@1: Wait, what?

@Binkstein

Wow!

That’s an awful lot of pent up, idiotic prejudice you’re lumbered with there!

Binkstein, you mean like this BBC article which contains the following phrase?

“The Housing Executive is paying for the families, members of the Roma ethnic group, to return to Romania using emergency funds.”

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/8114234.stm

Or this BBC article which contained the following quote?

“Most of the Romanian families, who are members of the Roma ethnic group, spent Wednesday at the Ozone Leisure Centre in south Belfast, after being taken there from the church hall.”

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/8105488.stm

Incidentally, the Romanian Consul-General seems to disagree with you about the Romanian status of these people:

“”I was very encouraged that so many of the neighbours and local community in Belfast gave their support to these assaulted families,” he said.

The Romanian Consul General is to meet Social Development Minister Margaret Ritchie over the attacks. ”

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/8106482.stm

All of which is my way of saying: piss off and die, you racist dipshit.

“Public support for BBC increases”

That’s hardly surprising following the much trumpeted attack by Murdoch on the BBC for its journalism and news reporting. Compare the reliability of Fox News on the Iraq war:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_coverage_of_the_Iraq_War
http://www.newshounds.us/2007/06/23/fox_drops_the_ball_on_iraq_war_coverage.php

I actually listened to that early morning interview of Andrew Gilligan by John Humphrys on the Today Programme on 29 May 2003 when Gilligan suggested that the public claims made by the government about Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction (WMD) might not be true:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/today/reports/politics/hutton_audio_timeline_20040128.shtml

Dr David Kelly, the supposed source of the news leak about the reliability of the claims, committed suicide – if he did. Gilligan was obliged to resign his post as BBC Defence Correspondent and Greg Dyke resigned as BBC Director General.

The allied forces in Iraq never did find WMD in Iraq after the invasion. Anyway, from this secret memo of 23 July 2002, Blair already knew that the claims were phoney when he launched the infamous dossier on Iraq’s Weapons of Mass Destruction at a special session of Parliament held on 24 September 2002:

“C [that's the head of MI6, Britain's Secret Intelligence Service] reported on his recent talks in Washington. There was a perceptible shift in attitude. Military action was now seen as inevitable. Bush wanted to remove Saddam, through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD. But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy.”
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article387374.ece

Dr Brian Jones, head of the branch in the Defence Intelligence Service with responsibility for assessing incoming intelligence on WMD submitted his letter of 8 July 2003 to the Deputy Chief of Defence Intelligence to the Hutton inquiry:
http://www.the-hutton-inquiry.org.uk/content/mod/mod_4_0011.pdf

The letter includes this passage:

“Your records will show that as [blanked out] and probably the most senior and experienced intelligence community official working on ‘WMD,’ I was so concerned about the manner in which intelligence assessment for which I had some responsibility were being presented in the dossier of 24 September 2002, that I was moved to write formally to your predecessor, Tony Crag, recording and explaining my reservations.”

As for Blair’s comment at that time:

“Tony Blair has rejected calls for an official inquiry into the government’s claims about Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction.

“Speaking at the G8 summit in Evian [in June 2003], Mr Blair said he stood ’100%’ by the evidence shown to the public about Iraq’s alleged weapons programmes.”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/2955036.stm

ICM and the Gruniard classed as independent?
Are they not the same bbc support cohorts as always.
Also why do ICM not reveal their questions? Could it not be because they are directed to a positive slant to the bbc, as their favoured polling contractor?

Binkstein @ 1

“SOMEONE at the BBC made that decision in order to made the dirty-fingernail uncosmopolitan and very unhip Prods of Belfast look bad.”

Yes of course, that is the thing about stone throwing racists, it is the ‘BBC’ that made them look like backward fuckwits with their ‘biased reporting’. How stupid of us to be taken in by such slanted reporting showing kind, decent people, going about their, ahem, daily business of of tossing half bricks through windows.

Has it ever occured to you that people who start pogroms are making themselves look ‘unhip’?

I’ve read some laughable attempts to argue the BBC has a left-wing/pro-Labour bias on the internet, but “they ought to be more racist” has to be the most bizarre yet.

“Laughable attempts to argue the bbc has a left wing /pro-Labour bias”.
Just listen to the Toady Programme on radio 4 every morning and even JC would find it biased to these incompetents.
You really must get out more.

Cassandrina @ 8

I listen to ‘Today’ in the morning, what should I listening out for?

Also why do ICM not reveal their questions? Could it not be because they are directed to a positive slant to the bbc, as their favoured polling contractor?

All questions are revealed. Once you’ve let us know which are the loaded questions, and how, please come back with a point. Just mindlessly repeating drivel from Guido Fawkes’ site doesn’t count as intelligent commentary.

I think I am right in saying that Murdoch owns 53 newspapers world wide, and every one of them came out for the Iraq war.

I guess that is an example of the diversity of opinion that Murdoch junior was ranting on about.

Credit where it is due.

We must applaud The Sunday Times for publishing this leaked secret memo of 23 July 2002 from Matthew Rycroft about the visit of Dearlove, head of MI6, to Washington about the Bush administration cooking up the WMD claims to justify the Iraq war:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article387374.ece

Binkstein’s nasty stuff was erased.

However, Binky-on-hols has just travelled from Budapest to Bucharest by train; the journey was enlived by the presence of a dozen Roma. How lucky!

Thoughtfully, these Roma were concerned that their fellow-travellers might lapse into narcolepsy and so spent several hours shreiking at one another to keep us awake. They then fell asleep in attitudes best calculated to hinder the movement of passengers up and down the carriage aisle.

Maybe they were helping us to develop better bladder and bowel control.

A fee to watch TV. You can me for free.

Binky, is must hurt to be deleted?

Can someone somewhere highlight the flagrant breaches of the impartiality in broadcasting code being committed regularly by Sky News?

Most weeks it allows rightwing airheads like Jon Gaunt and James Whale to spout idiotic reactionary prejudice unchallenged, under the guise of reviewing the newspapers.

The characteristically ill-informed comments are never balanced out, presumably because producers think they can get away with it as it doesn’t relate to a formal news story or debate.