BBC's feminist leaning film critic Mark Kermode VIDEO
After watching BBC's latest film review on 14 May 2016 featuring Mark Kermode
we decided to look into the background of Kermode who is a self proclaimed feminist
and the above video clearly shows how the BBC is determined to fill every second of its output
with male hate propaganda from the likes of Kermode a femi male who
spins the feminist yarn on everything to do with film.
BBC promoting the feminazi latest HATE agenda #MaybeHeDoesntHitYou
Tony Wadsworth and Julie Wadsworth face child sex charges against young boys
The paedo protecting BBC are up to their dirty little tricks again. While an endless stream of BBC presenters and producers continue to be charged and jailed for abusing young boys they continue their vile smear campaigns against heterosexual men promoting the feminazi latest HATE agenda #MaybeHeDoesntHitYou.
Now for anyone still blind to what the BBC are doing here go back and read how their top predatory paedo Jimmy Savile got away with decades of abusing children while they pushed the feminist domestic violence very warped statistics that have seen thousands of children placed into care homes to satisfy their paedo ring headed by Savile to access .
Despite the vast exposures of what is going on within BBC premises they still think that attacking heterosexual men, and one of the main causes of making children vulnerable when deported to children's homes were Savile and his army of BBC paedo's can help themselves unhindered thanks to children losing the protection of their biological fathers . Sinister and creepy is how the BBC is now looking
and using public money to make children more vulnerable to the continued attacks by their sinister and creepy presenters. Read more about Tony Wadsworth and Julie Wadsworth the latest in a long line of BBC presenters charged with abusing young boys.
Unbelievable the lengths the BBC's feminists / homosexuals will go to smear heterosexual men but the latest
ruse takes the biscuit. Some guy called Paul Trueman hears an emotional abuse story on the BBC's The Archers
then sets up 'out of the blue' a Just Giving site
on behalf of Refuge on hearing the plight of the FICTIONAL character
But like everything the BBC does NOTHING is quite as it seems . It turns out Paul Trueman (Interesting name TRUE man)
works at a company called Bray Leino who are pushing this story on their website
They clearly have a corporate connection to Refuge who spout false lies and stats about how the poor wee wimmin of Britain
ALL have a rough time from those bad heterosexual men and deserve all our sympathy. However there is a far deeper reason
for these endless propaganda stories and it is to do with how the British crown requires an endless stream of FICTION
to steal on a scale so vast no one can truly comprehend the enormous sums that are being stolen from men in their courts.
The BBC have already been proven to use DRAMA to smear, as black actor Gary Beadle who played a character called,
and you wont believe the name, Paul Trueman between 2001 and 2004 a fictional character from the BBC soap opera
EastEnders and who had been critical of the storyline, suggesting it played into black, racial stereotyping see
BBC MANHATING : Reggie Yates is part of the problem VIDEO
Posh actors complain about the public complaining about them
James Norton the actor who is portrayed as the bad guy in the BBC drama Happy Valley proves just what is going on in the media. They want to show the 'WORKING CLASSES' as not worthy so they get a POSH boy to play a working class man who terrorizes the population of a small town.
"James Norton has spoken out about the ‘ridiculous’ preconceptions about ‘posh’ actors."
Of course the basic concept of always showing the working classes as a menace instead of the POSH boys playing the scum and filth toffs that are infiltrated into every area of London and make the working class boys look like angels compared with the massive criminal empire London city reigns over.
It would not be quite as shameful if they had at least offered the part to a working class boy instead of the posh
set who frequent London's luvvy circuit.
The BBC take money from the peasants to portray those peasants, well especially the male working classes, as abusers of women and children and follows exactly the news line they take with their homosexual / feminist propaganda.
Despite endless FOI requests to expose their freemason agenda the BBC and its predatory paedo set formerly controlled by predatory paedo Jimmy Savile will continue to produce drama's that attack the working classes as the cause of all ills. Meanwhile propping up the royal parasites and their masonic minions who are in fact the persecutors of the working classes both within the legal and political establishments and ensures the peasants anger continues to be vented onto working class males through fiction and a grossly distorted news agenda.
It will be those working class men in the end that will require to remove these establishment scum from power before any vestige of equality will take place in a country riddled with gross injustice that the BBC has aided and abetted with their hideous devious agenda.
