Tell us About Yourself

[Teddy Bear]

As the subject says, here's the place to tell us anything you'd like us to know about yourself, and reason to join our site. Certainly not compulsory though

[Teddy Bear]

Aug 7, 2011 1:13:54 GMT thehighlandrebel said:

I was talking to members of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt in the 1980's and was told that they would one day turn the streets of this country into rivers of blood

Hopefully it will be theirs then.

[carl1960]

Ok Here is the story. I was born in the North East in 1960 moving to Hampshire in the late sixties after my father was laid off from his job in Sunderland. After leaving school I served in an armoured regiment for six years.
After leaving the Army I worked in the civil service DHSS/DSS/DWP/pensions agency for 18years. I left in 2001 after becoming increasingly unhappy about the way the whole system was going.For most of the time I was also a union rep with the infamous CPSA/PCS again I became increasingly disallusioned with the union as it shifted from looking after theintrests of the staff to playing politics in areas of no concern to the majority of it's members.
After leaving there I went to a warehouse job where I was paid a lot more money for a lot less stress. However due to circumstances in my personal life I had to move and ended up in North Wales working for Royal Mail. Recently again due to a relationship breakdown I had to move again finding myself in a series of dead end minimum wage jobs. Being laid off last year by a scum bag company who tried to rip me off I now find myself harvesting the fruits of Labours mis-managment and am unemployed and for the record I don't claim a penny in benefit.
Over the years I have noticed a steady decline in the standard of the BBC especially it's journalism. The funny thing is when you talk to people about this they think you'r a bit nutty. However when you tell them what to look for it's amazing the number that come back to you to agree.

[Teddy Bear]

Aug 8, 2011 8:45:57 GMT carl1960 said:

Over the years I have noticed a steady decline in the standard of the BBC especially it's journalism. The funny thing is when you talk to people about this they think you're a bit nutty. However when you tell them what to look for it's amazing the number that come back to you to agree.

Brainwashing can only work on those unaware of what is being done to them, which is why sites like ours exist. Those who continue to support the BBC after its bias is made clear to them have a self interest to see the BBC agenda implemented.

With all your comings and goings Carl, glad you found your way here.

[richard111]

Hi. I'm a pensioner just three years short of getting free access to BBC TV. It doesn't make me happy because I have resented paying that "licence fee" most of my life.
I'm also deeply resentful of all the increases in my gas, electric, water, travel costs (petrol) and council taxes while my pension has gone up by £2.50 a week. And all this in the name of saving the planet by going green!
I've lived in deserts, the tropics and temperate zones. I've held a private pilots licence and I have deep sea navigation qualifications. When I first heard of global warming (now climate change) I looked up the science. It doesn't take rocket science to see that this is a total fraud. I am happy to explain it in simple language anyone can understand if they are interested.
Greetings to thehighlandrebel, my grandfather was born in the Gorbals and my father was born in Dublin. Opinionated I am.
I was an electronics technician most of my life. Then converted to computers and ran networks. Once in a University for a few years.
Now retired in Pembrokeshire and enjoying life on the coast.

[Teddy Bear]

Welcome Richard. I too have done quite a bit of travelling in my life, though it sounds like yours was not only round and round but also up and down - so you've seen our planet from every perspective

It's great if you can monitor the climate change bias of the BBC with your own understanding. I must admit I rely on bona-fide scientists or those in the know who make it to the media to do it for me. My certainty that it is a con is seeing how it has been used both by the BBC and the government, not to mention the other 'green' interested parties with their agenda.

Plus of course any other impressions you have of the BBC that you feel compelled to share with the public are also invited. Those with rich experiences, as you seem to have in abundance, are best suited to recognise bullshit when you see it.

[thethinkingman]

Greetings,

I am a civil engineer who has been hounded out of Zimbabwe.

I am conservative/republican in general but I do not like the fundamentalist Christian bias that these philosophies seem to attract. I despise Islam and what it wishes to do to our planet. I am also no fan of the philosophy that thinks blacks should be excused for their behavior on the grounds that it is not their fault but that society has made them do it.

Overall I think that we are all individually responsible for ourselves and that choices have consequences. Society has nothing to answer for as regards my existence.

Now, I am looking forward to being a part of these discussions if only as an observer but I do have opinions and I will be outspoken when it can add to the discussion.

