school…
Very true, but in the case of the report from Bristol parents were interviewed and they were defintely not Eastern European.
Bristol was a very clever choice, having a disproportionate number of middle class ethnic British of child breedign age. Why? Well it is a highly popular target destination of many of the young professional middle classes desperate to leave London before their children reach school age. It is an attractive city and still at a far more acceptable level of 'vibrancy' than most other large UK cities, as well as being in the south (there arent many cities in the south).
Its vibrant enough for me, my mothers family were from there and I visit regularly. According to the 2011 census, 1 in 7 residents were born outside the UK.
The City has a large population of Somalis and who can forget that the 1981 riots kicked off in St Pauls? The place is till a tinderbox.
Even the affluent areas are being flooded by Eastern Europeans living 8 or more in rented buy to let properties.
Joshaw says:
Unguarded remark from otherwise lefty, PC teacher at my wife's London school:
"I've yet to meet a Somali woman with a job."
They do have a 'job', raising their huge families!
Paid for by the taxpayer.
Andy S. says:
Last figures I saw were 85% unemployment rate amongst the Somalian "community" in this country.
The term "unemployed" is inappropriate, as it implies people who want to be employed or are employable but do not have jobs. There was a report produced several years ago – by the Institute for Public Policy Research of all people I think it was – that described various immigrant groups as "economically inactive". That's a coded way of saying that they have absolutely no intention of working and instead choose to live on benefits and the proceeds of crime.
Phil Ford says:
"…Must just be one of those mysterious things that happen then, with no obvious cause or explanation."
I saw the BBC news reports on this, too. Surreal. Chilling. Orwellian newspeak made real. They described all the symptoms but somehow failed, completely, utterly, to suggest the cause. I suppose it's just another example of how the BBC take us all for mugs. Or are we supposed to consider it 'world-class' reporting?
Well here's a clue from Gascoigne primary in Barking:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/primaryeducation/10283731/Gascoigne-Primary-in-Barking-the-school-that-just-keeps-growing.html
'The London borough contains six of the 10 largest primary schools in Britain, and 70 per cent of its 47 infant, junior and primary schools have already been extended. Its growing population (20 per cent of residents are of school age) is compounded by a melting pot of cultures and nationalities, due to immigration from abroad and nearby boroughs.
Sixty languages are spoken at Gascoigne Primary, and over 90 per cent of pupils have English as an additional language. "It's a very mobile, turbulent population because of the nature of the area," explains Mr Garton. "One third are Eastern European – Albanian, Polish, Russian – one third are African – Nigerian, Ghanian, Congolese – and the other third are from every other population you can think of. There's a tiny proportion of British-born children."
Hard to see how it could be a "melting pot" whilst also being "mobile" and "turbulent".
Still at least there's a few "British born" children to teach them native values. Oh, wait…
RCE says:
Makes you wonder why Billy Bragg ever left.
Pounce says:
The bBC and its use of adjectives
Has anybody else noticed how the bBC reports the news differs when it is reporting about Islamic thugs and those who are there to combat them. For example the current bBC account of the nerve gas attack on Syria is:
President Barack Obama has said the credibility of the US, its Congress and the international community is on the line over their response to Syria's alleged use of chemical weapons. The only people who are claiming it was alleged is the bBC, why even the Syrians admit Nerve gas was used, but they are saying the rebels did it.
When Terry the Taliban murder ,death, kills in Afghanistan, the bBC goes quite unless of course the target of their anger was a British soldier and the bBC will have them making a comment within minutes.
Now contrast that when the evil Western Imperialists kill somebody, how many airstrikes have the bBC reported within minutes from the darkest reaches of whatever country they are in and the bBC will claim that civilians have died at the hands of the the..British,Americans, jews etc.. They will quote it as fact even thou, the facts haven't even been written up. and so it is with the latest revelation about British soldier abusing dead Iraqi bodies. I quote from the Baghdad broadcasting corporation :
Al-Sweady inquiry: Soldier 'shot Iraqi bodies'
A "very angry" sergeant fired bullets into the bodies of Iraqis who were still "twitching" after a gun battle, the Al-Sweady inquiry has heard. Ex-army private Duncan Aston also said he saw a soldier stamp on the head of a dead Iraqi and others attack detainees. The inquiry heard other soldiers did not agree with his version of events.
Ok, then the above is followed later on by:
He said he then saw his platoon sergeant, Paul Kelly, approach "looking very angry".His sergeant tried to fire at one of the men but his weapon did not work and "he then threw his rifle to the ground and said words to the effect of 'give me your weapon'," Mr Aston added. "He put a full magazine of bullets into both bodies that had been twitching but he also fired into the bodies of the other dead gunmen in the ditch," he said.
You know what I have no problem believing that angry people can commit the worse crimes and that anybody found guilty of abuse must be punished, yet something doesn't seem write with the above account and that is:
His sergeant tried to fire at one of the men but his weapon did not work and "he then threw his rifle to the ground
Well other than the fact, that the Sgt fired into a dead body and not a man , the fact he threw his rifle on the ground after it jammed. Err no, he would have tilted it to the side, locked to see the position of the working parts and carried on in clearing his blockage. Anybody who had done basic training would know, never mind somebody who had most likely completed Jnr and Snr Brecon. They were in a war zone even an unthinking idiot would now that there is always somebody around the corner waiting to kill you. Throwing your weapon on the ground is what a sprog would do in a hizzy fit, not somebody in charge of at least 30 men. Then I saw the picture of the person who is making these allegations. Sorry I forgot this is about the bBC use of adjectives and how while it has no problem using them when Allah's finest kill usually by the very liberal use of 'Alleged' when the Brits are accused of anything, it is always taken as fact. Anyway then I saw the picture of the man making these allegation and I saw all I wanted to see about who is making things up.
The bBC, the propaganda arm for Islamic terrorism.
How long before he asks to be called Chelsea?
"Trust in the BBC 'at risk' after paying out £1.4MILLION more than it needed to in severance deals to senior managers."
"NAO reveals 22 pay outs were bigger than contracts dictated.
"BBC accused of focusing on increasing deals not protecting the licence fee."
By MATT CHORLEY, MAILONLINE POLITICAL EDITOR.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2411170/Trust-BBC-risk-paying-1-4MILLION-needed-severance-deals-senior-managers.html
Never discussed is why these people were on 24/ 36 month fixed or rolling contracts in the first place.
Three month notice would have been more than adequate.
The BBC should be paying the minimum they can get away with not the maximum they can get away with. Aw yeah I forgot; if they didn't pay 'the market rate' their 22,000 employees would bugger off and work for … who exactly?
Reporting the News of a PowerBlackout in Venezuela:
A power cut has left 70% of Venezuela without electricity, including parts of the capital Caracas. The blackout disabled traffic lights in the city, causing traffic chaos. It also partially disrupted the underground transport system. Thousands of workers were sent home. Power was slowly being restored in different areas after the cuts.Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro blamed the opposition for "sabotage" to power transmission lines.
Venezuela's main power distribution network failed Tuesday, depriving 70 percent of the country of electricity and creating traffic chaos in much of Caracas, which normally escapes such outages. Electrical Energy Minister Jesse Chacon said on state TV that the failure was in the "backbone" that carries electricity from the Bajo Caroni region, where 60 percent of Venezuela's power is generated
So reading the two above news accounts which do you feel gives the truer picture: The so called impartial bBC or the nasty biased rightwing Fox News?
The bBC which doesn't even bother reporting the news anymore
They haven't got a clue about Venezuela…
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-23885377
"Could smuggling be to blame for Venezuela's food shortages?"
Thoughtful says:
Every time I manage to be the last poster as a new thread is created so here it is again !
http://www.oldham-chronicle.co.uk/news-features/8/news-headlines/82194/news-full#comments
I thought I'd post this as such a shocking story and low sentence. What truly is appalling is that shocking though it is such acts no longer merit reporting in regional media, let alone the mainstream.
If this had happened the other way around you can bet the BBC would be carrying it as headline news and an appropriate sentence would have been handed down.
…got to me some sort of retard to carve your name into the victims!
Dysgwr_Cymraeg says:
Ah, that cultural enrichment they bring to the shores of this backward shithole in which we live.
One of those benefits of multiculturalism again.
DavidA says:
I'm reminded of the teenage girl who allegedly punched an elderly Sikh guy who had (also allegedly) groped her bum, so hard that (shock, horror) "his turban fell off".
It made headlines for days and sparked a nationwide manhunt (girlhunt?) for the perpetrator, who was eventually tracked down in far-away, leafy Devon.
Makes you wonder what would have been said if two teenage girls had pounced on this Pakistani chap in a park and carved their initials in HIS arm?
The latte cups would have been quivering all over Islington for weeks. And doubtless we wouldn't have had to scour the pages of the Oldham Chronicle to find it, either.
Old Goat says:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/bbc/10286689/One-in-seven-BBC-executives-overpaid-to-quit.html
The luck of the Irish.
http://tradingaswdr.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/the-news-where-you-are.html
To be sure. Or, in the case of George E. subsequently, of course, doubly sure.
Can't wait for Mardell and the BBC to spin away this latest statement from his beloved Obamessiah in Sweden:
"I didn't set a read line: the world set a red line."
In other words, the Nobel Peace Prize Laureate-in-Chief, someone who Mardell once claimed doesn't want to be "the world's policeman" is now declaring that He is the world's top cop.
How's that hopey-changey……aw, screw it.
That's one more than 97%, another stat that really has the world's actual… public… totally convinced.
It's possible some media are iffy, mind…
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent+world/obama-administration
Pelosi said this after a WH meeting the other day, it must be their agreed get-out phrase.
hehehe…its all gone pear-shaped:
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/357605/engel-obamas-red-line-i-mean-worlds-andrew-johnson
http://twitchy.com/2013/09/04/do-these-people-even-talk-to-each-other-kerry-says-obama-drew-red-line-video/
It looks like the BBC have just ignored his reinterpretation of the 'red line' comment. I can't see it anywhere on the website. Understandable for the BBC, given that it makes Obama look weak and lacking leadership, but not world class journalism.
'the BBC have just ignored his reinterpretation of the 'red line' comment'
About all they can do.
Any actual mention would need an explanation, and that hitches an already tarnished 'tell it often enough' BBC to a politician driving off a cliff ignoring any sources of information that extend beyond the BBC and his dwindling fan base.
He'll soon be toast.
