Click to get your own widget

Friday, May 30, 2014

Brian's Big "Debate" Today

 Was held in Townhead "Village Hall". This one was specifically about the reverendum (16 weeks to go). The total audience was about 35, which is poor, though no schoolkids. On the panel were

- Patrick Harvie, Green leader (* coincidentally on during the April edition previously described, and also previously described by me as "a permanent fixture on the BBC")
- James  Dornan, SNP

V

- Annabelle Goldie, Tory and previously party leader
- Jim Murphy, Labour (impressive - he has mastered sincerity and displays it as effectively as he did the spot of blood in the middle of his white shirt after the Clutha bar tragedy)

4 questions during which I was able to answer twice as was Robert Malyn, Glasgow branch chair.

1 - "Who should we believe when the figures the Yes and No camps produce are so far apart."  Obviously everybody said me, what else can they? However Harvie somewhat weakened my question to him by getting in his admission first. Dornan had said their growth figures were credible. Harvie then said it wasn't about growth or economic success but equality, greenery etc. When I got chosen I pointed out that Harvie had said in a TV debate that "nobody should vote for independence on the grounds that it would produce growth, indeed that he didn't expect any growth" and that Nicola Sturgeon, on stage with him, hadn't disagreed. Would these 2 lie to tell us which it was, since it is difficult to accept their position until we know what it is.

Brian then took several other questions and in the shuffle mine went unanswered, which is answer enough.

2 - "Can Scotland be viable without oil" - Murphy wisely answered that of course we would be viable, just poorer. Harvie said we must stop burning oil because of "catastrophic" warming.

I put up my hand and got called & said "As a supporter of UKIP I do not believe in the catastrophic warming Mr Harvie warns us of. This is supported by the fact that there has been no warming at all, let alone catastrophic warming since 1998. However, be that as it may, because of the shale gas revolution, we must expect oil prices to fall. There is as much shale available in Britain as to match our oil. One thing we can be sure of is that if the SNP or Greens had been in power when north sea oil was found it would still be in the ground. Again nobody answered it.

Robert also stated from personal experience of living in Ireland in 1990s and 2000s during the boom, that Ireland generally since Independence in 1922 has been an economic basket case and various public services e.g. health service, Public Service TV, and Transport Infrastructure roads / rail etc were pretty poor in comparison to the UK in General and Scotland in particular.

3 - "What about the pulling of cinema ads" - a light hearted bit in which people said which films they didn't like. I wanted to point out that this may show the people to be less interested in the referendum than the political classes and it would be dreadful if the vote, either way, went 51:49 on a 40% turnout. I wasn't asked.

4 - "Do we need Trident in a post cold war world" - Quite a lot of sensible points were made on all sides, mainly on the principle of keeping it. I didn't try too hard because I really don't know what the proper answer is. If I had been taken I would have said something about it being a token on both sides since there is no possibility of Britain actually using our nukes except as part of a general NATO action.

Robert got to point out the incongruity of those wanting to cancel our nukes on financial grounds while we give foreign aid to those investing in their own ones (ie Pakistan). 

Labels: , ,


Saturday, May 17, 2014

Dalgety Bay Scare Raises Its Ugly & Fraudulent Head again

  Newspaper letter sent out a few days ago. That the entirely false Dalgety Bay radiation scare is promoted by SEPA and the BBC, is scandalous. The rest of the media are not willing to allow serious reporting of the facts either:

Sir,
       Once again we see the Dalgety Bay scare story being hawked around by the most scaremongering, and least reliable, parts of the media (that would be the BBC & Guardian). 
 
       The facts are that not only is there zero evidence of any harm whatsoever.
   
      Worse SEPA (nor indeed anybody else) have even attempted to deny that the very maximum radium that could have been put on that site 65 years ago was 0.25 grams, one quarter of what is there naturally and 36 billion times less than the 9 tonnes of uranium and thorium in a normal square mile of soil)
 
      Which is why SEPA have known but kept silent that the radiation at Dalgety Bay, all perfectly natural, is over 1/3rd lower than found, equally naturally, in any Aberdeen street.
 
      Rather worse that, though SEPA have publicly claimed to have found "the daughter elements of radium" as part of their collection of rocks there is only 1 such element, Radon gas, which, being an unreactive gas, could not possibly be a rock.
 
      This scare may have provided years of gainful employment to government "environmental officers" but it has cost the taxpayer many millions of £s and by planning blight, cost homeowners in Dalgety Bay at least as much. All for a scare which any honest scientist knows to be false.
 
      If it were not the Ruhr, over which a thousand times as many, with miniscule amounts of radium containing paints, were destroyed, would have been uninhabited ever since.
 
Neil Craig
 
Ref - the theoretical maximum exposure http://a-place-to-stand.blogspot.co.uk/2012/02/dalgety-bay-what-is-theoretical-maximum.html
a range of articles on the subject, none disputed by SEPA http://a-place-to-stand.blogspot.co.uk/search/label/Dalgety%20Bay

Labels: , ,


Friday, May 16, 2014

"The Sun Has Got His Hat On" Is Not An Inspiration To Racism

    In my younger days the BBC denied that Radio 1 censored the more racy records "we just don't play them". No such hypocrisy now - they not only ban such filth they fire the DJ who, not having sensitive enough political antennae, played it.

"A veteran BBC local radio DJ has lost his job after playing a song on his golden oldies show containing a racist word.

BBC Radio Devon DJ David Lowe, 68, said he was unaware that a 1932 version of The Sun Has Got His Hat On included the n-word."

   Here are the lyrics but, since I am a moderate fellow I have replaced the word:

Joy bells are ringing,
The songs birds are singing,
And ev'ryone's happy and gay.
Dull days are over,
We'll soon be in clover,
So pack all your troubles away.

The sun has got his hat on
Hip-hip-hip-hooray!
The sun has got his hat on,
He's coming out today.

Now we'll all be happy,
Hip-hip-hip-hooray!
The sun has got his hat on,
And he's coming out today.

He's tanning gender non-specific persons of colour out in Timbuctoo,
Now he's coming back to do the same for you.
So jump into your sunbath
Hip-hip-hip-hooray!
The sun has got his hat on,
And he's coming out today.
Never saw the grass so green
Never saw the sky so blue
What a lot of fun to ev'ryone,
Sitting in the sun all day.

All the little boys excited,
All the little girls delighted,
What a lot of fun to ev'ryone,
Sitting in the sun all day.

Now we all be happy
Hip-hip-hip-hooray!
The sun has got his hat on,
And he's coming out today.

He's been roastin peanuts out in Timbuctoo
Now he's coming back to do the same for you.
So jump into your sunbath
Hip-hip-hip-hooray!
The sun has got his hat on,
And he's coming out today.