BBC TV Licence Goon Calls Occupier a Pervert! VIDEO
The Shame of BBC TV Licensing VIDEO
BBC HARDtalk - Francis Rossi on Jimmy Savile and TOTP (Oct 2014) VIDEO
Matt Allwright on the BBC TV Licence Scam
The Masonic BBC exposed VIDEO
Vile BBC kiss the royal parasitic arse BIG TIME VIDEO
Why do the BBC select a homosexual to produce BBC Breakfast?
James Laidler BBC Breakfast producer showing children around the BBC Breakfast studio's
Heterosexual men know the lengths the BBC go in their endless smear campaigns that come especially from BBC Breakfast.
Non stop attacks on heterosexual men from the many feminists that control its output. But they also
have a homosexual James Laidler behind the production and training and we believe one of the major reasons
the BBC are heavily homosexual leaning while anti heterosexual thanks to them selecting male hating
feminists and homosexuals for one of the most influential programs on British TV.
Laidler is a peddler of all things homosexual and being allowed to use a major BBC
platform, paid by the majority of the population who are NOT homosexuals, and used to smear straight men
while glorifying everything to do with homosexuality, lesbianism and feminism.
Here is a background to Laidler who brags on Linkedin that he is a
Board member (BBC Pride/BBC Diversity)
November 2007 – November 2012 (5 years 1 month)Civil Rights and Social Action
Board member of BBC’s lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender forum which represents such staff and also
acts as an advisory service to programme makers on LGBT issues. As well as organising a variety of
quarterly events, each attended by hundreds of people, I assisted the BBC Academy in the creation of its
new diversity training course.
HOW MUCH HOMOSEXUAL BRAINWASHING IS INCLUDED IN HIS DIVERSITY TRAINING PROGRAM AT THE BBC?
I am a dedicated journalist, innovative storyteller, and skilled trainer, with extensive experience across television, radio, online, and social platforms.
• Senior Broadcast Producer for the UK's most watched morning news programme - BBC Breakfast.
• Created and delivered bespoke training for new journalists across the BBC.
• Described as 'instrumental' in planning and output of BBC News General Election 2010 morning special. Worked directly with show's main anchor to brief, block, rehearse and broadcast.
• Originated the role of Social Media Editor for BBC Breakfast. Conducted extensive audience research before developing and implementing the programme's social presence. Developed social media policy and best practice for BBC News, and trained other teams including staff from the New York Times, Financial Times and Reuters.
• Worked with BBC Breakfast's Executive Producer planning and implementing the relocation of almost 100 staff from London to new facilities in Greater Manchester - part of the biggest relocation in Britain's broadcasting history, and becoming the country's first national news programme to be based outside of the capital.
• Co-ordinated training and piloting for the state-of-the-art gallery automation system ahead of its rollout across BBC News.
Hypocritical BBC GREAT at using FOI absolutely dire at answering FOI requests
British Broadcasting Corporation Room BC2 B6 Broadcast Centre White City Wood Lane London W12 7TP
Telephone 020 8008 2882 Email firstname.lastname@example.org
Information Policy & Compliance
13th August 2015
Freedom of Information request – RFI20151316
Thank you for your request to the BBC of 31st July 2015, seeking the following information under
the Freedom of Information Act 2000:
1. Provide the total amount paid in salaries per year from BBC licence payers money to the
department that made that FOI request?
2. Please provide which BBC editorial head sanctioned that FOI request and his or her
The information you have requested is excluded from the Act because it is held for the purposes
of ‘journalism, art or literature.’ The BBC is therefore not obliged to provide this information to
you and will not be doing so on this occasion. Part VI of Schedule 1 to FOIA provides that
information held by the BBC and the other public service broadcasters is only covered by the Act
if it is held for ‘purposes other than those of journalism, art or literature”. The BBC is not
required to supply information held for the purposes of creating the BBC’s output or information
that supports and is closely associated with these creative activities.
For more information about how the Act applies to the BBC please see the enclosure which follows this letter.
Please note that this guidance is not intended to be a comprehensive legal interpretation of how the Act applies to the
The limited application of the Act to public service broadcasters was to protect freedom of expression and the rights of the media under Article 10 European Convention on Human Rights (“ECHR”). The BBC, as a media organisation, is under a duty to impart information and ideas on all matters of public interest and the importance of this function has been recognised by the European Court of Human Rights. Maintaining our editorial independence is a crucial factor in enabling the media to fulfil this function.
