According to the BBC report http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-38373867 on the Berlin attack:
'"We are investigating whether it was a terror attack but do not yet know what was behind it," a police spokesman told AFP news agency.'
I think we all know, don't we...
The Electoral College vote today...
The BBC report http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-38359934 that:
'An increasing number of migrants are returning to Calais, two months after the "Jungle" camp was cleared by French authorities, aid workers have told the BBC.
Gavin Lee spoke to the charity Care for Calais, which says several hundred migrants are still hiding out in the region, with the aim of stowing away illegally to the UK.'
It's odd that these 'migrants' won't settle for France where they are now or any more of the previous safe countries that they've crossed since entering Europe. Why do they so want to get to the UK? A UK that the BBC keep telling us is racist, anti migrant and economically doomed since Brexit? Maybe it's the benefits... Maybe the BBC are liars...
This BBC report by Ian Katz http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-38303381 purports to examine whether reporting the hacking of information is about revealing the truth or not.
Of course being from a BBC journalist the answer depends upon what has been hacked. If it's information about sportsmen and drugs then that's fine but if it's about one of the BBC's chosen politicians being at best careless about the storage of information, or worse revealing corruption then that might be treason.
'How should we handle troves of confidential data effectively handed to us by foreign states? Do we risk becoming "useful idiots" when we run precisely the stories that a hostile government wants us to?'
How about revealing the truth about a politician who wants to be the most powerful elected politician in the free world?
'It's a question we wrestled with on Newsnight when we ran a series of stories about Bradley Wiggins, based on the medical records of athletes - material widely believed to have been hacked by the Russians in revenge for the banning of hundreds of Russian athletes from the Rio Olympics.
It felt uncomfortable, but the public interest in establishing whether a major sporting figure had broken the spirit of the rules - if not the letter - seemed clear cut.'
Public interest established...
'When it comes to tampering with elections the stakes are rather higher. One prominent victim of another state-sponsored hack told me he thought journalists who feasted on material served up by the Russians with the aim of influencing a US election were committing "something verging on treason".
Dean Baquet, the executive editor of the New York Times, which has run a string of stories based on the hacking of both Podesta's mail and, before that, material from Democratic National Committee figures, told me the thought that he might be doing Vladimir Putin's bidding sometimes kept him up at night.'
Isn't the story that Hillary Clinton kept security sensitive information on an unsecured server, that the media cooperated with the US Democrats over many matters and worse. Oddly Ian Katz manages not to mention the more serious of the allegations revealed by the 'hack'. It is almost as though the truth matters less to Ian Katz and the BBC than casting aspersions on Donald Trump's election victory. Can that really be the case?
This BBC report http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-38337108 uses the word hardliner to describe someone who supports the right of Israel to exist in secure defensible borders.
Has the BBC ever described as a hardliner someone who wants to shrink Israel's borders so it cannot easily defend itself?
Has the BBC ever described people who want Israel eliminated as the world's only Jewish majority state as hardliners.
The answers to those two questions reveals why I and so many other people believe that the BBC is institutionally anti Israel. I wonder what conclusion the Balen Report came to on this matter?
This Breitbart article http://www.breitbart.com/jerusalem/2016/12/15/leading-arab-daily-trumps-picks-marks-first-time-washington-stands-up-to-terrorism-iran/ is fascinating. Here's an extract:
'"We understand that Hillary Clinton's defeat in the elections angered the Muslim Brotherhood. What fueled the latter's anger was how Trump received Egyptian President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi in New York earlier this year," Rashed said in reference to Trump's September meeting with the Egyptian leader, which prompted the latter to declare he had "no doubt" the president-elect would make a strong leader.
"It's on this basis that they try to picture Trump's administration as racist and as an enemy of Islam and Muslims," he continued "Iran, Al-Qaeda, and Islamic groups like the Muslim Brotherhood" are the chief objectors to Trump's choice of appointments, Rashed writes.'
Now why would Iran, Al Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood object to Trump and by logical extension prefer Barack Hussein Obama or Hillary 'Saudi contributions' Clinton as US President? It's a total mystery isn't it...
This nasty little BBC report http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-38325121 is just another excuse for the BBC to stir up anti Trump sentiment. It begins thus:
'One of China's most prominent women's rights activists has written a letter warning US President-elect Donald Trump against "sexist behaviour".
Zheng Churan says "feminists around the world are watching" Mr Trump for signs of "straight man cancer".'
What the definition of straight man cancer is we are not informed. To my mind it's rather a sexist notion, that straight men are sick and need curing, although such cures probably won't work.
Of course to the BBC this is manna from heaven as it helps their incessant anti straight white man narrative.
There is another angle to this report that I will try to write a post on later this week.
This BBC report http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-38326238 does actually manage to mention, albeit as opinion not fact, that ISIS terrorists are masquerading as migrants in order to get into the UK.
'Islamic State militants are "moving in migrant flows, hiding in plain sight", the UK's defence staff chief has said.