     I note that the archaic use of the word "gay" to mean cheerful, has not yet become entirely offensive, or the term "coming out".

     Firstly it is obvious that it is not intended to be offensive. Indeed the "message" is one of us and the inhabitants of Timbuktoo being all "one under the sun" I do not see any possible way listening to these lyrics could turn one into a drooling racist.

     Indeed racism clearly has nothing to do with it. What we are seeing, as I said in a previous post about gay "marriage" is the redefining of language to make dissent more difficult, as described in Orwell's 1984, combined with an attempt to destroy our knowledge of history.

   I am not saying these lyrics are art, or even anything other than rather silly, but they are a sign that the words and values we used to hold are, in many cases, rather different than today's (and not so long ago - I remember Tony Blackburn or DLT or somebody equally innocuous, used to play it on radio). That different cultures, including our own, were different, is an important fact, without which it is impossible to judge the here and now. Also they are, like the smoking ban and gay "marriage", the Politically Correct proving they are completely in charge, by enforcing something obviously stupid and pointless and making it stick.

    And even a BBC employee shouldn't be fired "pour encourager les autres" on such a ridiculous excuse.







 

Labels: , ,


Tuesday, April 29, 2014

BBC Head Of Censorship Says Censor To Promote Our lie

  This was on Andrew Montford's blog Bishop Hill some time ago (a Scottish blogger who is one of the world's leading sites on the "catastrophic global warming" fraud):

 -----------------------
In his Mail on Sunday article today (keep scrolling) David Rose reveals that the BBC - at least in Scotland - has a new policy of protecting climatologists from challenge on air.
A BBC executive in charge of editorial standards has ordered programme editors not to broadcast debates between climate scientists and global warming sceptics. 
Alasdair MacLeod claimed that such discussions amount to ‘false balance’ and breach an undertaking to the Corporation’s watchdog, the BBC Trust. 
Mr MacLeod, head of editorial standards and compliance for BBC Scotland, sent an email on  February 27 to 18 senior producers and editors, which has been obtained by The Mail on Sunday. 
It reads: ‘When covering climate change stories, we should not run debates / discussions directly between scientists and sceptics.
If dissenters from the climate consensus are not to be allowed to put their case directly, there is presumably little point in having those arguments put by BBC interviewers. So from now on the pronouncements of climatologists will be treated as holy writ and the most alarmist scientists can be allowed to scaremonger without fear of contradiction.
----------------------------------------------------------

      "Head of Editorial Standards and Compliance" can barely even be described as a euphemism for "Head of the Censorship Department".

      The BBC Charter does specifically make it a legal requirement that they report impartially and with "balance". The very existence of a Censorship Department proves that they are engaged in extensive and illegal censorship, and have no worries about being brought to account for their illegalities.

      The existence of a department large enough to require a Head, let alone a regional Head, simply to provide instructions on what must be censored means the amount of across the board censorship at the BBC must be massive.
-------------------------------------------------
     
      Another example, from the same site some days later would be the extensive BBC coverage of the possible poisoning of 6 birds (I have also heard the same news being gone over again yesterday) while the fact that windfarms in Scotland kill in the high thousands of birds a year, goes entirely censored.

     Since this is roughly 1,000 times more it would clearly be impossible for the BBC to give equal coverage to both news items unless it were no more than 1/1000th honest (ie 99.9% corrupt).

    By not reporting the windmill news at all they have clearly proven they do not aspire to even that level of integrity. Because the 28 Gate fraud became public we know that across all departments, the BBC have been aware, for a proven 7 years, that the warming story is, at least in large measure, fraudulent. There can therefore be no possible suggestion that any of these 99.9%+ corrupt totalitarian liars have any excuse or that any other state owned broadcaster anywhere in the world is as dishonest as our the BBC. 

Labels: , , ,


Sunday, March 30, 2014

Because UKIP Is Censored Some Of The Clearest Arguments Against Separation Are Also Being Censored

   Letter sent to all and sundry. When it isn't published I will cut it & send it out again, several times. That will mean something close to 200 submissions. Statistically that would guarantee publication if our media were interested in balanced letter pages.
---------------------------------------------
Sir,
     At his Scottish conference, LibDem leader Nick Clegg has said how important it is that the Unionist parties work together to defeat the separation referendum. Liberals, Labour and Conservative. There is obviously something missing from this spirit of togetherness – any willingness to work with the 3rd party in British politics UKIP (4th in Scotland, but still ahead of Clegg’s own & likely to take 1st place in the EU elections).
 
      I attended a debate hosted by a leftist charity where the 3 approved parties spoke but from which UKIP was censored. The audience vote showed the approved parties lost heavily. This failure was all the more unnecessary since all the “nationalist” speakers, even from the SNP, were antagonistic to nationalism. All based their pitches on the, in my view, unrealistic expectation that separation would make us independent of the laws of arithmetic and able to make enormous financial commitments without raising any money. One speaker even acknowledged, in response to my question, that he would be happy to see us in permanent recession as long as their shibboleths were satisfied. It should not have been difficult to win that debate.

      By comparison, last year UKIP’s leader Mike Scott-Hayward, candidate Stuart Maskell and I stood, without preparation, in debate against Yes campaigners (the traditional party representatives all pulled out at the last moment) and won convincingly.

      Part of it is that some of the most clear-cut arguments involve the EU. If Scotland were to join as a new nation we would, at best, get the basic new nation terms. This means we would lose our share of Britain’s rebate (£500 million); would have to sign the Shengen immigration terms, meaning border posts at Gretna; agree to eventually joining the Euro; and sign up to the working time agreements which, going by the far worse continental employment figures, would destroy 170,000 jobs. However, because the traditional parties are EU enthusiasts they are clearly reluctant to mention this, and do not appear to have their hearts in the fight at all.

     By excluding UKIP, for party political reasons, they (& the BBC whose censorship of UKIP in Scotland would have done the Soviets proud) are preventing Scots having a full and rounded debate. This is what happened in the AV referendum where the LibDems refused UKIP’s assistance, deciding to depend on the popularity of Clegg – and lost despite the polls starting in their favour. If Britain is destroyed and Scotland plunged into financial disaster under incompetent politicians who think wishing will make it so (& who have already threatened to repudiate the national debt, something no sensible chancellor ever merely threatens to do) it will not be because the extreme “socialists” and a declining covering of nationalists, have won the debate. It will be because the LabConDems & BBC have ensured  Scots have not had a real debate. From experience both Clegg and I can confirm that those presenting the UKIP view can win in debate whenever we are not censored out of it. We can win the debate on whether Britain should have a future if we are not censored and Scotland’s future is too important an issue for it to be settled by party interests.
 
