Scottish Referendum

Scottish Referendum

Should Westminster Recall The Scottish Referendum

Saturday, 20 September 2014

BBC Control & Westminster Leaks

"A DAMNING email shows the UK Treasury leaked sensitive information about a Royal Bank of Scotland contingency plan to move its registered office from an independent Scotland before the bank itself had decided to announce its plan."

The lovely establishment, the BBC - a service we all have to pay our TV licence for. Mine has now been cancelled, as I will never watch the BBC again.

The BBC - this is an establishment who hid Jimmy Savilles "hobbies" from the public. Our licence fee kept that man, and the people around him in a lavish life that he flaunted to all his victims. That to me says it all really.

The BBC - impartial? Factual?


The BBC is completely biased - and as stated above, morally corrupt.

Once Westminster got the scare - the two weeks from vote You Gov poll showing YES in the lead.

The BBC took note - and started the smear campaign. Churning out article and programmes filled with fear, and appealing to the masses to vote NO.

Now several other factors come into play here also. The BBC is funded by their licence fee. The BBC would lose all of its Licence Fee Money if Scotland gained independence.

It would no longer be compulsory in a FREE SCOTLAND to pay a TV Licence to a Company from a Foreign Nation.

There is no way the British Broadcasting Corporation wanted the Yes Campaign to win.

More proof?

The Hydro live debates. There was a debate there for all the 17 year olds who were given the vote. In the debate, the 17 year olds were told they had to say they were voting no.

Little did they know - these kids are savvy, phone out - social media - EXPOSED. And their mums on facebook telling everyone their kids have just text to tell them!

Is this right - forcing viewers to listen to corrupt lies? And try to sway opinion that way?

More proof?

Kevin Bridges - Live Debate

Kevin Bridges (Middle) Live at the Referendum on BBC

Now he has no need to lie, this is 100% proof that the BBC are Pro-Union. We can now lay to rest ANY doubt the BBC are impartial. Kevin tweeted it, he was brave to do so. Now we are left with ‘What Now’ I think many of us are right, EVERYONE is voting Yes, the BBC are fooling us to think it is close and it is nowhere near it. I have the vote at 70% and if you have been keeping up with my blog, you will know I have been counting EVERY MoriPoll. YouGov and media related poll all showing 50/50, on the ground by people like you and I it is 70%.

We are voting YES in high Numbers Scotland. I said I would out every lie and every myth, is this another one? Well done Kevin on being brave enough to tell us “The BBC told us to be impartial”

Source Shauny News

The major broadcasters largely support the “NO” campaign when most of the Scottish population in social networks are favoring the “YES” movement, Professor John Robertson, from the University of the West of Scotland, told RT.

RT: Your conclusion is that the major broadcasters are favoring the “NO” campaign. Could you briefly explain to us how you came to that view? Do you think the accusations over Nick Robinson's report for the BBC could affect the public mood?

John Robertson: I find fairly more bias against the “YES” campaign than in favor of the “NO” campaign. I am not surprised: the BBC is a national broadcaster and has a vested interest in a British state. But latterly things have become more serious. The Nick Robinson case is in danger of becoming a cause célèbre and causing people to focus entirely on that. It is important to remember that in the evening broadcasting in which Nick Robinson did tell lies, there were many other examples of imbalance heavily balanced in favor of the “NO” campaign. That is the important point. Many commentators, now including independent writers in English newspapers like The Guardian and so on, have described the BBC as being in full propaganda mode comparable to that of 2003 when the BBC followed the Blair administration`s line to tell lies about the reasons for attacking Iraq. It is beyond bias.

RT: There are just three days to go before the historic vote - can any coverage actually influence the outcome at this stage?

JR: I think the Westminster administration in London is in full panic mode because of the opinion poll suggesting that there may be a “YES” vote. And I think, rather late in the day, they have realized they were overconfident, and have now moved to try and remedy the situation. But I think it may be too late because the electors in Scotland see a panic in their behavior. This is self-inflected wound by David Cameron. At the Edinburgh agreement two years ago the Scottish side wished to have an alternative choice on the ballot paper and that would be “devo-max” which would be not full independence but enhanced independence. David Cameron`s administration was so confident they would win that they wouldn`t have to give anymore. So they insisted on all or nothing and shot themselves in the foot rather badly. Either way, even if there is a close victory for “NO” that will be in the end very destabilizing for Britain.