Warm Regards

[Teddy Bear]

Welcome TTM

You sound like a man who knows his own mind and has formed his own opinions, which is a prerequisite to recognise an agenda or bias from any source, regardless of purpose.

I hope you will elaborate more on your 'declarations'. You made a point to mention certain elements that presumably 'hit' you personally. It would be interesting to know why and in which way.

Also since you were attracted to this site, presumably BBC output hit a nerve. While we here might be well aware of it already, it's always good to hear impressions from newcomers that might see another perspective to add further dimensions.

Feel free to be much more than an observer. No doubt you will concentrate on those topics that most concern yourself, and input is always appreciated to best give a more rounded 'take' on things.

[leefirth1962]

Hello. I'm a new member from Doncaster. It's not just the bias of the BBC and its bully tactics when collecting the unjust licence fee that I don't like; but at times the Corporation is down right incompetent.

[Teddy Bear]

Welcome Lee, sounds like you'll fit in here just fine

[christiangiver2]

Hey! My name is Biff. I have a background in personal and business insurance. I am ready to talk politics!

[Teddy Bear]

Welcome Biff, I see your company is in Massachusetts USA. I'm curious as to what particularly aspect of BBC output inspired you to join our Biased BBC forum.

[cherenkov]

I'm a scientist by trade though I won't say what branch of science I ply my trade in, just that my screen name is NOT a hint. I've lived in England most of my life, and love the country and the people in the main, but I was born in Scotland. I am married and a step-father of one young man who has left home now and doing well for himself.

I was born just under a decade after World War Two and have seen a lot of changes, and the emergence of of the UK's self-destructive political cycle, i.e. Lab > Con > Lab > Con.... For me, the advent of coalition government in this country is possibly the only way we can put an end to a political oscillation that has so damaged our country over the decades since the war.

Also, as an Anglophilic Scot (yes we do exist, and in larger numbers than some might care to think) I have no liking for the SNP, and believe that the breaking up of the UK is not necessary to address any credible grievances the SNP claim against the union.

Perhaps because I'm a scientist, I am a realist politically, I deeply distrust and dislike the blinkered thinking of any kind of idealist, and look for rationality, objectivity and above all impartiality from the news service providers of this country.

After due consideration I am now of a view that the three main parties, in England, and those parties seriously in contention in the other UK countries should be government funded with unions, and other vested interest groups like banks and corporations banned from seeking influence through huge donations. That this is not the case, as in what follows, is why I'm joining this forum, having felt the BBC News is failing to be impartial, and I think I can see why.

www.nuj.org.uk/innerPagenuj.html?docid=2127

There are over 4000 members of this union (The National Union of Journalists) paying their union dues to this biased, anti-government union, including some 200 members in Scotland. When you consider that over 90% of the funding for the Labour party comes from the unions, including the NUJ members, at the BBC and elsewhere, how can you expect anything other than a continuing anti-coalition bias to emerge, which I and many others, as confirmed by the BBC itself on it's own feedback programme, believe we are witness to day after day.

The BBC's response is that such allegations are an insult to the professionalism and integrity of it's staff, and it is actually us that are perceiving a bias because we are are ourselves biased in favour of the present government!

All I would say is that that rather insulting speculation would be easier to stomach were the NUJ and other unions not so well embedded in the BBC News, clearly militant, and clearly deeply idealogically opposed to anything to do with the coalition....

www.guardian.co.uk/media/2011/oct/25/strictly-come-dancing-bbc-strikes

[Teddy Bear]

A very warm welcome Cherenkov, and an excellent first post.
It was so good that I actually deleted your apology, and set up the duplicate as a topic in itself..

We have another regular poster from your neck of the woods - Thehighlandrebel, and when he's not on a voyage as a merchant seaman he posts quite a bit, sharing your umbrage at the BBC biased output.

Though you haven't said which branch of science you're in, I've no doubt you're expertise will go a lot further than (the lack of) mine in monitoring BBC science output - particularly in relation to AGW. But whatever area you choose to comment on, it is more than welcome.

[cherenkov]

Thanks. As for BBC science output, as Ghandi said when he was asked what he felt about Western civilization replied 'it would be a good idea!'

So dumbed down is the science coverage on BBC that I fear a lot of people who are scientists or science enthusiasts don't bother to watch it.

One young relative of mine is a physics student currently studying in Canada. Her mum mentioned to her that she'd been watching Professor Pop Star Brian Cox's recent series and was curtly told by the student not to bother!

