BBC Bias - they don't even hide it now

Why is Gordon Brown's enforcer,Blinky Ed Balls commenting on David Cameron's speech on the BBC? Did the BBC invite any of the Conservative Shadow Cabinet to comment on Gordon Brown's speech?

From Biased-BBC comments:
"Antony Calvert:
Ok here's a classic example of the subtle bias of the Brown Broadcasting Corporation.

After Gordon's conference ramble the Beeb published several comments in reaction to the dull oratory. As you would expect Labour MPs and trades union sycophants were all published. Not a single Conservative politician was quoted, despite many making public comments.

Fast forward to today's Tory conference climax and post Cameron speech reaction. Guess what? 2 Labour MP quotes, one from the laughably dull Ed Balls.

Fair??
Antony Calvert | 03.10.07 - 5:39 pm | "

"DavidK:
The position was even worse about the reaction to the Cameron speech than Anthony Calvert (two posts higher) makes out. After the Brown speech, no fewer than nine Labour toadies were lined up to sing his praises, with Greenpeace and CND mildly in dissent.

With David Cameron, there were just three Conservative pieces of favourable comment, followed by four against - one from Ed Balls, one from David Milliband, one from Greenpeace and one from a pollster whose biography reveals he has spent the past ten years working in and around Downing Street and is writing a book about Blair.

This was a rare example of 'like for like' and should have been entirely even-handed. That it wasn't speaks volumes.
DavidK | 03.10.07 - 5:52 pm | "



Now here are the links to the BBC reasction to the three main party leaders' speeches for Gordon Brown, David Cameron and Menzies Campbell.
As you can see, the reaction to Gordon Brown comprises 5 Labour MPs, 6 Union Leaders, a presentative each from Greenpace and CND but no opposition MPs and just 3 of those reactions were in any way less than completely positive about the speech. The reaction to David Cameron's speech comprises 3 Conservative MPs, 3 Labour MPs, representatives of Greenpeace, the Green Party, Greenpeace, the SNP, Mori, 2 Conservative bloggers and 1 Lib Dem blogger and 8 of the reactions were negative about the speech. The reaction to Menzies Cambell comprised of 6 entirely positive comments from Liberal Democrats. The BBC just do not care any more, the bias is blatant. Either it is directed by the Labour Government or the bias is institutionalised.

"Oscar:
The 6 o'clock news continued the BBC policy of doing everything they can to undermine Cameron's speech. After billing it as the speech of his life and make or break for not just him but the whole conservative party, they gave about a 3 minute report - using the most damaging clips they could - carefully edited to take it out of context. Then they moved onto something about ballot boxes being ready on time and a vox pop about holding an election. No other comment at all - analysis - discussion. Both ITV and C4 were much much beter. C4 gave the kind of edited highlights that actually gave some sense of the whole speech - unlike the BBCs hatchet job. Compared with the incredible cosmetic makeover they gave to Brown's terrible effort, Cameron was treated with contempt. And this after a nearly total blackout of important speeches by IDS, Hague and David Davis yesterday. Our state broadcaster is now dutifully serving the government with suspicious compliance. If this is allowed to go on - the BBC will be right about one thing - the future of the opposition parties really will be at stake - they really could be on the verge of destroying our democracy.
Oscar | 03.10.07 - 7:24 pm |"

I am fed up with this BBC anti-Conservative/pro-Labour bias, surely there is something that we can do. How about a poster advertising campaign showing examples of the bias with links to a web site that could show the BBC clips. If the BBC won't be even handed, let us publicise their bias.

Newsnight on the web

How long before the BBC put last night's edition on the web, I for one want to watch Paxman's interview with Bob Ainsworth.

BBC Bias

Thanks to Theo Spark for that one.

Lisa Ventura

There was a lot of excitement surrounding Lisa Ventura's erotic fiction web site and how that contributed to the loss of her seat on Worcester Council. I blogged at the time that if this was the reason that she lost the seat then "The small-mindedness of much of the population of this country never ceases to amaze me."

Today the following comment appeared on that article and I have repeated it here, in its entirety, as I think it bears repeating:

"The Tory candidate in the Worcester City Council by-election has spoken out in protest against recent press coverage which stated that she is the proprietor of “Wicked Tickles”, a website that sells a vast array of “whips, chains and other bondage products”.

Lisa Ventura, who lost her seat in the by-election by a swing of 17.6% to Jenny Barnes of the Labour Party, runs a website entitled Erotic Fiction by Rose (www.eroticfiction.org), a site which she writes for under a pseudonym and which contains a number of short fictional stories, fictional journal entries and reviews, all of which are very tame in nature.

However, according to Simon Walters of The Mail on Sunday (issued on Sunday 23rd September 2007), Ms Ventura runs a far more risqué website than her own called “Wicked Tickles”. Mr Walters made the mistake when he visited www.eroticfiction.org.uk in error instead of www.eroticfiction.org, and no-one from The Mail on Sunday contacted Lisa to validate the information.

“I am extremely incensed and angry by Mr Walters mistake,” said Lisa. “The difference between my site and this “Wicked Tickles” site is huge. My site is very tame in nature compared to “Wicked Tickles” and contains material that is more akin to Mills & Boon romance novels. Also if you visit my site, there is no online shop”.

The matter has been brought to the attention of John Wellington at The Mail on Sunday who has promised to look into how the error occurred, but so far no formal apology has been printed or issued.

“I am looking to set the record straight as I feel I have been grossly misrepresented by The Mail on Sunday,” said Lisa. “I would also like to point out that I am not the proprietor or connected in any way to the “Wicked Tickles” website”.

Lisa would also like to point out that reports of content on her own site being modelled on her are entirely false. “The content is created around a fictional character called Rose, exactly how you would create a character in a novel,” stated Lisa. “I don’t see anything wrong with the type of website that I have, and I don’t see what the fuss is all about. I am a writer, we create scenarios and we create characters. That is what writer’s do!”

Since her by-election defeat, Lisa has been in high demand and there has even been speculation in the press that she could have changed the course of history if Gordon Brown decides to call a snap General Election this Autumn on the basis of the by-election result in Worcester. She is also an archetypal “Worcester Woman”, who according to The Politics Show on BBC-1 (broadcast Sunday 30th September 2007), “deserted the Tories for Tony Blair in 1997”.

More Follows….
However, there is one correct fact in all of the press coverage – Lisa does indeed live in Beaver Close, Lower Wick.

“A lot of the press couldn’t believe that I actually live at such an address given my website,” she said. “But the fact is I do. You couldn’t make it up”.


Notes to Editors:

1. Lisa is available for interviews, comments and TV appearances; please contact her on 07971 420987 or email to lisa@lisaventura.co.uk

2. Standard publicity photos of Lisa are available upon request."

George Orwell quotation

Bearing in mind my apparent fetish for referencing George Orwell's 1984 today, I thought that this George Orwell quotation taken from today's Samizdata blog was worth repeating here -

"So much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot."

BBC anti-Conservative attacks - the fightback (part 2)

I blogged recently about how the Conservatives were fighting back against BBC Bias by "1. George Osborne took a swipe at James Naughtie answering one question about Gordon Brown with "well you know him better than I do."
2. Oliver Letwin swatted the usual 'lurch to the right' question from Martha Kearney on WATO with a sharp riposte that is was a piece of Labour propaganda.
3. And best of all at a fringe debate hosted by the BBC on whether Cameron was in touch with the grass roots a conservative woman turned the tables on Martha asking her why the BBC allowed Gordon to get away with 'British jobs for British workers' rhetoric and indeed got feted for it, but if a conservative had said it they would be torn limb from limb. Funnily enough she didn't reply."

Now I read a comment on Guido Fawkes' blog that I think is a work of genius for when being interviewed by James "If we win the election" Naughtie - "...Tories on Today being interviewed by him should stop referring to "Labour" and start referring to "Your party, Jim." He makes no pretence of being impartial, so why should they have to pretend he's impartial?" Go on, who amongst the Shadow Cabinet is going to be the first to try it?

Jerry Brotton - "historian"

I blogged recently about Trevor Phillips' quoting Dr Jerry Brotton's theory that the defeat of the Armada in 1588 was due to the Turks distracting the Spanish in the Mediterranean and this was because of a letter sent some years earlier by Elizabeth 1 ordering the ambassador, William Harborne, to incite the Turks to harry the Spanish navy. This theory has been fairly comprehensively demolished not least in the aforementioned article of mine, in Laban's post at Biased BBC and at .UK Commentators.

Now I read that Jerry Brotton is at it again, this time he has "told the Guardian Hay literary festival that a hitherto unnoticed letter from George's war chief and Prime Minister, Winston Churchill, to his ambassador in Istanbul showed that it was Turkish air power rather than the RAF's swashbuckling pilots which delivered the fatal blow to the Nazi invasion plans.
The letter, which ordered the ambassador, Hughe Knatchbull-Hugessen, to incite the Turks to declare war on Hitler, was written in 1940 and has been buried in archives ever since because it did not apparently relate to any major historical event.
But Mr Brotton told the festival: "Churchill's plan was ultimately successful. Turkish air movements in the eastern Mediterranean fatally split Hitler's Luftwaffe. So alongside all the stories we're told at school about why Hitler failed to conquer Britain and destroy county cricket, we should add another reason: the Anglo-Turkish alliance brokered by George VI, Churchill [and others]."

