BBC Views Online often seems to report unexplained phenomena – for instance, from the last few days, off the top of my head, we have:
- Inquiry as stolen car kills woman – I presume the car stole itself and ran the woman over, rather than a car thief (or suspected car thief even) being responsible;
- A 15-year-old boy is being prosecuted in connection with the case of a girl who fell pregnant at the age of 11 – did he trip her up then? Girls obviously need to be careful in case they fall over and get up pregnant;
- A woman was killed and several people were injured when a stolen bus went on a five-mile rampage through Dublin – naughty, naughty bus – don’t do that again.
I’m sure readers of Biased BBC can spot many more unexplained phenomena reported by the BBC. Let us know in the comments – and mind how you go – it’s a strange world out there!
thanks ashley.
i had to reproduce that last bit in bold, so that i could get my head around it:
Mr Brown said among the biggest challenges he faced was ensuring people’s hard earned cash was properly prioritised when he made spending decisions.
Ashley Pomeroy writes:
“The article seems to exist purely to puff up Gordon Brown as a functioning human being rather than as an reanimated corpse.”
Quite! And there seems to be rather a large number of those around at the moment, doesn’t there?
Of course, the dissembling Reith will be along to pour scorn on the notion of BBC bias. But not until Monday – when he can do so via a terminal paid for by the BBC’s poll tax payers!
Dear me – I seem to have become anonymous. That last comment was mine.
ashley -> that is a tour de force.
archduke | Homepage | 13.05.06 – 3:00 am
Archduke: you have lost it. Ashley was completely off track and comprehensively wrong.
You believe because you didn’t have the staying power to read the website.
For example, Bell (“the knight in shining armour”) knew the whole grauniad story was a frame-up but was led by his pomposity and vanity to carry on regardless. The man’s an immoral cretin. But, of course, he has the lurve and respect of his fellow cretins at the beeb/grauniad.
Ashley Pomeroy 13.05.06 – 2:56 am
I agree. I was initially intrigued with this, although it has to be said that Neil Hamilton is not the most effective spiritual head of a crusade. If Alan Clark or somebody with an ounce of charm had been similarly wronged it might be easier for me to care, but I do not care for Neil Hamilton. Is he aware of Guardianlies.com? I imagine he wants to forget about the 1990s entirely. Wasn’t he on Have I Got News For You – a BBC programme – a few years after the 1997 election?
NH at the time of the plot had risen to be a Minister of Trade in the Conservative Gov. No wally he. AP is merely reacting with hindsight to a long litany of baseless pisstaking based on the fraudulent grauniad story.
But the website looks like something that might be profiled on Skepdic.com, and mention of a summary of evidence that is nonetheless 22,000 words wounds my heart with a monotonous languor.
Bit pompous eh, Ashers old man.
In fact whenever I read a piece of text in which someone aggressively uses the word “facts” and “prove” and “case” I become suspicious, for a shrewd person would not want to give the impression of having to prove a theory. A shrewd person would give the impression of already having proved the theory. He would try not to use legal language, because that smacks of TV-educated Americans. He would then lay the theory out, using wit and charm, and at the end he would try to win support.
The point is that I think the website was written in the form of a legal briefing for the attention of readers with a viable attention span
I am reminded of the film of “All the President’s Men”…
zzzzzzzzzzz
After a cursory glance of Guardianlies, the impression I get of your case is that Mohammed Fayed (an untrustworthy man) was angry with the Conservative Party and perhaps lied to the Guardian (a newspaper that does (sic) like the Conservative Party), and that the Guardian made a big issue of the story because it did not like the Conservative Party. Neil Hamilton subsequently and spectacularly failed to do anything about this because he was a weak, chinless wonder who was dominated by his wife and eventually broken by Martin Bell, a wounded man. I would not want Neil Hamilton as my MP. I cannot see Neil Hamilton playing hardball with Robert Mugabe.
NH did do somethingabout it – he sued for libel. Martin Bell is a hollow poseur who couldn’t break a lollipop stick never mind break NH.
So, perhaps Mohammed Fayed made up a story, and the Guardian printed it…
The grauniad made an error in accusing NH along with Tim Smith MP (who admitted guilt and resigned). Instead of admitting the error they moved to cover it up with the help of various mendacious staff from Harrods and crooked lawyers.
and it cost the Conservative Party the 1997 election, which they lost in a huge landslide and from which they have not recovered and will not for a few years.