That said, the BBC makes a huge range of information available about our programmes and content on bbc.co.uk. We also proactively publish information covered by the Act on our publication scheme and regularly handle requests for information under the Act.
The BBC does not offer an internal review when the information requested is not covered by the Act. If you disagree with our decision you can appeal to the Information Commissioner. Contact details are: Information Commissioner's Office, Wycliffe House, Water Lane, Wilmslow, Cheshire, SK9 5AF, tel: 0303 123 1113 (local rate) or 01625 545 745 (national rate) or see http://www.ico.gov.uk/
Please note that should the Information Commissioner’s Office decide that the Act does cover this information, exemptions under the Act might then apply.
BBC News Division
Freedom of Information
From January 2005 the Freedom of Information (FOI) Act 2000 gives a general right of access to all types of recorded information held by public authorities. The Act also sets out exemptions from that right and places a number of obligations on public authorities. The term “public authority” is defined in the Act; it includes all public bodies and government departments in the UK. The BBC, Channel 4, S4C and MG Alba are the only broadcasting organisations covered by the Act.
Application to the BBC
The BBC has a long tradition of making information available and accessible. It seeks to be open and accountable and already provides the public with a great deal of information about its activities. BBC Audience Services operates 24 hours a day, seven days a week handling telephone and written comments and queries, and the BBC’s website bbc.co.uk provides an extensive online information resource.
It is important to bear this in mind when considering the Freedom of Information Act and how it applies to the BBC. The Act does not apply to the BBC in the way it does to most public authorities in one significant respect. It recognises the different position of the BBC (as well as Channel 4 and S4C) by saying that it covers information “held for purposes other than those of journalism, art or literature”. This means the Act does not apply to information held for the purposes of creating the BBC’s output (TV, radio, online etc), or information that supports and is closely associated with these creative activities.
A great deal of information within this category is currently available from the BBC and will continue to be so. If this is the type of information you are looking for, you can check whether it is available on the BBC’s website bbc.co.uk or contact BBC Audience Services.
The Act does apply to all of the other information we hold about the management and running of the BBC.
The BBC's aim is to enrich people's lives with great programmes and services that inform, educate and entertain. It broadcasts radio and television programmes on analogue and digital services in the UK. It delivers interactive services across the web, television and mobile devices. The BBC's online service is one of Europe's most widely visited content sites. Around the world, international multimedia broadcaster BBC World Service delivers a wide range of language and regional services on radio, TV, online and via wireless handheld devices, together with BBC World News, the commercially-funded international news and information television channel.
The BBC's remit as a public service broadcaster is defined in the BBC Charter and Agreement. It is the responsibility of the BBC Trust (the sovereign body within the BBC) to ensure that the organisation delivers against this remit by setting key objectives, approving strategy and policy, and monitoring and assessing performance. The Trustees also safeguard the BBC's independence and ensure the Corporation is accountable to its audiences and to Parliament.
Day-to-day operations are run by the Director-General and his senior management team, the Executive Board. All BBC output in the UK is funded by an annual Licence Fee. This is determined and regularly reviewed by Parliament. Each year, the BBC publishes an Annual Report & Accounts, and reports to Parliament on how it has delivered against its public service remit.
BBC always have an excuse to avoid answering FOI requests
British Broadcasting Corporation Room BC2 B6 Broadcast Centre White City Wood Lane London W12 7TP Telephone 020 8008 2882
Information Policy & Compliance bbc.co.uk/foi bbc.co.uk/privacy
12 August 2015
Request for Information – RFI20151218
Thank you for your request of 19th July 2015 under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (‘the Act’) seeking the following information:
"Please provide the following information under FOI legislation and within the 20 working days
1. Former BBC presenter Noel Edmonds has made it clear on national TV including the BBC itself that he cancelled his TV licence and refuses to pay for a BBC licence. The following clip show the very comments he made on the BBC captured here
What action has been taken by the BBC against Noel Edmonds that is being taken against thousands of ordinary people every year for refusing to pay for a BBC TV licence?