Luckily for the BBC, the unique way they exist places them along with cockroaches or Herpes no matter what they do.
Quite the legacy.
NotaSheep says:
Except he did set a redline and the White House confirmed that he had. August 2012 – "We have made it very clear… that a red line for us is we start seeing a whole bunch of chemical weapons moving around or being utilised… We have communicated in no uncertain terms with every player in the region that that's a red line for us and that there would be enormous consequences if we start seeing the movement on the chemical weapons front or the use of chemical weapons…"
Whitehouse April 2013: 'We go on to reaffirm that the President has set a clear red line as it relates to the United States that the use of chemical weapons or the transfer of chemical weapons to terrorist groups is a red line that is not acceptable to us, nor should it be to the international community. It's precisely because we take this red line so seriously that we believe there is an obligation to fully investigate any and all evidence of chemical weapons use within Syria.
On your red line question, it is absolutely the case that the President's red line is the use of chemical weapons or the transfer of chemical weapons to terrorist groups.
But I think nobody should have any mistake about what our red line is. It is when we firmly establish that there has been chemical weapons use within Syria, that is not acceptable to the United States, nor is the transfer of chemical weapons to terrorist organizations. And the people in Syria and the Assad regime should know that the President means what he says when he set that red line. And keep in mind, he is the one who laid down that marker. He's the one who directed that we provide this information to the public. And he's the one who directed that we do everything we can to further investigate this information so that we can establish in credible, corroborated, factual basis what exactly took place.'
Looks like the president's red line went up a black hole.
a) Why are all my posts (even with no or one URL) now into pre-mod?
b) Hey-ho.
c) May as well get hung for a sheep as a lamb:
chrisH says:
I note that the BBC quoted the Resolution Foundation today in some old spat, designed to do in the Tories.
It referred to them as "the left-leaning think tank"…which I admit is better than their usual "independent" soubriquet.
But…when does a Lefty kite flying agitprop front organisation for the likes of Will Straw etc become merely "left-leaning".
Is it the BBC alone that gives itself the right to decide whether the IEA, CPS, Migration Watch are "right-leaning"…or are they bound to always be "right wing"…neo-fascist or swivel-eyed loons obsessing about Europe/immigration etc.
No-the Resolution Foundation are spirits straight out of Barbara Castles beehive…and forever able to call up the BBC with their pink guff and media hackademics to ensure we get their message.
Left-leaning, tilting or just Commie.
Easy to call em Commies…less text, you see!
#88 says:
Left Leaning?
I'm sorry to tell you that they didn't qualify that on the 2 o'clock news on 5 Live…which gave us the unequivocal message that 'One on five British workers in Britain earn less than the living wage'….supplemented by the message that this is a report from a think tank…which eventually we find is the Resolution Foundation (or should that be Revolution Foundation?).
No such qualms about the Taxpayer Alliance report about unemployment. Richard Bacon is careful to tell us that the report's author is a former Tory candidate.
Ray Mears talks about the bBC in todays Guardian:
In 2009, after making programmes for the BBC for 15 years, Mears did a series for ITV, and has since made two more. Why the switch? "People think either that they weren't offering me enough money or that I'd had some sort of spat. But it was neither of those things. The BBC were slow to make decisions, and I was critical of some of the management there at the time, but none of these were the reasons I went to ITV. ITV simply asked me to make some wildlife programmes. I love wildlife, it was a natural thing for me to do, so I said yes, and I really enjoyed them." He will be back on BBC4 next year, though, with a series about the Wild West, and says ITV have no problem with that. "The management at ITV is very grown up," he says. "Having run a business for 30 years, I feel I can have a business conversation with people who really understand and that's been refreshing." BBC, take note.
http://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2013/sep/04/ray-mears-it-found-me-great-outdoors
'….but none of these were the reasons I went to ITV. ITV simply asked me to make some wildlife programmes.'
Hmmmm, you could definitely read that a certain way, especially given that BBC wildlife programmes (amongst others) seem to be nothing more than agitprop pieces for 28gate eco-fascists.
I would have thought Mears made up for a low level of green scares by raving on about how much better primitive cultures are than ours.
Perhaps the points system should be more widely publicised.
The topic of sites tarnished by what is posted and left up often comes up. It's a tricky one.
Interesting what BBC Newsnight seems OK with currently on twitter and FaceBook.
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnewsnight
Soilsoilsoil Soil Once you kill dog yoweri kaguta museveni who is originally from rwanda the banyarwanda here will run back from where they came from, dog museveni and his step brother salem saleh never been on battle field they just wear the combat those videos you see on youtube of dog museveni wearing army uniform is propaganda. I was told that dog museveni and salem saleh, are fearful banyarwanda.
The banyarwanda people have there own country and land but what are they doing here? And where are the banyarwanda people going? All these problems we are facing are all caused by banyarwanda, we need to kill the banyarwanda
#ExposeTruth @githeer
@BBCNewsnight @paulmasonnews try white phosphorus being used against the Iraqis by the dirty Zionist Jews and yanks pic.twitter.com/tUV6fBSJ3U
Sites must just hate it when that happens. Especially if some rush to report them.
Flokkers, shut off your engines.
I find it… 'interesting', that text of such nature still seems to remain up.
Is it possible that the BBC is unaware of it?
Possibly… those so concerned with 'hate' speech here have not popped across to mention it?
Or maybe they too are now in 'our belief is this is about right' attrition hell with CECUTT too.
ps: Looking at the Newsnight twitter feed Mr. Katz seems to be accelerating their plummet to joke status on topics as well as competence or integrity.
It's not just still up. That first post shows threee times on the Newsnight front page. I'm guessing that's just the way Facebook works, because I'm bu**ered if I can make head or tail of it. Showing my age, because it all looks like a jumbled mess to me.
'just the way Facebook works'
That's FaceBook, like twitter, the FREE US-based social media entities the £145.50 UK BBC piggy-backs and uses, via unique funding, to offer a degree of separation in what it punts out or gets back in by way of 'feedback', that is coincidentally utterly dominated by their kind of folk.
Some saw it would not end well.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/newsnight/fromthewebteam/2012/03/this_blog_is_now_closed_-_foll.html
I shared the above as this forum on occasion has criticism and even threats of 'reporting' made for individual posts made that are then spun up into a generic hate site claim or to demand the owners act or else.
I do not see any such thing yet on the BBC managed forums I have linked to, after a few days, when those that haunt here cannot be unaware even if they have been rendered silent for a while now by the bunker-busting revelations all around that are keeping them in hiding.
That there is not one comment on Newsnight FaceBook or Twitter, or any reaction from the BBC administrators, considering the calibre of post (with 'likes' now) made and allowed to stay up (the repetition is just spamming each thread, making the disinterest of the Newsnight staff all the more pathetic in being highlighted), tells me all I need to know about the Flokkers that poison this site on behalf of the entity they see fit to justify or protect.
These are BBC-sanctioned posts currently with text such as…
'we need to kill the banyarwanda'
'the dirty Zionist Jews '
These seem to err on the less than 'feel the love' end of social media exchange.
BBC CECUTT still has the same 'some of you sillies think this trivia is important' on its home page after a week, as they carefully select what people are complaining about and, typically, forget to refresh with other distractions.
The new BBC Newsnight editor appears to have one of these odd personal/professional twitter pages too, but without the weasel disclaimer.
One presumes his views do reflect those of the BBC, who can be held to account for what he says, if it is ever less than accurate or impartial?
Charlatans says:
On the end of last open thread, I raised the BBC not challenging Rach Reeves on the Today programme, interviewed by Sarah Montague, when Reeves said most of labour donations are not coming from the unions.
Item was copied from Guido web. Here is an update:
http://order-order.com/2013/09/04/listen-rachel-reeves-donation-porky/#comments
Albaman will not doubt want to comment on this with some statistics so he can obfuscate like he did this morning by going back to the 2012 Labour accounts in an attempt to divert the discussion point about donations.
The point is Labour reliance on the Unions and Today programme not challenge Reeves, particularly when the item today was about GMB announcing 90% cut of their funding to Labour.
Not BBC bias – just one of those 'Did I really hear that?' moments in an interview with Angela Eagle on PM.
Asked to comment on her party's fractured relationship with the GMB she said they needed to 'redefine the relationship into a vibrant reality'.
From a woman who was a Minister of State in the last Labour government.
Perhaps she misunderstood and thought her brief was to get her ministry into a state. In which case, job done.
Keep listening out for the BBC using the '97% consensus in scientific papers that global warming is man-made' lie cooked up some months ago by a bloke called, coincidentally, Cook.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/09/03/cooks-97-consensus-disproven-by-a-new-paper-showing-major-math-errors/
'Dr Legates said: "It is astonishing that any journal could have published a paper claiming a 97% climate consensus when on the authors' own analysis the true consensus was well below 1%.
"It is still more astonishing that the IPCC should claim 95% certainty about the climate consensus when so small a fraction of published papers explicitly endorse the consensus as the IPCC defines it."……
Dr William Briggs, "Statistician to the Stars", said: "In any survey such as Cook's, it is essential to define the survey question very clearly. Yet Cook used three distinct definitions of climate consensus interchangeably. Also, he arbitrarily excluded about 8000 of the 12,000 papers in his sample on the unacceptable ground that they had expressed no opinion on the climate consensus. These artifices let him reach the unjustifiable conclusion that there was a 97.1% consensus when there was not.
"In fact, Cook's paper provides the clearest available statistical evidence that there is scarcely any explicit support among scientists for the consensus that the IPCC, politicians, bureaucrats, academics and the media have so long and so falsely proclaimed. That was not the outcome Cook had hoped for, and it was not the outcome he had stated in his paper, but it was the outcome he had really found."
And a nail-on-the-head quote from the late, great Michael Crichton's novel on the AGW scandal: 'Dr Willie Soon, a distinguished solar physicist, quoted the late scientist-author Michael Crichton, who had said: "If it's science, it isn't consensus; if it's consensus, it isn't science." He added: "There has been no global warming for almost 17 years. None of the 'consensus' computer models predicted that."
Nice one, Johnny. If you've got the time, it would be well worth you checking out the 50:1 website – some fantastic video interviews with a range of well known climate sceptics such as Anthony Watts, Jo Nova and several others.
Website: http://topher.com.au/50-to-1-video-project/