Neil Craig    

Labels: , ,


Saturday, March 08, 2014

BBC, Joseph Goebbels & Vince Cable

“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.” Joseph Goebbels

      Which is why the BBC, not any of the parties from the Greens through to the BNP, is the greatest threat to democracy and freedom in Britain. The BBC, despite a legal duty in its Charter to "balance" is provably more than 99% corruptly lying and censoring in the cause of totalitarian fascism, government parasitism, war crimes and on occasion racial murder, child rape, genocide and worse.
    
   They don't even attempt to deny that. And because the broadcasting regulator uses them as a template and the press do to (being dependent on the state for much advertising money, without which they are bankrupt) our entire mainstream media are as corrupt as almost anywhere in the world.

     Thank Ghod for the internet.

     The corollary is "lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie" - that is to say that if the BBC totalitarian monopoly were ended and we had free media able to allow the truth equal debating time, the entire corrupt political structure could not long survive. Free media will unleash the greatest enemy of our corrupt politics.

-------------------------------
    This was brought up by an EU Referendum discussion of Vince Cable denouncing the Tories for now, at least officially, promising a referendum. This being the same Mr Cable who, like all his equally corrupt LD colleagues, went into the last election with a manifesto promise of an EU referendum (applied as a sop because they had immediately broken their manifesto promise of an EU referendum for the Lisbon Treaty). To demonstrate the highest LD standard of integrity he and they immediately broke that promise too and are getting away with the media airbrushing it out of existence,

Labels: , ,


Friday, February 21, 2014

In The Audience Of Brian's Big Politically Approved Multi-Person Lecture

  Was on Radio Scotland today 12-1.00pm.

It's actually called "Brian's Big Debate" but a debate is something where both sides of an argument get to speak, indeed get equal time to speak & the BBC don't do debates.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b03vd2yh   link

5 guests from Labour, SNP, Tory & from Unite (the government employees union that, at least officially, is the main funder of the totalitarian PR group HnH) & a comedian (all comedians are actively left wing political correctitudes according to the BBC - Jim Davidson, for example, isn't a popular comedian).

While UKIP are almost entirely censored from the state owned BBC we have had an effect - the Greens, who were virtually a permanent fixture are not so blatanly supported and since Cowdenbeath made us the 4th party, the LibDems seem to be missing too. How long till we beat theTories and approved political discussion is limited to 2 parties.

There were 4 questions,on 3 of which I got to speak. Having been in this audience several times before I guess i am getting how to get to speak. Put up your hand, HIGH AND KEEP IT UP EVEN, OR PARTICULALRY WHEN YOU ARE IGNORED AND KEEP SPEAKING.

Audience must have been a couple of hundred - the show was sponsored by the Glasgow Business Council and there were more business suits than normal (& no classes of schoolkids) but most of the questions came from a fairly small number of people, as normal.

-----------------------------------------

1 - About the Ukraine fighting - all panelists said the expected cliches. I was first to speak & said

"The western role in the Ukraining conflict isn't widely reported. The US assistant secretray of state, Victoria Nuland, was caught giving the Ukrainian rebel leaders their literal marching orders - you can find the tape online but it doesn't get much coverage in the approved media.

The reason she can do this is because "non-"governmental organisations, which are all funded by western governments, are supplying the rebels with $20 million a week and a significant amount of arms.

If somebody was to pay Rangers or Celtic supporters groups a $1 million democracy awareness raising grant to occupy George Square, George Square would be occupied.(laugh)


( At this point Brian said lets move on but I kept speaking and what i said went out)
The only reason anybody in Ukraine wants to join the EU is because they could migrate. If the British people are not comfortable with 30 million Romanians and Bulgarians being able to come it unlikely they will be happier with 50 million Ukrainians."

------------------------------------------

2 - Was about celebrity endorsements of the refereendum campaign (Bowie having just done so). Which gave the panel the opportunity to work Bowie song titles into their answers. put up my hand intending to say "Showbiz people say politics is showbiz for ugly people so I suppose that means showbiz is politics for shallow people so their endorsements aren't very important" which would have raised a laugh & makes the point that politics is important, but is hardly profound. I didn't keep my hand up and wasn't chosen to speak.

------------------------------------------

3 - Should the SNP come up with a plan B for our currency. Brian poinred to me and said "that man at the back with his hand up", several rows behind me.

Shortly after he chose the person directly in front of me.

Then 2 places tomy left.

Then the one sitting on my right hand. Then me.

"You can't become a member of a club that doesn't want you. Doesn't matter if you think you qualify. I happen to think Osbornes 4 conditions for it wise for England to share liability with us are reasonable (these 4 conditions have barely got a media mention), but either way we can't if they won't let us. The SNP are just embarrassing themselves by not saying what their alternatives are.

Incidentally I disagree with the lady who said giving a Plan B (audience member 2 minutes before) would weaken the case for plan A. If you want to negotiate you need an alternative otherwise youn have nothing to negotiate with."

--------------------------------------------

4 - Asking if the panel would like to live on benefits. (near the end one of the panel said to the lady asking it "I've had dinner at your hoose, it was great" which suggests she was not simply a member of the public but an activist, and probably not living on benefits - the question is very of the unanswerable "have you stopped beating your wife" sort and indeed the lady near the end pointed out that it hadn't been answered)

Indeed I didn't answer it. I said

"A major cost to those in poverty is electricity. We have over 1 million Scots households in fuel poverty with avergage bills of nearly £1,500 but it is intended to raise this to £3,000 by 2020.

If ANY of the approved parties actuall cared about poverty they would be working to reduce prices...... (Brian said thank you we've got to move on and this time the microphone was removed. To be fair it was near the end of the programme. This meant I dodn't get the chance to say on air)....... but only UKIP want to reduce prices. Even ed Miliband, with his cynical and destructive promise of a short term freeze, is on record as saying he wants higher electricity prices. In fact we know that at least 90% of electricity prices are various sorts of government parasitism and all of these parties are actively trying to increase them."

--------------------------------

All in all as good as one can expect on a broadcaster that censors dissent as heavily as the BBC.

Labels: , ,


Sunday, February 16, 2014

Sochi The $50 Billion Olympics

   We hardly seem to gear about these games without the $50 bn pricetag being mentioned. Usually with the implication or outright claim that it is all going into Putin and his friend's pockets. So is it:

 Although few stories mention it, the source of that estimate was Dmitry Kozak, a deputy prime minister who headed Russia’s Olympic preparatory commission, which was charged with supervising the work in Sochi. Last February, Kozak told reporters in Moscow that Russia was prepared to invest 1.5 trillion rubles in Sochi, which was the equivalent of $50 billion.

But like most large round numbers, this one needs a few caveats and asterisks.....estimating the cost of the Games depends on how, and what, is counted.

Kozak said that the Russian government would spend $6.7 billion on Olympic facilities. He said Russia would invest another $16.7 billion in upgrading rails, roads and other infrastructure surrounding Sochi. That comes to $23.4 billion in 2013 money — massive, but not even halfway to $50 billion.