2.Year on year please provide how many people have been JAILED for refusing to pay for a BBC TV licence?"
Please note that "TV Licensing" is a trade mark used by companies contracted by the BBC to administer the collection of television licence fees and enforcement of the television licensing system. The majority of the administration of TV Licensing is contracted to Capita Business Services Ltd (‘Capita’). Over-the-counter services are provided by PayPoint plc (‘PayPoint’) in the UK, and by the Post Office in the Isle of Man and Channel Islands. Marketing and printing services are contracted to Proximity London Ltd. Media services are contracted to Mediaedge:CIA International Limited ("MEC"). The BBC is a public authority in respect of its television licensing functions and retains overall responsibility.
Firstly, I should explain that anyone who watches or records television programmes at the same time as they are being shown on TV, or live on an online TV service, needs to be covered by a TV Licence. People caught watching or recording television programmes could risk prosecution and a fine of up to £1,000.
Please be advised that we cannot comment on a specific individual’s circumstances unless that individual has recently put their personal circumstances into the public domain. This is because the licensable status of an individual’s address, together with any action that may have been taken by TV Licensing, constitutes personal information under section 40(2) of the Act.
Personal information about living individuals is exempt under the Freedom of Information Act if disclosure to a third party would breach one or more principles of the Data Protection Act 1998. As the individuals do not expect these details to be disclosed, to do so would be unfair. Therefore, disclosure would breach the first principle of the Data Protection Act 1998 which requires data to be processed fairly and lawfully.
Please be advised that a person cannot be sentenced to imprisonment if convicted of an offence under section 363 of the Communications Act 2003. The maximum penalty for not having a valid TV Licence is a £1000 fine (or £2000 in Guernsey and £500 in Jersey). The court may also order the convicted person to pay for TV Licensing’s costs in the proceedings. However, a person may be imprisoned by the court for failing to pay the court fine as a last resort. Section 82(4) (b) Magistrates’ Courts Act 1980 states that a magistrates’ court can only issue a warrant of commitment where it is satisfied that the default in payment of the fine imposed is due to the offender’s wilful refusal or culpable neglect, and it has considered or tried all other methods of enforcing payment of the sum and it appears to the court that they are inappropriate or unsuccessful.
For England, Wales and Northern Ireland, imprisonment figures are retained by both the Ministry of Justice ("MOJ") and individual magistrates’ courts and can be requested using the following address - Data Access and Compliance Unit, Postal Point 6.25, Floor 6, 102 Petty France, London, SW1H 9AJ.
However, under our duty to advise and assist you under section 16 of the Act, please note that the latest data from the Government shows that, in the nine-month period January to September 2014, 34 people received an average sentence of 18 days1 (with actual time served likely to be less than this).
1 Parliamentary question asked by Lord Bassam of Brighton on 6th February 2015, answered by Lord Faulks on 18th February 2015.
If you plan to publish a story on this information, please include the following statement:
A TV Licensing spokesperson said:
"We are constrained by the Data Protection Act on what details we can release on individuals.
It’s TV Licensing’s duty to enforce the law on behalf of the 95% of people who do pay the licence fee. Clearly, where valid licences are held, TV Licensing has no reason to prosecute. Where we have evidence to suggest someone is watching TV illegally, they risk prosecution and a fine of up to £1,000. This applies no matter who you are or what your personal views about the licence fee are."
If you are not satisfied that the BBC has complied with the Act in responding to your request you have the right to an internal review by a BBC senior manager or legal adviser. Please contact us at the address above, explaining what you would like us to review under the Act and including your reference number. If you are not satisfied with the internal review, you can appeal to the Information Commissioner. The contact details are: Information Commissioner's Office, Wycliffe House, Water Lane, Wilmslow SK9 5AF. Tel: 0303 123 1113 (local rate) or 01625 545 745 (national rate) or see http://www.ico.gov.uk/.
Freedom of Information Advisor, TV Licensing Management Team
Push for an immediate common's debate on the future of the television licence.
Why is this important?
There's been considerable public dissatisfaction for quite some time:
- In 2013, 70% stated that the BBC licence fee should be abolished or cut according to an ICM poll for The Sunday Telegraph.
- The Magistrates' Association has been calling for the decriminalisation of TV licence evasion for nearly 20 years, concerned that evaders are punished disproportionately.