Sir Stuart Peach said he was "worried" about the global reach of IS militants who destroy their identity documents to travel illegally into other countries.'
The BBC don't find the space to reveal to the British public that ISIS have stated that this is their objective and tactic. ISIS are open about this but the BBC have to protect the concept of refugees having to be welcomed into this country come what may.
"………….the fact that we have, in Israel, a thriving democracy, a beacon of tolerance, an engine of enterprise and an example to the rest of the world for overcoming adversity and defying disadvantages.
As most of us here know – and as I realised during my visit in 2014 – seeing is believing.For it is only when you walk through Jerusalem or Tel Aviv that you see a country where people of all religions and sexualities are free and equal in the eyes of the law.
It is only when you travel across the country that you realise it is only the size of Wales – and appreciate even more the impact it has on the world…………."
More here at isthebbcbiased.blogspot.co.uk
http://isthebbcbiased.blogspot.co.uk/2016/12/theresa-may-friend-of-israel.html
Views like those will not go down well at the institutionally anti Israel BBC. #BalenReport
This report in The Mail http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4020990/The-jihadi-sleeper-agent-t-deport-identify.html is worth reading in full to understand the priorities of the British government. Here's a pretty long extract.
'An asylum seeker described as the 'very model of a modern Al Qaeda terrorist' has been allowed to stay in Britain despite being jailed for plotting attacks in this country.
The 'sleeper agent' jihadi – who The Mail on Sunday is banned from identifying – was about to be deported back to his native Jordan after his release from prison.
But Home Secretary Amber Rudd changed her mind after the man's lawyers argued that he would be tortured.
The man was convicted of amassing terrorist materials, including bomb-making manuals, on his computer. A jury heard that he created a list of targets such as nightclubs and airports, and was described by the trial judge as an 'Al Qaeda sleeper agent' waiting to launch an atrocity in the UK.
He was jailed for nine years at Manchester Crown Court but was released after only five years.
The Home Office then ordered that the terrorist be deported to Jordan. Earlier this year he appealed against his deportation at the Special Immigration Appeals Commission (SIAC), a secret court that only hears cases involving foreign terrorists and others who pose a threat to national security.
But as the married father began his appeal, Mrs Rudd wrote to his lawyers, revealing she will no longer deport him.
Daniel Furner, a lawyer at Birnberg Peirce, who was acting for the man, told The Mail on Sunday: 'The Home Secretary decided not to deport him to Jordan in July this year because she accepted he would face a serious risk of torture.'The man has now been given 'restricted leave to remain', which means he has to apply every six months to have his stay renewed.
However, SIAC ruled he cannot have refugee status – which would allow him to stay in Britain for life – on the grounds that he is a convicted terrorist..
The SIAC judgment, made public last week, said the man had used so many aliases that his real identify was still uncertain.... The judgment said the man entered Britain in 2002 from Rotterdam, where he was sharing a flat with four other jihadis.After he entered Britain with his wife in 2002, he gave immigration officials a false name and said he was from Iraq, producing a forged Iraqi birth certificate. He and his wife were allowed to stay in the UK and were placed in accommodation in the North of England.He claimed up to £100,000 in benefits using his genuine passport, which he kept hidden from immigration officials. He also opened several bank accounts under different names and worked in higher education.
... in 2006, anti-terrorist police raided two properties that he and his family lived in, seizing two computers belonging to him that contained a vast library of terrorist material, including manuals to make car bombs. He had also been in contact with an Al Qaeda cell in Britain linked to Dhiren Barot, who was convicted of plotting to detonate a 'dirty' bomb – containing radioactive material – on the London Underground in 2007.
At the trial of the anonymous terrorist, the judge said: 'Doubts remain as to who you really are and where you really come from. The only reasonable conclusion to be drawn… is that you were a sleeper for some sort of terrorist organisation.'
Do you feel safe now this man's human rights have been protected and he's allowed to stay in this country?
How stupid or uncaring are our Home Office that they can make such a decision?
Do the Home Office care so little for the British public that they'll put the human rights of a terrorist above those of the British public? I ask purely rhetorically of course...
Even when the threat to the British people is so real, the human rights of the jihadi is more important, why?