I wouldn't go that far but I know what she meant. Lavish special effects, exotic locations and presumably a huge cost per episode all to persuade a viewing audience, the BBC patronisingly believes to be as knee-jerkingly averse to anything scientific and thus nerdy and geekish as they themselves are, to keep watching. In terms of actual content there was nothing that a good physics teacher with a blackboard couldn't have covered to the general understanding of all the viewers in about 15 minutes!

Just about all the presenters on BBC News are terrified of harming their street cred by appearing to be sounding scientific. The worst offenders are on radio 5 Live and Radio 1 of course, But John Humphreys on Saturday's Today programme, covering the repeat of the Cern neutrino experiments that suggest they travel underground at a speed very slightly faster than c, the speed of light in a vacuum, puts on this kind of rather jocular incredulous manner, almost seeming apologetic that something so nerdy and uncool was being covered on the programme. So many of them seem to do the same, going out of their way to inform the listeners that, 'of course I'm a total non-science person myself so it's all going over my head'.

Still, as long as Sir Patrick Moore and his team are allowed to continue, as well as that Scottish geologist Dr Iain Stewart whose series on global warming was pretty good/fair (although once again lavishly overproduced and thus expensive), there is always hope!

'Bang Goes the Theory'- a curate's egg- good in parts, but certainly an improvement.

[Teddy Bear]

I must admit I used to watch Patrick Moore, but long before 'the age of Aquarius'. From what I can see now, the BBC can do a good job, but only when the subject is one they don't have a personal interest or existing agenda in. Overall, they do far more damage than they do really inform, especially as it is the serious issues that affect our society that we need proper and truly balanced debate, and honest reporting.

Take this story today for example

[quark]

Perhaps we are here because we have a particular political view which may not be espoused by the BBC. Regardless of person's politics history as shown that even with leanings to the left, if this kind of bias is left to ferment unchecked it will end up consuming its own ardent supporters like any system where the checks and balances have suddenly become by contrivance obscured by the double speak that the BBC is guilty of on a daily basis. Bias is lying and self delusion which will eventually lead to a totalitarian state of mind. That process is already happening. What bothers me is that our numbers are small and despite all of the indignation and anger to what is happening constantly on a daily basis, there doesn't seem to be anything happening of any consequence to stop this.

[Teddy Bear]

Welcome quark - sounds like you belong
As the saying goes - 'A journey of 1000 miles begins with the first step'.
I think many people might be aware to some degree that the BBC are biased, but haven't realised the damage to society that this is creating. It's probably only when it touches them personally in some way that they will be conscious of this, and will then want to take some kind of action. I don't know what has to happen for this to become a major issue, but I've no doubt it will. The mentality displayed by the BBC carries the seeds of its own destruction, and it's only a matter of time. By creating this record we preserve an easy way for any who perceive this bias to see that they are not alone, and gain strength, and help spread the word to more and more.

Have faith

Look forward to read more of your perspective on BBC output.

[cherenkov]

Welcome Quark. Looking forward to your contributions.

[pac1960]

I am:
well educated
erudite
honest
open
respectful, courteous etc.
diligent

Can see and despise:
dishonesty
dissembling
perversion
corruption
manipulation
abuse
( people who hide behind corporate armour )

I am a teacher and educator and see basic standards ignored - I don't they have even been taught. This is blatantly clear in the BBC. Presenters who pretend to be journalists. They present 'The Party' and its doctrine. Ingsoc rules. We have the freedom to be ignored and that freedom must be protected by them The Party knows best. And It is impeccable. I you dare to challenge it then you are seen as perverse and not worthy of anything. The BBC is a Tower Of Babel tragedy with clear Dante's inferno of writhing sinners who have no sense of truth or integrity. That is the sin: sheer blatant inhuman corruption in all its vilest forms.

[Teddy Bear]

Welcome Pac
Well you certainly won't get any argument from me about the BBC observations you state here.
It seems most of those in media realise they have the power to affect the way people will think, and the BBC with the cloak of 'impartiality' that the licence fee gives them, use it to full advantage.
The sad thing is, people are too ignorant to realise what has been done to them.
I remember being told in school that the origin of 'education' is to bring out from within.
Nowadays it's to fill one with what 'they' want you to think - in the limited way they want it to be.

I look forward to read your take on specific BBC output.