"Asked about his previous discovery that the Turks stopped the Armada, Dr Brotton said "It's amazing really. The evidence for the Turks defeating Hitler is just as strong as it is for them defeating the Armada"."


Hmm, I think I smell a rat, this article may in fact be a hoax. But that makes the point rather well, the "PC" view of history is so absurd that almost any claim could be made and believed by gullible students of history and desperately PC journalists.

Living in Gordon Brown's New Labour Police State, now and in the future

Read this from England Expects and wonder at how we have allowed ourselves to end up living like this. A pensioner can be arrested and on his "stop and search form they said they wanted to speak to him, under the Terrorism Act, because he had been looking at a police officer...Once at the police station we were taken to separate rooms and questioned for about 45 minutes...Then officers went with us to our flat and searched it before returning us to the pub. We feel violated..."

As England expects says it is Constable Savage reborn. Constable Savage was a Not the Nine O'Clock News character in a sketch who arrested Mr Winston Kodogo for "Looking at me in a funny way". That 1980's sketch was attacking the police for being racist, now the police are more likely to arrest a pensioner for "looking at a police officer" and for having "been seen passing a white envelope" or for heckling a Labour Minister, remember Walter Wolfgang? This time it took eight police officers to arrest two disabled, innocent pensioners having a quiet drink in their local, next time they might be coming for you. As The Holloways sing so well:

"So this is great britain and welcome aboard
A sinking ship thats full of shit and someone nicked the oars
A failing false economy
an anti-punk automony
Our once unique Identity's
Been washed from our shores

...

In a land of hope and glory
do we really rule the waves?
The truth is a different story
We're all just a bunch of slaves"


Many more years of this New Labour government and our already reduced freedoms will be further diminished. Any freedoms left to us will be at the gift of the state, not ours as of right. We will belong to the state and Gordon will graciously allow us to live here; so long as we pay our taxes, carry our papers ID card, not protest, not speak out of turn, take part in the daily Two Minute Hate, listen to and believe only the Ministry of Truth (aka The BBC), not think out of turn, not do anything other than that that is the path chosen for us by the Great Clunking Fist. You can laugh and sneer at my view of our future, but think about it just a bit more and it gets less funny and more plausible.

Gordon Brown was compared to Stalin by his former top civil servant Lord Turnbull, once Whitehall's most senior mandarin, a man who said that Gordon Brown treated other senior ministers "with more or less complete contempt". Lord Turnbull said in the Financial Times, of Mr Brown's style: "You cannot help admire the sheer Stalinist ruthlessness of it all." That is how he will increasingly treat the British public, with ruthlessness, to him we are no more than sponges there to be squeezed to extract ever larger tax revenue and to vote him back into power, election after fixed election, so he can proclaim the glorious success of yet another 5 year plan. We will all hail the "Brilliant Genius of Humanity" and marvel at "the extraordinary modesty characteristic of truly great people" and all will be well in Airstrip One.

Remember:
WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH

"The Party seeks power entirely for its own sake… We are different from all the oligarchies of the past, in that we know what we are doing. All the others, even those who resembled ourselves, were cowards and hypocrites. The German Nazis and the Russian Communists came very close to us in their methods, but they never had the courage to recognize their own motives. They pretended, perhaps they even believed, that they had seized power unwillingly and for a limited time, and that just round the corner there lay a paradise where human beings would be free and equal. We are not like that. We know that no one ever seizes power with the intention of relinquishing it. Power is not a means, it is an end. One does not establish a dictatorship in order to safeguard a revolution; one makes the revolution in order to establish the dictatorship. The object of persecution is persecution. The object of torture is torture. The object of power is power."

"If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face—for ever."

Thanks are due to George Orwell's 1984 and a biography of Stalin for most of the quotes in this piece.

The return of the fuel escalator

In 2000 the then Chancellor, Gordon Brown ended the fuel escalator, the process by which fuel prices increased by above the rate of inflation. The 2 pence per litre (7 pence per gallon) increase in fuel duty implemented yesterday and the already announced increases of a further 2 pence per litre in April 1008 and 1.84 pence per litre in April 2009 show that the fuel escalator is back in all but name.

Hauliers' leaders last night raised the prospect of a return to the blockades of 2000 as lorry drivers grew angry at the current increase and the promised future rises. They accused the Prime Minister of reintroducing by stealth the controversial 'fuel duty escalator' of automatic annual increases. Roger King, Chief Executive of the Road Haulage Association said that "There's real anger... Although no one's yet manning the barricades, if it continues like this some may be tempted. These rises are unjustified...It means British businesses are paying 26p a litre more for their fuel than lorries filling up on the Continent...However the Government dresses it up, Gordon Brown has put Britain back on to the fuel duty escalator which led to the last round of fuel protests."

The AA and the RHA agreed that this 2 pence per litre rise takes the fuel duty element of the price of a litre of diesel in the UK to 50.35p compared with an average for the rest of Europe of 22.7p a litre.

Remember how the Government folded in 2000 as the fuel protests grew, remember the panic in Government Ministers' faces as they felt the first anti-Government protests. Do you think Gordon will enjoy facing down lots of big angry truckers?


Now all we need is some movement on John Redwood's idea for publicising Government percentage take from petrol and we could be getting somewhere.

The oxygen of publicity

The blogosphere were right and wrong, Gordon Brown has not made a new policy announcement every day of the Conservative conference but he had to do something to take the attention way from the Conservative party. So he has gone to Iraq, nicely timing his visit for the reporting to coincide with David Cameron's speech to the conference tomorrow (Wednesday) and to take some of the heat off of his beleaguered Chancellor Darling. There is an unwritten rule that the political parties leave each other to get what publicity they can during their conferences, but as Labour have ignores many other unwritten rules (such as the alternating between Labour and Conservative Speakers of the House of Commons, a rule they broke when they imposed Michael Martin as Speaker), not to mention the written rules that have been ignored, I don't see why we should be surprised. It looks to me as though Gordon Brown does not like being on the back foot, he needs to take the initiative and show how he is the force for change by taking troops out of Iraq, or at least promising to do so, or at least promising to promise to do so. I wonder if the BBC will ask Gordon Brown when he decided to make this move and when he decided that the Government policy on Iraq was flawed, he was after all a member of the Blair cabinet, wasn't he?

Escape from Gordon

Have a play of this game from the Conservative Party Conference. Ah it brings back memories of many wasted hours in arcades playing Pac Man; although my favourite arcade game must be Missile Command - now to find a PC or PS2 version with the right type of trackball controller.

Taxing non-domiciles - The Labour Party's response

In my previous article I included some speculation from Benjamin Brogan in the Mail and from Iain Dale regarding the admitted use of Treasury officials' "analysis" to rubbish the Conservative non-domicile tax proposals. Guido Fawkes has done his bit and produced a fine piece of "attack blogging", do read the whole article but the bits I particularly like are these:

"But the Labour party press release is even more extraordinary:
"Today George Osborne made a £3.5 billion tax commitment. Treasury analysis shows it is impossible for him to raise the money he needs to pay for this commitment from his proposals on residence and domicile. Initial costings by the Treasury show that George Osborne's proposal would raise a maximum of £650m, leaving George Osborne at least £2.9 billion short."
It is a sacking offence for civil servants to engage in party political work. Darling has just press released a confession to a fundamental breach of the Civil Service Code. In reality politicians often pressure civil servants to cross the partisan line, discretely behind closed doors where they would be unlikely to be caught, certainly not with the work press released during the opposition's party conference. Gus O'Donnell, who heads the Civil Service, will not be impressed with this at all."

Personally I doubt that anything will come of this story BUT the news tide is turning in so far as that pressure on Gordon Brown is having an impact and his weak and over-promoted ministers will not be able to stand the weeks of pressure that a general election campaign would bring.

Identified Cameras - an update

Previously I have blogged about the cameras appearing on London's main roads and was told that they were Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR) cameras, purely there to enforce London's Low Emission Zone (LEZ). I didn't believe that then and I believe it less by the day. They are there to enforce road pricing and others agree, this is an extract from a comment on Iain Dale today - "It's EU policy, look it up. A trans-European lorry charging scheme is already booked in, and should be happening by 2011 if I remember rightly. have you checked those new cameras in the cpaital? My guess is that are not just for the so-called low emission zone, they are also card-readers for the road tolls. The tolling hardware is already laid on most of the motorway hard shoulders in the UK. How do you think they are going to toll Greater Manchester? The same useless 'technology' used in London?"

Road pricing is coming, the Number 10 petitioners will be ignored, we will all pay more...

