PJC Journal – Original

There is much speculation at the moment as to when and how
the ‘mistake’ was made when the BBC showed
in a press conference the Queen ‘going off in huff’, and whether or not it was a deliberate attempt to undermine the Queen..

A scene of the monarch walking out of a photocall, which the
BBC described as ‘a huff’, was in fact, the
Queen walking in at the beginning of
the session with photographer Annie Leibovitz.

The Controller of BBC1 has
insisted lessons will be learnt from the storm caused by erroneous footage, but
it has now emerged that the corporation was alerted to the error the day before
admitting it in public. 

The BBC admits it was alerted at around 7pm on Wednesday – the day the footage was aired to
journalists – that it had made a mistake, and Mr Fincham was immediately told.

But the clips were still being shown on BBC
news bulletins after 7pm and the
corporation did not apologise publicly to the Queen until around noon on Thursday for the misleading scenes. 

By then, stories about the monarch storming off in a strop
had already gone around the world.

Whether the footage had been made internally or externally
(the BBC is not saying which), it would
still have had to go through a rigorous quality checking process, including a
legal check before either going to air or being presented to journalists, that
process must have ticked all the boxes and approved this release. . 

Given the history of the BBC
over the past 10 years, its clear left wing bias and being the pseudo
mouthpiece for Government policy, in my view it was a deliberate attempt by
someone within the BBC to discredit Her
Majesty as part of the wider agenda of separation that is currently going on
between Government and Crown.

NuLab takes the view that once the European constitution Treaty has been ratified by parliament, for which the people are being denied a plebiscite, and
the UK loses
its sovereignty to Brussels, then
the Queen is no longer a national requirement. 

It is for the BBC to
discover exactly who, but at the end of the day someone’s head must roll for
this, because if this is propaganda, it is totally unacceptable.

Now finally, is the BBC planning
a hatchet job on our armed forces, and what are they doing by encouraging other
crown servants to commit criminal breaches of the law by speaking to the
press without appropriate permission.

Note: this line has been added since the BBC
post originated this morning.

Serving members of the
Armed Forces may wish to seek the advice of their commanding officer before
responding.

UPDATE: Well, this view seems to be fully backed up by the former BBC Producer Anthony Jay. A well written piece in today's Telegraph (3 pages) with a huge insight into the Media Liberal thought processes of not just the BBC, but the MSM in general.

NuLab – Destroying Britain
from the inside out.

Related Reading:

Indian Literature: Sanskrit literature, Main Page, Mahabharata, Classical language, Sangam literature, P?li Canon, Vedas, Indian epic poetry, Assamese ... Bengali literature, Bhojpuri language

Old Yishuv: Musta'Arabi Jews, Sephardi Jews, Four Holy Cities, Jerusalem, Main Page, Safed, Tiberias,Jaffa, Deluge Myth

Stop the War Coalition: Main Page, Osama Bin Laden, John Rees, Communist Party of Britain, Communist Party of Great Britain Provisional Centre, Committee

Philby: intelligence service aux mains d'un agent soviétique

Structured Experience Kit-Main Pages

There is much speculation at the moment as to when and how
the ‘mistake’ was made when the BBC showed
in a press conference the Queen ‘going off in huff’, and whether or not it was a deliberate attempt to undermine the Queen..

A scene of the monarch walking out of a photocall, which the
BBC described as ‘a huff’, was in fact, the
Queen walking in at the beginning of
the session with photographer Annie Leibovitz.

The Controller of BBC1 has
insisted lessons will be learnt from the storm caused by erroneous footage, but
it has now emerged that the corporation was alerted to the error the day before
admitting it in public. 

The BBC admits it was alerted at around 7pm on Wednesday – the day the footage was aired to
journalists – that it had made a mistake, and Mr Fincham was immediately told.

But the clips were still being shown on BBC
news bulletins after 7pm and the
corporation did not apologise publicly to the Queen until around noon on Thursday for the misleading scenes. 

By then, stories about the monarch storming off in a strop
had already gone around the world.

Whether the footage had been made internally or externally
(the BBC is not saying which), it would
still have had to go through a rigorous quality checking process, including a
legal check before either going to air or being presented to journalists, that
process must have ticked all the boxes and approved this release. . 

Given the history of the BBC
over the past 10 years, its clear left wing bias and being the pseudo
mouthpiece for Government policy, in my view it was a deliberate attempt by
someone within the BBC to discredit Her
Majesty as part of the wider agenda of separation that is currently going on
between Government and Crown.

NuLab takes the view that once the European constitution Treaty has been ratified by parliament, for which the people are being denied a plebiscite, and
the UK loses
its sovereignty to Brussels, then
the Queen is no longer a national requirement. 

It is for the BBC to
discover exactly who, but at the end of the day someone’s head must roll for
this, because if this is propaganda, it is totally unacceptable.

Now finally, is the BBC planning
a hatchet job on our armed forces, and what are they doing by encouraging other
crown servants to commit criminal breaches of the law by speaking to the
press without appropriate permission.

Note: this line has been added since the BBC
post originated this morning.

Serving members of the
Armed Forces may wish to seek the advice of their commanding officer before
responding.

UPDATE: Well, this view seems to be fully backed up by the former BBC Producer Anthony Jay. A well written piece in today's Telegraph (3 pages) with a huge insight into the Media Liberal thought processes of not just the BBC, but the MSM in general.