Anthony Watts in interview: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RiuHOzykxC0&feature=c4-overview&list=UUkZ1K4oDMjYJVl5jlL-pZ2A
Thanks Phil. Started to watch the interview with Marc Morano the other night – it's nearly an hour long and it was late so the rest I'll catch up on – but what an articulate guy, and one who not only knows his stuff but can also communicate it very effectively. His website Climate Depot should be compulsory daily reading for every AGW obsessive at the BBC as well as every headmaster/mistress in the UK (and beyond).
http://topher.com.au/50-to-1-video-project/#prettyPhoto/7/
The 50:1 video project on 'climate change' mitigation costs lost me on the maths (it was a bit fast) but I've just noticed the site has a pdf. explaining the calculations. If they are correct, it will cost $3.2 quadrillion (yep, that's $quadrillion) – in other words 80% of world GDP – to abate 1 deg C of warming across the planet – even assuming, of course, you believe in the claimed warming powers of CO2 and/or you hadn't noticed that temperatures haven't risen for the last 17 years!
Every time I see Marc Morano in interview I thank God he's on the side of the climate sceptics. Like Lord Monckton, he's another articulate, informed sceptic none of the msm dare touch with a bargepole, for fear he'd destroy their ephemeral 'consensus' with ease – and with stone cold facts (as opposed to empty propaganda).
Do try to watch the Donna La Framboise – interview; she's very knowledgeable about the inner workings of the disgraceful IPCC and she has a great sense of humour.
graphene fedora says:
A video nasty for those stuck in the 'green room' at the BBC:
http://www.trendingcentral.com/incredible-video-debunks-entire-global-warming-agenda/
he is doing my head in with his left wing bias,who,yes supergob richard bacon,did you hear him today shouting,bawling and screaming like a banshee,he is so annoying,in fact, he is the most annoying presenter at radio 5 live.
Rtd Colonel says:
no small feat
Oh, great:
Joint Chiefs Chairman Criticizes Leak of Syria Military Plans, Delay in Syria Strikes as Forces Moved
The chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the president's top military adviser, told the Senate on Tuesday that U.S. plans for attacks on Syria were made more difficult by leaks to the press and the president's delay in ordering the strikes.
Gen. Martin Dempsey, the chairman, said in testimony before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee that despite those setbacks he is confident military strikes will be effective in degrading the Syrian military's chemical warfare capabilities.
Dempsey appeared before Congress with Secretary of State John Kerry and Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel in the first day of what is expected to be a two-week debate on whether to approve President Obama's announced plans to take military action along
Unlike Kerry and Hagel, Dempsey had no prepared statement and provided short answers to most questions.
Asked by Sen. Ben Cardin (D., Md.) if public discussion of plans by the United States to use military force had made it more difficult to conduct the strikes, Dempsey said: "Yes, senator, it has."
Dempsey said within the past 10 days "there was a significant leak of military planning that caused the regime to react."
Hey, what happened to the President who's cracked down on more leakers than all previous Presidents combined? This isn't dithering: it's mass incompetence at all levels. The BBC will shift blame anyway.
If the Japanese had been kind enough to give two weeks' notice of the attack on Pearl Harbor, do you think there would have been any ships there on December 7th?
There are those who think we did know and that Roosevelt deliberately left everything in place because he wanted an excuse to go to war against Japan.
There's a live programme on BBC Three at the moment from Hackney (no Abbott though). It's a cross between Gameshow's Big Question and Question time for the 18 – 25's, 'right on' innit, ignorant and those with a poor attention span.
Disgracefully, the BBC have a representative (?) sample of young people in the audience and have turned the biggest issue confronted by the world (Syria) into a quiz show where you can ring in and vote for your favourite panellist.
No surprise that the BBC's chosen lefties are getting the most votes. Damian Green, as the establishment fogie, was a good choice for the BBC to put up against Chakrabarty.
'Telegraph' (£):-
"The questions that have to be answered about our bloated BBC.
"Lavish pay-offs and a City bonus culture have tainted a corporation that belongs to us all."
By Peter Oborne.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/bbc/10286628/The-questions-that-have-to-be-answered-about-our-bloated-BBC.html
Sir Arthur Strebe-Grebling says:
Shock news! Ex-BBC man says there are too many foreigners.
Greg Dyke, ex-Director General of the bBBC, now Chairman of the Football Association, spoke of the "frightening trend" of the reduction in the number of English players in the Premier League.
Anybody tell me how Greg Dyke managed to get this gig?
Are we looking again at that Adam Crozierwho also managed to hop from a state run monopoly(The Post Office in his case) and onto the FA lilypad?
Something decidedly fishy going on up there…how the hell is Dyke able to speak about football or know of it?
God knows, he's not even a woman.
chrisH, once one has made the mandarin circuit, anything is possible, regardless of knowledge or aptitude. It's the new nobility.
Rufus McDufus says:
To be fair at least Dyke has a clue about organising a p*ss up in a brewery unlike Crozier. Dyke was definitely not BBC material.
AsISeeIt says:
Greg Dyke to cure the ills English football?
Let me guess…. England need to change the colour of their kit?
Is it hideously white?
I do hope he didn't say that the Premier League was hideously black, thats just not allowed…..
BBC bias by ommission of Council run by Labour – child grooming failings inquiry:
Rotherham Council, (63 Labour Councillors – 4 Conservatives 1, UKIP, 1 Independent).
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-23963761
No surprise here then.
Maybe if we demanded to know whether it was Shoesmith Labour or Michael Martin Labour that were in office when all this was going on, we might get somewhere.
These witchfinders that hunt down UKIP foster carers are all greedy Labour stickybeaks who are as thick as slag, and as greedy as Jonathan Ross..and about as moral and honest as Russell Brand.
Wonder if any of them knew Jimmy?…can`t imagine the BBC will be bothering to find out.
Note these scandals are all the work of Labour…a LABOUR Council mark you( in a Kincock voice!).
And still the chumps of Rotherham will vote for yet more of the same-maybe they deserve Sharia up there by way of a pilot project.
Gameshow Nicky Campbell this morning had a phone-in debate which was a conservative free zone.
Yes it was another in-house affair with Labour bods chatting nicely to one another about Trades Union funding.
Funny thing though… the amount of Lefty buzz word bingo!
Zero hours contracts…. bedroom tax….Margaret Thatcher….
I am already a political refugee from Radio 4. I fled to 5 Live and hoped to learn to live with dumbed down wannbes and sport. If this blatant politicking on behalf of Labour goes on I may have to seek asylum elsewhere. Perhaps Paul Mason will come down and do a piece for Newsnight on my sad plight?
First they came for the Radio 4 listeners, then the Radio 5 ones…..
Don't forget the kids….
Openly gay daytime Radio 1 jocks Nick Grimshaw and Scott Mills.
Not to mention the likes of Diplo, Benji B, Mista Jam, Robbo Ranx and Toddla T on 1xtra, god knows what our kids are being exposed to.
Uncle Mac they ain't , oh hang on……
David Brims says:
Uncle Mac a forerunner to Jimmy Savile
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/4624692/Pervert-outed-by-John-Simpson-was-the-voice-Toytown-fave-Larry-the-Lamb-Derek-McCulloch.html
I had to google 'Toddla T' just to be sure you weren't making it up!
Always funny when Mills talks about his 'flatmate'.
Big Dick says:
Don`t listen to any of that lefty shite on 4 or 5 , it does my f***ing head in ! Only listen to the brilliant Nick Ferrari !
John Anderson says:
LBC has a reasonable balance of presenters – deliberately choosing some of them from either side, while the mainstream presenters seem far more competent than anything on BBC radio.
So – "Talk Radio" is something that could easily be left to the market to sort out. A good case for closing down Radio 5 – its sports content could also be covered by the private sector.
Likewise there is no proper reason for Radio 1 and 2 and 6 – all their stuff is matched by private-sector capability. Regional radio should be left to the regional press, BBC's present regional radio damages the local press which is struggling for survival.
Radio Asian – the case for closure is obvious.
That leaves Radio 3 – for which a case could be made, it is less trite than Classic FM (but heading that way) and it does sponsor some original output. And Radio 4 – needs a damn good clear-up to get rid of the bias, but that might be feasible, especially if private-sector talk radio was more prominent.
Plus Radio 4 Extra. Like the curate's egg. Endless droning links by the likes of Arfa Smiff, and too many repeats of the trashy unfunny Radio 4 "comedy" programmes – but lots of enjoyable repeats of stuff from the days when BBC comedy was funny, and when drama was not political or environmental or multi-culti polemic.
Disagree re Radio 2, although it doesn't cater for the older listener as it once did and should, its become a Radio 1 lite.
No private sector station caters for the over 60ish music listener. Radio 6 is a waste of our money, only on DAB and too much like 1 & 2, Radio 1xtra again is a waste seemingly catering for gangsta rappers and other MOBO type stuff.
Radio's 1, 1Xtra and 6, are all offered by privateers and can go as can 5, and in their place just Radio 2 and Radio 2plus, plus for the older listener.
Radio 2 plus also having hourly local opt outs for local news and opt outs in the case of bad weather (hence get rid of local BBC stations) and sport like Radio 2 used to carry on an evening or Saturday.
Job done!
Because over 60s are just a bunch of boring old farts with all the wrong opinions.
….and the world will be a much better place when they are gone, or so those from The Left keep saying (and have said so on here before now).
Try TalkSport, I moved from BBC 4 & 5 to London but now mostly Talksport. I'm less indoctrinated by BBC brainwashing and my fantasy football team is going great guns!
Marsh says:
Talksport used to be a great station, but now it's awful. A little bit of broadcasting followed by 5 mins of adverts – repeat. Fact is, I have no where to go for unbiased, impartial news, especially here in Scotland. BBC Radio Scotland is possibly worse than 5L.
Leha says:
at least Talk sport is honest about what it is..
And yes Radio Scotland is just as dire as 5L
Just hope LBC gets a national DAB & Freeview slot eventually ,& a bit of licence fee grant ,like the new local city tv stations starting next year are getting.
DickMart says:
James Naughtie interview with Director of NAO on the universal credit system on Today this morning a classic textbook case of biased interviewing that happens so often on the BBC. I'm not saying that there aren't serious questions to be answered, but the way Naughtie conducted the interview was completely out of order. Closed questions, inviting the interviewee to agree with Naughtie's own opinions/conclusions ("don't you think that…?"), even on quasi-political judgements, which it would not be proper for the NAO as an impartial body to answer, and then Naughtie's comment that it was "appalling", which it may well be, but isn't that a judgement for listeners or other interviewees to make and not the BBC?
Yes. Amused that he introduced an IT expert by inviting him to talk about Government IT failures in the past 'few' years (few?)
I got the distinct impression though that Labour's Naughtie wasn't to keen to let the discussion spill on to what the expert said was the 'biggest' IT failure of them all – Labour's NHS patient records disaster.
no mention of the £100,000 Million (Likely to be double that in reality) wasted by the BBC on the digital archive project, which has probably led to someone stepping aside and at worst getting a huge payoff to reward such enterprise.