Taxing non-domiciles

Benedict Brogan's Daily Mail blog has an excellent time line through the non-domicile proposals. One revelation that he puts forward is that "George Osborne hopes to raise £3.5 billion by asking 160,000 non-doms to cough up £25,000 in exchange for a pledge that he will not try to tax their overseas income...But where did he get the idea? Step forward David Mills, one-time husband of Tessa Jowell, a regular in the Italian courts, and an expert on off-shore finances. Five years ago he suggested a £20,000 levy on non-doms." Is this true, can we find out?


Benedict Brogan also wonders if the election frenzy created by Gordon Brown is just froth designed to get the Conservative party to reveal its best proposals early enough for him, his non-partisan civil servants and the BBC to attack. "But here's something else to consider: remember Muhammad Ali's rope-a-dope trick? Let your opponent exhaust himself by revealing all his best shots? Some in Brown Central see an opportunity here. We all the talk of an election has put the pressure on the Conservatives. They've had to launch a crash election plan, and they have been forced to reveal plans that might otherwise have stayed hidden away until an election is actually called. If Mr Brown decides it's not time to go to the country after all, he will have the comfort of knowing that he now has months to pick away at the Tories and their tax package. It's too clever by half, surely, but I hear Labour folk quietly rubbing their hands, confident that they have the Tories where they want them - exposed." Quite possible, indded probable but I think the Conservatives will benefit from having to bring forward proposals , it gets rid of the "they have no policies" stories.


"What strikes me though is the scale of the Labour spin operation tonight, which is designed to turn a "Tories promise you tax cut" story into a "Tories rocked by funding row" tale. I have in my inbox a press release from the Labour Party Press Office, in which Alistair Darling, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, claims: "Today George Osborne made a £3.5 billion tax commitment. Treasury analysis shows it is impossible for him to raise the money he needs to pay for this commitment from his proposals on residence and domicile. Initial costings by the Treasury show that George Osborne's proposal would raise a maximum of £650m, leaving George Osborne at least £2.9 billion short. So George Osborne cannot afford the promises he is making. He cannot afford to cut inheritance tax." ...I look forward to hearing from the Treasury tomorrow why exactly its civil servants and this Government department are doing party political work to undermine another political party's conference." As I have said before, this Government has politicised the civil service to such a degree that they just accept that they work for the Government party rather than the Government of the Country.



Iain Dale has a nice long exposition of this story on his site as well. "Labour seem to be flailing around all over the place on George Osborne's Inheritance tax proposals. Alistair Darling claimed earlier today that the number of non-domiciles in 2008-09 will be below 150,000. He is simply wrong. Expert analysis cited by Accountancy Age and others shows that it is likely to be in excess of 200,000 following rapid recent growth"

"The Treasury's latest attempt to attack Conservative figures has spectacularly backfired tonight. Alistair Darling claims that only 15,000 non-doms have off-shore incomes over £60,000. This is not a figure the Treasury have ever given before. Indeed, on 30th April 2007 Ed Balls answered a question in Parliament saying the Treasury did not have such information.


"Estimates of the tax foregone in the UK as a consequence of the use of the
remittance basis by those not domiciled in the UK are not routinely made.
Information is not held on overseas income and gains that do not give rise to a
tax liability in the UK." (Ed Balls MP, Hansard, 30 Apr 2007, Column 1383W)

As Dawn Primarolo said this is because non-doms are not required to disclose this information: "In general, individuals do not have to inform HMRC of their foreign income or gains unless this is relevant to their UK tax liability." (Dawn Primarolo MP, Hansard, 8 Mar 2007, Column 2220W)."

Something else for Gordon Brown to worry about

Prague Tory has a nice article from 23 July this year regarding how the Canadian Prime Minister called an election with a lead of 5% to 10% and yet lost heavily "but the key feature of the Conservative campaign was their "policy a day" initiative that won round the public and the media." Here is how the polls went in Canada, take a look Gordon and do have another sweaty night...

Funding the Inheritance Tax and the Stamp Duty reduction via taxing non-domiciles

As I have blogged previously, Gordon Brown really should have pulled his finger out and done what he promised back before 1997 and taxed non-domiciles. Now George Osborne has promised a tax of £25,000 per annum per non-domicile and will use that to scrap inheritance tax on the first £1,000,000 of estate and scrapping stamp duty on the first £250,000 of a property. Now Alistair Darling and the BBC are saying it won't work, to be fair Jon Snow on Channel 4 news is pressing Alistair Darling hard on this issue and pushing the non-domicile tax evasion point. Alistair Darling is just repeating the same points over and over again and looking rather shifty.

If you want some figures to attack the BBC biased coverage then take a look at Iain Dale's Diary: Labour Wrong-Footed over Inheritance Tax Funding#links#links.

The claims and counter claims on this matter will run and run and I will be very interested to see how the Daily Mail and the Sun in particular cover this tomorrow. The decision on editorial line will be vitally important and so I expect Gordon Brown and his henchmen have already been putting the pressure on the editors of these two papers (Paul Dacre and Rebekah Wade) to not go overboard praising the policy and to give the Labour claims more fulsome coverage. We will see if the big clunking fist gets his way on this one or if he has something else to increase his stress levels over.

Two programmes to watch tonight - Monday 1 October

Channel 4 - Dispatches - 20:00 - 21:00 "Dispatches reveals the contributions made by different immigrant groups, drawing on exclusive research from the Institute for Public Policy Research." The IPPR is a nice left wing research body who really would not have wanted to come up with the figures that they did for this programme. There has been a lot of advance publicity in the press but oddly the BBC have avoided the results of the research, I think they would have more than happily reported if the results had been more in line with the BBC "narrative".

BBC 1 - Panorama - 20:30 - 21:00 "How I Became a Muslim Extremist: Shiraz Maher, a former member of radical group Hizb ut-Tahrir, explores extremism in Britain and what needs to be done to win the hearts of angry young Muslims." Could be worth a watch but I expect a slight BBC gloss to be put on the threat and of course some allocation of blame to the non-Muslim population for Islamaphobia.

Mind you I am very tired after a hard day working and blogging, so I may just settle down with Mrs NotaSheep and Nigella Lawson!

BBC anti-Conservative attacks - the fightback

Maybe the fightback has started, Oscar a contributor to the Biased BBC forums has today blogged in reply to my "Most of the public like to see fair play, how can we show that the BBC is not playing fair?"

the following "Conservatives did a bit of biting back in today's broadcasts.
1. George Osborne took a swipe at James Naughtie answering one question about Gordon Brown with "well you know him better than I do."
2. Oliver Letwin swatted the usual 'lurch to the right' question from Martha Kearney on WATO with a sharp riposte that is was a piece of Labour propaganda.
3. And best of all at a fringe debate hosted by the BBC on whether Cameron was in touch with the grass roots a conservative woman turned the tables on Martha asking her why the BBC allowed Gordon to get away with 'British jobs for British workers' rhetoric and indeed got feted for it, but if a conservative had said it they would be torn limb from limb. Funnily enough she didn't reply.

It went a small way to getting the message across - but obviously nowhere near enough to combat the shameless bias. I've also noticed that the BBC are shifting the rhetoric on the election to a triumphalist crowing that Brown has set "an elephant trap" for the Conservatives - confirming what I suspected all along, it's all been one of his stunts and he has no intention of calling an election. If people have any sense this will backfire on him - all it tells you about Brown is that he is a dodgy man who sets elephant traps. So much for 'trust'. But no doubt the BBC will come up with yet more spin to cover up for him.
Oscar | 01.10.07 - 2:20 pm |"

I spotted number 1 but I doubt that subtlety such as 1 & 2 will do much to redress the balance, I do like number 3 though...

Gordon's increased tax on petrol

As has been widely reported today, the tax on petrol has risen to £0.65 per litre, that's around £3 a gallon in real terms. John Redwood has come up with a brilliant idea "It’s high time the petrol companies put the tax on the bill and on the pump price so all could see the extent of the great fuel rip off. Some people think high fuel prices are about the policies of oil companies - in the UK they are about a greedy government."

So come on, which British oil retailer has the nerve to do this first, obviously not BP who are in the pocket of the Labour party but surely someone else could do it. Failing that how about a sticker campaign at all garages putting stickers proclaiming the amount per litre that goes to the Treasury compared to the retailer etc. Since a litre of unleaded is all but £1, a nice percentage chart would equate to pennies and be easy for the public to understand. Can anyone design such a sticker?

John Redwood's article can be seen here.

Poor Gordon

A nice article by Plodicus on Gordon Brown's dilemma as to when to call an election, along the same lines as my previously expressed thoughts and well worth a read.

Right of Centre?

I was voted 90th on Iain Dale's top 100 "Right of Centre" bloggers, what does right of centre mean though. The standard left wing - moderate - right wing political model is flawed and always has been. The "right wing" German Nazis had far more in common with the "left wing" Russian communists than with the Conservative party in the UK during World War 2. Currently, the BNP have far more in common with the Socialist Workers Party than they do with the Conservative or Labour parties.

"There are no gays in Iran"

Saturday Night Live just couldn't let that remark by Mahmoud Ahmadinejad go unsatirised -

Thought crime

Wikipedia has had a page showing the "List of scientists opposing the mainstream scientific assessment of global warming", contrary to the MSM propaganda this matter is not settled, you can see the article here for the moment anyway as it is "This article is being considered for deletion in accordance with Wikipedia's deletion policy", join in the discussion here.