' A few words you will hear ad nauseum, especially from the BBC, the "media" party of the Neo Liberal suck ups Appeaser May, Pickles and co, the Red Tories etc.West Bank: This territory was for millennia called Judea and Samaria. After the 1948 War of Independence, Transjordan annexed it, renamed it the "West Bank," and occupied it for nearly two decades. In the Six Day War, after Jordan attacked Israel, Israel entered the territory and administered it until the Oslo Accords era, when Israel turned over much of the area to the Palestinian Authority.Occupation: When it comes to Israel, the UN is obsessed with the word "occupation." A recent Wall Street Journal article documents 530 General Assembly references to Israel as an "occupying power" versus zero for Indonesia (East Timor), Turkey (Cyprus), Russia (Georgia, Crimea), Morocco (Western Sahara), Vietnam (Cambodia), Armenia (Azerbaijan), Pakistan (Kashmir), or China (Tibet). Saying that Jews are "occupying" Judea is as nonsensical as saying Arabs are "occupying" Arabia or Gauls are "occupying" France.Settlement: The UN uses the term to insinuate Israeli theft of "Palestine." The Obama administration eagerly embraced this terminology. If there is an occupying force in Gaza, it is Hamas. The West Bank is "disputed territories" to anyone claiming a modicum of neutrality. As Elliot Abrams put it, "the term 'settlement' loses meaning when applied to Jews building homes in their nation's capital city.""You can't colonize Palestine because you can't colonize colonizers. The Muslim population in Israel is a foreign colonist population. The indigenous Jewish population can resettle its own country, but it can't colonize it.Muslims invaded, conquered and settled Israel. They forced their language and laws on the population. That's the definition of colonialism. You can't colonize and then complain that you're being colonized when the natives take back the power that you stole from them.There are Muslims in Israel for the same reason that there are Muslims in India. They are the remnants of a muslim colonial regime that displaced and oppressed the indigenous non-Muslim population.All these Muslim conquests and invasions are well-documented. The Muslim settlements fit every historical template of colonialism complete with importing a foreign population and social system that was imposed on the native population". Until they began losing wars to the indigenous Jewish population, the Muslim settlers were not ashamed of their colonial past, they gloried in it. Their historical legacy was based on seizing indigenous sites, appropriating them and renaming them after the new conquerors.The only reason there's a debate about the Temple Mount is because Caliph Omar conquered Jerusalem and ordered a mosque built on a holy Jewish site. The only reason there's a debate about East Jerusalem is because invading Muslim armies seized half the city in 1948, bombed synagogues and ethnically cleansed the Jewish population to achieve an artificial Muslim settler majority.The only Muslim claim to Jerusalem or to any other part of Israel is based purely on the enterprise of colonial violence. There is no Muslim claim to Israel based on anything other than colonialism, invasion and settlement.Israel is littered with Omar mosques, including one built in the courtyard of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre, because Islam is a colonial entity whose mosques testify to their invasive origins by celebrating colonialism as their true religion. The faith of Islam is the sworn religion of the sword.Islam is a religion of colonialism that spread through invasion, settlement and conquest"D Greenfield'
Thanks nogginator at http://biasedbbc.org/blog/2016/12/12/start-the-week-open-thread-107/#comments
I couldn't have put it better myself.
Here's a second quotation from this biasedbbc.org article http://biasedbbc.org/blog/2016/12/13/the-reality-breaking-the-silence/
'My father was indoctrinated with this ideology in the early 1980s…Dad would say 'you kids don't know nothing – Islam will take over, there will be mosques everywhere, you must think of your after-life – not this life. Kaffirs will burn in the fire of hell.'
His words would frighten me, and I had no reason to doubt his words of wisdom as he was reading the Quran and attending mosques where pious religious mullahs gave sermons about the Quran. He was becoming anti-Jewish, even though he had never met a Jewish person in his whole life. He was becoming anti-west although he never actually went back to live and retire in Pakistan until mum died.
Now in hindsight I realise he was brainwashed into an ideology – by the same mosques and mullahs in Birmingham that preach tenets of Jihadism. Pensioners as well as the young get indoctrinated. Dad had become colder and more disconnected the more religious he became.
In 1996 I remember seeing flyers and posters advocating meetings for Muslims to talk about Jihad – a call for the 'umma' and anti-west propaganda…in a chip shop in Ward End run by mullahs. I remember thinking: why haven't the police arrested these guys?
When the horrendous events of 9/11 happened , I remember thinking 'oh my God, they have started to attack the West'. I was gripped in fear…and I understood who the enemy was. I was shocked when I realised that Western governments didn't know who the enemy was.
I remained silent for most of my life but I was seething with anger at Islamists…how did this goverment not sense what was coming, while many at the grassroots level could sense it ?'
This passage angers me, I knew about jihad and the increasing Wahhabi domination and indoctrination of British and European Muslims, if I knew then why didn't the UK government and intelligence services? More worrying, what if they did know but didn't care?
This biasedbbc.org article http://biasedbbc.org/blog/2016/12/13/the-reality-breaking-the-silence/ both saddens and angers me. Here's the first quote for you to mull over:
'I left because there was no way I was going to raise my children as a lone mother in a community where the Imams or mosques did nothing to serve the community or teach a plural Islam. Even the schools were allowing little primary school girls to wear headscarves, and that has nothing to do with religion. The extremists have had over twenty five uncontested years to mobilise the minds of British Muslims and their backwardness now dominates some areas.
Multicultural polices are not working…'
Reading this short BBC report http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-38298393 on the system of kafala in Qatar I was struck by the lack of anger in it, the lack of moralising about the evils of slavery. After all the USA is still demonised by parts of the BBC as having operated a system of slavery.
Then I wondered how different the BBC would be if it was Israel that operated a system of slavery now.