The Flokkers' engines must have seized from being stuck in the hangers for so long, but just to clarify, the amount flushed is pegged at £100M, plus a bit, yes. A fair few licences the BBC Trust is there to ensure best utilised.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-22651126
But they are vewy, vewy, sorwy.
Top comments interesting too.
I want a pint of whatever (absinthe?) Voice of reason is on…
This?:
23. voice of reason
25TH MAY 2013 – 0:45
Between 2010 and 2012, the project cost the corporation £98.4m
Thats over £110,000 per day for 720 days.
I simply wish I was on a contract in that period!
Or this?:
927. voice of reason
The Tories will happily pay £98,000,000 to retain the control of the BBC to trial out and ultimately scaremonger its policies through.
The war on "terrorism" for example. What a laugh!
A real shame that BBC has become political property
Oddly, the thread shut down immediately thereafter.
I wonder of Monday's PAC outing will even rate a mention from media or parliamentary parties?
As someone else has noted the NAO thing has been totally misrepresented and interpreted (accidentally on purpose presumably). That said, even if it has lost 34 million so far that is an ABSOLUTE BARGAIN compared to the multiple BILLIONS lost by New Labour. In fact in just two (of dozens) schemes they lost a total of 16 BBBBillion
….and the rest!
Energy Day BBC Radio 5 Live: 'we meet the family that had to sell their clothes to pay their energy bills'
As much as one would like to take this seriously….
One supposed expert contributer to this watermelon flavoured BBC funday says this: 'the poorest are paying the most for their energy – what kind of social justice is that?'
Where do I start? Well, how about basic economics…. I'm sorry to break this to you Beeboids but the less you buy of a thing the more you pay per item. That's fact. That's the way economic markets work. Oh wait…. your assumptions are Statist and Communistic? Well why didn't you Beeboids say that at the top of the show?
'the family that had to sell their clothes to pay their energy bills'
I know our energy bills and I know the amount and value of our family's clothing on the second hand market.
Unless this bunch were in the habit of sporting designer kit or Elton's cast-offs, I doubt what they'd get would boil a kettle.
I think I'm going back to bed. Today will be intolerable.
Radio 4 are misrepresenting a report by the NAO and a day of energy, global warming poverty activism on Five Live will be too much to bear.
Already the wind turbine loonies are being given a free ride. For their and Nicky Campbell's information, at the moment (at 08:40) they are contributing a piddling 394 mw of electricity, which is a useless 1.04% of the 37,524mw being generated / imported.
No doubt Harrabin will be along soon to tell us we are all going to fry.
Perhaps they enlisted the assistance of a BBC expert from one of the many "sell your junk" programmes which are such an essential part of the BBC's unique provision.
I agree with Guest Who. It simply doesn't ring true that a family would sell clothes to pay energy bills! Any one fancy a bit of critical thinking?
If money is short, then buy/wear MORE clothes and turn the (relatively expensive) heating down or off. Even very tatty clothes can still be patched up and worn around the house or in bed. They could also be used to reduce drafts from under doors and as cloth to mop up condensation. The utility value of the cloth will greatly exceed the monetary value from sale.
It's true. Here's the picture of the interview.
I'm always left agape at stories on the Biased Broadcaster on high energy bills, and the way they always leap to attack the energy companies.
They always seem to ignore the stealth taxes which the government have loaded onto lifes essentials and which have made the cost of living unaffordable for those on low incomes.
It's not easy to work out all the 'levies' on our fuel because they're seemingly a closely guarded secret, but here are a few:
Levies:
Feed in tariff for 'green' energy
Free insulation loft and cavity wall
Renewal of the National Grid
Warm Front discount for 'vulnerable' customers
Carbon levy
And that is not a comprehensive list!
Once you've had the privilege of paying all these you will find that they are all subject to VAT at 8% !
So next time you hear someone complaining about the cost of gas & electric, remind them about all the stealth taxes which have been loaded onto their bills.
It's the greedy politicians, not the 'greedy' energy companies !
I felt sorry for the guy from Wales who rang Gameshow, who was having trouble selling his house because of a proposed windfarm .
He had no chance of getting his message across faced with an audience (mob) loaded with activists and the self interested.
It was amazing having made his point how in an instant Gameshow was able to go to a woman who had seen the value of her house increase and how her fellow villagers loved the things. The sheer speed of the response sounded suspicious….as did the woman who was speaking in a 'personal capacity' but took the opportunity to have a go at fracking an fossil fuels.
Gameshow said beauty is in the eye of the beholder…no, Campbell it was in the eye of the activist.
What a dirty manipulative programme that was (and today is, on the BBC)
Yes, that suggest that they keep 'anti'agenda' calls off air until a rebuttal response is found then air the two things.
Thoughful, don't forget car tax/road tax or whatever it's called these days – gone through the roof for most cars because it's based on CO2 emissions. It's a very nice little earner for HM Gov., but not such good news if you are driving a car with the 'wrong' kind of engine.
Nail. On. Head. You won't ever see that BASIC FACT mentioned by the BBC. It would be tantamount to giving the game away.
The BBC have such a frail grasp of 'truth in reporting'.
Why didn`t they burn their clothes instead to keep warm , or is that a net contributor to Global Warming ! Nice weather , down south at the mo ,I just love GW , bring it on ! Pity the new Manchester HQ is in the north , all the muppets forced to work their now , will have to keep their heating on a lot longer during the year , how sad.
Don't ever believe what the BBC says about climate – even for Manchester (gorgeous summer's day today).
The PrangWizard of England says:
I worked in Manchester for 20 years, I lived in Hale. I now live down south, thank the Lord. The weather in and around Manchester is absolutely horrible, pity all the BBC isn't there.
Any mention of how much green energy policies contribute to higher prices?
I listened to the first minute of Princess Nikki's programme. The first person up was whingeing because there should be a solar panel on every roof in Britain (because we have money for wars but not for this, the usual leftist gripe about everything), followed by a German boffin who claimed that renewable power could fill all of our energy needs. Five Live got switched off at that point, which helped save a bit of power at any rate.
And presumably (because the BBC have impeccable form on this) the German boffin went unchallenged.
In other words, this is the BBC helping to guide the country towards an energy and therefore economic and social catastrophe through its misrepresentation of what can be achieved through 'renewables' i.e. becuse they never mention the inconvenient truth that we still need gas, coal and nuclear to provide standby for when the wind doesn't blow and the sun doesn't shine. It would be interesting to do a NOP to see what proportion of the population actually understand both this and how critical fracked gas is going to be for our energy security.
Isn't there any way the BBC can be sued for this abdication of a responsibility to 'inform'? Is there a lawyer in the house?
The Germans do know a lot about energy, though. After all, they own most of the power companies operating in the UK (Powergen, E.ON, npower…)
And they know coal does a much, much better job than wind and solar….
http://www.platts.com/latest-news/coal/london/analysis-german-4-gw-new-coal-plants-in-testing-26170384
'Five new coal-fired power plants in Germany with a combined capacity of around 4 GW have had their "first fire" over recent weeks and will be generating electricity in the hot testing phase over the next couple of months, according to a Platts survey of the five plant operators.'
Not that Campbell would mention it, of course, or even be aware of it in his little BBC eco-socialist renewable bubble.
Are those 4 plants ('planed a decade ago') in addition to these?
http://www.turn180.ie/?p=632
There has been a BBC TV News channel item running today which within 60 secs moves from an alarmist story on energy prices in the U.K, to the importance of 'renewables' as propagandised by someone in the industry.
There was no mention of the role of coal, oil or gas, despite a BBC Radio 5 survey which says this:-
"Some 67% of people said they would support more coal, oil and gas stations being built in the UK if it brought energy prices down."
Of course, there is no reference to how the BBC-NUJ, in supporting direct action against fracking and the development of shale gas, is assisting to keep energy bills high.
Luxury! When I were a lad we used to stand round t'candle to keep warm…and when it were even colder we lit it.
Aye, and livin in't ole in't grand, the bloody wind blew't art oll't tarm!
Anyone else noticed the Nazi Salute Assad supporters make while singing the national anthem?
http://tundratabloids.com/2013/01/assad-regime-forces-make-effort-to-recapture-suburb-of-damascus.html
http://spitfirelist.com/news/another-picture-worth-a-thousand-words/
This is Hezbollah:
http://www.trunews.com/hezbollah-if-assad-is-threatened-we-will-hit-israel/
And no comment about a fascist Islamic group adopting Nazi symbolism right next to Israel?
So Alan Hansen is hanging up his mic in 2014.
These Beeboids seem to have no tact, reportedly on £40k a week of our hard earn't BBC tax, "He relaxes in his Southport home" with a seemingly a garden the size of Epping Eorest behind him, they seem to love rubbing our noses in it, no shame….
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/10287266/Alan-Hansen-to-leave-Match-of-the-Day-next-summer-after-22-years-as-leading-BBC-pundit.html
LOL you think that's a big garden??
I imagine that Gary Lineker has an even larger one and he lives in the expensive South East, in Esher. Take a look at his home the one with the flat roof in the centre of the photo:
http://virtualglobetrotting.com/map/gary-linekers-house-1/view/?service=1
Southport is just too North West, and certainly far too close to Liverpool !
Still bigger than my postage stamp….!
"Look North" last night covered the closure of care homes by Leeds City Council. We should be thankful that the programme chose to go beyond the obvious Labour councillors/GMB representatives for interview, but the interviewee (charity/quango bod?) provided the inevitable line that it was all down to cutz by the evil Tory government. So far so good but it would have made a welcome change if our sympathetic Harry could have asked the guest to suggest where all the extra public money was to come from & to make explicit that they wanted out taxes to rise. They never get beyond the money grows on trees/ someone else will pay scenario
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leeds-23962947
hmmmm…back in February their budget was approved and included 18.6 million quid increase in spending on children's services and adult social care in the city.
I wonder what they COULD be cutting instead. Funnily enough the opendata Leed.gov.uk site is painfully bad at supplying nay data at all.
Exactly, SO. Whenever have you heard the BBC ask 'So what would you cut instead or do you think the country should keep on borrowing money to pay for stuff it can't afford?' Similarly with the NHS – there seems to be an assumption that as a country we are somehow entitled to world-beating, government-provided healthcare and 'living within your means' doesn't apply nationally.
But then, we all know why it is thus…….
Tory council improves services AND cuts council tax –
http://britain-today.blogspot.co.uk/2013/01/how-to-cut-public-spending-and-have.html
Will all end in tears says:
Have been listening to 5 Live's Energy Day for the past hour with Dame Nicky.
A loaded audience and guests resembling the best type from QT. We have the Green Party, Friends of the Earth, anti-frackers, solar panelists, wind turbine lovers, oh, and of course, Ed Davey (hahahahahahahaha).