The lying accusations didn’t help but were not the complete story.
And there is a BBC dimension, but most of us here accept that that the BBC and the Guardian have performed unprotected and consensual anal sex on each other for quite some time now. If all of this is the case and it is significant and it can be proved and proved again, it needs to be formulated in such a way that it makes the man in the street angry. I imagine that most people, when confronted by Guardianlies, will reply that the Tories deserved whatever they got and that it was good that Neil Hamilton’s constituents voted for Martin Bell, a wounded man (as I have already said).
But the reason why NH lost his seat was because, given the fallout from the false stories in the MSM, the LibDems and socialists conspired to drop out of the race for Tatton in favour of MB, who, knowing full well what was going on, followed his vanity and unscrupulously stood as “the knight in shining armour”. The great british public, ignorant of the true facts, voted the scoundrel in.
My memory of the Major administration is of John Major and Norman Lamont admitting that they had wasted billions on something called the ERM, to no avail.
All the three main parties agreed (stupidly) to join the ERM. It fell apart on the Conservative’s watch so they had to take the fall. Mrs Thatcher to her credit didn’t want to join but Lawson and Howe threatened to jointly resign if she stayed out.
You might say that Gordon Brown has also wasted billions. Perhaps he has. It is not the waste that destroys a government. It is being in a position whereby the Prime Minister and his Chancellor have to go on television and admit having wasted billions that destroys a government. It implies that the government is not in control. When I think of John Major and his government I think of a government that was not in control. Perhaps the government is never in control. The art of government is therefore to not have to admit being powerless, and Labour has been very good at that.
I should think that most commentators on this blog realise that zanulab is far worse that any Conservative Gov could ever be. However, the Labour Party has the incomparable advantage of being monitored by a benign and complaisant beeb to maintain them in power. Although eventually even that protection breaks down, as we might be beginning to see.
From will’s Times link above:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-2178097,00.html
“It is not the first time that the BBC has been embarrassed by a case of mistaken identity. Last year Rhodri Morgan, the First Minister of Wales, was mistaken for a cast member of Doctor Who when he was due to appear on the BBC Wales political show Dragon’s Eye.”
Easy to mistake your bug eyed aliens striving for world domination.
Another good BBC piece for John Reith’s dossier: “Palestinian PM makes plea for aid”. Never mind any reference to Hamas’ devotion to the destruction of Israel, this piece doesn’t even say WHY Hamas aren’t getting their usual supply of western dosh! Not even the classic BBC phrase “Hamas, regarded by Israel and the US as a terrorist organisation”… this article, masquerading as a news headline, wd be incomprehensible to anyone who hasn’t been following the BBC’s apology for Palestinian terror these last few years
Some people getting over excited here..
STILL nothing on the Beeb about the AQ letter most of the Yank media are discussing which apparently shows them really struggling and admitting that they operate to get media attention.
Paragraph:
“4. The policy followed by the brothers in Baghdad is a media oriented policy without a clear comprehensive plan to capture an area or an enemy center. Other word, the significance of the strategy of their work is to show in the media that the American and the government do not control the situation and there is resistance against them. This policy dragged us to the type of operations that are attracted to the media, and we go to the streets from time to time for more possible noisy operations which follow the same direction. ”
And Michelle Malkin hits the nail on the head:
So, put it all together: al Qaeda in Iraq is failing. It has little military strength, and the Iraqi people “do not support its cause.” It has succeeded in one arena only: the….. media. Yet, despite the despair manifested by the authors of the captured documents, that one success may be all that al Qaeda needs. Because the perverse negativity of the American (and British) press is the only view that most Americans/Britons get of the conflict’s progress. And, because of their shoddy coverage of the war, our reporters and editors provide the terrorists with their only gleam of hope.
Why is this not on the Beeb?
Or the fact that 1,577 of the 1,972 jihadis arrested since last May were Iranians? Or the fact that Jordan has arrested 20 suspects and seized Iranian-made Katyusha rockets in its probe of alleged plots by Hamas to carry out attacks in Jordan?
The BBC maintains its argument that the “root causes” of terrorism are all our fault, and never bring out properly the fact that jihadists take their guiding messages from the Koran and from people brainswashing them to justify their evil deeds. (Or in the case of the 7/7 London bombers, maybe one of the group brainwashing himself as well as the others.)