Then I realised that when you're an organisation that is institutionally anti Israel and pro Islam why would anyone expect you to be unbiased in your reporting.
'Germany has admitted Schengen zone nations must bring back border checks amid fears terrorists pretending to berefugees are moving freely across the continent.'
Terrorists pretending to be refugees in order to move freely across Europe, No Shit Sherlock. They've told us that this is what they will do, why are we surprised that they are doing it?
Daily Mail article here http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4024098/Germany-admits-Schengen-zone-nations-bring-border-check-terrorists-pretending-refugees-moving-freely-continent.html
The BBC report on this, is nowhere.
The BBC's report http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-38281950 of Teresa May's plans to fight antisemitism in the UK gets a grudging welcome from the BBC in an article that ends thus:
'Labour, which has faced accusations that it has failed to tackle anti-Semitism in its own membership, welcomed the move.
A spokesman for Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn said hatred towards Jews was "as repugnant and unacceptable as any other form of racism".
Earlier this year Baroness Chakrabarti, the former director of civil liberties group Liberty, chaired an inquiry into anti-Semitism in the party.It found the party was not overrun by anti-Semitism or other forms of racism, but there was an "occasionally toxic atmosphere".'
This is the same Labour Party that is lead by someone who only last week shared a platform with at least one person who's exposed antisemitic views, lead by someone who called the anti Semitic and murderous scum of Hamas and Hezbollah 'friends'.
Only today Guido Fawkes has exposed yet another Labour Party member espousing apparently anti Semitic sentiments, read more about that here http://order-order.com/2016/12/12/tatchell-heckler-says-hes-labour-member-who-voted-corbyn/ but not on the institutionally pro Labour and anti Semitism minimising BBC.
It's also interesting that that BBC article doesn't once mention Islam as one of the two main causes of the rise in anti Semitism in the UK. Mind you as the other is the BBC's endless stoking of hatred for the world's only majority Jewish state that may not be too surprising.
Apparently:
'Six people have been arrested on suspicion of offences under the Terrorism Act.
Four men from Derby, a man from Burton upon Trent and a woman from London have all been arrested on suspicion of engaging in the preparation of an act of terrorism.'
Will anyone give me odds as to the backgrounds of these five 'men' and one 'woman'?
More here http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-derbyshire-38287126
One part of this BBC report http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-38280627 hit me:
'"I found bodies, many of them women, lying on the pews. It was a horrible scene," said cathedral worker Attiya Mahrous.
"There were children. What have they done to deserve this? I wish I had died with them instead of seeing these scenes,'' another witness told the Associated Press news agency.'
"What have they done to deserve this?"
In the eyes of the Islamists they are deserving of death because they are infidels/kufr. But you won't learn that from the BBC.
'If Naz Shah and Jeremy Corbyn continually claim that they are not antisemitic, what is their explanation for hanging out with and obviously enjoying the company of those that are?
You'd think it might occur to someone at the BBC to at least ask the question. After all the BBC spends so much air time speculating on the motives and misdemeanours of other politicians, it seems odd of the BBC not to at least seek Laura Kuenssberg's opinion on the matter.'
More including the most recent examples of who Jeremy Corbyn and Naz Shah choose to appear alongside here http://isthebbcbiased.blogspot.co.uk/2016/12/is-is-bbc-biased-superfluous-yet.html in an article by Sue.
Some other related questions for the BBC:
Why do so many on the left ally themselves with hard line Islamists?
What connects socialism with Islamists?
Is antisemitism excused by the behaviour of Israel?
If it is then is Islamophobia excused by the behaviour of ISIS, Hamas, Hezbollah, Al Qaeda, Al Shabab, Iran, Saudi Arabia etc etc etc?
Craig at biasedbbc.org has yet another example of the pernicious and incessant bias that the BBC thrusts down the British public's collective throats day after day after weary day.
'Whenever I go to the dentist I always ending up sitting in the waiting room hearing Steve Wright in the Afternoon. (Do all dentists go with Radio 2?) This Wednesday's edition, broadcast during my latest visit (which was an absolute delight), featured the following item in its 3 o'clock news bulletin, which I'll transcribe in its entirety:
'Time' magazine has named the US president-elect as its Person of the Year. Mr Trump said it was a great honour. Previous winners include Ayatollah Khomeini, Joseph Stalin and Adolf Hitler.
Other winners - unmentioned by Radio 2 here - include Winston Churchill, Gandhi, the Queen and Ronald Reagan. '
The BBC's bias is clear and obvious, it's also dangerous. For all those reasons it should be stopped, why don't the government, a supposedly Conservative one, do something about this biased organisation? Are they frit?