Toady Today interview with George Osborne

The 08:10 Toady interview today is with James "If we win the election" Naughtie, I wonder if he will let George Osborne speak without interrupting too much, I wonder if he will try to hide his politically biased venom... We shall see. If I were George Osborne I would point out any interruptions and compare them with last week's interviews with Labour ministers.

Tax is the issue, apparently the stamp duty promise is a downgraded package on the 2005 manifesto- what has your party done on stamp duty James? Oh yes, raised it hugely. Inheritance tax gets away OK. Non domicile levy is being discussed, why not mention Gordon's endless broken promises to review this since before 1997. Go on George attack Gordon's record on this issue. At last George mentions Gordon's "review". Squeeze on unfair benefits claimants figures being examined, I wish Jim Naughtie would stop the heavy breathing during George Osborne's answers, most irritating and designed to show impatience with the interviewee. It would appear that Conservative ambitions are uncosted but Labour ambitions are reported as factual and unquestioned. Dreadful speech by Prime Minister remark allowed to pass by James Naughtie.

One interesting exchange was the "that will be a decision for the Prime Minister, not me" comment by George Osborne and the "do you seriously think that Tony Blair made the decision without discussing it with Gordon Brown" answer that tailed off a bit as James Naughtie realised the implications across the last 10 years Labour policies.

Nice of Nick Robinson to put so much emphasis on the word "desperate" in his opening remarks.

All in all not as biased as I feared/expected.

Some realism on the BBC comments page

The current number 1 recommended comment on Have Your Say - "Tory Party Conference: Your views" is this:


"Added: Sunday, 30 September, 2007, 08:45 GMT 09:45 UK

the BBC interviewed david cameron this sunday morning, asked clearly "you are behind in the polls! how are you going to change this?"

david cameron replied "polls go up and down, you should ask a polster about this, im here to present a real change for the british voter."

he then went on to list policies and answer questions on the individual points.

at the end of the interview, the program went to latest news headlines, the first headline was read out, "david cameron has said he is worried and faces a big challenge to reverse his party's poor showing in the polls!"

come on BBC, disgraceful reporting!

how can you tell us you are not pro labour biased when you report like this?

[denzil69] "

BBC biased against the Conservative leader, who would have thought it...

UPDATE:
This comment, the most recommended at 19:31 last night appears to have disappeared from the comments page, I wonder why?

UPDATE 2:
Andrew at Biased-BBC has followed this up and documented it nicely and will get more feedback than I would here. I will keep this blog updated as I feel this sort of bias needs as much publicity as we can give it.

Bend over Britain

Thanks Theo Spark for this one -

Big Brother Britain

This Labour government's mania for control and surveillance of the law abiding majority in this once free Country gets more out of control by the week. This week the news concerns "Officials from the top of Government to lowly council officers will be given unprecedented powers to access details of every phone call in Britain under laws coming into force tomorrow.

The new rules compel phone companies to retain information, however private, about all landline and mobile calls, and make them available to some 795 public bodies and quangos.

The move, enacted by the personal decree of Home Secretary Jacqui Smith, will give police and security services a right they have long demanded: to delve at will into the phone records of British citizens and businesses."

"Files will also be kept on the sending and receipt of text messages.

By 2009 the Government plans to extend the rules to cover internet use: the websites we have visited, the people we have emailed and phone calls made over the net."

"The new measures were implemented after the Home Secretary signed a 'statutory instrument' on July 26. The process allows the Government to alter laws without a full act of Parliament.

The move was nodded through the House of Lords two days earlier without a debate."

Debate, why should we need a vote; it's all for the good of us, it must be - Gordon wants it. Will the BBC cover this attack on freedom, will they f**k.

Banana Republic

Just read it.

The Economy is FUBAR (part 4)

For more on the faltering UK economy and why Gordon Brown has to call a snap election read this article in the Mail on Sunday.

"Even as he was making his triumphant conference address in Bournemouth, the cold winds of economic reality whipped around Mr Brown's ears. Moments before he took the stage, new data showed the Government borrowed a colossal £9.1 billion last month — the worst August on record and about £3 billion more than predicted.

In his final budget as Chancellor, in March, Mr Brown said that borrowing would fall this year — the August figures gave that the lie. " The Prime Minister will not have been happy to see the public finances once again failing to match up to Treasury forecasts," says Robert Chote, the director of the independent Institute for Fiscal Studies."

Any coverage of that on the BBC last week or this? Of course not, it's not part of the "narrative".

Andrew Gilligan comes clean

Andrew Gilligan has a Comment is Free article mainly attacking Alastair Campbell and I am all ion favour of that. Hidden in amongst this article is this admission "For my part, I confess I've never in the least minded criticism from Alastair. I'm part of a long list of people on the left - Ken Livingstone, George Galloway, Rhodri Morgan - whose careers have received the priceless boost of being attacked by New Labour." Yet another (now ex) BBC man who is "part of the left", how many more are there there?

BBC anti-Conservative party attacks

I have blogged previously about the BBC attacking the Conservative party and you can read much more about the BBC's inherent anti-Conservative and pro-Labour stance and especially their love-in with Gordon Brown at Biased BBC. Some comments in the Biased BBC forum caught my eye this morning and I repeat them here to show that there are people who will report on any BBC bias in this coming week. After the disgustingly pro-Brown coverage especially the PM programme, I have already said that the coverage of the Conservative party conference will be from a completely different angle and will include the compulsory "lurch to the right" comment if any Conservative mentions immigration whilst Margaret Hodge, Gordon Brown, Jack Straw etc. can "play the race card" without being accused of so doing.
My comments in italics


Comment 1:
"Oscar:
Following on from Towcestrian's comments, the BBC kicked off coverage of the Conservative conference (6pm news on R4) quoting Alistair Darling berating the Conservatives over their review of Gordon's blundering mess of a tax credit scheme. The report ended with a threatening - 'the Tories won't be allowed to get away with any unaccounted spending plans'. Amazing really after Brown has just got away with a whole raft of unaccounted spending plans in his fantasy of 'personalised' health care and 'personal tutors' for everyone and education funding up to 21 for low income families etc etc etc. without any airtime given to the opposition. In the beeboid world only Conservatives have to be held to account. When the Great Brown Man speaks they get so choked with pride and emotion somehow no questions are asked.
Oscar | 29.09.07 - 6:24 pm |"

Oscar, the Labour spending plans are fully costed and workable, they must be they are the product of Brown and Darling, whilst the Conservative ones must be uncosted and either reckless or stringent cuts.


Comment 2:
"Martin:
The 5 lite attack dogs at work on the Tories already. Attacking a Tory for comments that some BNP supporters might have legitimate points. (what that our Country is being over run and turned into an Islamic state?)

Noticed that they didn't mention that Margaret Hodge had made similar comments not that long ago.

THIS IS JUST THE START OF THE BBC ATTACK ON THE TORIES
Martin | 30.09.07 - 8:52 am |"

See above Martin, see above. Nobody ever said that the BBC was unbiased; did they?


Comment 3:
"Martin:
You guys have got to check out Andrew (Nu Labour luvvie) Marr's interview with Cameron.

Endless question about Green Taxes and how they don't work. Don't seem to remember him asking Labour or Lib Dems about that?

Oh and as usual he's asking Cameron to justify every spending pledge. Yet last week Brown went down a huge list of spending pledges yet NOT a single question from the BBC as how to fund them.

Why not Andrew Marr?
Martin | 30.09.07 - 9:27 am |"

The answer to that is obvious Martin, it is because Andrew Marr is a BBC Labour supporting stooge.


Comment 4:
"Oscar:
Martin - agree with every word. The contrast with Marr's interview last week when Brown was treated like royalty, and his attempt to humiliate Cameron this week couldn't have been greater. Marr even stooped to rustling around with the newspapers while Cameron was speaking. Why is a party that isn't in power (and on present polls is not likely to be in power) subjected to the third degree while the government gets away with fantasy plans for spending sprees with no questions asked. When policies that were dubbed as nasty right wing filth when Michael Howard produced them are suddenly hailed as wonderful when Brown spouts them, and when the BBC entirely jettison their green agenda in the interests of getting at the Tories, it shows the depths of their sheer unprincipled partisanship. When it comes to NuLab they've gone from being the feral press to the fawning press at a single brownite stroke.
Oscar | 30.09.07 - 10:32 am | "

Yes that would explain it Oscar, the bias is becoming so noticeable that I wonder if David Cameron should "go big on it" during his speech...


Comment 5:
"Oscar:
William Hague gave a barnstorming performance to open the Conservative Conference packed with good one liners leaving the BBC spoilt for choice for their coverage. What did the World at One do instead? They didn't mention Hague's speech at all but spent ages playing inaudible sounds from Blackpool to show up some sound problems the conference had experienced. It was just ridiculous and petty and reveals what we all know - the BBC are openly campaigning for the Labour party in the run up to a possible GE.
Oscar | 30.09.07 - 4:54 pm |"

Any good speech must be ignored, the "narrative" is dissent, problems, splits and lurches to the right.