NuLab – Destroying Britain
from the inside out.

Related Reading:

Old Yishuv: Musta'Arabi Jews, Sephardi Jews, Four Holy Cities, Jerusalem, Main Page, Safed, Tiberias,Jaffa, Deluge Myth

Driving Change: How the Best Companies are Preparing for the 21st Century

Front Page (Sterling Main Street)

Structured Experience Kit-Main Pages

Philby: intelligence service aux mains d'un agent soviétique

We have long called for legislation that would give powers
to the information commissioner to force companies to inform customers when
security and data breaches occur which involve personal data. 

At a conference in London
yesterday on “Big Brother Britain”,
the main credit checking company Experian has flatly rejected the idea of
automatically informing the UK
public when their ID details may have been hijacked.

Gillian Key-Vice, Experian’s director of regulatory affairs,
said that while she recognised why people might “think it’s a good idea”, such
a scheme could cause “unnecessary concern” amongst individuals where a breach
has already been “managed”. 

Trouble with that approach is that the public don’t know
whether it has been well ‘managed’ or badly ‘managed’. We take the view that it
is reasonable that if a data breach has occurred, and their personal details
are in the public domain, then they have a right to know, a right to prepare
for, and try to prevent any potential identity theft or fraud. Not to advise
customers of data breaches fuels the view that the finanancial services
industry don’t care, and would rather cover up breaches in secret.

I think that it is now well documented that companies,
especially financial institutions ‘manage’ data breaches only in as much as it
protects their own bottom line and reputation, with the wider consequences to
the customer being ignored unless it is likely to involve liability to that
institution. 

Not to advise customers of data breaches only adds fuel the
view of cover ups and secrecy.

Anna Fielder, policy consultant at the National Consumer Council, said the UK
should follow the example of California,
where companies who expose individuals’ data have to contact and notify the
individuals concerned.

She added that the UK
should adopt another US
trend, where customers have the right to lock or freeze their credit records,
with companies only able to access records on the individual’s say so.

Dr Ian Forbes, a consultant social scientist at Fig One
Solutions, said the regulations in California
amounted to a “continuous public plebiscite” which meant customers could choose
to avoid companies that were sloppy in their protection of customer data.

That can only be a good thing for individuals in protecting
their personal information. 

Experian, and other companies who hold and process personal
data must now drag themselves into the level of debate where the individual is
taking responsibility for their own identities seriously, and companies such as
Experian can no longer ‘manage’ people in secrecy.

 
(source)

Related Reading:

Stop the War Coalition: Main Page, Osama Bin Laden, John Rees, Communist Party of Britain, Communist Party of Great Britain Provisional Centre, Committee

Philby: intelligence service aux mains d'un agent soviétique

Un tour du monde des écoliers, à portée de main

Soviet Main Street

Driving Change: How the Best Companies are Preparing for the 21st Century

We have long called for legislation that would give powers
to the information commissioner to force companies to inform customers when
security and data breaches occur which involve personal data. 

At a conference in London
yesterday on “Big Brother Britain”,
the main credit checking company Experian has flatly rejected the idea of
automatically informing the UK
public when their ID details may have been hijacked.

Gillian Key-Vice, Experian’s director of regulatory affairs,
said that while she recognised why people might “think it’s a good idea”, such
a scheme could cause “unnecessary concern” amongst individuals where a breach
has already been “managed”. 

Trouble with that approach is that the public don’t know
whether it has been well ‘managed’ or badly ‘managed’. We take the view that it
is reasonable that if a data breach has occurred, and their personal details
are in the public domain, then they have a right to know, a right to prepare
for, and try to prevent any potential identity theft or fraud. Not to advise
customers of data breaches fuels the view that the finanancial services
industry don’t care, and would rather cover up breaches in secret.

I think that it is now well documented that companies,
especially financial institutions ‘manage’ data breaches only in as much as it
protects their own bottom line and reputation, with the wider consequences to
the customer being ignored unless it is likely to involve liability to that
institution. 

Not to advise customers of data breaches only adds fuel the
view of cover ups and secrecy.

Anna Fielder, policy consultant at the National Consumer Council, said the UK
should follow the example of California,
where companies who expose individuals’ data have to contact and notify the
individuals concerned.

She added that the UK
should adopt another US
trend, where customers have the right to lock or freeze their credit records,
with companies only able to access records on the individual’s say so.

Dr Ian Forbes, a consultant social scientist at Fig One
Solutions, said the regulations in California
amounted to a “continuous public plebiscite” which meant customers could choose
to avoid companies that were sloppy in their protection of customer data.

That can only be a good thing for individuals in protecting
their personal information. 

Experian, and other companies who hold and process personal
data must now drag themselves into the level of debate where the individual is
taking responsibility for their own identities seriously, and companies such as
Experian can no longer ‘manage’ people in secrecy.

 
(source)

Related Reading:

Driving Change: How the Best Companies are Preparing for the 21st Century

Old Yishuv: Musta'Arabi Jews, Sephardi Jews, Four Holy Cities, Jerusalem, Main Page, Safed, Tiberias,Jaffa, Deluge Myth

Un tour du monde des écoliers, à portée de main

Soviet Main Street

Stop the War Coalition: Main Page, Osama Bin Laden, John Rees, Communist Party of Britain, Communist Party of Great Britain Provisional Centre, Committee