The rest of his projection included private, speculative investment by Olympic sponsors, including billionaire friends of Russian President Vladi­mir Putin. Russia hopes the Olympic stimulus will turn the Sochi area into a year-round tourist magnet long after the Olympics are over, and it encouraged investment in hotels and other facilities in the region.

But not all of this spending was directly related to the Olympics, such as the construction of a Formula One racetrack in Sochi that reportedly cost $350 million. And as Kozak noted, some of this money would have been spent by public and private sources without the Olympics.

     So $6.7bn - just over £4bn - for the actual facilities. Hardly extortionate compared to our £2bn £9bn £14bn £20bn. The rest looks like sensible commercial spending on not just building a new town but a spectacular on designed to be a one of the world's big holiday resorts. I don't know how much it would cost to build Benidorm in one go but I suspect it would be of that order.

    It certainly seems unlikely that the billionaires are investing $26.6 bn in the expectation it will disappear into fraud - that is not how you become a billionaire.

    If you are going to invest in building a holiday centre can you think of a better way of getting it the publicity that distinguishes good from world class than hanging it round an Olympics.

    But mentioning that doesn't fit the agenda of our state owned censoring media who want to ramp up fear and hatred of the Russians for having an undemocratic government (much more democratic support than ours) with a state owned censoring media (mostly less state owned than us and with legal rights for small parties to get coverage*).

* Granted we also have a legal right, as part of the BBC Charter, that our state owned broadcasters must get "balanced" coverage proportional to their support - its just that the law is worthless if those in charge ignore it.   

Labels: , ,


Wednesday, February 12, 2014

Labour Sock Puppet Is A Nationalist Thug - Our Ruling Cartel In Action

   Yesterday's letter, not published so far, contained a mention of the thousands of "political activists" in Scotland who are actually paid by qangos and "charities" which turn out to be state funded fronts.

    The extent of state funding of apparent opposition groups and jobs for the boys qangos is one of the most important of the many things you aren't going to see reported on the state funded BBC and most of the press.

     It also means we get to pay an enormous amount. UKIP previously calculated that useless qangos we could get rid of without damage cost the UK £60 bn. On a population basis, after adding 25% because everything government does costs 25% more here, that means Scots are paying an extra £6,400 million a year.

       But worse is the way it corrupts political life.

      And by happy accident the Scottish Daily Mail have come up with this scoop (or story the more approved papers simply won't publish) about a Fascist street thug who turns out to be a government paid Fascist street thug.
==============================

The extremist hired by four councils to promote youth vote
Taxpayers foot bill for nationalist rabble-rouser
By Alan Roden
Scottish Political Editor
Scottish Daily Mail
Tuesday, 11 February 2014, p. 7.
 
A RADICAL pro-independence campaigner who believes Britain is a 'degenerate' country with a 'bloodstained' flag has been given taxpayers' cash to encourage teenagers to vote in the referendum.
 
Left-wing firebrand Liam O'Hare, who was involved in an unsavoury demonstration against UKIP leader Nigel Farage, has been hired to visit schools, colleges and universities in Glasgow and the surrounding areas.
 
The decision by Labour-led Glasgow City Council and the Renfrewshire Valuation Joint Board to employ the activist to help sign up youngsters to the electoral roll sparked fury last night.
 
After being alerted to Mr O'Hare's strong anti-Unionist views by the Scottish Daily Mail, a council source said he might now be sacked.
 
Mr O'Hare is also the Scotland-wide organiser for a 'politically neutral' organisation that encourages people to register to vote. A spokesman for Bite the Ballot last night said Mr O'Hare 'certainly doesn't represent' the body's views, and the Mail understands his position might now be reviewed.
 
The former Edinburgh University student, who attended Hillhead High School in Glasgow's West End, was last week unveiled as a ' youth engagement worker' by the city council and the board that looks after the electoral register in Renfrewshire, East Renfrewshire and Inverclyde.
 
He receives an undisclosed payment for working one day a week for the organisations on a temporary contract.
 
Mr O'Hare, who has also branded the Tories 'scum', revealed his appointment to friends on Facebook late last year and wrote: 'Ideal time to be getting young people registered here.'
 
Earlier this month, he was also described as a neutral commentator when he was interviewed for TV shows about the drive to encourage Scots to register for the September 18 referendum.
 
He later joked on Facebook: 'I made a fleeting appearance on the [BBC] Sunday Politics show today as a "neutral commentator" on a piece about young people and independence… nae laughing!'
 
The official Yes Scotland campaign has published comments from Mr O'Hare in his capacity as a Bite the Ballot organiser, making no reference to his support for separation. But on Facebook he has hit out at the 'British establishment' and said the pro-Union campaign Better Together has 'lost the plot'.
 
In an earlier post, he wrote: 'Just arrived off the ferry in Larne [in Northern Ireland] to the sight of over a hundred Union Jacks. Can't wait till 2014 so we can say goodbye to the British state and that bloodstained, imperialist flag.'
 
In November, he wrote on Twitter: 'What is the positive case for the Union? We need to move into the 21st century and leave the degenerate British state behind.'
 
He has launched several attacks on Unionist politicians – urging people to tell David Cameron to 'get tae f***', and branding Scottish LibDem leader Willie Rennie a 'total goon'.
 
Mr O'Hare also once wrote 'f*** the cops' on Facebook and has repeatedly praised the notorious Celtic 'ultras' group Green Brigade, which has been accused of damaging the name of the club.
 
Last year, he helped to organise a conference by the group Radical Independence, whose members were involved with a distasteful Margaret Thatcher 'death party'.
 
He was a key figure in a protest in Edinburgh against Nigel Farage, in which the MEP had to be rescued from a pub, where he was meeting journalists, by a police riot van.
 
Last night, David Coburn, Ukip's lead MEP candidate in Scotland for this year's European Elections, said: 'It is outrageous that Glasgow City Council is paying this man – who has proven by his actions to not understand that democracy is about different opinions being freely presented – with taxpayers' money to promote democracy.
 
'Trying to persuade people to register to vote, especially the young, is a very good thing, but to pay somebody who is a key figure in the Yes campaign is utterly wrong.'
 
Scottish Conservative chief whip John Lamont said: 'The authorities would have been hard-pressed to find someone more radically biased if they'd tried. This is clearly not someone who can be trusted to engage with youngsters in an objective, positive way.'
 
A Glasgow City Council spokesman said: 'Liam is not a council employee and is only paid by us one day a week in his role as youth engagement officer.
 
'His role is to encourage electoral registration, it's not politically restricted; however it would be clearly inappropriate in his position to try to influence voters.'
 