Comment 6:
"Oscar:
And as a postscript - the R4 5 o'clock bulletin actually headlined (I paraphrase) 'On top of the bad news in the opinion polls the conservative party conference has had another setback' What setback could that be? Yup - the earthshattering information that there've been technical problems with the sound system. And they call it news.
Oscar | 30.09.07 - 5:45 pm |"

Any good speech must be ignored, the "narrative" is dissent, problems, splits and lurches to the right.


Comment 7:
"bodo:
It looks like the BBC has their 'narrative' for the Tory party conference all sorted out. There is a crisis in the polls, Cameron is struggling, there is a huge challenge ahead, there are appeals for unity, and some Tory ministers have made "extremely controversial" comments about immigration. Expect lots more references to "a lurch to the right", rumours of leadership challenges etc etc. Pretty much every report looks like it's going to be a negative one.
I expect that even sound Tory proposals will be headlined with the Labour reaction, i.e.; " the government has criticised the latest Tory proposals to..." - just as they did with John Redwood's proposals to cut red tape a few weeks ago.

Still, I expect the BBC reporters are looking forward to getting their teeth into some politicians, especially after the fawning and totally uncritical and unquestioning coverage that the Labour Party conference got last week.
bodo | 30.09.07 - 6:05 pm | "

As above, the "narrative" is dissent, problems, splits and lurches to the right.


Comment 8:
Voice of Reason:
Last Sunday Julian Worricker's programme had three guests who all agreed amongst them selves that they all wanted 10 more years of a Labour government. I was outraged by the lack of balance this displayed but presumed it was because of the Labour conference starting that day. Yesterday the programme had three guests who all agreed amongst themselves that David Cameron was rubbish and Labour was only only party worth voting for. |The BBC has now given up all pretense at being a national broadcaster and is now simply a vehicle for Labour propaganda
Voice of Reason | 01.10.07 - 11:15 am |

Why do the Conservative leadership not bring this up again and again. It is a disgusting policy decision by the BBC that needs attacking.


Comment 9:
Oscar:
The BBC has now given up all pretense at being a national broadcaster and is now simply a vehicle for Labour propaganda
Voice of Reason | 01.10.07 - 11:15 am

Agreed. It's incredible how blatant the BBC is about their diehard support for the Labour government. All fighting talk of independence died with the demise of Blair. Since Brown arrived the slavish adherence to Brown led spin and bully boy tactics against the opposition is pretty much complete. And the honourable exception of Andrew Neil, whose coverage of the Lab party conference was frequently 'off message' - is treated like a pariah in the BBC hierarchy. Wonder how long his programme will last with cuts looming.
Oscar | 01.10.07 - 11:42 am |

We all know it, but what can we do about it?



If you hear any more of this type of coverage do please add it in the comments to this entry in my blog.

Do you need to stay up all night?

If you don't want to go to sleep tonight, then read this article, nightmares all but guaranteed...

The speech David Cameron won't make

Richard Littlejohn has written the speech he would give if he was David Cameron. He's not and I don't think David Cameron's speech will bear much resemblance to this speech, nor do I think that David Davis would have given such a speech if he had won the leadership election instead of David Cameron. However, it is way past the time that David Cameron and the rest of the Conservative shadow cabinet stopped being nice and cuddly to try and stop the BBC from crushing them, and realise that that a lot of the public have finally realised what this Labour government have got away with for 10 years and want some attacks on this Labour government. Forget being nice, get Gordon.

Brown pledges bluetongue action

According to the BBC, "Brown pledges bluetongue action". Isn't this what he was trying to do when he invited Lady Thatcher to Number 10?.

Sorry but I couldn't resist making that joke...

Goodbye Jane

Jane Garvey is leaving BBC 5 Live and the BBC are asking for our fond reminiscences of her broadcasting genius. I did enter my suggestion yesterday on the relevant BBC suggestion page but oddly the BBC have decided not to use it. My suggestion was of course the subject of this post back in May. It concerned Jane's reminiscences about the 1997 election night party atmosphere at Broadcasting House as the BBC celebrated Labour winning the election. Here's the transcript of the broadcast -
"Jane Garvey: I do remember I walked back in - we were broadcasting then from Broadcasting House in the centre of London, all very upmarket in those days - and the corridors of Broadcasting House were strewn with empty champagne bottles. [Hearty laugh from Peter Allen] I'll always remember that. Er... not that the BBC were celebrating in any way, shape or form…

Peter Allen: No not all...

Jane Garvey: ...and actually I think it's fair to say that in the intervening years... er... the BBC, if it ever was in love with Labour has probably fallen out of love with Labour, or learnt to fall back in, or basically just learnt to be in the middle somewhere which is how it should be. Um, but there was always the suggestion that the BBC was full of pinkos who couldn't wait for Labour to get back into power. That may have been the case - who knows - but as I say there have been a few problems along the way over the last ten years. Wish I hadn't started this now. "

Ah, broadcasting genius...

Take a look at Biased-BBC for their coverage of this matter.

Will he or won't he?

Gordon, Gordon, Gordon, it must be hard being Gordon. The Labour party is sitting pretty in the opinion polls and he is receiving favourable coverage from the tame media, the Labour party pulled together and the press didn't look too deeply for any dissension. By contrast the press will be out to look for any signs of disagreement within the Conservative party next week, Lord Tebbit has been used for this purpose this weekend already, and the BBC will not give David Cameron the full PM positive view treatment that they accorded Gordon Brown last week. So what's the problem, why is Gordon worried? He's a worrier, just look at the chewed nails and the nose picking, what if it all goes wrong? What if the Sunderland council by-election result is more representative than the polls? What if the Labour vote is just piling up in the Labour safe seats and not in the marginals? What if the economy tips over between calling the election and election day? What if someone, somewhere, starts to attack Gordon Brown's record and personal reputation as they should do? What if the BBC can no longer keep the lid on the nose-picking and the other more scurrilous stories that are doing the rounds? What if, what if, what if?

BBC censorship?

I blogged yesterday about the Mariella and Gordon love-in. Thanks to "Lurker in a Burqua" on Biased BBC we can see that the BBC have changed the caption under the picture of Mariella Frostrup within that article. The original caption was "Ms Frostrup is a family friend of the Browns", the new caption is "Ms Frostrup asked Mr Brown about the election date". You can see the original here and the new version here - Don't you just love Google cache?

What caused the BBC to change the caption? Surely Mariella isn't embarrassed at being fingered as a friend of the Browns. Surely Gordon isn't embarrassed that his tame interviewer has been outed as a family friend. Surely the BBC aren't trying to stop highlighting the friendship. Surely the BBC aren't doing Gordon's bidding or trying to protect him...

Gordon Brown is upping the temperature over the coming election

The Brown Broadcasting Corporation has upped the temperature over the possibility of Gordon Brown calling a general election here and here. It would appear that "Labour has begun recruiting people who would play an integral role in any forthcoming general election campaign, the BBC understands.
A number of individuals have been asked by the party if they could begin work next Monday, BBC political editor Nick Robinson says. Their jobs range from planning the logistics of campaigns to liaising with voters and the media. The recruitment process is not proof that a snap poll will be held, however. And advisers to Gordon Brown continue to insist that the prime minister has yet to decide whether to hold an autumn election." Surely Prudence Brown wouldn't spend money on wages for people to run an election campaign that isn't going to happen... Also "Women's minister Barbara Follett has fuelled fresh speculation about a possible autumn general election. Speaking at a Labour Party conference fringe meeting, she said there was an "80% chance", suggesting 25 October, 1 or 8 November as possible dates. Mrs Follett is the first minister to speak so explicitly about the chances of a snap poll and its timing. Skills Secretary John Denham has said opinion polls predicting election gains were "exciting" to see. Meanwhile, Ed Balls, schools secretary and aide to Prime Minister Gordon Brown questioned whether the greater gamble would be to wait before having a snap poll. Senior figures are suggesting a snap poll is now more rather than less likely and Mr Brown has again urged Tory supporters and members to join him. Mrs Follett told a conference fringe meeting: "When I came here I thought there would be a 40% chance - I now think there's an 80% chance. "It's about having a mandate, having a fresh start, whether its 25 October, 1 November or 8 November," she said."

There was an interesting letter in today's Telegraph "Sir- I have already been contacted by Electoral Services regarding my availability for polling station duties, listing all Thursdays from October 18 to the end of February, except for those in December. Admittedly this is described as a "contingency plan", but this is the first time I have known this to happen. Fay Davies, Barnet, Hertfordshire" I think the pressure is building and the planning so advanced that even cautious Gordon will feel the time is ripe to go to electorate.

