Wednesday, 14:25BST:
The Guardian (or is it ‘theguardian’ these days?):
Tories offer qualified terror bill support
BBC Views Online:
Tories delaying terror laws fight
The Views Online article did at least start by explaining:
The Tories say they will back proposed new anti-terrorism laws as MPs debate them for the first time, but will oppose some aspects at later stages.
The party is particularly against plans to allow terrorism suspects to be held for up to 90 days without charge.
The Liberal Democrats are expected to formally vote against the Terrorism Bill at Wednesday’s second reading.
The bill would outlaw “glorifying” terrorism and make it an offence to commit acts “preparatory to terrorism”.
The Conservatives’ decision to back the government at this stage of the bill’s progress through Parliament signals an end to the previously united approach on the issue by both opposition parties.
The increase in the time police can hold terrorism suspects, from two weeks to 90 days.
But oh, that awful headline – so misleading – especially for people who didn’t read the story itself. While we’re at it, can anyone tell me what that last paragraph is meant to say? Does anyone at the BBC (including sub-editors) ever read through what they’ve written before clicking ‘Publish’? We are forced to pay for this stuff you know!
The headline was subsequently changed – it now reads: Terror Bill clears first hurdle – but only as part of BBC Views Online’s questionable practice of completely re-writing existing stories rather than either adding an update or starting a new story. Just one more way of re-writing history as we go along!
Rob
The BBC is an agent of Islamification. Why would they speak out against Islamic cruelty?
“It is unclear what was behind the attack, but the girls attended a private Christian school and one of the heads was left outside a church leading to speculation that it might have had a religious motive.”
Pathetic
OT: The Guardian’s leftist plot against the Conservative government.
I’ve only just found out about this, though I’m sure this isn’t news to many of you here.
Remember the ‘cash for questions’ scandal in the ’90s?
Here is the story that the media never told.
Conspiracy? Or just leftist-inspired sloppy journalism?
You decide.
“It is unclear what was behind the attack, but the girls attended a private Christian school and one of the heads was left outside a church leading to speculation that it might have had a religious motive.”
Of couse it hasn’t got anything to do with religion. Islam means peace, remember?
Update.
http://www.thejakartapost.com/detaillatestnews.asp?fileid=20051029140826&irec=0
“series of bomb attacks and assassinations of Christians. These included a blast at a market in Poso, a predominantly Christian town, that killed 22people in May.
Christian leaders have repeatedly accused the authorities in Jakarta of not doing enough to find the perpetrators and bring them to justice.”
Don’t let Islam into government.
perhaps muslims dont like ‘private’ – just like the BBC
on this page http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/newsnight/newsnight_interviews/default.stm you will find Gavin Esslers interview with BNP leader Nick Griffin. What is interesting is not so much what Griffin says as Esslers pushing of Islam and his refusal to brook any critisism whatsoever of this most peaceful religion.
Did anyone see Catherine Deneuve showinng Essler up as the nervy pinko that he is on last nights Hardtalk Extra?
It took a Grande Dame to show up this whinging little [deleted].
Most gratuitous reference to global warming award winner, in a Have Your Rant regarding the end of British Summertime (putting the clocks back one hour):
“So goodbye then, to another beautiful, subtle summer. I see daylight saving as part of a classic and endearing British culture together with Europe and Australia that should stay with the present times. However, this ritual may come to a halt in the future. A major global warming effect worldwide is likely to provoke a turbulent change with regards to the treasured things of old.”
http://newsforums.bbc.co.uk/nol/thread.jspa?threadID=161&edition=1&&&edition=1&ttl=20051029164647
This isn’t a BBC comment per se, but it is funny to see how someone can shoehorn in comments like this. I’m amazed it didn’t include a criticism of George Bush or the Iraq War.
Iraq Liberation…
Immigrants rioting in France:
http://edition.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/europe/10/29/france.riots.reut/
Don’t see anything about it on BBC online.
Where’s Matt Frei working his way through the maze of burning cars in search of trapped children to “rescue” while mouthing cliches about what it all says about French society?
The Beeb’s hypocrisy is palpable. Vicious race riots on their doorstep in England and France — but instead they’ll go halfway around the world to comment on “racism” in Louisiana!
Susan,
Looks like CNN is also be unable to say
http://edition.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/europe/10/29/france.riots.reut/
North-African, Islamic, benefit addicted youths?
Quite right Rob, bet they weren`t Chinese.