- Up to 50 MP's demanded recently an urgent Government review of BBC funding
I resent having to pay for the BBC for the following reasons:
Unique funding or daylight robbery?
- The BBC has long advertised with phrases such as "thanks to the unique way the BBC is funded" however should that unique way been seen as a positive. Surely it is questionable that a non-government entity should be entirely funded by tax that they are independently allowed to, first, claim and, second, collect.
- The licence fee forces people to pay for self-funded services, such as itv, channel 4 and so on.
- Its business model relies upon fear of criminal sanctions to achieve success: you cannot go to prison for non-payment of your licence fee, but you can be jailed for not paying a fine.
- The BBC sends out almost 100,000 letters every working day threatening viewers with £1,000 fines unless they pay the TV licence fee. (They have posted 47million letters demanding payment in the past two years.)
- More than 3,000 a week appeared before the Magistrates Courts in 2012, accused of watching television without a valid licence.
- Licence fee evasion makes up around one ninth of all cases prosecuted in magistrate courts.
- Of the approximately 180,000 prosecuted, 164,932 have been convicted and fined in 2012.
- in 2012, 50 people were imprisoned, up from 30 in 2009. Of those, 49 were given a sentence of less than three months; one person was given a sentence of somewhere between three and six months.
Burden on the poor:
- The licence fee represents a much higher proportion of income for poor households
- According to a National Audit Office report from 2002: "Areas with high evasion rates are most likely to have a higher than average proportion of younger people, low income households, and students and single parent families, and a high level of County Court judgments 50 per cent above the national average".
- by forbidding all tv programs to non-licence payers, it prevents poor people to enjoy a hobby that's virtually free or it criminalises them, in particular women with children living on welfare.
The licence fee gives an unfair advantage to one broadcaster:
- Itv has a total external revenue of £2,590 million
- Channel 4's total revenue is £908 million a year.
- UKTV (owning Dave, yesterday, etc) had £265 million in revenue.
- In comparison, the BBC has a total income of £5,066 million of which £3,726 million comes from licence fees.
- The BBC has been funded by the licence fee since 1923.
- The current TV licence fee started in 1946
- TV licence might have been relevant when TV was in its infancy. Nowadays, it's not. Many channels offer quality programs funded by advertising.
How it works:
- The licence fee is classified as a tax since In January 2006.
- It cost each house with a TV the sum of 40p a day. In context of austerity, this is actually quite a lot.
- The Licence fee has been frozen at its 2010 level of £145.50 until 31st March 2017
- Free TV licences are available for households with a member aged over 75 and are Licences are half price for the legally blind. Those aged over 60 and in residential care homes can get Accommodation for Residential Care licences for £7.50 a year.
It doesn't have to be this way:
- Canada, United States, Australia, Hong Kong, Luxembourg, Monaco and Spain don't have TV licence fees. Presumably its national TV is paid by taxes, in which case it's paid proportionally to each individual's income.
A need of control has been expressed many times:
A BBC funded by the public needs a democratic mandate, not just the votes of a few people who enjoy nature programmes.
Although it hasn't arisen as an issue yet, the nature of the licence fee as a tax could lead to the BBC being manipulated by the government in power with the threat of withholding funds if information damaging to that government was made public. Evidence of this kind of manipulation has already been seen in the run up to the 2015 election and the proposed leader's debates.
Papers have hinted that "thousands of Top Gear fans who signed a petition demanding Jeremy Clarkson be reinstated are now threatening not to pay their TV licence fee in protest." I am one of them.
I think it's particularly relevant to address this now as this issue needs to be debated by the government before 2017, but more so because of the "Fracas", which brings the BBC's responsibility towards the general public to the forefront.
Noel Edmonds stating he cancelled his TV licence and REFUSES to pay for one
TO BBC Freedom of Information section
19 July 2015
Please provide the following information under FOI legislation and within the 20 working days
1. Former BBC presenter Noel Edmonds has made it clear on national TV including the BBC itself that he cancelled his TV licence
and refuses to pay for a BBC licence. The following clip shows the very comments he made on the BBC captured
What action has been taken by the BBC against Noel Edmonds that is being taken against thousands of ordinary people every year for refusing to
pay for a BBC TV licence?