RT: Why do you think the “YES” campaign is not getting enough media attention?

JR: It is very clear split; it is very fortuitous that social media have become as prevalent as half the Scottish population is on Facebook. The activity online and social media is very heavily dominated by the “YES” campaign. Perhaps in part because the mainstream media have largely supported the “NO” campaign. It is very shabby stage. And the BBC in the last few days have in almost an ashamed way increased the bias in favor of the “NO” campaign. But social media may tilt this. In something comparable to the Arab Spring but rather more successful than the Arab Spring. The Scottish population is highly educated with the most graduates of any country in Europe, and I think that the intellectual activity across a wide grassroots movement on the internet may tilt this despite the media bias.

Now this is terrible, The Queen stated on many ocasions she would not make any statement as it was up for the people of Scotland to decide. Why are the BBC then printing this?! 

The BBC were inundated with Complaints from people regarding their methods of "reporting"and YES campaigners staged a peaceful demonstration at the BBC studios in Glasgow. 

Shameless: BBC Caught Manipulating the Debate on Scottish Independence
21st Century Wire says…

Even in the face of obvious state censorship, the media still adopts the soft language, calling it ‘bias’ instead. Call it bias if you want, but it’s really censorship.

As Scottish Independence draws nearer, the media and propaganda war intensifies. London’s financial elite clearly do not want it, and big media are rallying behind the bankers. 

If you ask the BBC how their reporting is on Scottish Independence, they tell you it all fine and that ‘it’s perfectly in keeping with our own guidelines’. Besides, who would dare question the BBC?

TOO SMART FOR THE REST OF US: BBC brain cell Robinson shows how desperate the bankers are and how partial the BBC are (Photo: Ceasefire Mag)

In what was perhaps to most pathetic example of propagandising from the press pit ever caught on tape, one of BBC’s six-figure career propagandists, Nick Robinson (above), attempted to run point on the independence scare-mongering by somehow theorising how Scotland would lose loads of tax revenue should Royal Bank of Scotland (RBS) move its head offices down to London. This was an LOL moment. Intellectually challenged Nick was immediately put in his place by Alex Salmond as to the rules of corporation tax.

That Robinson tries to insinuate that somehow a lemon like RBS leaving town would constitute a loss for the Scottish taxpayer is a laugh. Robinson dares not mention how RBS became 81% owned by taxpayers after receiving a £46 billion bail-out in 2008 and 2009. As far as companies go, RBS is just another sponging ponzi house, more like a liability than an asset. Thanks Nick.

Robinson goes on to remark, “Why should a Scottish voter believe you (Salmond) – a politician, against men who are responsible for billions of pounds of profits”. What an astonishingly arrogant remark from a supposed journalist to a national leader. Scare tactics and fear-mongering. What about the BBC’s supposed principle of ‘impartiality’? Another LOL moment?

It just goes to show you how elites in London hold the northern lower castes in utter contempt. Of course, Robinson’s partisan canvassing for the bankers wasn’t as crude and blunt as David Cameron (left), who earlier this week claimed that voting ‘Yes’ for Scottish Independence would make Scotland more vulnerable to Islamic terror attacks. How arrogant do you have to be to make a statement like that?

All this is nothing new either. Evidence of the BBC’s ‘bias’ can be traced back to February 2014. Dr John Robertson from University of West Scotland published an extensive research study on ‘bias and fairness’ in mainstream news reporting on the issue of the Scottish Independence referendum, covering both BBC and ITV. Here’s what he found:

“So, on the objective evidence presented here, the mainstream TV coverage of the first year of the independence referendum campaigns has not been fair or balanced. Taken together, we have evidence of coverage which seems likely to have damaged the Yes campaign.”

So it’s been dirty from the beginning. Can’t say we are surprised, but it’s interesting to see the BBC being forced to be so blatant…

BBC accused of anti-independence bias after editing out Salmond’s reply to ‘bank exodus’ question

The BBC faces accusations of anti-independence bias after its political editor, Nick Robinson, produced a report that wrongly claimed Alex Salmond had ignored his question during a heated press conference.
Calling into question the impartiality of the publicly-owned broadcaster, the veteran BBC correspondent edited out Salmond’s lengthy answer, in which the First Minister claimed the BBC had skewed facts and colluded with the Treasury to undermine the “Yes” campaign.

The exchange between Robinson and Salmond came after the BBC reported that a UK Treasury source said the Royal Bank of Scotland (RBS) would move its headquarters to London if Scots voted for independence. At the press conference, Robinson asked Salmond how Scottish taxpayers would make up the loss of tax revenue.
Highlighting similar announcements from Scottish-based firms, Robinson said:
“Why should a Scottish voter believe you, a politician, against men who are responsible for billions of pounds of profits?”
What is not shown in Robinson’s report is Salmond’s reply and the heated exchange that followed

In his reply, Salmond insisted that the economic significance of RBS, Lloyds Banking Group, Tesco Bank, TSB and Clydesdale Bank seeking to re-domicile to London would be minimal, as only banks’ “brass plates” would be moving, while jobs in Scotland would remain secure.
When Salmond attempted to move onto the next questioner, Robinson repeatedly challenged him to answer questions about the banks’ warnings.
The First Minister then went on the attack, calling for a leaks inquiry into who from the Treasury briefed the BBC about the RBS announcement.
He called it a matter of “extraordinary gravity” and said he was writing to the head of the British civil service to demand an investigation.

BBC Political Editor Nick Robinson (Photo from Twitter/@bbcnickrobinson)
Apparently pre-empting Robinson’s line of questioning, Salmond held up a screen grab of the BBC story, saying that “you, Nick, or one of your colleagues” was responsible and that the leak was “as serious a matter as you possibly can get.”
“I know the BBC in its impartial role as a public sector broadcaster will give full cooperation to that investigation,” Salmond said pointedly.
He added: “This has been a lively campaign across Scotland with heckling at many meetings across Scotland. This is the first opportunity the BBC have had to heckle at a meeting,” Salmond said, laughing.
The exchange took place during a press conference held in Edinburgh for international journalists covering the independence referendum.

Professor John Robertson, of the University of the West of Scotland, published a detailed academic paper earlier this year showing widespread bias in the BBC’s coverage of the independence campaign.
“The use of dubious evidence and sources, the tough interviewing of ‘Yes’ supporters and the passive interviewing of ‘No’ supporters and the demonizing of the First Minister, Alex Salmond,” were among some of Robertson’s observations.
Dismissing Robertson’s paper, a BBC spokeswoman told RIA Novosti news agency: “Our coverage of the referendum story is fair and impartial in line with the editorial guidelines.”

Former Newsnight hack slams Beeb’s referendum ‘propaganda’

Former Newsnight correspondent Paul Mason seems rather happy to be free of Auntie, especially since the Scottish independence referendum campaign sent the establishment to panic stations: ‘Not since Iraq have I seen BBC News working at propaganda strength like this. So glad I’m out of there,’ he writes on his Facebook page, to the consternation of former colleagues. ‘It’s on my friends-only Facebook page so not meant as any great statement other than weariness,’ Mason tells Mr S, ‘it says what it says.’ Lucky, then that he is now at Channel Four News – that famed bastion of slant free news.


12th Sept 

BBC repeating lies....
"Five banks - including RBS - have said they might move operations out of Scotland"
Didn't the CEO of RBS say in his letter to staff their plans would "not affect jobs or operations" ?
And NO MENTION of Morrison's saying that prices might actually FALL.

The BBC is Killing Democracy!

Stuart Cosgrove exposes BBC referendum bias

Reported on BBC 11th Sept 

No comments:

Post a Comment