A couple of months ago a student hired an SUV and tried to kill a lot of other students on campus at the Uni of North Carolina.
He has now explained his actions, with chilling charity. He is not nuts. He truly believes that his religion teaches him to kill, and he has quoted chapter and verse from the Koran in minute detail.
http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/011397.php
Outfits like the MCB and MAB know this is the underlying teaching that motivates these jihadists. It is NOT Iraq or Afghanistan – they are simply pretexts. It is their interpretation of their religion.
http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/011397.php
OT on the OT thread:
Incredibly moving rediscovery of BBC recording of newly-liberated Bergen-Belsen inmates singing ‘Hatikvah’.
Voices from the past, more relevant than ever:
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/
Look what happens when R4 “varies” from its usual diet of enviro-leftyism.
IT WAS announced as a “thought-provoking, controversial, intelligent and well-informed” live phone-in show, hosted by the award-winning talk radio DJ Gary Bellamy.
But since the end of its first late-night slot on Radio 4, irate listeners have been phoning the BBC, setting the station’s messageboards alight and writing to the Daily Mail to complain about the cringeworthy twaddle they have heard on Down the Line.
One protested: “Radio 4 has long been an oasis of sanity and intelligence among the hysterical drivel that passes for radio programming these days . . . Surely there is enough witless drivel provided by insomniacs and morons on other radio stations? Please, please can we have our Radio 4 back?”
Among a number of complaints about sexism and racism was one concerning Bellamy’s hostile reaction to a West Indian from Barbuda. “Are you joking?” the broadcaster asked. “There’s no such place. That’s a cross between Barbados and Bermuda, isn’t it?” Amid mounting concern about the dumbing-down of the station, Radio 4 came clean yesterday after the programme was exposed as a spoof. The unscripted show was the creation of Paul Whitehouse and Charlie Higson of the BBC comedy sketch programme The Fast Show.
And the “award-winning” Gary Bellamy? He doesn’t exist, except as a character played by the writer and comic Rhys Thomas.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/newspaper/0,,175-2178090,00.html
About an hour and a half ago I watched a terrible report on News 24 about how Rock Bands should no longer embark on World Tours because of Global Warming.
I’ve just had to sit through half of their “travel” slot being turned into a propoganda machine for the Dubai tourist board.
Five minutes on how they are building a huge new international airport in Dubai – the biggest in the world – to accomodate those huge A380 Airbuses. Did they mention Global warming then? No of course not.
In BBC world it’s OK for Islam to pollute but not Western rock bands who travel the world bringing entertainment to millions.
Back to my now regular ranting about Sky as well as the BBC. I’m sure they are about to announce a merger. Sky news is almost exactly the same as BBC now. They even put the same stories out in the same order nowadays
From Our Own Correspondent this morning carries the usual BBC slant. Justin Webb mocks Bush for about 5 minutes, including his intelligence, and argues for amnesty for all those 20 million illegal immigrants. Another reporter says there is peace in some obscure Bulgarian village between Muslims and Christians – so we should let Turkey join the EU and thereby open the floodgates to all of Asia.
When will Justin Webb point out that while many Americans are unhappy about the policies Bush has pursued, and rabid Dems call him Bushitler, there is widespread derision for Dem leaders like Nancy Pelosi and Howard Dean.
Ashley Pomeroy:
I guess I should be grateful for such a lengthy critique.
The most complex stories can only be condensed so far. “The World At War”, for example, took 26 hour long episodes. To have summarised that conflict into a short story would have rendered it meaningless.
To have backed up with documentary evidence every contention and statement of fact within the document “The Concise True Story of the Cash for Questions Affair”, in Section Two of my website, which at least allows readers to understand what the true story is, would have made it quite indigestible.
The true story is far bigger and more complex than that which the history books currently record. It has its roots way back in 1984, ten years before the first CFQ story accusing lobbyist Ian Greer of bribing MPs hit the newsstands.
Recent evidence shows that Fayed most certainly did not invent the allegations which the Guardian subsequently printed, as originally thought. The evidence now shows that The Guardian’s then editor Peter Preston and the paper’s lobby correspondent David Hencke invented the story themselves with the blessing of The Guardian’s late chairman Hugo Young. Fayed merely gave them the go-ahead to run their yarn, with him in the role of a supposed whistleblower, in a fit of pique after receiving a colossal tax bill just weeks after John Major had refused to intervene to grant him British citizenship.