2.Year on year please provide how many people have been JAILED for refusing to pay for a BBC TV licence?
BBC plays the victim card for three nasty regimes
Zionists claim they are victims of the worldwide goyim
Feminists / lesbians claim they are victims of heterosexual men
Homosexuals claim they are victims of heterosexual men
The very warped agenda of the BBC can be seen clearly in the above three examples. Those at the very top of the BBC controlling its output are freemasons,
zionists, feminists and homosexuals in some cases a multi faceted conglomerate of the above pushing a very twisted agenda that continually blames heterosexual men for their psychopathic view that they are ALL victims.
What VICTIM status does is allow the establishment to claim power and control over those the BBC accuse of being the instigators of a three victim network of ranting lunatics that the freemason / zionists will happily fulfill as the overlords making tyrannical laws that strip men of their lives.
Victim status promoted by the BBC gives these three special interest groups priority over virtually everything men require to sustain a decent quality of life. The masonic scum who want control of ALL men not part of their creepy satanic cult use victim hood as an excuse to rob and persecute men while lining their evil masonic coffers with trillions stolen from men unaware of the complicity of these groups given platforms regularly on the BBC.
Very few get a platform to counter their devious tendencies that are blatantly obvious as an establishment propaganda machine that has seen children en masse being stolen into care homes to satisfy the paedo network inside the BBC that was headed by top masonic satanist Jimmy Savile. The same evil bastard that ranted endlessly about the royal parasites at every opportunity on his BBC pulpit.
Paedo protecting BBC's vicious MALE apartheid style propaganda VIDEO
Paedo protecting BBC struggle to remove their tongue from the royal arse VIDEO
BBC TV Licensing thugs harassing and defrauding yet another elderly pensioner 76yo David Ambrose VIDEO
NOEL EDMONDS DOESN'T HAVE A TV LICENCE : SHOULD WE? VIDEO
BBC platforms for whinging 'victim status' feminists like Julia Gillard VIDEO
Lawyer controlled BBC pushing the mortgage scams VIDEO
from Old French mort gage (“death pledge”)
A special form of secured loan where the purpose of the loan must be specified to the lender, to purchase assets that must be fixed (not movable) property such as a house or piece of farm land.
A fixed asset ensures it can be seized with ease by the crooks pushing these loans like the crooked bankers and building societies
along with the crooked judges and lawyers only to happy to relieve you of those FIXED assets that they can steal with total
This is a centuries old racket that needs CULLED. They force you to pay for 25 years into the bank vaults for
a house that takes weeks to build and then you have to be extremely lucky not to have some issue that ensures they can thieve
your home back especially the Divorce Industrial Complex that has been finely tuned to give them ALL the excuses they need to kick you out into the street.
Ask any man about home ownership that ended up homeless thanks to the evil bastards who have organised the biggest most lucrative corrupt scam on the planet. Many who end up DEAD trying to fight the masonic gangsters who control these evil schemes pushed over the edge by the psychological games they play with anyone who is deluded into believing they OWN property.
BBC Norman Smith calls Nigel Farage a CUNT VIDEO
Male presenters disappear from feminist run BBC Breakfast News
BBC hacked by ISIS? VIDEO
The BBC Paedo Protection Racket Run By Satanic Freemasons VIDEO
Have the BBC finally learnt their lesson over Jimmy Savile? VIDEO
Crimes That Shook Britain Jimmy Saville VIDEO
Jeremy Clarkson protected by his lodge buddies at Chipping Norton for to long?
Jeremy Clarkson on public sector strikes The One Show - November 30th 2011 claiming they
should all be shot
Clarkson is the stereotypical BBC presenter sitting in his opulent surroundings of Chipping Norton, paid by the British TV licence payers and neighbours with the Prime Minister David Cameron and former Murdoch Moll Rebekah Brooks and yards from Chipping Norton golfing set and Evenlode Lodge 6535 top freemason haunt that dominates all proceedings in and around the upper class twats who think buying a house in that area makes them UNTOUCHABLE.
Clarkson has been seen cruising around on a jetski emblazoned with masonic emblems so there is NO DENYING he is one of them and happy to shove it in peoples faces and the MAIN reason he is , despite endless distasteful statements, still working for the BBC or at least until the latest disciplinary hearing is settled.