The Labour attacks on Boris Johnson & "Posh Tories"

I blogged here, here, here and here that I believe Boris Johnson to be a dream opponent for the Labour party and their in-house broadcaster, the BBC and how his "poshness" and being an ex-Etonian would be targeted relentlessly by them. In the aforementioned articles I showed a few examples, these incidents will increase now he is the official candidate but I see that Blinky Ed Balls layed into Boris Johnson and David Cameron yesterday, he described Boris as "a Bullingdon club throwback to a bygone age" and said that "David Cameron's back to basics is back-to-privilege" and that "they are still the Tory party of the privileged few". Expect to read, hear and watch much more of this over the run up to the General election and the London Mayoral elections, in which ever order they come...

UPDATE:
Hazel Blears was at it at 08:40 on Friday's ToadyToday programme, even Edward Stourton sounded embarassed!

An article worth reading

Read this article by Peter Oborne on "Magna Carta 2007 - an updated version to protect us from an overweening State".

George Bush is a moron

Well that's got the attention of the anti-Bush brigade so now comes the story. Sites such as this "I just have to mention it. Thursday's episode of The Daily Show with Jon Stewart. Oh my God. How funny was it? And for a very wrong reason indeed. I've already shared it with others. George W Bush thought Nelson Mandela is dead? Dude! How wrong could he possibly be! It was incredibly funny though. Especially Jon Stewart's reaction.", this "Usually he’s just too easy a target to bother posting on his many gaffes, and after almost two full terms you’d think you’d get used to this president, but unfortunately George Bush still conspires to surprise with another incredible dose of the stupid. Part of the reason why there is not this instant democracy in Iraq is because people are still recovering from Saddam Hussein’s brutal rule. I thought an interesting comment was made when somebody said to me, I heard somebody say, where’s Mandela? Well, Mandela is dead, because Saddam Hussein killed all the Mandelas. He was a brutal tyrant that divided people up and split families, and people are recovering from this.", this "The Daily Show just showed another classic Bushism: "Today I hear people say, 'Where's Mandela?' Well, Mandela's dead." Did I miss a meeting? Just for contrast John Stewart's now interviewing Bill Clinton...", this "Nelson Mandela is still very much alive despite an embarrassing gaffe by U.S. President George W. Bush, who alluded to the former South African leader's death in an attempt to explain sectarian violence in Iraq. "It's out there. All we can do is reassure people, especially South Africans, that President Mandela is alive," Achmat Dangor, chief executive officer of the Nelson Mandela Foundation, said as Bush's comments received worldwide coverage. In a speech defending his administration's Iraq policy, Bush said former Iraqi President Saddam Hussein's brutality had made it impossible for a unifying leader to emerge and stop the sectarian violence that has engulfed the Middle Eastern nation. "I heard somebody say, Where's Mandela?' Well, Mandela's dead because Saddam Hussein killed all the Mandelas," Bush, who has a reputation for verbal faux pas, said in a press conference in Washington on Thursday. Jailed for 27 years for fighting white minority rule, Mandela became South Africa's first black president in 1994. He won a Nobel Peace Prize for preaching racial harmony and guiding the nation peacefully into the post-apartheid era. References to his death -- Mandela is now 89 and increasingly frail -- are seen as insensitive in South Africa.", this "Strap Him Down and Sedate Him - Fast
I saw this last night on the Daily Show, a breathtaking example of how utterly screwed up America's presidency has become. It was George w. Bush hisself opining on the sad fate of Nelson Mandela: "I heard somebody say, Where's Mandela?' Well, Mandela's dead because Saddam Hussein killed all the Mandelas." George Bush, by all accounts is not a stupid man. Oh hell, he is so."

So it's clear, George Bush is a moron, he thinks Sadam Hussein killed Nelson Mandela. Well no, that wasn't what he said or meant; this is what he said "Part of the reason why there is not this instant democracy in Iraq is because people are still recovering from Saddam Hussein's brutal rule. I thought an interesting comment was made when somebody said to me, I heard somebody say, where's Mandela? Well, Mandela is dead, because Saddam Hussein killed all the Mandelas. He was a brutal tyrant that divided people up and split families, and people are recovering from this. So there's a psychological recovery that is taking place. And it's hard work for them. And I understand it's hard work for them. Having said that, I'm not going the give them a pass when it comes to the central government's reconciliation efforts." You can read the whole transcript here. George Bush was using an analogy, he was explaining why in Iraq there was no Nelson Mandela type figure as there had been in South Africa. As you can read at the Captains Quarters "Bush didn't claim that the Nelson Mandela himself was specifically dead -- he used Mandela as a metaphor for the lack of civil disobedients that could have facilitated a peaceful transition of power. Those that had existed in Iraq got murdered by the tyrant, a fate that did not befall Nelson Mandela in South Africa.
It's really a simple analogy. In fact, it's so simple that everyone but a Reuters journalist could figure it out. That does mean a moron attended the press conference, but it wasn't the man behind the podium."

Thanks to Tim Blair for the heads up.

For more on the perceived stupidity of George Bush take a look at this previous article of mine.

Sharia Law

See this for a previous take on the coming of Sharia Law to Britain and see this for he BBC's take on the issue - "Some British Muslims want Shari'ah law implemented in the UK. But how could this work alongside the existing legal system? Shari'ah law is already practiced informally here to resolve Islamic divorce, inheritance and family disputes. But many in the west see Shari'ah as oppressive and brutal with punishments like stoning and amputations.
Award winning filmmaker Ruhi Hamid, a British Muslim goes to Nigeria to see Shari'ah law in action."

Some British Muslims? I think the last figures I saw showed that "Four out of 10 British Muslims want sharia law introduced into parts of the country".

The MSM news have been covering one Muslim supporter of Sharia law recently, Dr Omer Butt. You can read the BBC article here but the salient points are that "A dentist who told a female patient she must wear a Muslim headscarf to receive treatment has been found guilty of serious professional misconduct."
"Dr Omer Butt was found guilty of discriminating against the woman, known as Ms A, by a disciplinary panel of the General Dental Council (GDC)."

And the punishment was.... "an admonition at the end of the three-day GDC hearing."

"Giving evidence in his defence, Dr Butt said he "politely requested" the woman, a non-practising Muslim, to wear a headscarf.

He said it was "unlawful" for him, as a Muslim, to look at a Muslim woman who was not properly covered up."
Look out for a lot more of this type of "unlawful" defence as we are got used to the idea that Sharia law has a proper standing in the UK. In this case it was a Muslim woman that he wanted to wear a headscarf before he would treat her, in a few years it will be all women - see Egypt, Malaysia, Indonesia, etc. etc. etc.

They do love HMV at the BBC

The BBC's positive coverage of everything Gordon Brown says or does is reaching new levels. Take a look at this "sketch" by Nick Assinder and try to keep your last meal down. Headlined "Gordon the tease melts Mariella" the more interesting extracts run as follows (my comments in italics):

"Tony Blair may have flirted outrageously and Bill Clinton may have mesmerised with his louche charisma."
No mention of any right of centre flirters then, I wonder why?

"But when it comes to turning grown women into stammering jellies, Gordon Brown, it appears, is your man."
Is this real, or part of the decided "narrative" that Gordon Brown is a sex symbol for women. It must be footage like this that turns them on -

"Mariella Frostrup, not normally known as a pushover, seemed to come over all unnecessary when she hosted a question-and-answer session with the prime minister at the Labour conference."
Mariella has several good qualities but is she renowned a hard questioner, I think not. In fact I would have said that her career had been based largely upon flirting with male guests.

"You might think she would have become immune to the PM's entirely unintentional charms by now - after all, she is a family friend."
Or you might think that as a family friend and occasional actress it would be in her interest to act "all unnecessary". You might also winder why the BBC use a Gordon Brown supporter to host this Q&A at the Labour conference.

"But no. Her normally composed TV persona slipped as she introduced the prime minister with just one giggle too many and then, after around the third mention of his official title, gasped: "I shall lapse into 'Gordon' shortly, I am sure." "
Well she is a family friend so I doubt she calls him anything but Gordon over a family lunch.

"Mr Brown treated the question with precisely the same weight as he did all those which followed."
Mr Brown doesn't have much light and shade in his speaking, just solidity and a fake smile.

"Ms Frostrup asked Mr Brown about the election date
He promised his answer would be shorter than the question - and quite dramatically failed to deliver.

He then led us into a sort of extended state of deja vu as we listened again to his favourite jokes (very good but not worth this amount of retelling) and some lengthy expositions of the policies we had already had explained from the conference floor over the past few days."
Gordon Brown's favourite tactic for years has been to bombard his audience with figures, lots of figures, so many figures until the audience a)can no longer process information, b) forget what the question was and/or c) lose the will to live. Gordon has now added the trick of repeating the same phrases over and over and over and over and over again, it saves thinking of new things to say and he has learnt the key phrases very well indeed; in New Labour Britain, this is known as foreplay.

"Mr Brown ruled out a referendum on the EU treaty and abolishing the remaining grammar schools, and he again said he wanted to "reach out" to supporters and even members of other parties to join his crusade for a better Britain."
We are nearing the formation of a one party state in England which is just what the BBC want.

"By the way, all this reaching-out talk has sparked rumours there are some more Tories being lined up to defect to Labour - perhaps at the start of next week's Conservative party conference."
You think? Gordon Brown will do all that he can to ensure that the "narrative" at the Conservative party conference will be negative - splits, defections and discontent to contrast with the joy abounding at the Labour party conference; the BBC will set the mood music beautifully.