[timbucknall]

Hi Everyone,
my name is Tim i live in Cheshire. although theres lots of instances of BBC bias i could mention. my main interest is in several very worrying instances of anti-Polish bias.

I see you're already on top of the comments made by the MP for Shrewsbury (with which i totally agree).
During the recent coverage of the terrible child abuse scandal I was disturbed to hear how the Radio 4 newsreaders initially felt the need to keep adding "the couple are originally from Poland". when do they ever say this about other nationalities?
although later bulletins dropped this information the damage was done.

I'm a member of the Polish Media Issues Group on facebook
and my " Day Job" is with the Kresy-siberia foundation
very best regards/Z Powazaniem!
Tim

[Teddy Bear]

A warm welcome Tim

I can understand your shame at the actions of this Polish couple but I wouldn't read too much into the fact that their nationality was identified. It was probably the fact that they had only been here in the UK since 2006 that made it a point to be reported. I see that most of the media included this detail in their coverage of this story.

I very much doubt people on the whole here would become anti-Polish as a result of the crimes of these 2 people though - there's bad eggs everywhere.

Actually the BBC have no problem identifying the country of origin of a particular offender except when it is a Muslim involved. Then they will ignore the country of origin, though it is usually obvious from the photograph, if included. Their next option will usually be to identify them as 'Asian', and if push comes to shove, we might then get Pakistan, as an example.

I'm curious about what kind of issues you monitor in regard to the Polish media. Do you have a BBC equivalent there, or is it the media in general?

Good luck with the aims of your foundation.

[timbucknall]

Hi Teddy thanks for your quick reply and kind words.
the Polish Media Issues group actually monitors miss-reporting of Polish issues in the international media outside Poland.

for instance Nightwaves on BBC R3 carried an interview with Anthony Seldon who stated "if only these Poles and others who took part in the Holocaust had stopped to think about what they were doing".
we complained that the speaker held Poles more culpable for the holocaust than the Germans

the BBCs response to our complaints was everything your members
have come to expect. half our members received no response, my complaint email seemed to bounce actually, have your members ever experienced this?


the automated email response i received from Nightwaves & Feedback made me think the BBC's email system has been hacked
in that the bounce notice came from a non bbc adress i've never seen before

i would say that 98% of the work of the group
is challenging broadcasters who say "polish camps" rather than "German camps in occupied Poland" and variations on that theme

other actions are related to the coverage of the start of World war 2, left-wing historians inevitably fail to mention the Soviet invasion from the East on sept 17th 1939 and the deportations and murders that came with it. often they do this by implying that Eastern Poland was Soviet territory before World war 2.
we're trying to get people to refer to the Nazi-Occupied area (1939-1941) as "Western Poland" rather than just Poland. and we have had some success on that front


thanks very much for your time and the kind welcome, have a great weekend

[Teddy Bear]

You're very welcome.

I must admit the subject you're monitoring is not one I've specifically looked for myself, and you can feel free to post in any relevant category when you encounter breaches of BBC charter in this regard. If you feel the BBC are biased on this subject I'd be interested to hear your view about why you feel they are - what's in it for them?

Regarding the matter of how your complaint was dealt with, you can also post the details of it here.

You have a great weekend too

[charmbrights]

I wonder, as I now have a free (over 75) TV licence, whether I should continue to berate the BBC for its bias?

As someone once said, "You get what you pay for," and I now feel I am getting value for my money!!

[Teddy Bear]

I'm glad at least that you're now free from the burden of having to pay for this insidious organisation. Question is whether you're happy for the BBC to continue with its present agenda, under the guise of being fair, impartial, and balanced, which their existing charter gives it, for what this agenda does to our society?

Presumably you can't be happy to think what is happening to this country, and what your loved ones are subjected to by the continuance of the BBC in its present form, regardless of whether one pays for it or not.

I hope you'll continue to express your perceptions Charm

[steevo]

If/when the license fee becomes history for all maybe you can continue this forum as simply the anti-British BBC?

[Teddy Bear]

I believe that if they were privatised and were to maintain their present agendas, then they wouldn't be in business very long.
There's a reason the Guardian has one of the lowest circulations in the newspaper industry.

So you wouldn't fancy having a go at the UN?

[steevo]

You've got a good point. And maybe I would fancy an anti-UN forum? A Teddy Bear anti-UN forum. There's no question it would be relevant.