The deluded followers of Clarkson seem to think it is Clarkson who makes the show rather than the show made Clarkson who has been allowed to provide the tory fascists with endless back up when, during the nurses strike Clarkson suggested in a BBC interview they should be hauled out into the street in front of their families and shot.
Now for anyone with any modicum of humanity to hear such extremes from a bastard, who like Jimmy Savile lived the high life on the millions the BBC paid him to ponce across the globe living a life of opulence while smearing , on behalf of his well heeled tory / masonic pals in Chipping Norton at the peasants as if they are not worthy.
Clarkson is there as a reinforcer to the nasty bastards running the country to line the pockets of the few and like Savile, who ranted endlessly about Thatcher and the Queen, Clarkson is there with his endless innuendo's to back up the fascist scum who have been allowed to shit on the peasants from a great height as the scumbag drives away into the sunset with his luxury car paid by the very peasants Clarkson is allowed to sneer at, at every opportunity he can. Long overdue the boot but for the freemasons running the BBC giving him carte blanche to ridicule anyone who he thinks he can brush away like bullshit from his well heeled boots, also paid for by the peasants.
If only the zionist run BBC were as sympathetic to Israel's Gaza holocaust VIDEO
BBC promote the mark of the beast VIDEO
Femi BBC promote political mafia's 'special' treatment for female criminals VIDEO
Holocaust fest on BBC breakfast this morning
Anyone who watched BBC Breakfast this morning would be noting that more than 50% of the time on air was dedicated to the Holocaust,
conveniently 70 years ago and just as mounting pressure is being centred on the zionist Israeli murdering gangsters now up for criminal war crimes at the International Criminal Court (we will wait and see the outcome from that DEN of iniquity).
Its a pity the BBC were not as vigilant exposing the paedo's in their midst, the Israeli zionist mafia operating inside the BBC (via head honcho Danny Cohen) who deliberately downplay the GAZA holocaust survivors who time and again, after each blitz by Israeli mass murderers, seem to get away with , by the West's media anyway , as if it was a minor skirmish and not the total obliteration of the infrastructure of Gaza that their people depend on.
The Bitch Broadcasting Cunts also pump out the most VILE man hating feminazi shite to allow the zionist / freemasons who control Britain's courts to line their pockets with the spoils of men who face the divorce holocaust where most of the legislation has been conjured up by the likes of jewish lawyer and Thatcher henchman Leon Brittan who it is claimed was part of a homopaedo network abusing and murdering young boys at a sordid Westminster paedo ring in London.
The BBC are a monster using our licence money to get away with MURDER. Presenting issues clearly to distort news
and divert the attention of the sheeple away from those behind the most vile persecution campaigns on the planet.
They are an evil blot on the landscape, not only in Britain, but across the rest of the world where there sordid psychopathic programs are brainwashing the sheeple overseas who think the sun shines from the royal arse thanks to the most horrific sickly sweet deference and veneration shown to the biggest gangsters on the planet.
Vile Savile and buddy abused for decades thanks to their freemason cop pals
Police say sorry for ignoring the ‘worst kept secret in Scarborough’
Suspected child abusers Jimmy Savile and Peter Jaconelli could have been captured 30 years ago, had police listened to their victims at the time.
That is the frank admission of North Yorkshire Police, with the force now confessing that it was told about the abuse decades ago – but decided not to do anything about it.
The force has now offered a full apology to the duo’s victims, after a report found there was “overwhelming” evidence to say they were guilty of dozens of ?serious sexual offences - including rape.
A report on Operation Hibiscus reveals that ice cream magnate Jaconelli carried out a four-decade campaign of abuse in Scarborough, and along with Savile, would have been arrested if still alive.
But with Jaconelli’s offending believed to have gone on until a year before his death in 1999, it means the police’s decision not to pursue the initial complaints let him continue abusing children for at least another decade.
“His crimes were the worst kept secret in Scarborough,” said an anonymous Scarborough man, who worked for the ice cream man at his seafront parlour as a teenage boy.
“It’s unbelievable that so many people could know what was going on, yet the police have clearly just turned a blind eye.”
He claims that while none of his friends ever admitted to being abused by Jaconelli, the obese judo expert would “brush” himself against boys and grope them.