A source added: 'This will be looked at to see if his services will still be required.'
 
Mr O'Hare declined to comment when visited at his home, and did not respond to further attempts to contact him.
 
==============================================
 
       The attack on UKIP in Edinburgh was unquestionably an example of street fascist thuggery. A friend of mine was showered with a liquid an told "Next time it will be petrol".  Does anybody doubt that had it been done by the EDL/SDL there would have been dozens of arrests?
 
      Instead in Scotland our First Minister, whose government's most important job is to protect people from thugs, spoke in favour of the Fascists. "Radical Independence" remain an honoured, albeit violent, part of a Yes campaign which has thereby made itself at least pro-Fascist.
 
     In fairness I will clear RI of being racist. While they did chant racist anti-English slogans it turns out that a number of those at the "spontaneous demonstration" against NIgel and UKIP were SWP members bussed in from England. It was thus not racist but simply a cynical attempt to play up to what they believed was Scottish racism by faking racism. In fact that demonstration marks the beginning of a rise in support for UKIP here. On the other hand Salmond and the Yes campaign fell for it because it appeals to their totalitarian side.
 
    Yet Liam O'Hare, whom it would be entirely politically incorrect to assume may be of irish extraction, is not merely being encouraged by the SNP.
 
    He is being funded by a Labour owned council. Funded to visit schools. Funded to encourage people to vote - nominally for anybody but who doubts that if somebody said they intended to vote UKIP he would feel entitled to lose the paperwork?
 
    And, of course, the state funded broadcaster the BBC, who are legally required to be "balanced", have not only given this guy as much coverage as they have given all the UKIP membership in Scotland (ie 1 soundbite) they went out of their way to say this thug was a "neutral" person. I have, incidentally, emailed the BBC to see if they are going to maintain this lie or publicly retract it. I'll let you know.
 
    What this shows is not just that there is a certain amount of politically decided support of and payment to various people, from some of the most respectable in society, down to street thugs. Not  even that it is endemic in various parties and the state broadcaster but, much worse, that despite being publicly opponents, underneath that both sides are paying not only their own people but their "opponent's" to and thus that much of Holyrood politics is simply pantomime.
 
     I'd like to praise the Scottish Daily Mail and Alan Roden for publishing this. The traditional image of journalism was of people who went looking for news; explored dark corners; and turned over rocks to see what lived under them. The modern reality is often of people who sit in offices rewriting press releases from government quangos and government funded charities (Friends of the Earth, WWF, Scottish Renewables, ASH, Oxfam Bernardos etc - along list of usual suspects). A free society needs traditional journalism and we don't get much of it.

Labels: , ,


Wednesday, January 29, 2014

BBC Caught Lying Again, To Hide How Corrupt & Useless Our Ruling Class Are

    This is an email I sent to the BBC. They haven't answered it and today, have not acknowledged Richard Bacon's "error" so I guess that means it was deliberate and they have decided to maintain the lie.
------------------------------------------

Dear BBC,
                  On the Richard Bacon show today (Tues 28th) he made the astonishing claim that despite having opposite policies Britain and the US have "the fastest growing economies in the world".
 
     Clearly Bacon is either wholly and completely ignorant of our and the world's economy or deliberately lying and wholly and completely corrupt, or both.
 
     As you will be aware the truth is that the US is not only not the world's fastest grower it is well below even the world average of about 4 1/2% (nearly 6% if the EU isn't counted).
 
    Britain of course is well below that well below average figure.
 
    Clearly the BBC as an organisation cannot excuse themselves as being wholly and completely ignorant. Therefore, by definition, if there is any slightest possibility of the BBC being able to claim to be in any slightest way honest, or one which any individual who was in any slightest way honest could ever work for, you cannot continue to maintain this Orwellian lie.
 
   I look forward to seeing if he retracts the lie on Wednesday's programme with the same emphasis he told it with. If not then that is a BBC acknowledgement that you are indeed wholly and completely corrupt totalitarian fascist propagandists.
 
    In which case I must ask for an assurance that you will never under any circumstances suggest that anything I ever say is less than millions of times more truthful than the most honest thing anybody in your fascist propaganda organisation ever says. I await your explanation &/or confirmation.
--------------------------------------------
 
   I have mentioned this on Left Foot Forward where one can always be guaranteed replies which will prove the ignorance, totalitarianism and foolishness of professional "socialists" and descend into ad homs as their claims dissolve.
-------------------------------------------  
 
Yesterday Richard Bacon on the BBC stated that this meant that \Britain and the US have "the fastest growth in the world". Of course nobody pretends that the BBC is anyhing other than a wholly corrupt, totalitarian, fascist propaganda organisation, that will tell absolutely any lie and censor absolutely any fact to promote the thieving parasites in Westminster. Nobody with the slightest trace of honesty can, by definition work for these whores.

Nonetheless that that is a remarkable lie by even BBC standards. The truth is that far from being the fastest growth in the world - the US is growing more slowly than the world AVERAGE of 4% (with the EU in recession the non-EU average is near 6%) and Britain, of course, is below the US's below average performance.

One can see why the Westminster thieves are so keen that the BBC lie to support them. It is obvious that if our ruling parasites really wished an end to recession they could at least match the non-EU average.

Nonetheless, cynical as I am about our Ministry of Truth broadcasters I am surprised that the BBC told and have decided to publicly maintain a lie so gross and easily checked.
         (US #116, UK #173)
 

Labels: , ,


Sunday, January 26, 2014

Criado-Perez Threatens Violence - Only In A Police State Would Police Arrest Other But Not Her

   The BBC have been making a massive case of the prosecution of a couple of people, and now their imprisonment, for making death threats to the unknown celebrity feminist  Criado-Perez, so extreme that the judge said "it is hard to imagine more extreme" ones.

   Brendan O'Neill on Spiked wrote it up and the unimaginably extreme death threat is "Fuck off and die" which is clearly not even a death threat of any sort and could not have been claimed so by any judge who was not wholly corrupt.

   Brendan is pushing the obvious fact that this prosecution is harsh and an overreactive threat to free speech. In comments I go further to say that the difference between a free society under the rule of law and a police state is that in the latter the law is, or is not, applied according not to what you have done but to whether you are politically approved:

So expect to see James Hansen locked up for saying anybody who expresses doubts about catastrophic global warming should be imprisoned.
George Moonbat for threatening to murder airline executives.
The BBC for saying climate sceptics should be treated like paedophiles.
Well OK no they shouldn't for precisely the same reasons this pair shouldn't.

But more important is the differential treatment. The law is distorted in one direction to imprison people for not liking "feminists" and even more in the opposite to protect state funded totalitarians. If the law, for political reasons, is not applied equally on everybody this is the difference between the rule of law and a police state. That this pair should be treated humanely is important but that they should be treated the same as Moonbat and BBC executives is vital.
 