The original isthebbcbiased.blogspot.co.uk article is here http://isthebbcbiased.blogspot.co.uk/2016/12/previous-winners-include.html?m=1
Is the BBC biased? CIW NEWS have launched the world's first daily media bias index, here http://ciwnews.com/2016/12/05/ciw-news-launches-worlds-first-daily-media-bias-index-ciw-news/
This should be interesting, up until now biasedbbc.org and myself have posted plenty of examples of the bias shown by the BBC. Meanwhile Craig formerly of beebbiascraig and now the main force (sorry Sue) behind isthebbcbiased.blogspot.co.uk has posted similarly, alongside some very detailed analysis of the BBC's bias. That analysis is what proves the BBC's bias but it's hard to measure. Now CIW are going to attempt to measure this bias via an index comparing the number of times the BBC use the term far right versus the number of times it uses the term far left. It's an interesting idea, here's CIW's take on this:
'What is the idea behind the index?
The index records how the BBC describes the world in a way that places it on an ideological spectrum ranging from far-left to far-right. As an organisation that historically emphasized that "impartiality and objectivity were the essence of professionalism in broadcasting", it is reasonable to expect the BBC's output does not privilege one part of the ideological spectrum over another i.e. that its output is balanced. On any particular day, it is reasonable to expect that there may be more new BBC content referring to the "far-left" than the "far-right", or vice versa. If the BBC is balanced, it is also reasonable to expect its output does not contain markedly more references to one compared to the other when a longer period is considered, say weeks or months.However, if the BBC has a left-liberal bias as its critics claim, its output would contain markedly more references over time to "far-right" than "far-left". This is for two reasons. One, the further left the BBC is on the ideological spectrum, the less there is to its left for it to see as left-wing, and the more there is to its right for it to see as right-wing and "far-right". Two, the further left it is, the more likely it is to use the pejorative "far-right" for right-wing ideas and people it dislikes, and the less likely it is to use the pejorative "far-left" for objectively "far-left" ideas and people for which it has an ideological affinity.Recent examples of the BBC using "far-right" as a pejorative include its documentary describing North Korea's Communist regime in that way, its Chinese language content Angry White People: Coming face-to-face with the British far right, and its broadcast using the term for Nigel Farrage (for which one of its presenters was forced to apologize).'
I will monitor the CIW index from now on.
This is how the left keep their chosen narrative front and centre whilst pushing inconvenient truths to the side.
'At least 2,000 educators around the country reported racist slurs and other derogatory language leveled against white students in the first days after Donald Trump was elected president. But the group that surveyed the teachers didn't publish the results in its report on Trump-related "hate crimes.
"The Southern Poverty Law Center partnered with the American Federation of Teachers, which formally endorsed Hillary Clinton, to circulate the questionnaire among its 1.6 million mostly Democratic members. The survey was sent out to K-12 teachers and administrators who subscribe to its "Teaching Tolerance" newsletter.'
There's a lot more here http://nypost.com/2016/12/05/report-buried-trump-related-hate-crimes-against-white-kids/ but obviously not on the BBC.
A BBC report http://www.bbc.com/news/health-38228411 on bed shortages in the NHS and not a word about why demand might be increasing for NHS beds. Of course any mention of immigration in anything other than a totally positive light is verboten at the BBC.
Jean-Claude Juncker is the poster boy for EU arrogance and authoritarianism:
On Greece's economic meltdown in 2011
"When it becomes serious, you have to lie."
On EU monetary policy
"I'm ready to be insulted as being insufficiently democratic, but I want to be serious … I am for secret, dark debates"
On British calls for a referendum over the Lisbon Treaty
"Of course there will be transfers of sovereignty. But would I be intelligent to draw the attention of public opinion to this fact?,"
On the French referendum over the EU constitution
"If it's a Yes, we will say 'on we go', and if it's a No we will say 'we continue',"
On the introduction of the euro
"We decide on something, leave it lying around, and wait and see what happens. If no one kicks up a fuss, because most people don't understand what has been decided, we continue step by step until there is no turning back."
"There can be no democratic choice against the European treaties"
https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Jean-Claude_Juncker
Thanks to the contributor at
http://biasedbbc.org/blog/2016/12/05/start-the-week-open-thread-106/#comments
This BBC report http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-38187641 on the recounts in the US Presidential Election includes this line:
'One of the state's 72 counties had already completed the process by Friday - Mrs Clinton gained a single vote over Mr Trump.'
One vote at a time the Democrats will do their best to wrest this election victory away from Donald Trump.
Milo Yiannopoulos is becoming quite a hero of mine. The way he stands up to the SJW nasties is rather impressive.
Watch from 1:01 for the sort of mea culpa that the BBC have been unable to make.
Did you really think that we'd be allowed to have Donald Trump as US President or to leave the EU? The political elite know what's best for us and the mainstream media will assist in any way they can.
'Euroscepticism is growing in Germany with two-thirds of Germans feeling dissatisfied with the state of the European Union (EU) and nearly half wanting a vote on membership of the supranational bloc.'
More here at Breitbart http://www.breitbart.com/london/2016/11/30/majority-germans-dissatisfied-eu/ but not on the institutionally pro EU BBC.