Great analysis from the BBC regarding the recklessly dangerous brinkmanship from the Iranian President:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4387852.stm
“Our correspondent says this is the closest Iran has come to saying it will not attack Israel.”
Funny that, I thought that someone saying that Israel should be “wiped off the map” sounds like a pretty clear intention TO attack Israel. Then again, obviously I am not fully multicultural and cannot understand that such subtle signs as calling for genocide of a country, organising mass violent demonstrations and burning flags while chanting “death to Israel” actually mean that they are all fluffy bunnies who mean no harm.
very OT
I’ve just tried to sign up to the new DHYS system. While searching for an interesting country to belong to in the countries drop-down list I found Tuvalu, Brunei Darussalam, Belgium and of course Palestinian Territory, Occupied. I quickly scrolled down to ‘Z’ to see if my favorite country, Zionist Entity, is on the list but fortunately it is not (as of now).
Granted, from the BBC I wouldn’t have expected anything less regarding occupied Palestine. One cannot be too thankful that they haven’t written Palestinian Territory, Stolen! or something of the sort.
But the more intersting entry was that of Taiwan or as it appears on the list: Taiwan, Province of China.
I tried to register to the NY Times, thegrauniad, the Spectator, the Telegraph, Newstatesman and the Independent. None have this ‘Province of China’ addition next to Taiwan.
So, WTF BBC?
Did anyone see Catherine Deneuve showinng Essler up as the nervy pinko that he is on last nights Hardtalk Extra?
It took a Grande Dame to show up this whinging little [deleted].
Socialism is Necrotizing | 29.10.05 – 4:40 pm | #
can anyone post a link to a video or preferably a transcript of this programme? thanks!
Slightly OT, but then again maybe not. If any beeboids still want to praise George Galloway they should read the superb piece by Christopher Hitchens. It’s not far away, just go here: http://www.slate.com/id/2128742/
max,
This may interest you. The Taiwanese have asked Google to stop referring to their country as a province of China. Choice quote:
“… many international media companies, eager to expand their presence in the Chinese market, are succumbing to pressure from Beijing.”
QED methinks.
Ahh, but Google managed to comply with that request. I doubt the BBC would even listen.
Cheers JohnOfCoventry.
Indeed. I also fail to see the BBC’s financial interest.
(D)HYS were running a thread on GMT/BST.
Perhaps due to the failure of the BBC to maintain ceefax at the proper time (still at BST as I write) they have completely removed the thread – not headlined, not in the historical listing.
Comments on Bush’s travails are promoted back to featured status.
If you haven’t seen it, the American Expat gives our resident BBC reporter, Paul Reynolds, a well deserved spanking. Be sure and read Paul’s reply and Scott’s reply back.
A must read for any who thought Paul might be seeing the light – think again.
http://theamericanexpatinuk.blogspot.com/2005/10/bbcs-reynolds-disappoints.html
SPOT THE DIFFERENCE
Blair writing in The Observer
Get real on climate change
It’s easy to take frustrations out on the Bush Administration but people forget that the Senate voted 95-0 against Kyoto when Bill Clinton was in the White House.
http://observer.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,6903,1604790,00.html
The BBC’s take on Blair’s article
PM pessimistic on climate treaty
President Bush refused to ratify the Kyoto treaty when 141 countries signed up to it this year because he said it would be too costly to the American economy, and the fact that the fast-growing developing countries were not part of it.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4389778.stm
I agree Dan, you beat me to it
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4389778.stm
Unlike most news stories we have exactly the same amount and quality of information as the BBC, because we can read the Observer article too. And it turns out that the BBC report is ever so slightly more anti-US and anti-Bush than Tony’s article.
http://observer.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,6903,1604790,00.html
Get real on climate change
We know climate change is a major threat. And worries over security of energy supply and rising oil prices are pushing energy policy to the top of the agenda. But we must understand that neither issue can realistically be dealt with unless the US, the EU, Russia, Japan, China and India work together.
We also have to recognise that while the Kyoto Protocol takes us in the right direction, it is not enough. We need to cut greenhouse gas emissions radically but Kyoto doesn’t even stabilise them. It won’t work as intended, either, unless the US is part of it..