  •  

    Your first example epitomises the "thought police" mentality. The second, if true, is incitement and is already illegal, the third is plain idiocy, which whilst annoying if criminal would condemn most of us to incarceration or worse.
        in this conversation
      • "every time someone dies as a result of floods in Bangladesh, an airline executive should be dragged out of his office and drowned" G Moonbat
      •  
      • http://www.theguardian.com/com...
        Clearly illegal indeed, certainly as the law is applied to the politically unapproved.
        But that means we do indeed live in a police state where Moonbat, BBC executives (I was thinking of Helen Boaden who perjured herself in the high court in relation to 28 gate, and was immediately promoted to Head of Radio) and ecofascists generally who are allowed to vandalise and intimidate with approval of police or courts like brownshirts outside Jewish shops.
      However this was topped and my point about the differential application of "the law" proven by anither commenter who showed that the "frightened" (as she seems to have said under oath) member of our fascist nomenklatura was engaged in precisely the "threats" others are imprisoned for using against her. She has not yet been imprisoned.
     
    BlueCrashDive
    • If "fuck off and die" is a death threat then that is a rape threat (though our state owned media who said the former certainly won't claim the latter)(& of course it won't be treated as criminal that she said it)

    Labels: , ,


    Friday, January 17, 2014

    You Get The Privilege Of Paying BBC Workers An Extra £740 Million - Government Gave BBC Extra Funding To Promote What They Knew To Be Warming Lie - No News At Ten

       Via Bishop Hill we find a £740 million hole in the BBC employee's pension fund, caused by the stupid parasites putting money into the windmillery they have been using public money to advertise for more subsidy of.

        Share prices in windmill companies are now close to worthless.

        So what is to be done to help the poor things.

    "The BBC is to pump £740 million of licence fee payers’ cash into its pension scheme, to try and close a funding deficit that has nearly doubled over the last three years.

        Well, surprise surprise, the BBC is going to pay it. Since the BBC has no money of its own and is unwillingly subsidised by us, to the tune of about £2.5 bn a year, this is going to put a significant hole in BBC spending on actual programmes &/or a significant increase in what is taken from us.

        Typically mention of this does not come from the BBC who are rigorously censoring any mention on their own site, though to be fair, they have twice previously mentioned the rising problem - in 2003 & 2006.
    -------------------------------------------

    In a similarly corrupt vein the censorship, on BBC sites continues, of any mention that the 28 Gate fraud proves that the entire organisation have deliberately lied (& in Helen Boaden's case perjured herself in court)  to promte a warming scare they have known for, at a minimum, 7 years, to be a lie itself.

       However the estimable Sunday Mail does an article on it (with assistance from Bishop Hill & other bloggers) which reveals that the corruption was even more direct than appeared.

        In promoting the lie they were not merely doing the state's work the very "symposium" of the "world's leading scientists", on which they depended (actually only 2 scientists but they did have a US government psychological warfare expert, a CofE divine and enough government paid ecofascist activists to fill the black hole of Calcutta. It also turns out that this psychological wadfare symposium against the British people was funded not form the BBC's government grant but from an additional direct government payment.

    "The controversial seminar was run by a body set up by the BBC’s own environment analyst Roger Harrabin and funded via a £67,000 grant from the then Labour government, which hoped to see its ‘line’ on climate change and other Third World issues promoted in BBC reporting"

    Labels: , , ,


    Wednesday, January 01, 2014

    28 Gate Revisited - 1,000 Letters On The Subject Censored

        We have just had the first anniversary of 28 Gate, the BBC being proven to be lying in their claim that it is OK to lie and censor about catastrophic global warming because 28 of the world's leading scientists supported them. I sent this letter to 96 newspapers worldwide, which brings me to a total of 1,000 letters (well about 25 to an average of 40 papers) and not one published on paper, though I have had some on online site.

        Zero in 1,000, when the letters are written moderately competently is not a record even the North Korean media could exceed. It is obviously statistically impossible without massive de facto censorship across our entire mainstream media.

    Sir
          The extent to which 28 Gate has been made, in an entirely Orwellian way, has been deleted from the news record is frankly scary.

        We have just passed the 1st anniversary of it being proven that the BBC had, for 6 years, then, continuously and repeatedly lied to promote their censorship of any dissent over the alleged catastrophic global warming consensus. The BBC had claimed to have the support for this of "28 leading scientists", from across the world at a symposium held by them. Helen Boaden, then on suspension over the Saville affair but since promoted to be head of BBC Radio, said under oath, in a court case brought because the BBC refused to identify them, even testified that they were not only leading scientists but that they had been selected for their "multiplicity of views".

        Then the list of names came out and it was revealed they were not 28 of the world's leading scientists. 26 of them weren't scientists at all. Nor were they selected for "multiplicity of views". Every one was an activist, almost all paid by the state. Climate activists, renewables salespeople, 3rd world "aid" activists, and for higher authority a Church of England cleric and a psychological warfare expert from the US embassy.

         The news of this fraud was, obviously, never reported by the BBC. It still hasn't been. More ominously it got little coverage in newspapers, and what there was being almost all by the more trustworthy commenters, who get to choose what they write, rather than in "news" pages.

          And our police, who spend many millions building cases against NOTW reporters and Tommy Sheriden, not only refuse to investigate what appears to be an open and shut case of perjury by Helen Boaden, they refuse even to say why not.

         We may read, in our papers the scandals, lies and airbrushing by the North Korean regime. Would it not be desirable for us to learn of what must be assumed to be worse lies and atrocities of western powers?

    Neil Craig

    Links for 28 Gate
    Initial report http://a-place-to-stand.blogspot.co.uk/2012/12/principia-scientific-has-interesting.html
    ThinkScotland article http://a-place-to-stand.blogspot.co.uk/2013/01/to-bbc-director-general-tony-hall-open.html
    Boaden's perjury reported to police - forwarded to the Met who refuse to comment http://a-place-to-stand.blogspot.co.uk/2013/02/bbc-perjury-case-for-28-gate-police.html
    How Red Nose Day charitable funding was used to promote the fraud http://a-place-to-stand.blogspot.co.uk/2012/12/principia-scientific-has-interesting.html
    Reaches 864 letters http://a-place-to-stand.blogspot.co.uk/2013/08/unpublished-letters-proof-of-deliberate.html
    Last letter to another 40 http://a-place-to-stand.blogspot.co.uk/2013/10/letters-unpublished-in-septemberearly.html

    Censorship worse than NK
    Genuine, atrocities carried out by NATO worse than North Korea's and unreported by our media - dissection thousands of living people to steal body organs
    http://a-place-to-stand.blogspot.co.uk/2010/12/eu-report-admits-nato-police-dissected.html
    and massacre of at least 210 by our "police" http://a-place-to-stand.blogspot.co.uk/2008/01/dragodan-massacre-freedom-of_23.html
     

    Labels: , , ,


    Wednesday, December 11, 2013

    How To Get On The BBC - Call For The Criminalisation Of Democracy

      Last Thursday I referred to one of the guests on BBC's "Big Debate", Alan Miller, as a professor of political correctness.