There have been two, TWO voices suggesting that perhaps renewables are not all they're jacked up to be and these belonged to callers. There has been no attempt at balance whatsoever.
One of the most cringe worthy moments came when the Dame asked a "professor" what he thought of fracking. Didn't really need an answer. You could tell it was bad, bad, bad by the way prof just sniggered, followed by the Dame sniggering and then the requisite round of applause from the gathered acolytes.
A fuckin disgrace.
Yes, heard part of it and couldn't agree with you more. the worst case of bias I've heard from the BBC in a long time, and that's saying something. This specific example alone surely must be addressed by someone who has a strong public voice. It was absolutely disgusting. This is where David Vance should be making his voice heard.
At this point, Will, you should expect some kind of defence of this 1 in 3 BBC pitch (with enviro-fascism kicking downhill) from the likes of Albaman. But as with the majority of examples posted here, and given the alarming pop-upability of the beeb-backers on minor isses of accuracy, no answer indicates the bias is grudgingly accepted.
worst goddamn radio ever.
roll on FoxRadioUK.
amen to that sister
Beeboidal says:
Nicky weighed in early with a mention of renationalisation of the energy companies, a pipedream shared by many a lefty. Nicky doesn't seem to realise that the BBC's beloved EU requires that we maintain a free market in energy. Right at the end, a particpant gave a repeat of the 'people choosing to eat ot heat' mantra. Well Lord knows what's going on in Europe, because our gas prices compare favourably. Funny thing is, I'm not hearing anything of 'eat or heat' in Euroland from the BBC.
Ah yes, the good old days. I remember well in the '60s when we had a brick fireplace installed and required a gas poker to facilitate lighting the coal.. The Gas Board had the monopoly so we went to the gas showrooms in Portsmouth – but it was shut on Saturdays and Wednesday afternoons, plus closed for lunch, opened at 10 and shut at 5. Eventually we conformed to their hours of work and asked to see their range of connecting pipes to subtely blend in with the fireplace. We could choose from their range (as selected by dedicated public servants on our behalf) which comprised bright red, bright blue or bright green. How wonderful of them to do our thinking for us. I wonder why Monty Python lampooned them so much?
And don't get me started about the GPO!
For those not around back then, it stood for General Post Office and it controlled all communication, including telephones, with predictable results.
starfish says:
GPO and communication – not often found in the same sentence
Not to speak of the three months' wait for a telephone (as late as 1982). Anyone favouring renationalisation of anything must be mad, amnesiac, or too young to remember the appalling quality of service and lack of choice.
'Anyone favouring renationalisation of anything must be mad, amnesiac, or too young..'
I was going to suggest another category, but the first two at least do seem to cover the market rate floor of the BBC.
In the City of London the Post Office engineers made packets out of charging people to install telex machines quickly – there was a 9-month wait otherwise.
Oh – and there was only one standard model of telex machine.
Not to mention the bloody power workers strikes which they took in turns with the miners, dockers, car workers, railwaymen etc etc – a never-ending spiral of misery as they fought each other to get to the top of the pay tree.
Then that horrible Mrs Thatcher came along and spoilt the fun of eating a tin of cold baked beans by candlelight……
Yes you are right on electricity & gas , the Dame 7 his motley crew ,are pretty thick ,in that they don`t know it is verboten under eu rules to have no competition in the energy market . They are constantly worshiping at the temple of the EU , & Global Warming , & when those worlds collide , they are just so stupid , that they don`t know how to lie their way out of it. Somehow the French just ignore those rules totally, & the only company is the state owned EDF & GDF (for gas).
Did they discuss how four hectares of fracking could prroduce the same amount of energy as the UK's 3,000 wind-farmsnothoughtnot.
Derek Buxton says:
Just why are BBC "journalists" either so biased or just plain ignorant of that of which they speak? Over the last days there were two "News" items", so called. The first claimed that Norway had to obey all EU regulations but had no say in the framing of them. Since most regulations start some distance from the EU , they are only the messengers. Most sstart off at the UN or WTO and are passed down from there. The point is that Norway have a presence at those organisations, the top table if you will. We of course do not, the EU speaks for us, or rather the Camerloon party. Nrway also have the power of veto, as with fishing and the Postal Directive. The second set of lies concerned the energy supply, it is known that our government want us to reduce our energy usage and have opted to price as many as possible out of using it. This is again at the hands of a UN Article on sustainability, intended to drive the industrial Nations back to third world status. This is supposed to improve the lot of these third world Nations which it will not accomplish. Our using 5Mw less does not pit that amount into the third world, hence it is stupidity squares!
'Just why are BBC "journalists" either so biased or just plain ignorant of that of which they speak? '
Because there's nothing to prevent it.
Now they have deemed themselves off-limits to any inbound feedback, with the lawyers to enforce it, they can claim whatever they like, charge you for the privilege and hide behind an FOI exemption if challenged.
All that works is mockery.
Which, as I see Mr. Bacon's wind-up hour getting slaughtered across twitter by those who actually do know a bit about science, is proving pretty good entertainment.
Mr. Bacon's wind-up hour getting slaughtered across twitter
Lead me to the slaughter please, aka gotta link?
Meanwhile, some amusement with Richard and UKIP MEP Roger Helmer.
Bacon: Let's listen to Caroline Lucas, the Green Party MP…
Helmer: (laughs)
Bacon : …she was ( fake laugh)..you just laughed at her name. Why, why do you laugh at her name?
Gosh, let's not ever laugh at a greenie, Richard.
Helmer: I think that when a member of parliament isn't prepared to use the democratic process but is prepared to go out and break the law on the street, you know something has gone wrong in the system.
Bacon: She wasn't charged with anything.
Helmer: She was removed by the police….
Bacon: (interrupting) She wasn't charged with anything though.
Helmer: Well I don't know whether she was charged with anything. She…
Bacon: (interrupting) Well she wasn't, I'm telling you.
Helmer: She was removed by the police..
Bacon: (interrupting) But she wasn't charged with anything.
Helmer: She wouldn't have been removed by the police unless she was obstructing, um, the..
Bacon: (interrupting) But she's not been charged with breaking the law.
Helmer: Fair enough.
A spirited though monotonous defence of the eco-loon by Richard. Two points for Richard.
1) It is possible to break the law, get arrested and not get charged. No charge does not equal did not break the law.
2) 'She wasn't charged with anything' sounds all very final, done and dusted. This will be news to Lucas and especially to Sussex Police, who have bailed her until 25th September at which point she may or may not be charged.
A nice pwning of the rank and utter half-wit that is Boooooooom Bacon.
That the police might have better things to do with their time than fuel Lucas' vanity is beyond Bacon.
Mustapha Sheikup al-Beebi says:
Is Bacon halal ? Would he even be safe to eat for non-Muslims, given that there might be traces of "certain substances" in him? I think we should be told.
The risk would be from contracting BSE.
Bacon spongiform encephalopathy
Or CJD – Crap Journalist Disease.
Perhaps a cull is in order, with DEFRA imposing a standstill order on Hampstead Heath until the disease is eliminated.
I'd like to see that run against Lord Hall Hall claiming that what the public is really clamouring for is another floor of James Purnells.
With the money I'm saving on no more monthly TVL & SKY, I may look at Netflix, as I have the choice.
BBC-NUJ is making a documentary follow-up on Islamic jihad, or less specifically, in Beeboid-speak, on 'terrorism.'
The original was entitled: 'My Brother the Islamist', but the sequel's title is diluted to 'My Brother The Terrorist.'
"BBC 'Terrorist' documentary gets sequel"
The BBC 3 programme makers promise:-
"My Brother the Terrorist, will examine how British extremists become disconnected with society."
But will the programme, which should be entitled- 'My Brother The Islamic Jihadist'- examine how the tenets of Islam are used to fuel jihadism? Unlikely.
We'll have to wait till 2014 to find out. No breath being held.
'..will examine how British extremists become disconnected with society"
I'd have thought that was more accurately '..disconnected from reality', as trying to impose mass slaughter on innocents to make up for massive personal inadequacies hardly seems the path of the rational.
It assumes they were ever 'connected' in the first place, what with this being a multicultural country and all that.
Many may have been "connected" originally. That's what we were told about Nearly Innocent Tamerlain, the Boston Bomber, wasn't it? But this, like so much of BBC coverage of this issue, seems to take the position that these people become disconnected first, due to other factors, and only then do they turn to violent Islamic extremism, apparently almost at random. It's never that being exposed to extremist Islamist thinking bore any connection, as it were, to the disconnect process.
I'm surprised it isn't "My brother the militant".
Victim?
noggin says:
dis – connected? if they re connected to that cult, the cult is the word!.
if the bbc … REALLY WANT TO KNOW they could ask R Spencer … even bbc faves like imams, are second to him.
can't be that disconnected as they prob dont work and get state handouts.If they dont like the way WE live then they know what to do…….
BigT says:
Labour rep on the Radio…. 'England' should be in a position to offer asylum to between 250,000 and 500,000 Syrians. Plenty of room, rich country etc. …..
BBC numpthy agrees ……
Next .. why are the nasty Tories not providing enough school places for our over burdened schools…… (no connection made again about immigration and overburdened resources)
And this influx of Syrian asylum seekers will very likely take place now that the British will not be intervening militarily, at least overtly. Cameron, with the fragrant Sam whispering in his earhole, will be keen to compensate for our no-show at the Tomahawk war dance by boosting his humanitarian prowess & letting them in by the scores of thousands. He'll get to feel good about that, which is nice, although the upper echelon of the BBC will take some placating; there can never be enough immigrants/'migrants'. In the months ahead, we'll know the beeboid households, the houses of the 'holier than thou', by the flowery banners proclaiming 'Syrians welcome here!' And then pigs will fly into tall, glassy buildings. Narcissistic altruism, from a distance.
Last night on RT, a Swedish opposition politician, commenting on the government's offer of residency to all Syrian refugees made the point that they are not 'fleeing' to Sweden, they are 'travelling' to Sweden. He catalogued the problems his country already has with unassimilable immigrants, & how Swedes have had enough. Although it made the government ministers 'feel good about themselves'. He's got it.
"Goodbye, Sweden-That-Was"
http://gatesofvienna.net/2013/05/goodbye-sweden-that-was/
And Sweden today (not reported by INBBC online)-
Muhammad cartoonist Lars Vilks survives jihad murder attempt"
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2013/09/sweden-muhammad-cartoonist-lars-vilks-survives-jihad-murder-attempt.html
Thanks for cheering me up. Every European country is on a path to national suicide.
The propaganda for further mass immigration, this time from Syria, is under-way, and BBC-NUJ is joining in.
Then there are the millions of women under threat globally from Female Genital Mutilation.