In other words, The Guardian was the proactive party, not Fayed. Fayed had no grudge against his former lobbyist Ian Greer whatsoever, but Peter Preston and Hugo Young had been gunning for Greer for some time and Fayed’s rage over his passport enabled them to take him out. It was only when they realised that their suspicions about Greer were not supportable that they then colluded with Fayed in the cover-up.
These contentions are all provable beyond any reasonable doubt, but it requires reference to a mass of documentary evidence to do so. WHICH IS WHY I WROTE TO THE BBC’S DIRECTOR-GENERAL MARK THOMPSON AND ASKED HIM TO INSTIGATE AN OFFICIAL ASSESSMENT OF OUR RESEARCH, GIVEN THAT IT HAS BEEN ENDORSED IN WRITING BY MANY PEOPLE OF INTELLECT AND STANDING INCLUDING THE BBC’S OWN JOURNALISTS ON BBC HEADED NOTEPAPER.
I humbly suggest that THAT is what you should keep your focus on – THE BBC’s REFUSAL TO ASSESS THE MERITS OF OUR RESEARCH. Not whether I’m right or wrong. That can only be established by scutinising the evidence, not by discussion here.
And that really is my last word on the matter for now.
dumbcisco writes:
” The BBC maintains its argument that the “root causes” of terrorism are all our fault…”
Indeed. And it’s not hard to see how the typical Beeboid’s mind arrives at this.
Spoonfed a diet of liberalism and socialist claptrap by the education system, s/he cannot believe in the concept that ‘some people are just born bad’ – they rape little old ladies and eat children because they are ‘misunderstood’ or ‘socially excluded’ or ‘suffered childhood trauma’
Similarly, nobody can be poor because they are lazy, stupid or trapped by a philosophy which keeps them in those codnitions – they are poor because someone else is rich.
Thus it cannot possibly be that people who hack other people’s heads off with breadknives aren’t pyscopaths, driven by an evil faith – they are victims.
It is, of course, the purest bullshit: but no true product of a modern liberal education can think any other way unless they undergo a complete revolution in how they think (eg Janet Daley and either of the Hitchens brothers). And that is simply far too painful for most people to contemplate.
And that really is my last word on the matter for now.
Jonathan Boyd Hunt | Homepage | 13.05.06 – 12:09 pm | #
——————————————————————————–
Appreciated, JBH.
(with apologies for the shameless self-promotion)
BBC anti-Christian bias, # 3,254,006. . .
*sounds of Hallaeuliah chorus reverbrate throughout the blog*
Normal programming now resumes….
Sooooooooooo…anyway! Tonight – those nasty old Cybermen on Dr Who – any bets being taken on when they are compared to the Tories? (I’ll be watching from behind the sofa by the way – I remember the originals!)
JBH
I have been away for two days and so have not yet had a chance to read all the stuff on your site. I’ll tell you whether I think the BBC’s DG was right or wrong when (1) I’ve read what he said and (2) I’ve read the so-called evidence.
I don’t mean to be a pedant but would you please…please…stop using the word ‘enormity’ to indicate size or importance? It means wickedness. It’s bad enough that some BBC reporters make this error without B-BBC people doing it too.
Isn’t Ashley P on good form? Brilliant posts all week.
On the subject of Major:
I will call him crap, and I will never stop, because the man was a venal liar. It was Major that convinced then PM Thatcher to take the UK in to ERM. His government rode the wave of a growing economy that was created by Thatcher’s reforms. It’s only a mercy that he didn’t start meddling and screw things up. Blair and co rode that same wave, congratulating themselves on how well they were managing the economy until today, when they’ve managed it right back in to the ground again.
John Reith:
Take at least a couple of weeks. I’ve given my word to the good people of this site that I’ll give my case a rest for a while.
And thanks for the English lesson.
John Reith:
If you (or anyone else for that matter) provide me with an e-mail address I’ll send you my correspondence with Mark Thompson and his predecessor Mark Byford.
GCooper – Another one who had an epiphany and was propelled over to the light side is is the formidable Melanie Phillips.
Isn’t Ashley P on good form? Brilliant posts all week.
