"Imagine a Tory donor who'd bought a company, run its pension fund into the ground, bought the assets back for pennies in the pound, who became a privy counsellor even though he wasn't qualified while personally funding the leader's leadership bid - they (sic) would be a massive story and yet somehow the BBC runs day after day on Lord Ashcroft, who as far as I can see has done nothing wrong, and gives Labour an easy ride. It takes me back to the tales we had of the champagne bottles in 1997 and I'm afraid the BBC remains biased and fails to ask the proper questions of those who are currently in power."
Source HERE (scroll in 12 mins)
18 comments:
See this week's Guy News: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9OwIdmunggY
But you never hear the Tory leadership complaining about this sort of thing like lord Tebbit used to.
I heard him say that on Radio 5 this morning , I can't remember Victoria Derbyshire's reply !
Should give hat tip to the biased BBC website Iain. They had it first.
http://biased-bbc.blogspot.com/2010/03/graham-stuart-on-bbc.html#comments
The BBC will be up for grabs in 2012. Given their support for this Government it's only fair that that are sold off to pay for the large debts they have allowed to run up without any criticism.
When is the last time anyone heard a single government policy being scrutinised by the media? I can't think of one.
Brown now seems to be in a position where he can literally say anything - and yet somehow his lies go unchallenged. Why?
Curmy- her response was to say and thats Graham Stuart a conservsative MP.
Basically dismissing his claims
Very good - until the point where he said, "as far as I can see he (Ashcroft) has done nothing wrong".
I would imagine DC and William Hague both see things rather differently.
Don't know where to begin with this drivel. Leaving aside the fact that Lord Paul of course was a tory donor whilst running one of the few British manufacturing businesses to survive Attila the Hen. Now he's switched sides you want to compare his business ethics with Ashcroft's. Really?
This is why the tories are falling behind, because they think that personal abuse is the answer to everything. If it was you'd be looking at a landslide. The reason why the papers are full of Ashcroft now, as deep down you well know, is because the Brains Trust at CCHQ thought it would be a good idea to let this time bomb go off right before the campaign rather than dealing with it at any time over the last ten years. Frankly it's a measure of how browned off the public is with Labour that this cowboy outfit has any sort of poll lead at all.
What on earth are those at Conservative HQ doing? Do they want to win the next election? I fear not.
The bbc is high upon the list of organisations against the responsible people of this nation. It is not how, but why is the bbc allowed to be like this?
Rather like the subject of immigration, pretty well everyone I listen to is critical of the bbc. But, like immigration, it is an inviolet subject.
Awash with money, the bbc produces so much unwatchable or blatently biased output. The bbc poll tax, aka Licence fee, has reached an obscene price. Let the bbc practice the freedom of choice it advocates and make payment of the licence fee optional.
So David, why do you insist upon your supporters funding that organisation? And, in the increasingly questionable event of you winning the forthcoming election, what will you do about?
Jimmy
Swarj Paul has resided here since 1966. His twin heirs were educated at Harrow School.
Nevertheless he has been a member of the Labour Party since at least 1971 and was appointed as a Labour working peer in 1996.
It is true that he made small donations to the Tories between 1979 and 1982. Sort of insurance policy. So he has not switched sides.
Not just the BBC. Channel 4 News is just as bad, maybe even worse.
Isn't it interesting that the BBC have been attacking the Tories all day (smearing actually) over their alliance with the UUP stating that this is bad for Cameron as he is in favour of the change in NI policing but the UUP opposed it.
So I assume the BBC will also therefore highlight the differences between Labour and the Lib Dems and how they couldn't work together in a hung Parliament?
ID cards
Trident
Cutting the deficit (Brown just wants to keep spending)
90 day detention
Joining the Euro
Afghanistan (the Lib Dems would like to get out)
Oh of course the BBC would simply suggest these are 'minor' differences and wash over it. Any lie will do from the BBC to keep their beloved one eyed idiot in power.
Weygand: Ashcroft has done nothing wrong, he's not broken the law and he's been cleared of any wrong doing by Parliament.
Ashcroft is doing nothing different to Labour non-doms.
Do you work for radio 5 by chance? You don't seem to have a clue.
Also, the BBC are trying to suggest that Ashcroft shouldn't be where he is in the Labour party as he's unelected.
So why do we have that prat Lord Mandelson as No2 to Brown? Who elected that tosser? The BBC NEVER question Mandelson's right to be where he is.
I still want to know why the leftie media won't investigate Mandy's dodgy mortgage application.
Anyone want to bet if Ashcroft had a dodgy mortgage Toenails, Marr and Paxman would be all over it?
"Anyone want to bet if Ashcroft had a dodgy mortgage Toenails, Marr and Paxman would be all over it?"
I'll take that bet. Unless you can explain how the premier of a UK overseas territory on 150k a year gets a mortgage to buy a $17m dollar house.
Why no Hat Tip to Biased BBC Iain? They have had this on their sidebar for years and do much good work exposing the leftwing bias thet the BBC constantly expouse.
@Martin
I accept that Lord Ashcroft has not been guilty of any legal impropriety whatsoever; that does not mean one can say that 'he has done nothing wrong'.
The site of DC and William Hague, normally so confident and assured, reduced to red-faced burbling on the matter suggests they are also uncomfortable about it.
Indeed, according to the Sunday Times (presently moderately pro-Conservative) - "The row over the tax status of Lord Ashcroft, the Tory deputy chairman, has damaged the party. Of the 68 per cent who said that they had followed the story quite closely or even vaguely, some 28 per cent — including 10 per cent of Tories — said that it had made their overall view of the party less favourable."
As Talleyrand might have said 'c'est pire qu'un crime, c'est une faute', especially as it leads those who desperately believe it is 'time for a change' to fear that even a new administration would just lead to 'more of the same'.
I'm amazed anyone still listens to that irritating, uninformed queen of the knee-jerk reaction's radio programme. But thanks for the great quote -- the remainder of the sane world would have missed it otherwise.
Post a Comment