Glad Wiggia brought this to our attention because if it needed proof of Beeb political bias, here it is.
If you look at that headline and ask: “And what? Seems reasonable to me,” then that shows your own bias towards the left.
But if you’re like so many thousands others and me, you’ll immediately zero in on the words “far right” and know that only a leftist uses such terminology. Neither ordinary people nor the perceived right use it, except in relation to, say, Mussolini.
The very notion that someone standing up for his country and wanting some direct democracy is “far right” shows the amazing mind of the person who uttered it.
A feeble attempt to redress a perceived imbalance by the BBC, of feelings since Rotherham and other events, virtually no mention of what or who the far right consists of, and no mention that an ever increasing mass of the general public is thinking this way, are they all “far right”, I naively thought that this kind of rubbish had been left behind after recent events.
Language is a dead giveaway, it betrays every time. When you see “read and weep” in our tags, it labels us as that mass in the middle – if you want to label it, perhaps the centre-right. I’m far more right than that socially, in regard to children. You’d expect that as a former headmaster.
I should have included this from a BBC report on the Australian terrorist raids, note the contradiction. If they are moderate then why would they be antagonised by this ? and quite frankly does anyone care anymore if they are ?
Analysis: BBC’s Jon Donnison in Sydney
The news of an alleged plot to publicly behead a random Australian will shock many people here, including the vast majority of this country’s long-established moderate Muslim community.
Many Muslims are unhappy with what’s going on in Iraq and Syria but would never resort to violence. These raids risk antagonising the broader Islamic community.
Wiggia has a different background to me, he’s a Londoner and has followed his path, I’ve followed mine. Yet both he and I both immediately saw the words “far right” in that headline, before anyone told us to look. Does that not say something?
Yes there IS a left and a right. The left can always be pinpointed when they try to make out there’s no left or right and they’re “neutral”, which is really quite risible – no one is neutral, politically, even if it goes largely unstated. And yes, that is a very centre-right position to take.
Another dead giveaway is the word Capitalist. It’s not that the crony capitalists or kleptocrats don’t exist – they do and I’ve a post coming up on Max Kaiser’s point, let alone posts passim here on Them – but that the language used immediately labels the politics of the person saying the Capitalists are to blame, just as much as another person saying the Unions are to blame.
Both left and right are fine with Banksters as a term. However, when someone starts throwing -phobes and -ists at you, “fairness”, “positive discrimination”, it’s odds on it’s a leftist. When someone starts throwing “return to sanity” and “heritage”, “underpinnings”, it’s odd on what their politics are.
And the use of “far right” to describe people of the land who are unhappy with ISIS or Rotherham is not only inaccurate in the extreme, not only does it show amazing bias from a supposedly neutral national broadcaster, it is also deeply insulting to a huge swathe of people throughout the land.
It’s insulting to all libertarians. It’s even insulting to those of the left who are equally horrified by both issues.