"Then, after a much longer time than anyone had expected, Ms Frostrup brought proceedings to a close with something along the lines of: "I know you could sit here and chat all day, but some of us have jobs to go to.""
Really Mariella, what is your current day job?

"But then, as the sound of scores of chair legs scraping on the floor filled the centre as delegates prepared to exit, she landed a corker.

"So when will the general election be then?" Ms Frostrup asked.

Silence reigned.

"Charming as you are, Mariella, the first person I would have to talk to is the Queen," came the reply.

Oh Gordon, you are awful. And a terrible tease."
Tease, hmmm, fat fraudulent liar more like.





HMV = His Masters Voice

UPDATE:
If you want to read a more "pungent" critique of the relationship between the BBC and Gordon Brown shown by the Mariella Frostrup interview then you could take a look at The Devil's Kitchen: The Gobblin' Lothario.

If you have a strong stomach you might even read this earlier article about Gordon Brown's sex appeal to both women and gay men.

The NHS up close - (The shade)

Mr NotaSheep found himself in hospital very recently with a severe allergic reaction. Once pumped full of antihistamines and pain killers what I really wanted to do was to sleep, but sleep on a NHS Acute Observation Ward is not easy to come by. One patient talked to himself all night; "Ow, ow, I wanna go home, go home, I wanna go home" for six hours, he was not a well man but the nurses did nothing, surely a side room could have been found for him. Then there were the nurses who chatted all night about this and that, only occasionally looking in on a patient who needed treatment, I was visited not at all that night, it was Mrs NotaSheep who gave me water and a few bites of an apple. To make sleep harder to come by, the ward lights were left on all night in the male ward (although they were off in the next door female ward - same nurses' station). In the morning after some of the nurses had discussed career paths, spoken to their various family members about the day ahead and chatted to the cleaners, Mr non-stop talk was moved to a proper ward and the lights were turned off, leaving the ward in semi darkness for half an hour before the sun came flooding in. I would have thought that sleep was a good medicine, if so I was denied it during my stay. The staff were generally friendly and competent and out of the half a dozen or so nurses and two doctors I saw, at least one spoke English like a native. The instructions from the East European Doctor re tablet taking were no helped by his inability to cope with English tenses, which made our conversation over when I should take tablets as opposed to when I had taken tablets, slightly surreal.

Overheard homework - (The light)

I was at a client's house yesterday when I overheard his daughter discussing her music homework with a relative. The girl was trying to get a list together of singers who write their own songs and was advised to include Barry Manilow in her list. "Does he write his own songs then?" she asked. How I restrained myself from bursting into song, I do not know:

"I write the songs that make the whole world sing
I write the songs of love and special things
I write the songs that make the young girls cry
I write the songs, I write the songs"


Interestingly (and I use the word wrongly - thanks Stephen Fry for that line) although Barry Manilow wrote many of his own songs, "I write the songs" was written by Bruce Johnston.

Light and shade

I don't normally do much in the way of personal blogging but the next two items are in that territory; one light, one definitely not.

Trevor Phillips

Trevor Phillips has always been part of the New Labour project; he was a close friend of Peter Mandelson, working with him at London Weekend Television and Peter Mandelson was his best man at his wedding. He only joined the Labour Party so as to campaign to be London Mayor but went on to become Chair of the London Assembly. Trevor Phillips was a great champion of Multiculturism, so it upset many of his fellow travellers on the left of British politics when he said in 2004 (extract is from the CRE website link here) that Multiculturalism was born out of a desire to recognise that diversity is a good thing, and to appreciate the many qualities newcomers brought to Britain. But he stressed that today we face new challenges that simply can’t be answered in the old language of race relations: My quarrel is not with those who like diversity. It is with those who want to make a fetish of our historical differences to the point where multiculturalism, as it is practised, becomes ridiculous, or worse still, a dangerous form of benign neglect and exclusion.

This was a strange article to write as it seemed to go against so much of what he had written and said in the past. In 2003 he wrote an article where he said "from Rome, through Constantinople to Venice and London, our (European) nations have a history of peacefully absorbing huge, diverse movements of people, driven by war, famine and persecution; and there is no history of long-term ethnic segregation of the kind one can see in any US city." A statement that any trip to Southall, Brixton, Tower Hamlets or many northern British towns would render negated.

In 2006 Trevor Phillips was appointed head of the Commission for Equalities and Human Rights, which was to be the great organisation promoting equality issues across the full raft of ethnic, gender, sexual-orientation, disability and other minority interests.

So what was Trevor Phillips thinking when he said at a Labour conference fringe meeting that British history should be rewritten to make it "more inclusive". He said Muslims were also part of the national story and "sometimes we have to go back into the tapestry and insert some threads that were lost". He quoted the example of the Spanish Armada, which was held up by the Turks at the request of Queen Elizabeth I. "It was the Turks who saved us," Mr Phillips told a Labour fringe meeting. You can read more about this here with the usual high level of BBC journalistic critical coverage. Now Mr Phillips studied Chemistry at Imperial College, London and I do not know when he stopped studying history. So here are a few facts to help him with the story of the defeat of the Spanish Armada...

1) There was no Turkey in the 16th century, I think he must be thinking of the Ottoman Empire, except all empires are bad so best to say Turks

2) Maybe Trevor Phillips is thinking of the battles of the early 1570's between the Ottoman Empire and the Spanish, the Spanish defending against the rise of the Islamic Ottoman empire's expansionism. Maybe someone has told him about the Battle of Lepanto in 1571.

3) The Ottoman Empire was at war with Spain in the late 16th century as were England but the causes were not the same.

4) Did you notice I said England (above)? That's because there was no Britain in the 16th century, the Kingdom of Great Britain only coming into existence under the 1707 Act of Union. Yes they did share a monarch from 1603 but they were separate countries, a bit like now after devolution...

5) Trevor Phillips theory comes direct from Dr Jerry Brotton, who postulates about a letter sent by Elizabeth 1 "The letter, ordered the ambassador, William Harborne, to incite the Turks to harry the Spanish navy. It was written in the mid-1580s"
Thank you Conservative Party Reptile for helping with this bit, 16th Century wars and politics not being my speciality. "It was actually written in 1584 or 1585, 3 or 4 years before the Armada, and had no impact on Turkish policy, because they were busy at the time in the Balkans."

6) I believe the Spanish Armada along with their Portuguese allies were defeated by an English navy with assistance from some of the Dutch navy, no Ottoman navy were noticed off of the coast of England or Scotland at that time.


Since Trevor Phillips is so concerned with emphasising the relationships between England and the Ottoman Empire, will he also push for the following subjects to be taught at school:

1) The life and times of Kurtoğlu Muslihiddin Reis

2) The campaigns of Admiral Barbarossa

3) The story of Malta and the Ottoman Empire

4) 1683 - When a 140,000 strong Ottoman Empire army arrives at Vienna in June and started to besiege the city. The siege was broken at the Battle of Vienna on September 12 with the arrival of a force of 70,000 Polish, Austrians and Germans under the Polish-Lithuanian king Jan III Sobieski, whose cavalry turns their flank. Considered to be the turning point in the Ottoman Empire's fortunes. Maybe this story wouldn't fit the "narrative" of evil Christian Crusaders and gentle Ottoman's defending their lands that we are encouraged to believe.

5) The story of The Coming Of The Corsairs and how Ottoman corsairs took the number of Europeans enslaved 1530-1780 at 1.25 million.


UPDATE:
Laban at Biased BBC has just posted an excellent digest of this story, take a look there.

Burma & Tibet

It is good to see the MSM finally catching up with those of us who have been trying to alert the world to the iniquities of the Burmese military rulers.

Maybe the MSM could also look at another Buddhist country that has been pillaged by a military dictatorship; I refer to Tibet. Somehow I doubt that we shall see much coverage of the terror that followed the Chinese invasion of Tibet in the pages of News International papers.

I just caught the end of the Radio 4 Toady Today programme reporting on events in Burma and heard them wonder if China could get more involved so as to protect the pro-democracy protesters. Two thoughts came to my mind:

1) do the BBC not realise which country it is that has been supporting the Burmese Military Government over recent years. I found this article that really shows naivety "Beijing is traditionally reluctant to speak publicly about the internal affairs of other countries.", reluctant to speak but happy to invade Tibet though. China imports much raw materials from Burma and is also building oil pipelines through Burma to ensure ever more oil can reach China to fuel its plans for world domination economic growth. Also before the BBC praise China and its ability to help Burma, maybe they could broadcast the fact that "Beijing used its veto in the United Nations' Security Council in January to block criticism of Burma's military junta."

2) do the BBC not think that promoting China as a country that could help Burma's pro-democracy demonstrators is rather odd, have the BBC forgotten the Tiananmen Square massacre?


Does anyone else find it ironic that the Labour Government are standing up for the rights of the Burmese people to hold protest marches in Rangoon and Mandalay having previously stopped the British people protesting within one kilometre of Parliament without the advance permission of the Metropolitan police.