“It wasn’t nice at all, but the boys were paid really well and they would just joke about it.”
His comments mirror those made by former Scarborough councillor Geoff Evans, who was one of the first to break their ?silence over the former Mayor’s deviant ways.
And since a TV expose on the duo, which police deem the “catalyst” for the wave of allegations against Jaconelli. the police have received 37 allegations from 35 different victims.
The vast majority involve Jaconelli alone, although there are two “shared” victims.
In an interview with The Scarborough News, Assistant Chief Constable Paul Kennedy said while he is aware rumours circulated around Scarborough for years, nobody else has so far been reported to police involving abuse.
However, while apologising to the victims his force ignored decades earlier, he said North Yorkshire Police will now “listen intently” to anybody who comes forward with any information about abuse.
“It’s quite clear that as a result of our investigation, in the past, of all the victims that have stepped forward, in a small number of case, there were missed opportunities when victims of crime tried to report crimes to the police they were clearly not listened to and clearly not investigated as thoroughly as they could be.
“What I can say is that we did miss opportunities in the past in the region of 30 years ago and to those people who did try and make those reports, on behalf of North Yorkshire Police, I’m so sorry that we did miss those opportunities.”
Ultimately, the decision to prosecute the pair would have been in the hands of the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS).
The police also state that both Savile and Jaconelli may have disputed the allegations when interviewed.
But Assistant Chief Constable Kennedy feels the stack of evidence against both is “so significant and overwhelming”, both would have faced the possibility of standing in court together to give both them –and their victims – their day in court.
However, with Jaconelli’s death 15 years ago, and Savile’s in 2012, any hope of their victims seeing justice was cruelly dashed.
“It is a matter of great regret that, from the outset of the investigation, there was no prospect of true justice being achieved as the suspects are deceased,” added Mr Kennedy.
“However, I hope the victims have gained a measure of closure from knowing that matters have now been investigated as fully as possible.”
But now woman responsible for keeping North Yorkshire Police in line has accused the force of “failing” Jaconelli’s and Savile’s victims.
Crime Commissioner Julia Mulligan took aim after the report on Operation Hibiscus highlighted the full extent of the duo’s decades of abuse in the region.
And the elected crime tsar adds that those 35 victims have been forced to live in misery, after the police failed to act upon initial complaints.
“It is clear that historically, North Yorkshire Police failed these victims,” said Mrs Mulligan.
But she added: “Whilst it is not possible to turn back the clock, I am confident that under the leadership of Chief Constable Dave Jones, who has come to North Yorkshire from elsewhere, any historical issues will be properly dealt with.
“Indeed the Chief Constable has referred the force to the IPCC on two separate occasions, one of which was then referred back to the force and the other we await the Independent Police Complaints Commission’s (IPCC) conclusions.”
The IPCC is currently probing about how the force dealt to complaints two years ago relating to Jaconelli and Savile’s offending.
It self-refereed itself in April to the commissions, and follows another investigation which found there was evidence of organisational failure regarding the Savile case, although the force was cleared of misconduct.
And Mrs Mulligan added: “Looking at North Yorkshire Police now, I am certain that the service has changed and believe this is demonstrated by their actions today.
“Moreover, in October I commissioned a formal ‘health check’ into how North Yorkshire Police currently investigates child sexual abuse and exploitation.
“This was a comprehensive review, and whilst a number of actions were identified, I am satisfied that the force has been able, for some time now, to respond effectively and immediately to allegations of abuse.”
And she warned that with more victims likely to come forward, it’s vital the police have the right safeguards in place to help them.
“It is crucial that the police and specialist support services for victims are both in place, ready and able to respond,” she said.
“Whilst no service is perfect, I do feel able to reassure the public that North Yorkshire Police is today in a strong position to act as is needed and expected.”
And following the last IPCC report, which highlighted flaws with the force, Assistant Chief Constable Kennedy said the force was continuing to take a “proactive” approach to tackling historical sexual abuse. cases.
He added: “Whilst there were failings to report some relevant information, there is no evidence to suggest North Yorkshire Police failed in its responsibility to support Operation Yewtree, the national investigation concerning Savile.
He added: “The public should be able to trust in its police service, and we are doing everything we can to be open and transparent about how we are dealing with historic sexual abuse cases whilst respecting the privacy of victims.”