Plus, the millions from Romania and Bulgaria, from January, 2014.
Plus the many more millions from Turkey, after E.U entry, which U.K political class (inc Beeboids) advocate.
Britain is being more rapidly colonised all the time.
Beeboids do not seem to care, or be aware of, the consequences of this political propaganda on British society.
I suspect they are all-too-aware, George. I think that's the whole point. The BBC has taken a deliberate position on the entire 'migration' (they are forbidden to use the 'immigration/immigrant' words) issue – which is resolutely in favour of swamping the UK with as much 'multiculturalism' as is possible. For as long as they are able to continue their unrelenting propaganda on the public airwaves to this effect, the policy will remain in full, catastrophic effect.
Yes, Beeboids certainly misuse the massive broadcasting power at their disposal to pursue their political agenda.
And a change of personnel at the BBC will not solve the problem.
Maybe a change of personnel in No Ten might help solve the problem, as Cameron is equally committed to the BBC objective. Should he deviate ever so slightly the Beeb will leap on him.
The bBC and how it defends the odious acts of Islamic terrorists
Indian diarist Sushmita Banerjee shot dead in Afghanistan
An Indian woman, who wrote a popular memoir about her escape from the Taliban, has been shot dead in Afghanistan by suspected militants, police say. Sushmita Banerjee, who was married to an Afghan businessman, was killed outside her home in Paktika province. The book about her dramatic escape in 1995 became a best-seller in India and was made into a Bollywood film in 2003.
Note how the bBC has inserted an adjective in front of the noun 'Militant' in which to act as damage limitation for those who murder who they can in order to Militise terrorise people. Of course as this is the bBC they then follow the above with this classic line:
"The Taliban have told the BBC they did not carry out the attack on Ms Banerjee.
Anybody else ever heard of a terrorist outfit with lots of blood on its hands ringing up the media in which to get its version across before the story has even aired. Me neither.
The bBC, the mouth piece for Islamic terrorism
'Anybody else ever heard of a terrorist outfit with lots of blood on its hands ringing up the media in which to get its version across before the story has even aired. Me neither.'
I have learned (see what I did there?) that the BBC's quaint habit of conflating what they wish with what actually is continues apace.
Hence Obama didn't say what he said, and those nice folk from the Taliban didn't do what they think people know they did. Honest.
All on the basis of telling it first and often enough. £4Bpa and a hand on the edit dial can help a fair bit there.
It goes back to trust, which The President, Taliban and of course the BBC have secured in spades of late.
Bedfellows indeed. Fleas included.
Perhaps the Taliban were keen to have a hotline to the BBC because they've heard of its world-renowned 'impartiality'.
http://tradingaswdr.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/unprocessed.html
Know what? As one of countless mega-hundred thou a year market rate screw-ups going through the BBC revolving doors, I'd probably take a few nasty looks as a pretty easy deal.
INBBC, Islamic ihadist murderer, and his Beard-
Two reports-
1.) 'Jihadwatch'-
"Fort Hood jihad mass murderer forcibly shaved in prison"
[Opening excerpt]:
"'Hasan said he grew the beard because his Muslim faith required it.'
"He also said he committed mass murder at Fort Hood because his Muslim faith required it. That's why he never should have been allowed to defy Army regulations by growing his beard in the first place."
(3 Sept).
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2013/09/fort-hood-jihad-mass-murderer-forcibly-shaved-in-prison.html
2.) INBBC:-
"Fort Hood gunman Nidal Hasan is forcibly shaven"
( 5 Sept).
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-23966193
Somebody actually said his Muslim faith required him to kill? Quick, tell Dez so he can claim it's not true and only racists think that.
Remember during the third presidential debate last year when the President mocked Romney for being "all over the map" on foreign policy, and a Cold War relic? Oh, how Mark Mardell laughed along with Him when He told Romney the 1980s were calling and they wanted their foreign policy back. Mardell, an experienced, well-paid, high-profile political analyst and veteran, world-class journalist, called it "depressing" that US foreign policy concerns were mostly about the Middle East, with barely a nod to China and nothing about his beloved Europe.
Well, guess who was right, and who got it wrong:
Putin warns Obama not to attack Syria without UN approval
Comparing evidence of Syrian chemical weapons use to intel on Iraq in 2003, in an interview with AP the Russian president threatens to supply advanced air-defense systems to Assad and elsewhere if America strikes.
And don't forget who's giving asylum to St. Edward. In other words, Romney was right, and the President and the BBC have been wrong. I guess Hillary's reset failed, and the President's caving flexibility on that missile agreement hasn't been much help either. And it's the President who has been all over the map on foreign policy. Not that the BBC would ever admit any of this.
Speaking of missiles
Hows that red line looking now I wonder?
That could trigger a Vietnam revulsion effect in the US. I seem to recall that it wasn't a Democrat who ended that war….over to you DP at GOP HQ…
Don't forget about the oil-rich strategic Aleutian Islands which Obamessiah has given to Russia in exchange for… nothing.
לשנה טובה to all those observing.
Unless I've missed something, the entirety of BBC output today acknowledging the existence of the Jewish New Year, the start of the High Holidays and the biggest turnout of Jews at prayer services around the world is a tweet from Anita Anand. There isn't even anything on the main Middle East or Religion pages.
What's the point of Jews/Zionists controlling the BBC if they can't even do a report about Jews around the world celebrating the New Year?
Out of Interest says:
"Unless I've missed something… The entirety of BBC output" Seriously. How would you know? You don't even live in the same country!
I see you're unable to address the point and have decided to play the man and not the ball.
Call a Waaaaaaaaaahmbulance! says:
Look. You made a statement that the "entirety" of BBC output didn't mention Jewish New Year. It would be hard to substantiate that at the best of times. But to monitor the "entirety" of BBC output from another country? That's not "playing the man" it's "pointing out the stupid"
Good thing you don't have to go find a mention of the Jewish New Year on the BBC website or check the Today running order or anything silly like that. Aren't you even a little embarrassed that the BBC doesn't even have anything on the Religion page?
"Good thing you don't have to go find a mention of the Jewish New Year on the BBC website "
http://www.bbc.co.uk/search/?q=jewish%20new%20year
News stories, information and programmes.
Can you use the BBC website search function in the US? Or is it disabled in some way?
Look David, you're one of the saner people still posting here. You leave and it's just racist old men, several fantasy accounts labelled "Pounce" and whatever GuestWho is on about. But stuff like this just damages your credibility.
flexdream says:
"You leave and it's just racist old men, several fantasy accounts labelled "Pounce" and whatever GuestWho is on about. But stuff like this just damages your credibility. "
The irony …
That said, he (a presumption on my part, based on a now familiar style), does currently have more 'likes'… and that is what counts for credibility these days.
But it's nice to be appreciated.
Yes, I used the search function. Either you don't understand what I'm talking about, or have decided to answer a different question on your own. The top three News stories don't count, because they're not specifically about the holiday. The radio segment for Sunday didn't show up in my search, so there's nothing I can say about that. Or perhaps it did and I misread. The rest of the results are either old, or a mention of the holiday amongst those of other religions on a festival calendar. It's a very poor showing, and nothing at all to do with my point.
Mohammedans get a fresh series of reports every year for their major holiday, so unless you have a population percentage rule to offer which explains that any group which falls below a certain portion of the population doesn't rate, I'd expect at least one lone "It's that time of year again" news brief, even if it's just a press release from Chabad House they stuck up for an hour or two.
Perhaps you didn't understand what I said. None of these is a new piece specifically acknowledging the holiday, on its own, outside of the context of some other story about the changing of the Rabbi or whatever. Where's a new piece – even one that cobbles together paragraphs from previous years – with photos of people celebrating or in prayer? Can't they even be bothered to whip up something showing nasty Jewish settlers preparing for the holiday? Hell, the top story in that search result could be taken as evidence that the President of Iran thinks the Jewish New Year is more important and more worth his time than the BBC does. And you want to talk about my credibility?
Attempts to flatter me by insulting other people will get you nowhere.
I suspect that's the last time he'll be posting (under that name, at least).
'You leave and it's just racist old men….'
Cheers, ageist young Islamophile.
I usually notice at least a thought for the day, a message from the Chief Rabbi or even the Blue Peter presenters mentioning Jewish New Year – this year – nothing.
Call a Waaaaaaaaambularnce! says:
Nothing on Blue Peter? Did you tune in to the BBC's Childrens' channel on Thursday especially to check?
And 1 like already for:
Call a Waaaaaaaaambularnce!
…as opposed to, earlier,…
Call a Waaaaaaaaaahmbulance!
Mathematically, the variations possible mean there's a better chance dealing with the Borg.
Blue Peter is your defense? Aren't you even a little embarrassed?
David, this is one of our regular "correspondents" posting under another name. They must have a handbook of names to use on a daily basis, similar to a daily password list. There's something very familiar about the tone of "Out of Interest"'s post. Wasn't it a post from "James Stables" that tried to disqualify your views about the BBC because "you don't live in Britain"?
I thought that ,but was that stables or some other 'non-de plume'?
''non-de plume'?'
I see what you did there:)
I've been on the receiving end of such geographical bigotry on many occasions, Andy. It's a recurring theme only because it's lowest possible hanging fruit, not because it's the same person doing it each time.
Blimey, they decide come back with a bang, and it's a twofer.
Shame their grenades rolled back into their own bunker.
Alan Larocka says:
Contrast this with the constant Ramadan shit we were fed on both BBC & C4
The problems of mass immigration for British people, cont'd.
In discussing problems of British economy, Beeboids do not mention immigration usually.
Here's some basic economics and arithmetic:
"What use is a GDP recovery if living standards are stagnant?"
By Fraser Nelson.
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2013/09/what-use-is-gdp-going-up-if-wages-are-going-down/
[Excerpt]:-
"Crucially, immigration is a factor in Britain. It wasn't so long ago that Osborne's Treasury was saying that GDP per capita, rather than the headline GDP figures given by the OECD et al, was the more important metric. But this basis, the recovery simply does not exist."
Go to 2nd table down in article: -GDP per capita-
http://cdn2.spectator.co.uk/wp-content/blogs.dir/11/files/2013/09/GDP-Per-Capita.png
Living proof, if it were needed, that the redistributionist agenda of The Left, driven mainly through mass immigration, is working. The pie grows, but your slice of the pie stays the same or even shrinks, because there are more people sharing it plus there are still the same number of unemployed needing state support.
Funny how the Muslim extremist supporting BBC will try and get into the 'mindset' of Muslim terrorist scum in some pathetic, trendy attempt at being 'intellectual' but yet will have zero dealings with BNP/EDL.