Read this at Breitbart http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/11/30/dumpkelloggs-kelloggs-declares-hate-45-million-americans-blacklisting-breitbart/ and then #DumpKelloggs
This BBC report http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-38152765 contains these two paragraphs:
'Mr Trump has vowed as president to institute an "extreme vetting" programme to limit immigration to the US from countries that are believed to be at a heightened risk of terrorism.
He had previously called for a "total and complete shutdown" on Muslim immigration to the US.'
Is that last sentence 100% accurate or deliberately misleading?
This BBC report http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-38151669 includes analysis from Gordon Corera that omits the news that the perpetrator of the Ohio attack said this:
"By Allah, we will not let you sleep unless you give peace to the Muslims. You will not celebrate or enjoy any holiday," he wrote before the attack. "Btw, every single Muslim who disapproves of my actions is a sleeper cell, waiting for a signal. I am warning you Oh America."
Presumably this attack is still 'nothing to do with Islam' so far as the BBC are concerned.
That rather bland headline to the BBC report http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-38152316 could mean that the employee made some anti Islamist comment but if that was the case then this story would be bigger news on the BBC. No, this is a story of Islamist penetration of a major intelligence agency.
Some questions arise from the BBC report, questions that the institutionally Pro Islam BBC won't ask.
'A BfV spokesman did not confirm a report in Die Welt newspaper that the man was suspected of planning a bomb attack on the BfV's Cologne office... '
Did the spokesman deny the report or just not confirm it?
' The man is reported to be of Spanish origin and a convert to Islam.'
No question missing here, just here we go again.
'The BfV said the suspect, who now has German citizenship, had previously "behaved inconspicuously".'
Which makes this all the more worrying surely. How many more Muslims are currently behaving inconspicuously but could start planning terrorist attacks in the future?
'BfV did not confirm which part of the intelligence agency the accused worked in, though German news magazine Der Spiegel said the man was recently hired to observe the Islamist situation in Germany.'
I wonder how many more experts on Islamists are in fact islamists themselves.
'It also reported that the man's family had no knowledge of his conversion, which the publication said took place in 2014.'
Two questions here, what conversion took place, is there an Islamist religion that requires conversion from being a Muslim?
'There are an estimated 40,000 Islamists in Germany, including 9,200 ultra-conservative Islamists known as Salafists, the head of the BfV told Reuters news agency earlier in November.'
How many were there of these islamists pre Angela Merkel's opening of the borders to 'refugees' from Islamic countries?
Do you agree that these are questions that an independent news reporting organisation would raise?
'Trump won't commit to accepting election results
Chris Wallace asked Donald Trump if he will accept the election results and he said "I will tell you at the time." Hillary Clinton responded to Trump's rigged elections claims by calling his remark "horrifying.'
Bill Still on what Stein, Clinton and Soros might be up to.
Which is why Donald Trump will not be allowed to become President of the United States of America, they will do their best to stop him.
As this BBC report http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-38126899 explores, the Remoaners are at it again. Are there any lengths that they won't go to to stop the democratic result of the EU referendum?
'Conservative MP and Brexiteer Dominic Raab said: "Rather than coming up with new legal wheezes to try and frustrate the will of the people, these lawyers should be working with us to make a success of Brexit."
The public have spoken; we should respect the result and get on with it, not try to find new hurdles that undermine the democratic process."'
Did you really think that the New World Order would allow Donald Trump to beat Hillary Clinton?
The fix is on its way...
BBC approving article here http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-38118852
Surely the word 'correctly' is missing from that BBC headline.
The report http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-38118739 that follows that headline only hints at the truth of the vicious dictatorship of Fidel Castro right at the end of the report when the BBC admit through clenched teeth that:
'He established a one-party state, with hundreds of supporters of the Batista government executed. Political opponents have been imprisoned, the independent media suppressed. Thousands of Cubans have fled into exile.'
Otherwise the BBC reporting of the death of the former brutal Cuban dictator is the hagiography that one would expect from a pro socialist media outlet.
'Turkey's President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has warned that he will let hundreds of thousands of migrants travel on to Europe if pushed by the EU.
He was reacting to a non-binding vote by the European Parliament to freeze talks on EU membership for Turkey.'
More here http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-38103375
But remember that there's no chance of Turkey joining the EU this century, do they think we're idiots?
I wonder how many of the 'experts' shown in this video are now telling us why Donald Trump can't succeed as US President? Why are you listening to them?
I know that I've posted this video before but with every day that passes it seems more relevant.
Could this really be the future of education if the Social Justice Warriors win?
Oh for a British politician willing to take on biased reporters in the same way that Donald Trump does here
"Sorry but don't you think it's time to stop all this propaganda"
If only more politicians had the guts to call out the BBC on its propagandising.
Of course 50 million Americans aren't racists but the BBC still cling to that narrative
Whenever you feel at all depressed, watch this video and your spirits will be lifted.
I especially enjoy the way The Young Turks turn on Hillary Clinton as the worst candidate. If she was so bad why were you supporting her?