        This was perhaps unkind. He is "Deputy Principal (Research & Knowledge Transfer), Heriot-Watt University"  and  "elected in 2007 by the Scottish Parliament to become the first Chair of the Scottish Human Rights Commission" which is a more formal and respectful way of phrasing it.

       I'm mentioning this as I have seen him twice more on the BBC since then. It is possible I have missed a few. On Sunday Politics saying nothing very interesting and yesterday on Newsnight Scotland saying promoting judicial activism in lawmaking and that it should be criminal for political parties to stand for laws that he and his pals don't like, such as the Spare Room Subsidy (or as the BBC falsely called it "Bedroom Tax" - this nomenclature may be going largely unopposed but it is clearly Orwellian to claim that a subsidy is the same as a tax). Dellers makes the same point about a lie told in the opposite direction (calling a lack of tax a subsidy) by the same PC types.

       By comparison a Scottish UKIP spokesman has been on BBC Scotland in the last 6 days as often as in the last 6 months - precisely never.

       One guy, with zero electoral support compared to the 4th party in Scottish politics and 3rd in UK. If our state broadcaster was making any slightest attempt to keep to its legal duty of "balance" the party would be getting at least 100 times as much coverage as the unelected prof. That would be 300 spokespersons on in the last 6 days or 9,000 in 6 months.

       Which, mathematically makes the BBC less than 0.012% honest or more than 99.989% corrupt totalitarians.

    Labels: , ,


    Friday, December 06, 2013

    Brian's Big Debate in Airdrie

       Yesterday I got an email from the BBC inviting me to the audience of "Brian's Big Debate" in Airdrie.

         It appears Airdrie is not a hotbed of political forment (it is Labour). Of the 52 in the audience 36 were classes of schoolchildren bussed in. There was me and 15 other adults.

         The guests were 3 woman MSPs from the LabNatCon party and a professor of political correctness called Alan Miller. Britain's 3rd party still censored as with Question Time.

         4 items under discussion - the first introduced by Big Brian and the others, questions from the schoolkids which they may have had some help with.

      1 - Wasn't Nelson Mandela wonderful. You don't need me to say what everybody said. One member of the audience spoke and then Brian browbeat the local minister to speak, after trying and failing to get anybody any other participants. I kept quiet because I didn't feel the need to raise waves and am glad I did reading Jerry Pournelle on the subject

    "RIP: Nelson Mandela, former President of the Republic of South Africa. The transition from apartheid to integration has not been entirely peaceful, but it never rose to civil war, and if South Africa still has a chance of emerging as a civilized society and nation it is due to him. He could have been a dictator. Instead he was a President"

    He wrote both better and with more grace than I would have.
    I am annoyed that our media have been cancelling programmes and devoting the entire news to hagiography because of a news flash that a foreign, unwell 95 year old had unexpectedly died. The BBC did not do so much for Thatcher who, even if we weren't British, was more important.

    2- The possibility of changing the law that requires some sort of corroboration before somebody can be convicted. This was also one of the subjects chosen last time I was at the "Debate" though that time it was not allegedly chosen by a 13 year old.

    The reason this time is that a couple of police bodies have reversed themselves and joined the SNP "consensus", Margaret Mitchell, the Tory speaker made a very good point that that looks suspiciously like kowtowing now that Scotland's police have been all brought under one central authority - in Edinburgh.

       I agreed with her on that and that it is very dangerous to a free society when rules of evidence are being removed purely to make convictions easier for one politically promoted charge (ie rape).

       On a second go Mitchell suggested several other changes in evidence which would work without so much of a problem (hearsay & similar previous crimes).

       I tried for another go to answer Miller blaming low rape convictions on "prejudice". I had intended to point out that defending solicitors normally prefer women on the jury since they are less likely to get all protective of the alleged victim, but I wasn't asked.

    3 - Was about the rise in pension age. Obviously a lot of the normal about how "they" were just trying to save money. I said "The problem, and it isn't really a problem, is that we are all living longer. Over the last century life expectancy has gone up by 1 year for every 4 that passes and pensions must take account of that. Indeed before most of this audience have reached retirement age we will have made medicinal advances that will mean they can live indefinitely. So the whole question of pensions is going to be made obsolete.

    4 - The PISA scores in which Scotland has done marginally better on reading and maths than England and marginally worse on science but the entire UK has slipped to mid-twentieth. The debaters all agreed that things could be better but at least we were ahead of the English.

    I said "Scots politicians should be ashamed of this. For 700 years Scots have been better educated than the English, often the best in the world. Our role in the Enlightenment proves that.

    We have now done marginally better than England on 2 classes but we actually spend quite a bit more per head. Worse than that - we have done worse than England in science. Scotland and Switzerland place first in the world in terms of scientific citations per capita - the best measure we have of scientific pre-eminence. Our politicians should be deeply ashamed of this failure."

    I should have shoehorned in "as a member of UKIP I know there are a number of reforms that could improve the situation though they would not perform miracles and anyway they won't get discussed on the BBC" but we are all wise in hindsight. Improvements would be a voucher scheme; firing the 10% worst teachers since quality of teachers is far more important than class sizes; allowing discipline in schools; not wasting time and pupil's respect by teaching propaganda like CAGW; reinstating grammar schools; and prizes for top performers of which only 4 are actual UKIP policy.

    However had I said that I might have put off a contribution from the kid who asked the question. He said that a problem was that it is difficult to learn when other kids are allowed to fool around in classes. I appreciate his problem. It is not in any way "liberal" or "caring" of kids not to allow discipline in schools. I'm not sure how bad things are but if the pupils are openly complaining they must be bad.

    On the way out the producer singled me out and thanked me for my contributions. I must agree they were far and away the best from the audience. This desperation to get an audience is interesting though not desperate enough to try anything people want.
    -------------------------------------
    PS I should, for comparison, have given the question I posed which the BBC decided should not be asked, under any circumstances, even when there were zero questions (or zero usable ones) from any adult.

    ".Scotland's central belt has massive shale gas resources. The SNP are bringing in tougher rules to prevent it being exploited. Meanwhile Grangemouth refinery is going to be saved by bringing in shale gas drilled in the USA, where it costs 1/4 of what our gas does. Is this equivalent to carrying coal to Newcastle?"