John Reith | 13.05.06 – 1:42 pm
Poor old Ashers.
This is te final ignominy.
Hi guys.
Anyone got a list of ex-BBC staff who have spilt the beans ?
I will start the ball rolling with
Robin Aitken
Jeff Randall
Rod Liddle
Ideally with a reference to them spilling the said beans.
eg
Robin Aitken (http://blitheringbunny.com/archives/2005/05/15/pink-bits-76/)
Jeff Randall (http://observer.guardian.co.uk/business/story/0,6903,1686504,00.html)
Rod Liddle (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2088-1462256,00.html)
I have been away for two days and so have not yet had a chance to read all the stuff on your site. I’ll tell you whether I think the BBC’s DG was right or wrong when (1) I’ve read what he said and (2) I’ve read the so-called evidence.
John Reith | 13.05.06 – 1:42 pm
My emphasis added.
So you haven’t made your mind up yet?
You have avoided all challenges to your anal point if view, why should this promise be any different?
Jack Hughes | 13.05.06 – 4:23 pm
Michael Vestey, from time to time in his radio review column in The Spectator
JBH:
If on your website you replaced every occurrence of “The Guardian” with “The Daily Telegraph” I’m sure the beeb would start to evaluate your evidence straightaway.
Gordon-Bennett:
Thanks for all that. That was a really funny post to Mr Reith. I’d hate to have you as an enemy.
On Any Questions the pamel was asked about “right-to-die”. In the studio discussion, and in the Any Answers calls from listeners, Jonathan Dimbleby repeatedly pushed the pro-euthanasia line, probing with questions anyone who opposed euthanasia but never questioning its supporters.
Now why aren’t we all gobsmacked at that ?
These BBC types are so blatant, they really don’t recognise their liberal/lefty bias !
Richard Dimbleby would be ashamed of his sons’ biased performances, I think.
Jack Hughes:
Ex-BBC man Gerard Baker penned a fabulous piece for the U.S. magazine The Weekly Standard entitled “The Wreck of the BBC”. Here’s the link:
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/003/710rcvzt.asp?pg=1
There also that old favourite from Justin Webb, blowing the gaff on the Beeb’s anti-Americanism. Here it is:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/from_our_own_correspondent/4400865.stm
That Gerard Baker article is worth re-reading. Nothing has really changed since Hutton.
John Reith:
… please…please…stop using the word ‘enormity’ to indicate size or importance? It means wickedness.
No it doesn’t:
“Enormity” gcide “The Collaborative International Dictionary of English v.0.48”
Enormity E*nor”mi*ty, n.; pl. {Enormities}. [L. enormitas, fr.
enormis enormous: cf. F. [‘e]normit[‘e]. See {Enormous}.]
1. The state or quality of exceeding a measure or rule, or of
being immoderate, monstrous, or outrageous.
[1913 Webster]
The enormity of his learned acquisitions. –De Quincey.
[1913 Webster]
2. That which is enormous; especially, an exceeding offense
against order, right, or decency; an atrocious crime;
flagitious villainy; an atrocity.
[1913 Webster]
These clamorous enormities which are grown too big
and strong for law or shame. –South.
[1913 Webster]
Nothing to do with bias, er….or maybe it has:
There was a live commentary on the World Service on the FA Cup Final, when they suddenly switched to global business, or some such crap with a dreary introduction to Egypt. Who the &^%# cares about Egypt?
The game is currently in extra time.
Does the BBC regard football as for the plebs?
There have been a succession of anti-Bush leaks from the CIA, including from people associated with the Clinton camp.
This is just a summary of some of the outrageous leakers. The BBC has used all of them, I think. They lap it up.
http://powerlineblog.com/archives/014070.php
I also thought Dimbleby conspicuously cross-examined the anti-act callers on Any Answers.
“Mosque image problem post-7 July”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4768547.stm
bwaaaaaaaahhhhh……
archduke,
You’d think all the bombers were muslims!
Anonymous
What was dreadful was that some of the ant-act callers had been through very challenging, sad situations themselves. They should have been simply allowed to put their views – not challenged on their views indeed their morality by Dimbleby. He did not challenge people with opposing views – which of course they are entitled to.
He really went far beyond the pale. But no-one at the BBC will pick him up on it. No shame any more at the BBC. Listeners are just stooges.