Sarah Palin was viciously destroyed by the mainstream media. Watch this video to see the real Sarah Palin, not the idiot she was portrayed as, is she?
Thanks Angela Merkel and others, your idiotic policy of importing young disaffected mostly men from Somalia is really helping destroy Western Europe.
Having watched that I'm slightly less disgusted than I was yesterday.
Oddly the BBC haven't given this news any prominence, after all they've the doom and gloom post Donald Trump Presidential Election victory narrative to push.
This news sucks, I and many others supported Donald Trump because we wanted Hillary Clinton investigated and tried for her role in Pay To Play, her email server, deleting emails and every other allegedly illegal act she committed.
This news had better not be true...
Milo Yiannopoulos vs Will Young on Newsnight from November 2013. It would seem that Milo Yiannopoulos isn't a natural blonde, he dyes his hair!
The way Milo Yiannopoulos spanks the BBC journalist James Cook when he asks Milo if he's a white nationalist should be studied by every right of centre person who's about to be interviewed by the hideously left wing biased BBC.
Will Tim Allen be joining Kanye West in hospital? The Hollywood elite don't like pro Donald Trump views from one of their own.
Kanye West makes some pro Trump comments and the next thing we know he's in hospital for "assessment".
Meanwhile the BBC report on this http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-38060498 manages to avoid mentioning Kanye West's pro Donald Trump remarks, we can't have people going against the BBC Donald Trump is a racist narrative, can we?
This BBC report http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-38060432 on plans to try to stop foreign nationals using the NHS without paying for the service to which they are not entitled.
Of course the BBC frame the debate on the grounds that help their case that the BBC should be for everyone. Thus pushing the idea that some British people may have trouble proving that they're British. More troublingly the BBC end the report with this:
'But the committee heard that according to official figures released earlier this year, in 2014-15 £674 million was charged to the UK government for the care of British citizens abroad, but the amount charged for the care of EEA nationals in British hospitals was only £49m.'
Oddly the BBC find no space to inform the British taxpayer who pay for the NHS, as well as the biased BBC, how much money is spent treating non EEA individuals. For a start I'd like to know how much is spent on maternity care for Nigerians and Ghanaians who arrive at Heathrow Airport well past the six months pregnancy they're certified as being and then have a premature birth paid for by the British NHS.
Here's http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3214709/African-mum-quintuplets-let-145-000-NHS-bill-Health-tourist-came-UK-birth-says-no-one-s-asked-pay.html just one example:
'Bimbo Ayelabola, 37, had to have complex caesarean section while in UK
The operation and neo-natal care for five babies cost in excess of £145,000
She returned to her native Lagos where she is successful a make-up artist
It's emerged that Homerton Hospital, east London, won't chase her for bill '
Remember that a Government commissioned report in 2013 put the cost of treating non entitled foreigners on the NHS as high as £2billion. Also remember that experts said that even this was an underestimate because the vast majority of overseas patients are never identified by hospitals.
It's odd that the BBC omit such salient facts. I say odd but I mean entirely predicable.
"Trump kept saying, 'We're in a room of liars, the deceitful dishonest media who got it all wrong.' He addressed everyone in the room calling the media dishonest, deceitful liars. He called out Jeff Zucker by name and said everyone at CNN was a liar, and CNN was [a] network of liars," the source said."
Trump didn't say [NBC reporter] Katy Tur by name, but talked about an NBC female correspondent who got it wrong, then he referred to a horrible network correspondent who cried when Hillary lost who hosted a debate – which was Martha Raddatz who was also in the room."
More here http://nypost.com/2016/11/21/donald-trumps-media-summit-was-a-f-ing-firing-squad/
Of course Donald Trump is quite correct, the vast bulk of the US mainstream media was hideously pro Hillary Clinton.
Oh for a British Prime Minister willing to take on the bias of the BBC the BBC is not an impartial reporter of news but rather a left wing campaigning organisation.
Facts you won't hear on the vile BBC.
An Englishman, a Scotsman and an Irish man went into a bar but the Engliahman wanted to leave so they all had to.
England comprises approximately 83.9% of the total UK populationSo one could argue that the population of 88.7% of the UK voted for Brexit and 11.3% voted to Remain. One could argue that but then one would be as wrong as the originator of the joke.
Scotland comprises approximately 8.4% of the total UK population
Wales comprises approximately 4.8% of the total UK population
Nothern Ireland comprises approximately 2.9% of the total UK population
Bill Still was right on the money re the US Presidential Election opinion polling realities. Is he correct about this too?
Democracy?
My attention wandered when one of them used the word 'deplorable', that was a sign of where he was coming from.
' Labour deputy leader Tom Watson has led a delegation of the party's MPs to visit Israel's Yad Vashem memorial to the victims of the Holocaust after Jeremy Corbyn turned down an invitation to go himself.
Mr Corbyn was originally invited by the leader of the Israeli Labour Party Isaac Herzog in the wake of the row which erupted earlier this year over anti-Semitic comments by former London mayor Ken Livingstone.'