The EHang 184 drone, which carries a single passenger on short journeys, will be tested in Nevada.
The EHang can travel at about 60mph for 23 minutes on battery power.
A drone taxi that can carry a passenger has been cleared for take-off over Nevada.
The EHang 184 pilotless passenger drone carries a single person and has been approved for testing this year in the US.
The Chinese-Built drone stole technology trade show CES 2016 in Las Vegas in January, and it won't have to go far from sin city for tests. The Nevada Institute for Autonomous Systems (NIAS) and the Governor's Office of Economic Development (GOED) have given the green light for the vehicle to take to the skies over the state, with an eye to full approval by the Federal Aviation Authority (FAA).


IICD assists CEOs, presidents, directors, and commissioners in a two-tier board structure in implementing corporate-governance reform, which is targeted at improving international competitiveness and aligning corporate practices with global standards in a free and open economy.
The lack of available institutions that concentrate on corporate directorship in Indonesia.
The need to stimulate awareness within the corporate level on the importance of corporate governance in Indonesia.
The need to improve the local quality standards of corporate governance practices that are globally recognizable.
- To improve skills, knowledge, and ability to accelerate good corporate governance.


As I'm working on getting back into the groove of teaching aerial silks again, I've been spending a lot of time getting re-acquainted with skills and my old bag of tricks and tips I used to religiously preach to my students in class. During some of my movement studies these past few days, I have noticed that knack for picking out particular body alignment issues has reached a heightened sensitivity once again. I've greatly attributed my ability to pick out particular movement issues to having to learn everything myself from the self taught pole dancer YouTube generation before there was the existence of pole studios and pole instructors as well as my assessment skills I was trained to develop from being a nurse.
Some of the classic movement mistakes I see students make can easily be corrected. I wanted to share a few of the common mistakes with my readers so they too can focus on incorporating these tips into their practice.
1. Sunken chest. I see this a lot in floor work. The shoulders are rounded and the upper back muscles are not engaged. While this is a natural state to want to round the shoulders, it is not an aesthetically pleasing posture and leads to you missing out on working those abdominal muscles in the movement to achieve your desired affect. While pole work can be fun, it's also a workout and you want to reap the benefits of each and every single movement.
2. Flexed feet in the climb. The points of contact in the basic pole climb include the knees and ankles. Most people will default to strong arming their climbs and neglect the use of their legs which results in over and unnecessary use of the tops of the feet. I have always taught the climb as being 90% legs and 10% arms. When the leg contact points aren't properly engaged, it leads to using the top of the foot, particularly the foot behind the pole, which creates a flexed foot. The flexed foot is bearing weight. In a proper climb, the knees and ankles are taking the weight which allows both feet to point for clean line approach to the climb.
3. Micro knee bends in straight leg inverts. The micro bends in the knees during inversions are the body's way of telling you that your abdominal muscles are not quite strong enough or are not properly engaged when performing this skill. Focus on engaging the abdominal muscles prior to inverting or working on ground abdominal conditioning exercises to better prep your muscles for completing this skill.