Interesting to see how the BBC will cover this:
http://today.reuters.co.uk/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=internetNews&storyID=2006-05-11T232423Z_01_N11375022_RTRIDST_0_OUKIN-UK-EXPO-NINTENDO-WII.XML
The BBC has on several occasions dismissively referred to Nintendo as a “Toy Company”, well the “toy company has just crushed BBC favourite Sony.
“you’d think all the bombers were muslims”
they arent – they are “misguided criminals”.
please do get with the BBC program, Mr Read. 😉
as usual, the BBC acts as an unpaid PR machine for the MCB.
“All the mosques in Britain are pure as the driven snow”
Yeah, sure. But we KNOW that the central mosques in Leeds and Birmingham have fiery preachers, we see what is preached in the Middle East and it MUST have an echo here.
Why doesn’t the BBC ask how many of the 1000 mosques in Britain are run by overseas imams, for example – especially imams from Pakistan. And how many are mainly funded by the extremist Wahhabi sect ?
But the BBC seldon asks any questions. Just waiting for the next time.
from popbitch.
things are getting so bad for top of the pops that they are having to fill the audience with bbc staff. apparently (well, this is popbitch.com )
cut’n’paste:
********************************
In case anyone wants to sneak their way in, then call the cops once it airs:
Following Mark Thompson’s email earlier today, Top of the Pops are pre-recording a show tonight for transmission on 21 May and they need a live audience made up of BBC staff.
When: 11 May (Today!)
Where: TC3, Television Centre
Directions: Go to main reception of TVC and then go to Foyer A to collect a validation sticker.
Time: 6pm
Host: Fearne Cotton and Diarmud Gavin
Guests: Ordinary Boys, Katie Melua, Gavin Degraw, The Feeling, The Beautiful South, Sunblock feat. Robin Beck
Restrictions: BBC staff on continuing or fixed-term contract only (due to legal restrictions), 18 years and over must have BBC ID card.
dumbcisco -> the funding issue is indeed a *huge* question.
In my humble opinion everything on the BBC is politicaly bias. Simply because its very exsistance is an act of political bias. Unfortunately for any prospects of change the entire political “left” of this nation believe that its removal is also an act of political bias.
I have said it before, and as an act of political propergander, I shall say it again. The only way to change the BBC in any way whatsoever, is to vote for any political party but the Labour one. Then when there is a Conservative government, lobby your MP for a change in the TV liecensing laws. I can assure you that the Conservative party have as much interest in getting “shot of”, or at least reforming the BBC, as it is possible for any British political party to have. The BBC must be closed soon. Because one day a left wing party more scary that the present one might get into power. Does anyone trust a party anything like the BNP for instance to gain access to an instant £3 billion budget world propergander machine in the future?
Or we can all have lots of fun moaning for the rest of our stay here.
email , allegedly, from Mark Thompson to all BBC staff (via popbitch)
***********************************
Dear All,
We’re asking for your help, and also hoping we can offer you some fun at the same time.
A new law came into force recently which requires some public entertainment to be licensed.
The BBC always seeks to operate fully within the law. Contrary to advice originally received, it now appears that the BBC needs a licence for certain audience shows. We are in the process of obtaining this. But while we do so, we need to introduce some restrictions on recording studio shows in front of members of the public.
We can however use audiences drawn from members of staff only, and we’re therefore inviting you to attend the programmes affected – from Strictly Dance Fever to Top of the Pops – which need recording during the time that it will take us to resolve the situation.
Top of the Pops is being recorded this evening – please click here to register attendance. Details of further shows available will be posted on the registration site shortly. We’ll keep you posted.
Regards,
Mark
“Does anyone trust a party anything like the BNP for instance to gain access to an instant £3 billion”
GP -> the yanks have dead right – separation of the media from the government backed up with the bill of rights and freedom of speech.
eggball scrawny on the Beeb news right now. about the “oh gee – mosques = terrorism” story.
pity they didnt show Abu Laban in full flow in a Copenhagen mosque a few months ago.
secondly – we’re still waiting for the hidden-camera-in-the-mosque documentary.
archonix
Good point I agree. However crap is a bit strong. Especialy as we have now had 9 years of real experience of the alternative. If a week in politics is a long time 18 years is an eternity. So at least be gratefull for the fact that a John Magor government was better then a Neil Kinnock one would have been.
Trust me.