I have absolutely no comment about this.
The BBC have a new crusade, word chosen deliberately, this time it's against 'fake news'.
The PM show included a long piece explaining how 'fake news' could have affected the result of the US Presidential Election.
The mainstream media have realised that they have lost their control of the agenda and thus the minds of the electorate. The incessant pro left of centre propagandising by the BBC and others has been effectively countered by the new Alt Right media and the mainstream media have decided to fight back. Their chosen ground is 'fake news' but a cursory look at sights such as mine, biasedbbc.org and isthebbcbiased would show you how factual the BBC really is.
The Conservative election victory, Brexit and now Donald Trump's victory have left the mainstream media bruised and angry, this sort of result cannot be allowed to happen again. The mainstream media have chosen the weapon that they have chosen to ensure that their views will prevail in the future. We must fight them tooth and nail. Our democracy requires a plurality of views, the mainstream media does not provide that.
What are the differences between what Bill Clinton said in his 1995 State of the Union Address and what Donald Trump says now?
I see very little difference.
Was Bill Clinton called a racist in 1995? Did the BBC react with outrage in 1995? Why the hate for Donald Trump in 2016?
That BBC headline is missing the key word 'illegal'. There's plenty of room for it and its addition would explain the policy rather better. But the BBC isn't interested in dispassionately explaining policy, it's more interested in increasing opposition to Donald Trump.
More from the biased BBC here http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-us-2016-37969112
Pretty much on the money, albeit from a left wing mea culpa point of view.
The BBC is cheerfully propagating the myth that Hillary Clinton won the popular vote and thus should be the next US President.
This is wrong for at least three reasons:
First because the electoral college method is well understood and the method used in the USA for Presidential Elections.
Second because the number of votes counted is not the same as the number of votes cast. This is because some states stop counting votes once the result would no longer be affected by the remaining uncounted votes.
Third because there are still a lot of uncounted absentee ballots. Two thirds of these are usually Republican votes.
However since when did inconvenient facts have a place on the BBC? The BBC is not an unbiased news reporting organisation, it is instead a campaigning body. The UK government MUST take action against the instructional bias of the BBC.
Senator Trey Gowdy as Attorney General would really put the wind up Hillary Clinton. I've been pushing this for quite a while now as Trey Gowdy is a great speaker, has a forensic mind and really understands what the Hillary Clinton affair is all about.
MSNBC convincing themselves...
Someone at MSNBC has got close to realising what the mainstream media got wrong. Of course the problem has being going on for much longer than this Presidential Election campaign. The problem runs much deeper than just opposing Donald Trump. Much of the mainstream media in the USA and elsewhere including the BBC, have ceased to be journalists and instead have become propagandists.
With proud thanksgiving, a mother for her children,
England mourns for her dead across the sea.
Flesh of her flesh they were, spirit of her spirit,
Fallen in the cause of the free.Solemn the drums thrill: Death august and royal
Sings sorrow up into immortal spheres.
There is music in the midst of desolation
And a glory that shines upon our tears.They went with songs to the battle, they were young,
Straight of limb, true of eye, steady and aglow.
They were staunch to the end against odds uncounted,
They fell with their faces to the foe.They shall grow not old, as we that are left grow old:
Age shall not weary them, nor the years condemn.
At the going down of the sun and in the morning
We will remember them.They mingle not with their laughing comrades again;
They sit no more at familiar tables of home;
They have no lot in our labour of the day-time;
They sleep beyond England's foam.But where our desires are and our hopes profound,
Felt as a well-spring that is hidden from sight,
To the innermost heart of their own land they are known
As the stars are known to the Night;As the stars that shall be bright when we are dust,
Moving in marches upon the heavenly plain,
As the stars that are starry in the time of our darkness,
To the end, to the end, they remain.
How did Donald Trump get elected? This video shows Donald Trump was quite impressive in the 1980s and 1990s, even the 2000s, but less so now.
Still he's a better option than Hillary Clinton. The Democrats could have won with almost anyone other than Hillary Clinton but the party machine wanted her.
This Breitbart piece http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/11/10/huffington-post-dnc-staffer-screams-donna-brazile-helping-elect-donald-trump/ is not that interesting except for what it reveals about the brainwashed left.
'"You are part of the problem," he continued, blaming Brazile for clearing the path for Trump's victory by siding with Clinton early on. "You and your friends will die of old age and I'm going to die from climate change. You and your friends let this happen, which is going to cut 40 years off my life expectancy."'
Does this DNC Staffer really believe that his life expectancy will be cut by 40 years as a result of climate change and if so why? Years of brainwashing by the left in education, the media and the majority of politicians have resulted in a large number of mainly young people who are scared of something that just isn't going to happen.
Milo Yiannopoulos is a fabulously 'dangerous faggot' and talks such sense. The problem is that's he's too good a debater for the BBC to risk interviewing.
Hillary Clinton cried 'inconsolably' : oh dear, how sad, never mind!