Google

Google is a great tool but I wonder if he person who reached my site by googling quran +sheep +sex really found what he was looking for here? I am sure I have use each of those three words in separate articles but I doubt if I could squeeze them into one article.

Where are the Conservative voters of 2005 now?

I blogged yesterday that there were several strategies that Gordon Brown could follow in order to a) win the coming general election and b) win a European Treaty referendum or avoid holding one. I finished by saying that "The anti-EU Constitution movement needs to galvanise itself and I am afraid that the priority is to support the Conservatives rather than UKIP because UKIP cannot win any seats but splitting the pro-referendum vote between Conservatives and UKIP will give Labour and the Lib Dems more seats than would otherwise be the case."

It would appear that one reason behind the Conservative's poor performance in the opinion polls is that 5% of the electorate (albeit on a small sample) that voted Conservative in 2005 now intend to vote UKIP. The Cameroonie's obsession with moving to the middle ground of British politics and so appeasing the BBC, may have lost them the Euro-sceptic supporters that they also need to win a general election. Of course the BBC having helped to get the most acceptable (to the BBC)of the Conservative candidates elected as Conservative leader can now help to attack him for his being an old Etonian, out of touch with the British public and so on. The same attacks that will be unleashed with even more ferocity on Boris Johnson once he is the official Conservative candidate for London Mayor.

The Labour government and their propaganda wing, the BBC, will do their best to ensure that we are ruled by a Labour government until the day comes when the European project comes to fruition.

Boris Johnson's web site is back

Following my post about the disappearance of Boris Johnson's web site, I hope that you have all followed the links to see what was the cause. This affair has become a bit of a cause celebre in the blogosphere although MSM coverage has been minimal. However, I read that this may be about to change as "Tonight, during the Saryusz-Wolski report "Towards a common European foreign policy on energy" the Euro realist MEP Tom Wise will use parliamentary privilege to spell out the allegations against Alisher Usmanov. He has been talking to Craig Murray to ensure that the allegations are accurate and to the point...Under the rules governing parliamentary privilege, any news organisation can repeat what has been said in the Parliament chamber, allowing the MSM to circumvent the legal threats being thrown about by Usmanov's lawyers Schillings."

We shall see, I still think that Britain's reputation as the best place in the world to sue for libel will still scare off much of the MSM. In addition the Dr Laurence Godfrey vs Demon Internet case which set the worrying precedent for Internet hosting companies has many of them scared rigid that in the future they may be sued for libel by a very wealthy and powerful businessman rather than an hirsute nuclear physicist.

It's generous Gordon, not.

An announcement made at the Labour conference this week was that of giving all service personnel serving six months or more in Afghanistan or Iraq a £140 rebate off of their Council Tax. The BBC report is here.

Of course like most New Labour announcements, the headline is better than the reality. There is no new money being made available so this money will come out of existing funds. The MOD press release boasts a 25 per cent rebate based upon ‘the average Band D Council tax bill’, however the small print shows that they’ve not actually used the Band D figure to calculate the rebate; instead, they’ve used the figure for average council tax. This means, troops living in Band D accommodation are getting £25 less than they should (£140 rather than £165). Also this rebate is of course less than the rebate that the government grants to prisoners, who pay no council tax whilst in prison.

You can read more about the MOD's view of this announcement on Iain Dale.

I am embarrassed, but also a little proud

Iain Dale's Diary: Guide to Blogging 2007: Top 100 Right of Centre Blogs - 90th position - not bad for a relative newbie.

New Liebour

Thanks to Theo Spark for this image -

BBC PM programme

17:30 to 17:43 was 13 minutes of Gordon Brown adulation. An excerpt from his speech, quite a lot of the staged applause and then interviews with five or six current Cabinet colleagues about how marvellous Gordon Brown is, how fantastic his speech was etc. etc. etc. Then by way of contrast there was an interview with John Hutton who told us how marvellous Gordon Brown was and how he, a Tony Blair supporter, had been so pleasantly surprised by how marvellous Gordon Brown was. John Hutton also told the ever so gentle interviewer how Gordon Brown would only call a general election if it was in the country's interest and how Gordon Brown's decisive leadership contrasted with the shambles that is the Conservative party. Finally there was "expert" analysis from a BBC political "expert" who told us how marvellous Gordon Brown was and how he didn't think Gordon would call an election soon because he was so trustworthy and didn't want to be seen as cutting and running and so ruining his trustworthiness.

That was thirteen minutes of pro Gordon Brown coverage, do you think we will get the same next week when David Cameron makes his conference speech?

Poor Gordon, poor us (part 4)

I blogged twice in August about Gordon's indecision about calling an election this year. As I said in the second article "I actually hope that he does win because like the 1992 election (but more so) this is the election to lose; when the economy fails the government in charge will be blamed. So don't campaign too hard David Cameron, hold back on you best shots and let Gordon get back in. I so much want to see his face as the economy that he has talked up for so long tips over into recession. The blame for the misery this will cause for millions in this country will have to laid upon Gordon Brown and even the best efforts of the BBC and the rest of the MSM will persuade the public otherwise. The crash will be painful and many will suffer but that is a given anyway (it is all but unavoidable), the important thing is that Gordon Brown and the rest of this sorry government take the blame and the opprobrium of the British public." Since I wrote that article we have had the Northern Rock debacle and Alan Greenspan's exceedingly pessimistic predictions for the UK economy (which the BBC let Gordon Brown skate over so easily yesterday on the Toady programme), so what will Gordon Brown decide to do?

All is not as it seems

You may have seen the Sun newspaper today and its coverage of the EU Treaty with some unkind coverage of Gordon Brown. I believe that this is a smokescreen, the Sun is firmly behind Gordon Brown as it was behind Tony Blair because the Sun backs winners and at the moment Gordon Brown is a winner. Rupert Murdoch has authorised an attack on the one policy of Gordon Brown's that Mr Murdoch cannot stomach and to warn him of what will happen if there is no referendum. My prediction is that one of the following three things will happen:

1) Gordon Brown will announce a referendum on the Treaty but worded as a sign up to the Treaty or Leave the EU choice and then hit the scare stories about exiting the EU as hard and fast as he can

2) Gordon Brown will announce a snap autumn general election and not explicitly promise a referendum in the manifesto and see if Labour can win on that basis. If Labour do win then he can say that the issue was put to the electorate and they voted Labour whose manifesto excluded a referendum (unlike in 2005) so that is that

3) Gordon Brown will hold a referendum on the same day as the general election so as to maximise the turnout and hope that he can convince people of the importance (see above) of voting the Labour way. This would allow Rupert Murdoch to sanction a vote Labour, vote NO the EU line. A Labour election victory and a Yes vote would be the outcome that he hopes for but a Labour victory and a No vote in the referendum would give him time to formulate another plan.

The anti-EU Constitution movement needs to galvanise itself and I am afraid that the priority is to support the Conservatives rather than UKIP because UKIP cannot win any seats but splitting the pro-referendum vote between Conservatives and UKIP will give Labour and the Lib Dems more seats than would otherwise be the case.

Naughty, naughty Blinky

Read this and wonder at the cheek of these people, "snouts in the trough" does not get close.

Naughty and so wet, from the Sunday Telegraph - "When I was 16 or 17, I would have a small glass of wine at lunch on a Sunday, or a shandy or babycham at Christmas". A babycham, I wonder if Gordon Brown shares his ex-Number Two's taste for the babycham?

You Gov Poll and Worcester council seat by-election

I blogged yesterday about the You Gov poll in the Telegraph. The same Telegraph article leaned quite heavily on a council seat by election in Worcester, which Labour won with 17% swing in votes, a huge swing. this seemed a little odd but the explanation is more interesting that much of politics, it appears that Lisa Ventura, the Conservative candidate for this safe seat suffered because of her running of a erotic website, eroticfiction.org, that included discussions of the merits of various sex toys. The small-mindedness of much of the population of this country never ceases to amaze me. Reading this article, Lisa Ventura's address brought a smile to my face - Beaver Close, Lower Wick, Worcester - you couldn't make that sort of thing up!

BBC continue to mislead over Climate Change (part 2)

The BBC has affected at least one person, This letter from today reads - "Martin Johnson quotes Christopher Booker's view that "the 'global warming' edifice is starting to crumble" (Letters, September 16). In the same edition, you report that the North West Passage is free of ice for the first time since records began (International News). Funny that…"

As I blogged last week "I read on the BBC's web site that "The most direct shipping route from Europe to Asia is fully clear of ice for the first time since records began, the European Space Agency (Esa) says." I was seriously scared until I read further down the article that records didn't begin in 1878 or even 1928 but in 1978. This is typical BBC, a scaremongering headline about "Climate Change" with a few paragraphs of detail to fuel the scare and then put the qualifier where most people wont bother reading to. The BBC may have had to cancel their Planet Relief day but that doesn't mean that they wont keep ramming this sort of cr*p down our collective throats as often as possible."

Well done BBC another victory for brainwashing and "the big lie".