1. We learn that “the US, the EU, Russia, Japan, China and India” must work together, long before Tony singles out the US specifically as needing to be part of it
In the BBC report however, we get three mentions singling out the US (in paragraphs 2, 3 and 5) before any other country is mentioned :
Most of the developed world – except the US – has signed up to the agreement. But Mr Blair, writing in the Observer, said cuts in greenhouse gas emissions can only be achieved by establishing a initiative that includes the US. ……..Any new agreement after the Kyoto protocol expires in 2012 would not be able to work either if, as with Kyoto, the US is not part of it, Mr Blair said.
Mr Blair argued that the problem of global warming cannot be dealt with unless any new agreement includes India and China – exempted from the current protocol because they are classed as developing countries.
This looks like the US is the problem and India and China are an afterthought. This may or may not be right but it certainly isn’t what Tony is saying.
2. Tony cautions us against taking out our frustrations on the Bush administration :
It’s easy to take frustrations out on the Bush Administration but people forget that the Senate voted 95-0 against Kyoto when Bill Clinton was in the White House
What’s the BBC’s take on this ?
President Bush refused to ratify the Kyoto treaty when 141 countries signed up to it this year because he said it would be too costly to the American economy, and the fact that the fast-growing developing countries were not part of it.
3. There’s a majestic bit of bile in the BBC report :
Mr Blair argued that the problem of global warming cannot be dealt with unless any new agreement includes India and China – exempted from the current protocol because they are classed as developing countries.
It must also include the US – the world’s biggest polluter.
It must also include the US [the fourth special mention of the US, by the way] must be a report of what Tony is saying, not a stand alone editorial comment. But Tony certainly didn’t say “the world’s biggest polluter.” That is editorial comment, slid into the same sentence that purports to be reporting Tony’s comments. Very naughty.
But not only is it sneakily and fraudulently inserted into a report of Tony’s comments, it isn’t even relevant to the story. The US may or may not be the world’s “biggest polluter” but CO2 isn’t “pollution”, and no one ever refers to it as such.
Slightly OT:
BBC’s take on the riots in Paris:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/4389920.stm
From the Fjordman’s Blog: http://fjordman.blogspot.com/2005/10/second-night-of-rioting-in-paris.html
The BBC have the finger on the pulse of terrorism again:
“Palestinians issue rockets pledge
Militants have fired scores of rockets into Israel
A leader of the Palestinian militant group Islamic Jihad says it has agreed a conditional end to rocket attacks on Israel from the Gaza Strip.
Khaled al-Batsh told the BBC the group would stop firing if Israel stopped what he called its aggression…”
Good to know that terrorists still talk directly to the BBC. But what was the Israeli aggression? The withdrawal from Gaza?
Full article: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4390428.stm
Thanks for the link to Fjordman’s blog Joerg, very interesting.
I wonder how these garçons have been doing in the French polls of late. My guess is ‘better than ever’.
John: I have to add that I read the piece by Fjordman on jihadwatch.org – credit where credit’s due.
Prince Charles has gone “dhimmi”; the Conservatives have lost the plot completely. Who’s going to fill the huge gap for people who are neither hate-filled nor leftist. It could be a surprising source. Here’s what I copied from the site http://www.think-israel.org . As you may guess, I’m pro-Israeli but not unthinkingly so.
“The Muslim promotion of anti-semitism in England has been very successful, perhaps because it is able to graft onto longstanding, well-established British antisemitism. Robert Wistrich documents the persistence and wide span of anti-Jewish mainstream prejudice, particularly among the media and the upper echelons of British society — the same group that supported Hitler in the 1930s. Contrariwise, an odd thing seems to be happening at the extremes. Over the last half century, the far left and at least one far right party — the British National Party (BNP) — seem to be exchanging positions on anti-Semitism. Nick Cohen observes that the liberal left appears to have become “Jew-obsessed” and is partnering with Islamists. In contrast, as Robert Locke points out, the once Nazi-sympathizing BNP has forsaken anti-Semitism. Their focus is on reducing foreign immigration to prevent the English becoming a minority in their own country. More and more, this means tackling the huge Muslim immigration and population growth, a problem ignored by most of the other parties. Unlike Tony Blair’s Labour party, it can take the fear of Islamification and the threat of Muslim terrorism seriously because it isn’t hampered by an official policy of supporting the EU and multiculturalism.”
Who are today’s nazis? If informed Jews are stating clearly that the BNP aren’t nazis, then they aren’t nazis. But what about the new friends of Ken Livingstone and George Galloway and that gruesome twosome themselves? The Jews are the canaries in western society and galloway, Livingstone et al are the new nazis.
It’s time to fight back.