    Labels: , ,


    Saturday, November 30, 2013

    Satirising Green's Complaint The BBC Doesn't Give Them Coverage - The BBC That Gives Them 40 Timnes UKIP's Caoverage

       Last time there was a Question Time in Scotland Nigel Farrage was on, but no representative from UKIP in Scotland.  The Greens sent a letter to the BBC, which clearly worked. It also got a significant amount of press coverage.

       On Thursday there was a Question Time from Scotland from which UKIP 4th or 5th party depending on polls, some of which put us ahead of the Tories. The 6th party, the Greens, getting 1/3rd of our vote according to polls, was there.

       This is taken, closely, from the Green letter:

    “Thursday’s Question Time line up is particularly bizarre, and following a telephone discussion with the editor it is clear to me that this programme has been contrived to censor, rather than produce serious debate. The lack of balance is staggering and I know from comments we’ve received it’s not just UKIP supporters who are alarmed. “This situation is particularly unacceptable with another by election coming up, which should require particular attention to political balance. The BBC has shown serious misjudgement in allowing Thursday’s programme to go ahead and UKIP should look forward to meeting senior managers to discuss how they intend to rectify a situation that will have harmed the broadcaster’s reputation for fairness.” The complaint from me to the BBC’s Executive Editor Hayley valentine and Phil Abrams of the Editorial Policy Unit is as follows…

    Dear Ms Valentine,
                                      We wish to object in the strongest possible terms to the choice of panellists for BBC Question Time on Thursday (28th November). This follows our consistent raising of concern over a number of years about the UKIP's lack of representation on the programme; in 14 years of continuous Parliamentary representation in the EU, UKIP Scotland have been invited to participate on not 1 single occasion. Thursday’s programme came from Falkirk, debating independence – this is specifically billed on the BBC website. with voters 2:1 against separation the panel chosen, and even more the audience, was extremely skewed on the independence question. UKIP Scotland is campaigning against separation and is the only party committed to Scotland not being in the EU (membership questions and their costs for us a, possibly the, major issue) yet we have been totally censored from all BBC broadcasting on the subject despite polling and recent electoral results showing us 3 times more popular than the ever present Greens,

       I can see no basis for the censoring of UKIP from the panel. A recent Conservative poll shows UKIP can expect 11% of the list votes compared to their 10% and the Green's far lower total, despite blanket media coverage by the BBC of both the other parties and almost total censorship of UKIP here. This failure even to attempt balance in party political terms, or in terms of the referendum debate is surely a breach of the BBC’s duty to impartiality. It is particularly disgraceful following the recent faux-racist Fascist attack on UKIP in Edinburgh, publicly supported by the SNP Duce and the BBC's subsequent disgusting interview aping the Fascist slogans. I am deeply disturbed that the BBC’s flagship political debate programme gives greater attention to censoring debate than to fair balance. I seek an urgent meeting to discuss how you intend to redress this situation, not only in the short term but in the run-up to the referendum in 2014 and to the EU election in which UKIP is widely forecast to prove the most popular party. As the BBC, properly, give more coverage to larger parties (though it should be proportionate not merely an excuse to censor dissent) the BBC should, the the election year, be interviewing UKIP spokespersons at least as often as those of parties expected to place 2nd or 3rd.

       I note that the Greens have, successfully complained in similar terms. The BBC gives 40 times more coverage per vote to them than UKIP all of it supportive whereas coverage of UKIP involves airbrushing on a Hitler moustache. Clearly this is incompatible with any suggestion that the BBC is less than 97.5% a censoring totalitarian propagandist and I would like to know what action the BBC intends to take to comply with the law.

    Yours sincerely,
    Neil Craig

    - See original at: http://www.scottishgreens.org.uk/news/scottish-greens-lodge-official-complaint-with-bbc-question-time/#sthash.V3xGVmH6.dpuf

    Will be interesting to see if the BBC even answer it. Or if any of the papers which reportedthe original report this.

    Labels: , ,


    Tuesday, November 26, 2013

    Requirements To Work For The BBC

     A couple of useful statements about the BBC:

    THE BBC is “dumbing down” science programmes because it is staffed with humanities graduates who are ignorant about the subject, a leading academic and presenter has claimed.

    Prof Lisa Jardine, who presents BBC Radio Four’s ‘Seven Ages of Science’ series, said producers assume that their audience is as clueless about science as they are.

    As a result, presenters are told to avoid using technical terms for fear of alienating people, while arts presenters can reference obscure cultural figures without,any further explanation, she said.

    Prof Jardine is a professor of Renaissance Studies at University College London and is also chairman of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority and president of the British Science Association.

    Speaking before the British Science Festival which takes place in Newcastle next week, she claimed the idea that presenters must “mash up the difficult stuff, and particularly science, because people are not able to understand, is a complete fallacy”.

    The myth arose because “everybody in the BBC is trained in the humanities”, she said, and although BBC Radio 4 is now introducing more scientific content, its science department is still dwarfed by the arts unit.

    “Anyone who has done broadcasting on science for the BBC will know that whereas you are never asked to explain who (actor) John Carlisle is, if I say ‘mitochondria’ (energy-producing components of cells), they say, ‘Can’t you say it in ordinary language because people won’t understand’.

    #################################

    Who Runs the BBC?
     BBC2
    The BBC Trust  consists of 12 Trustees and is headed by Lord Patten.

    Lord Chris Patten is a conservative peer and former governor of Hong Kong; he also happens to have 13 others jobs besides chief of the BBC.  These include an £80,000 year role as an advisor for oil company BP, and £40,000 a year from EDF Energy.  Some might well be surprised that the Chairman of the BBC Trust is receiving more pay from just these two advisory roles than the £110,000 a year he receives for his chairmanship of the BBC Trust....

    The recently appointed Director of News and Current Affairs at the BBC, James Harding, is a former employee of the Murdoch Press. While Editor of The Times newspaper, he was responsible for exposing the identity of police blogger NightJack by hacking the bloggers email accounts – which his legal team then covered up during a court case against the action. 

    Labels: , ,


    Tuesday, October 15, 2013

    "Beeboid"

          I thought I had invented the word "Beeboid", and was pleased to find it gaining common usage. 14,200 uses online and the Urban Dictionary - actually 2 different usages - for an unreasoning online fan of the BBC (July 2011)  or for a BBC employee uncorrupted by respect for the truth (July 2012 ).

         I have always used it for definition #2 and though there are still some people who automatically defend the BBC's integrity I find them increasingly rare except where they appear to be financially linked to the organisation, which would mean they fitted my definition anyway.

         My earliest use in my blog was Aug 2011 and I had used it in online comments prior to that but the earliest usages I can find are several around 2007 in the comments on Iain Dale's Dairy of which I was a regular reader so I must have adopted it by osmosis.

         But it does describe the bastards well doesn't it?

         Wonder when it will make the OED.

    Labels: ,


    This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

    British Blogs.