text:
Крите́рій Ло́усона — умова виникнення термоядерної реакції, що самопідтримується, або умова запалення термоядерної реакції. Вперше сформульований у науковій статті британським фізиком Джоном Девідом Лоусоном у 1957 році.

Формулювання
Аби термоядерний синтез став джерелом енергії, добуток густини частинок та часу їх утримання на гранично близькій відстані одна від одної повинен перевищувати певну величину.

Фізичні передумови
Умова існування реакції синтезу полягає в тому, щоб виділена енергія перевищувала енергію, що виноситься з плазми електромагнітним і корпускулярним випромінюванням. При рівності цих величин реакція синтезу протікатиме, але надлишок енергії для корисного використання створений не буде.

Цю умову можна записати у вигляді: nτ ≥ L(T), де n — густина високотемпературної плазми; τ — середній час утримання плазми в активній зоні реактора; L(T) — коефіцієнт Лоусона.

Функція температури L(T) залежить від типу використовуваного термоядерного палива: чистого дейтерію чи рівнокопонентної суміші дейтерію з тритієм.

Критерій Лоусона визначає мінімальну частоту реакцій синтезу на секунду, яка необхідна для стійкої підтримки реакції в матеріальному середовищі. Штучного синтезу можна досягти або завдяки створенню надзвичайно високої густини частинок, що взаємодіють (і як наслідок, підвищення до потрібного рівня ймовірності їх зіткнення), або завдяки тривалішого утримання частинок на гранично малій відстані одна від одної (тим самим, даючи частинкам більше часу для вступання в реакцію). Виходить, що аби термоядерний синтез почав виробляти енергію, повинна бути збережена умова:
Nt > ~ 1020,
де N — концентрація частинок (число частинок на кубометр об'єму), а t — час (в секундах).

Це і є критерієм Лоусона, що визначає умови для початку керованої реакції термоядерного синтезу. Його зміст полягає в тому, що по досягненні температури запуску реакції необхідний компроміс між концентрацією (або густиною) частинок та часом їх утримання в об'ємі, що забезпечує цю густину. Можна розпалити термоядерний синтез при меншій концентрації частинок завдяки тривалішому утриманню плазми, а можна — при меншому часі утримання плазми завдяки підвищенню густини частинок у ній.

Примітки

Джерела
 Сивухин Д.В. Общий курс физики. Том V. Атомная и ядерная физика.
 Lawson J. D., Some criteria for a power producing thermonuclear reactor, "Proc. of the Phys. Soc., Sec. B", 1957, v. 70, pt. 1, p. 6
 Пистунович В. И., Некоторые задачи токамака с инжекцией быстрых нейтралов, "Физика плазмы". 1976. т. 2, в. 1, с. 3
 Jassby, D. L. Neutral-beam-driven Tokamak  fusion reactors. Nuclear Fusion, vol. 17, Apr. 1977, p. 309-365.

Посилання
 Елементи великої науки: Критерій Лоусона
 Енциклопедія фізики та техніки: Критерій Лоусона

Див. також
 Коефіцієнт відтворення термоядерної енергії

Керований термоядерний синтез

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaWikipedia