Afraid I disagree. That would be a reason, an excuse. There is no excuse and the only reason is that he is entirely self-centred and unable and unwilling to behave in an acceptable manner because he perceives advantages in what he does. Inasmuch as he is capable of perception.
That reminds me.
All of which was caused by Margaret Thatcher and her obsession with privatising everything and wanting the BBC to follow a commercial model. She appointed her stooge Marmaduke Hussey as BBC chairman to do her dirty work.
en.m.wikipedia.org
Perhaps the most dramatic contrast in annual sales of pedelecs is with the Netherlands where annual pedelecs sales are one per 56 of the entire population of any age.
You are agreeing with me but offering an explanation. I, ve not tried to say who is to blame, perhaps it was Thatcher. She used BBC to win miners strike, start a war and win a GE she should should have lost, so why you hit the dislike key I have no idea. Well, I have but pointless saying it.
My "Dislike" was for your claim that they are not impartial, not for whatever you imagine.
As you will be aware, Patient Access enables you to access certain GP services online, including booking appointments and ordering repeat prescriptions. We have now extended the appointment booking feature of Patient Access into pharmacies. Certain services which patients would typically book with their GP practice, such as treatment for sore throat or hay fever, can also be delivered via pharmacies. Other services, such as hair loss treatment and antimalarial medicines, are not available to most, or to any patients on the NHS. By enabling users to book appointments in pharmacies (as well as their GP practice) within Patient Access, you are able to access a greater choice of appointments. This also helps to alleviate pressure on GP practices. Pharmacies are private businesses of course. . |
Claiming BBC to be impartial is actually quite silly. It is impossible for any institution of its size to be so. There are thousands of examples where BBC goes beyond simple reporting. Once indivuduals are involved in forwarding any kind of message slants one way are another are inevitable.Criticism of the BBC - Wikipedia
The reporting around Gazza incidents a couple of years ago showed beyond doubt the institution is willing to take sides in political conflicts. Ask any Jew.
Yes, perhaps the BBC does not favour any political party over any other, mind Cameron received triple the exposure over Miliband in their contest, there is without doubt a cultural leaning towards, as poster quoted, liberal left at the moment.
Yes, conflicting, but rare is the day where the news is simply "reported".
It surprises me that somebody with Fingers background cant see the bias. Wood for trees? Those that dont want to see? Or perhaps employees devotion.
I remember watching myself on a distorted BBC report about "violent" miners/protesters being arrested during mining strike. During those dark days BBC were anything but impartial. BBC and the Police were a tool for government of day. That will take generations to be forgotten.
Yes.. I think I can concur with Fingers on this one. And he will indicate that there are beancounters with stopwatches ensuring that both sides get equal time...Even when the level of intellectual argument is utterly convincing on one side and banal on the other. It makes for infuriating television.
What actually are you disagreeing with?
A pretty precarious situation "you've gotten yourself into"
Rather more to it than that
Actually no one could accuse your input of being either, it is often insulting rather than amusing and never original.
One small step for sanity. What I cannot understand is why any of the 274 would be prepared to vote themselves out of relevance ..if even for a month. If they are so hell bent on Brexiting ,the door is always open to do so..Even if it means stuffing the agenda or order paper with unimportant or un urgent prattle.
Q1)Have you invested any money in BXP?Rather more to it than that
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/faq/8/how-are-the-commission-president-and-commissioners-appointed
After the elections, one of the first tasks of an incoming Parliament is to elect a new President of the European Commission (the EU’s executive body). Member states nominate a candidate for the post, but in doing so they must take account of the European election results. Moreover, Parliament needs to approve the new Commission President by an absolute majority (half of the existing MEPs plus one). If the candidate doesn’t obtain the required majority, the member states need to propose another candidate within a month's time (European Council acting by qualified majority). For the 2014 elections, Parliament introduced the system of lead candidates. Each European political party put forward a candidate for Commission president and the party which became the biggest in the elections could propose Parliament’s candidate for the nomination for the Commission leadership.
On 2 July 2019, von der Leyen was proposed by the European Council as their candidate for the office of President of the European Commission.[2][3] She was elected President by the European Parliament on 16 July, with an absolute majority of 383–327
Which means your assertion " Elected from a base of one."
Is nonsense doesn't it?
As to farage he has simply set up a company without a board of directors which invites donations from supporters.
Nothing is offered in return but vague promises he can't deliver.
At an appropriate moment should he choose to do so, he can close it down, pocket the money and disappear
And all above board and legal
As you say, what's not to like? the mugs get ripped off as they deserve
"
