“Some critics suggest …”
This report on a church organisation helping out women who are the victims of sex trafficers: A ‘tiny drop in the ocean’
It contains a completely unneccessary comment about “some critics suggest that if the homes are run by the Church there is a chance its beliefs will be imposed on victims around issues such as abortion.” without identifying the critics.
It’s a nasty and snide comment that wouldn’t be applied if the charity had been run by anyone who wasn’t a Catholic nun,
Thomas Bridge
Annoying both sides.
I’ve just had a look at your Biased BBC blog. I have to ask : if the BBC has such an apparently blatant left-wing bias, how come it has regularly upset both right-wing *and* left-wing British governments since 1923?
Seriously, with the obvious exception of the WW2 Churchill administration, every single British government that has existed since the inception of the BBC has complained that the Corporation was out to get it. Harold Wilson, as Labour a Prime Minister as you could get, *loathed* the BBC. Jim Callaghan often complained that the BBC was out to get his government. Naturally, Blair has plenty of reasons to hate the BBC. And what about the MI5 vetting of BBC staff, as detailed here : link
Gareth
Actually, Churchill was no exception.
Gareth’s comments remind me of a good one-liner used by Marget Thatcher at a Tory conference.
Something along the lines that the problem with when Labour marched forward was that it always marched, “Left, Left, …. Left, Left,Left …”
and that is why Gareth’s comments are so off the mark. In fact its a standard BBC defence that gets wheeled out from time to time.
The BBC is always to the left of any government elected in this country.
Michel Foot and Tony Benn’s version of Labour (aka Trotskyism) aside the BBC would never support any British government in power. Which is probably why MI5 kept tabs on them.
Come to think of it the BBC shares alot with MI5. Both are unelected dysfunctional organisations that cost the UK taxpayer more than they are worth. The only difference being that MI5 is of some us, some of the time.
The BBC are filth..people are turning away in their Millions…..
A “Good Show” show now only gets 6-8 Million, the rest of their garbage goes un noticed by all but a few Hundred Throusands….
People are turning away in their droves…..
The BBC is obsolete……and it’s tounge is so far up Islams arse, they won’t survive the coming backlash…
Bye Bye BBC……you won’t be missed. Others are ALREADY doing it better than you…….you really do look like a PBS broadcaster now….un watched, and ignored by those who matter….
Obsolete…..we can thank Bill Gates for our freedom……good old America sets us free, while the BBC still has to threaten peope to get any money…..old sad joke, full of commies and queers……
lol.
You don’t seem to have a general thread up yet so sorry if this is in the wrong place.
Did anyone hear “The Westminster Hour” on Radio 4 on Sunday? They broadcast a peice by Justin Webb where, if I’m not mistaken, he actually defended the second ammendment of the US constitution and the spirit of American Patriotism. I found it quite a well balanced and interesting piece. Judge for yourselves and listen again on the Radio 4 website.
1. I should bloody well hope the nuns are ‘imposing’ their views on the women.
2. It seems that Gareth is under the misapprehension that the BBC is (politically) somewhere between Labour and the Tories. It’s a common mistake. If he grasps that the BBC is actually somewhere between the Socialist Workers Party and the Respect Coalition then he should get it. When the BBC knifes the Tories, it’s from the left. When the BBC knifes Labour, it’s from the left. In fact, if anyone can give me an example of the BBC knifing someone from the right, I’ll be kind to a liberal.
“The BBC is obsolete……and it’s tounge is so far up Islams arse, they won’t survive the coming backlash…”
Simon’s comment is worth putting to the test. I wonder if we can put in one thread all BBC items that have been:
(1) Highly Critical of Radical Islam
(2) Critical of Radical Islam
(3) Moderately Critical of Radical Islam
(4) Critical of Radical Islam but with a blancing criticism of its opponents
My money would be on less than 10 articles no matter how far back you go.
As for the backlash. Just look at the viewing figures and circulation numbers of teh BBC, Guardian, Independent. They have been consistently falling. Were it not for the government approved extrotion racket that the BBC operates (which incidentally is first and foremost a tax on the poor) the BBC would not exist.
Simon should have read Anonymous’ comment
Could’nt care less what a sad slave like Simo n says….
Just tell him to go home, turn on the BBC, and let them fill his brain with lies and shite……..
He is just a slave to his TV, and as such, no more individual than an Ant in a nest….just another parasite socialist, desperately trying to justify his mantra…
BBC and TV in general is watched by lazy losers who got no mates….lol.
Simon…go sit in your house alone, and stare at your glowing piece of furniture…you have no life, you life is has no menaing, you just do whatever the TV tells you to do………..you repeat whatever you are told to think, because you are too thick to come to your own conclusions…..lol.
Simon = BBC = Loser…….
somebody gets “offended” , and bang – its news:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/5399072.stm
Tell you what, ‘Anonymous’: when you’re trying to making a point, make it short and interesting. Stream of consciousness rablings, interspersed with abuse, are really very, very dull.
It’s not a matter of the BBC offending the government of the day, it’s why the government was offended. I suspect much of the pre-60s offence was to do with not slavishly following (and supressing opposing views concerning) the government’s line on any particular issue. I think at that time the BBC deliberately took the view that by allowing and following a policy of discreet opposition to the government of the day it was adding something to the British form of democracy and was not a negative.
Since the 60s, however, the BBC appears to have developed its own agenda which may or not be in opposition to the government of the day. For instance, it was implacably opposed to Mrs Thatcher’s policies from day 1 but gave Blairism an easy ride until Iraq (which the BBC strenuously opposes). The BBC’s current consistent bias is chronicled on this blog daily: put in an un-nuanced form, the BBC is part of the “modernising”, anti-traditional, pro-EU, anti-US, generally speaking metropolitan bien pensant tendency in all aspects of its output. As such it will always annoy whatever government is in power simply because governments have to be elected and cannot be totally consistent over all aspects of their policies. Accordingly the BBC annoys even left-wing governments although rather less than right-wing ones.
Critical of Radical Islam
You’ll find criticism of radical Islam sprinkled very sparsely indeed through the BBC’s output.
But, rare though that may be, I feel that our function should be not only to bash the BBC but to give credit where it’s due.
I recall that shortly after the Islamic Jihad suidide bombing in Tel Aviv back in April, the World Service put some tough questions to a Hamas representative who was, naturally, quite happy with the barbaric attack. One of the questions went something like this:
“How can you expect to resolve anything by blowing people up as they go about their business outside a fast food restaurant?”
But this is OT for this thread. On the subject of this thread, I think Umbongo’s comment puts it in good perspective.
Umbongo | 02.10.06 – 7:05 pm
This business of always criticising from the far left can be illustrated by just one example, although I am sure there are many others as well.
Have you ever heard any beeb interviewer say: “Prime minister, when are you going to speed up and extend your privatisation plans?”
PROSTITUTION BEHIND THE VEIL
A worthwhile insight into Iran on BBC4. The Storyville series is one of the few worthwhile news oriented programmes on the BBC. The documentary while not particularly well made (it failed to show teh scale of teh problem) was at least honest which is far more than you will get from BBC news reports filed by Frances Harrison.
It backed up some of the views I was trying to share with you on these boards last month on the true situation in Iran.
PROSTITUTION BEHIND THE VEIL
“In the Eighties, documentary maker Nahid Persson left Iran. She recently returned hoping that previous injustices had been swept aside, but what she found, as her moving film reveals, is a society and where “drugs and prostitution go hand in hand with hypocrisy”. Persson follows Minna and Fariba, whose husbands have been jailed and who have been forced to make ends meet by going on the streets. Both have a child and are heroin addicts, but Persson doesn’t judge the pair. Instead she presents a world in which they are condemned to struggle as secondary citizens and where the men either short-change them (“Six dollars?” queries one man. “Do you think I’m rich like a mullah?”), or buy sex by marrying them in what is called a “sigheh”, a temporary marriage, allowable under Shia law, which can last 10 minutes or 99 years.”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbcfour/documentaries/storyville/
i suspect that oftimes their “some say” sources have to be anonymous (assuming it’s not just a rhetorical gadget) because if they were consistently named, it would be too easily proven that, “but yes, s/he would say that, wouldn’t s/he”…
any thoughts, j reith?
Here is an example for Bryan’s benefit of BBC bias. NO HUMAN COMPUNCTION OR SENSITIVITY REQUIRED HERE.
The BBC has stood by its decision to show the bodies of British soldiers killed in Iraq in a documentary on Sunday, despite pressure from Downing Street and the families not to.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/2953652.stm
and what BBC were forced to say about it after complaints were upheld.
Complaints against the BBC for showing footage of two British solders killed in the war in Iraq have been upheld by the broadcaster’s own watchdog.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/tv_and_radio/3148751.stm
Here is a more typical BBC Story.
MEDIA INCENSED AT JOURNALIST KILLINGS
The killing of an al-Jazeera television journalist and two cameramen by American forces in Baghdad on Tuesday has generated great anger in the Arabic media.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/2931571.stm
and here is a story that will never appear on the BBC.
UK: MUSLIM THREATENS INJURED SOLDIER IN HIS HOSPITAL BED
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/10/02/ntroops02.xml
But had it been a Muslim fanatic/terrorist that had been in any way questioned by the British or American police or military, you can bet your bottom $ that is would have made headline news on all BBC media outlets.
Now do you understand Bryan? Or perhaps pounce needs to come around and draw you a picture. 🙂
The little codicil of
“But some critics suggest that if the homes are run by the Church there is a chance its beliefs will be imposed on victims around issues such as abortion”
Is a great reminder that it is the organisation that Winston Smith worked in, and still has irony poring out of it?
I think a certain kind of pickiness is worth while applying to this report. It is informative and will tick the boxes for addressing the reasonable issues of the story but even if you want to focus your criticism on the other perceived left wing media outlets, this report does seems particularly 21st century BBC.
They show a strange non-comprehending of the religion that used to be historically prevalent in the country defined by the first ‘B’ of their name, but any non Christian subversive who wants to turn their children into human bombs because they think this will give them a position on the 21st century world stage, are given un-critical love for their passion alone.
Now this is the type of news that the BBC HATES to report. The BBC doesnt have a dog in this fight. It has two. 🙂
Palestinian group threatens to kill Hamas leaders
http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/L02162756.htm
Here is Hizb u Tahrir trumpeting its appearence on the BBC on its front page in relation to the Popes comments. So this is the balance Beeboids are pointing to.
Why doesnt teh BBc invite members of Combat18 the next time there is an issue involving the National Front so that we can enjoy more of this type of balance?
http://www.hizb.org.uk/pressnew/index.php?id=3445
The BBC and their backers are now being prooved WRONG about everything…
They have encouraged Islamic Terror, encouraged the abuse of women and children, and have blood on their hands……
You of course notice that the BBCs ratings are falling right across the board…
the only people left watching the BBC are old crusties and dimwits who need their “education” force fed to them through the Idiot Lantern…..lol.
BBC = Chavs/Couch Potatoes/losers
Bijan Daneshmand,
Hold your horses there. You’ve read me wrongly. If you pay attention you’ll notice that in my 7:33 pm post I’m agreeing with your 4:38 pm post. Criticism of Radical is Islam is very rare indeed at the BBC.
But it does exist. And if we don’t give credit where it’s due, then we can be rightly accused of ignoring positive aspects of the BBC.
And then we ourselves lose credibility.
I don’t think our aim here should be simply to criticize the BBC. We should encourage it to change its ways, before it’s too late.
HAVE YOUR ANTI-SEMETIC SAY
To get a useful insight into the types of individuals who now go to the BBC to get information, and to see what the BBC means by MODERATED, just have a look at what the BBC MODERATED views of people reading their website is on a subject that causes Beeboids much anguish the Hamas-Fatah clashes. This is the opinion that the BBC chose to highlight on its front page.
The Hamas government must work. We have to respect the Palestinians’ choice – whether we like it or not.”Jozef Podsiedlik, Canada
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/default.stm
Sounds a bit desperate but it is the BBC line after all. No matter what Hamas is or does it was democratically elected, much in the same way that the Nazis were in the 1930s. So it MUST be supported. But have a look at what other views the BBC MODERATOR allowed.
I agree with some people here, lets give hamas the funds to kill jewish people cause europe did not finish the job. US Airspace, chi, United States
Thats about right its the standard BBC/EU line. So it passes the BBC MODERATED tests. But wait a minute what about the anti-Israel “balance” required here. Surely the Jews who control america should be behind all this. Ah yes here is the most reccomended comment.
America gives $3 billion a year to support the ever-expanding State of Israel so we should at least seek parity and support Palestine, not punish them for voting Hamas. Palestinians are living in abject poverty while Israel continues to grab land. The international community should be ashamed. Its one thing for America to do this, we all know the influence of AIPAC there (and the cluelessness of the American population), but we in Europe should be fair, not blindly follow US’s one-sided policy. Recommended by 56 people. Juniper, UK
“All Hamas has to do is to recognise Isreal & show the world they want to live in peace. Not a lot to ask”
Actually it is alot. You are saying they have to give up the quest to regain thier fathers and grandfathers land from those who forced them off. No one in the West has lifted a finger to help them regain what was stolen, so they must do it themselves. Israel always talks about thier rights, but what about the rights the Palestinians? If your land was taken, you would want it back too. Steve Hassan, Oak Harbor. Recommended by 54 people
“I was always told that ISREAL was the problem,but it seems that the Palistinians are more than capable of killing each other. No doubt most people will revert to type and blame Isreal….”
Keith Thomas, Netherlands: Well if you insist. Israel controls all funds going to the Palestinians. By witholding funds it is punishing the Palestinians for voting for Hamas. Israel would like nothing better than to see civil war. Israel is the problem. Kylie, Herts, UK. Recommended by 48 people
perhaps the question should be- “does the West want Hamas to survive?” and the answer is NO! the powerfull neo-cons, zionist and some european sympatisers, want the palestinians just to rot away and die. palestinians live on less than 1 dollar a day. yet the West allows Israel to bulldoze their houses, carpet bomb their streets, arrest whomever resists, close all gates out of GAZA, stop any food entering Gaza. basically the Vatican, EU, US sponsor the GAZA prison! Sub Zero. Recommended by 44 people
There are countervailing views on but none as radical or as heavily reccomended. THE BBC ENCORAGING ANTI_SEMETISM. ITS WHAT WE DO.
http://newsforums.bbc.co.uk/nol/thread.jspa?threadID=4072&&edition=1&ttl=20061003071106
OK Bryan. I understand your point but like the BBC Im not too keen on the facts getting in the way of a good story. But what do you mean by “before its too late”?
I’ll ask again in the spirit of interest and debate. Did anyone hear the Justin Webb piece on “The Westmister Hour”? I thought that THIS PARTICULAR PIECE was well balanced and interesting and as it actually was COMPLIMENTARY (to a degree) to the USA I found this quite unusual as most of the output from the BBC is NOT of this nature. This is not a comment the BBC’s output in general just an attempt to gather opinion on one particular piece.
I did not volunteer my opinions on politics, collectivism, my viewing habits or my life. Even so there have been some amusing and utterly goundless and ridiculous inferences about my character in reponse to my posting but none actually answering it.
(Yet again this is probably more suited to the general comment thread but it is BBC related)
Abortion is one of the things the BBC always seems to drool over. When partial-birth abortions were banned in the US they ent apeshit and started going on about the woman’s right to choose. Apparently sticking a combination food-blender/vacuum pump in to a babies head as it’s being born is somehow less of a crime than preventing it from happening.
Now, ion an unrelated topic, and not wanting to start a fight or anything (and I realise this is way OT) but:
we can thank Bill Gates for our freedom – Anonymous
I’d argue with that myself. Microsoft’s monopoly (and I have no problem with monopolies as long as they supply what the market wants) has held back real advances in computing by at least 10 years, by buying up promising startups and then winding them down or simply announcing competing products that are never actually produced, and by lobbying governments to implement laws and regulations designed to squeeze out its competitors (as have, for comparison, the various international media distributors). Microsoft is the BBC of the computing world, never content as long as people might be looking somewhere other than microsoft for their home computing needs.
As a private company they’re entitled to do that, and I don’t have to buy their stuff. I don’t either. However, the efforts Gates has had Microsoft making in attempting to hijack internationally defined standards in order to subvert them (so-called extend, embrace and extinguish) worry me. MS isn’t merely competing. They’re using a dominant position to remove the possibility of any alternatives.
Windows isn’t even that good either…
Sorry for the OT rant. 🙂
“Abortion is one of the things the BBC always seems to drool over. When partial-birth abortions were banned in the US they went apeshit and started going on about the woman’s right to choose.”
Even closer to home, there’s a country where abortion is banned outright and the right to life of the unborn is enshrined in the constitution.
What country is it?
Ireland.
(funny how you never hear about that on the BBC… )
Anonymous on IP number 86.144.121.211, I must ask you not to use this blog to merely vent your angry feelings against the BBC and those commenters with whom you disagree.
General comment: if you wish to be anonymous, fine, but helps readers follow who is saying what if you just take a moment to give yourself a nickname. Multiple commenters calling themselves “Anonymous” is very confusing.
Bijan Daneshmand,
By “before it’s too late” I simply meant before the BBC is 100% in the Islamists’ pocket.
That HYS post of yours is chilling in terms of the ant-Semitic hate that the “moderators” are letting through.
Over here in the Great Satan, some ‘extremist’ Christians have had some of their children murdered in an attack on one of their madrassas, sorry, schools. The fact that the ‘extremists’ are Amish, and the fact that their children are taught humility, decency, respect and peaceful ways would hopefully be reported by the BBC and contrasted with the ways of the so-called religion of peace. That’s what I would hope for, but I doubt that it would happen.
Bijan Daneshmand:
Re your problem with the most recommended comment on “have your say”.
Do you think that the popularity of that comment has been falsely inflated by an influx of “anti-semites”. Or do you think that the fact that it has been recommended by the most people is indicitive of the readership ?
I would guess the latter, but since there is nothing particularly controversial about those comments (in the sense that plenty of people think the same regarding US support) do you advocate the BBC should remove it ? Is that how they would (presumably) discourage anti-semitism ? If most people recommend that comment then they should leave it on.
Plenty of Israelis disagree with way the US bankrolls their country and paints them as being the Vanguard in the new Clash of Civilisations, but I doubt you’d call them “anti-semites”. Perhaps you would of course, it wouldn’t really surprise me.
Why do you insisting on reverting to rallying cry of “anti-semtism” when nothing about either Jews or Jewishness is mentioned in the comment ? Or do you not think that Israel is a secular modern deomcarcy ?
There’s one extremely vile comment there which I assume has either been missed by some negligent monitor or was intended to be ironic and posted by an Isreali supporter. There’s also one dubious comment about the US Israeli lobby which could be construed as anti-semitic, although in the context of the anti-PC leaning of a lot of the ‘Have you Say’ comment this isn’t particularly extreme.
The rest are anti-Israel rather than anti-semitic. ‘Have your Say’ is about the only non PC infected page on the website. You can’t have it both ways – let’s keep it that way.
According to “Anon” the following is neither antisemitic nor hate-speech:
I agree with some people here, lets give hamas the funds to kill jewish people cause europe did not finish the job. US Airspace, chi, United States
“… but since there is nothing particularly controversial about those comments…”
Way to go “Anon”!
Biodegradable
Actually I was talking about the most recommended comment, and not the one to which you refer.
You never miss a chance with that “anti-semite” card eh ? moron.
Anon
WHICH bloody comment?
Anon:
Biodegradable
Actually I was talking about the most recommended comment, and not the one to which you refer.
You said:
“… but since there is nothing particularly controversial about those comments…”
You never miss a chance with that “anti-semite” card eh ? moron.
Anon | 03.10.06 – 2:28 pm
So, are you saying this comment isn’t antisemitic?
I agree with some people here, lets give hamas the funds to kill jewish people cause europe did not finish the job.
If you want an argument about that being not an anti-semitic comment, you wont get one from me. It quite clearly was written by a fool and shouldn’t have got through, but my post was about the most recommended comment, you well know this but as usual have grabbed an opprtunity to apply your favourite defence.
America won;t let “Europe Finish the Job”…I can see it in a few years, where the Yanks and Russians have to come back and finish of the Job in Europe….
Mussies and Europeans are no good in a fight………this they will have to learn, all over again….lol.
Do you mean this one?:
America gives $3 billion a year to support the ever-expanding State of Israel so we should at least seek parity and support Palestine, not punish them for voting Hamas. Palestinians are living in abject poverty while Israel continues to grab land. The international community should be ashamed. Its one thing for America to do this, we all know the influence of AIPAC there (and the cluelessness of the American population), but we in Europe should be fair, not blindly follow US’s one-sided policy. Recommended by 56 people. Juniper, UK
America gives $3 billion a year to support the ever-expanding State of Israel so we should at least seek parity and support Palestine, not punish them for voting Hamas.
The US also supports the Palestinians financially. These are the people who cheered en mass on 9/11.
Palestinians are living in abject poverty while Israel continues to grab land.
This intelectual retard obviously is unaware of the Israeli withdrawal from Gaza. As for the Palestinians, if you devote your entire society’s output to killing your neighbours, you’ll end up in poverty.
The international community should be ashamed. Its one thing for America to do this, we all know the influence of AIPAC there (and the cluelessness of the American population), but we in Europe should be fair, not blindly follow US’s one-sided policy.
So, that’s the Aerican Israel Public Affairs Committee. And a pop at 300 million Americans. Ecco the liberal. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: it’s perfectly acceptable to be xenophobic and racist in the eyes of a liberal, you just have to direct it at the right nations and races.
Anon – you can be anti-semitic without forcing Jews to don a yellow star. It is just as anti-semitic to write 100 words about damning words about Israel, if just about every one of those words is a wicked lie. It is anti-semitic to lie and blame Israeli troops for the murder of Mohammed Dura, or for a ‘massacre’ in Jenin which didn’t happen, or for the supposed killing of a family on a Gazan beach, when it clearly wasn’t at the hands of the Israel.
Whether or not anyone else believes what this idiot claims, they are, at the least, controversial. To claim otherwise is a wilful delusion.
Pete_london
” supposed killing of a family on a Gazan beach, when it clearly wasn’t at the hands of the Israel.”
It’s not “clear” at all. In your view where Israel just doesn’t do these sorts of things it might be clear but there is no way that it can be described as such unequivocally. I certainly have never heard it dismissed anywhere as a “wicked lie” and to portray everyone who doesn’t buy the Israeli military reports of where the missing shell ended up as wicked liars is extreme even by your standards.
“As for the Palestinians, if you devote your entire society’s output to killing your neighbours, you’ll end up in poverty.”
Now who’s bias ? It’s typical of the commentariat on this site to issue such xenophonic statements but then bleat about anyone suggesting that Israel gets an disproportionate amount of US backing given it’s wealth. Far far more then the palestinians get.
As I said plenty of Israelis would think they’re government were guilty of the acts you think are fabrications, that does not make them anti-semites and it beggars belief that you would think it does.
Why should the Palestinians get any money at all when they spend it all on suicide bomb belts and rockets that are fired indiscriminately at Israeli civilians?
Anon
1. Show me where it is written that the US is obliged to match funding to Israel with funding to the Palestinians. The US government, answerable to the American people, is free to send funding where it damn well likes. IF it chose to support the only middle eastern state which recognises and upholds basic individual freedoms then so bloody what?! The fact that it also channels billions of Us taxpayes’ bucks to Egypt, Jordan, the Palestinians and others each and every years happens to wilfully ignored by the likes of you, or unknown by yo and betrays your ignorance.
2. I certainly have never heard it dismissed anywhere as a “wicked lie” and to portray everyone who doesn’t buy the Israeli military reports … Oh, but I bet you’re more than willing to believe the Palestinians and anti-semitic (look at their track record) Human Rights Watch though!
3. Now who’s bias ? What do the Palestinians produce, apart from Kassam rockets? What do they export, apart from Kassa, rockets, straight at Israeli civilians? Where is the innovation, the R&D, the urge to produce and trade with the world? Show me how the Palestinians aren’t the most dysfunctional, backward people on the face of the planet. Their entire society is dedicated to killing as many Jews on the one hand, and corruption, nepotism and graft on the other. They are dirt poor because they damn well deserve to be dirt poor. If they stopped dedicating their lives to killing Jews they’d all be in jobs pronto. Yes, for a few years the jobs would all be in Jewish owned firms but that would change within a generation. For decades they’ve been handed a golden goose and all they’ve tried to do is send their sons against it wrapped in explosives.
4. blah blah blah … zenophobic … blah blah blah Yawn. I’ll treat them with respect when they stop trying to kill every Jew they come across. I don’t anticiapte having to change my ways any time soon.
Pete_london
You’re entire argument only goes to show what it is people are sick of. Sick of the slandering of organisations which have done far more good around the world than bam pots like you who sit here calling them racists because they dare to present findings which don’t sit nicely with your black and white world view. Sick of our own and the US governments interference in a region of the world it desperately needs to control but barks on about democracy. Sick of women weeping over the ruins of their homes, Israeli children writing “greetings” on US shells about to be fired at villages, Ehud Olmert blabbering about “the most moral army in the world” while the screen shows a heap of bodies.
For your info I know fine well that the US supports SA and Egypt and other tin pot monarchies/dictatorships in the ME. Once the US’s attention is diverted in a generations time when the middle easts oil runs out, it’s the Israeli people who’ll be left with the legacy of hate people like you have fostered. it’s clear from your post that you don’t give a toss about the lives of anyone in the region other than those of Israeli citizens, whom you foolishly believe will benefit from your contemptable rhetoric.
The whole Zionist enterprise has been compared to the transplantation of an organ into the body of a human being. The natural immunity system rises up against the foreign implant, the body mobilizes all its power to reject it. The doctors use a heavy dosage of medicines in order to overcome the rejection. That can go on for a long time, sometimes until the eventual death of the body itself, including the transplant
A fool will say: to stand up to the rejection with a growing dosage of medicaments, provided by America and World Jewry. The greatest fools will add: There is no solution. This situation will last forever. There is nothing to be done about it but to defend ourselves in war after war after war. And the next war is already knocking on the door.
The wise will say: our objective is to cause the body to accept the transplant as one of its organs, so that the immune system will no longer treat us as an enemy that must be removed at any price. And if this is the aim, it must become the main axis of our efforts. Meaning: each of our actions must be judged according to a simple criterion: does it serve this aim or obstruct it? I know which you do.
To Anon:
‘Sick of women weeping over the ruins of their homes, Israeli children writing “greetings” on US shells about to be fired at villages, Ehud Olmert blabbering about “the most moral army in the world” while the screen shows a heap of bodies.’
I have to ask: are people likewise sick of young Palestinians being brainwashed into walking into crowded areas and blowing themselves up with the express intention of killing and maiming as many Israelis as possible? Or is this acceptable to you?
To all: Apologies for straying off topic – I won’t go any further!
“I have to ask: are people likewise sick of young Palestinians being brainwashed into walking into crowded areas and blowing themselves up with the express intention of killing and maiming as many Israelis as possible? Or is this acceptable to you?”
What on earth would give you that impression !? Would it be because I expressed the widely held view that the comments posted on “Have your say” were not anti-semitic at all ? Ah – i see your logic, if I say that Israel is not doing much to create a peaceful middle east, I must enjoy the slaughter of innocent people in Israel. A familiar argument.
N.B. This post was listed as being from Rachel Miller in error. It was in fact addressed to Rachel Miller, as the author says below.
Edited By Siteowner
Here is what Brits really thnk about the Bloody BBC…..
the BBC are loved by no one, and survive only on lies, bigotry and deception.
http://jamesstgeorge.proboards32.com/index.cgi?board=UKdomestic&action=display&thread=1159861973&page=1
Rachel…if you can;t see them as anti semitic…then you are just another racist bigot like the Muslims you support….
Go away, the world does not need losers like you…..go lay on your back, think of England, and hoover up your benefits…s’all your good for.
woops – that was me and not Rachel Millar, I was replying to her though.
Anonymous – (4:48pm) I believe that Rachel Miller was not the poster of the post you are aluding to. I think it’s someone else pretending to be her.
As for the general style of you rcomments my advice to you would be to lay off the crack pipe you’re smokeing!
Funny how our resident socialists allways sound National socialist when it comes to particular races and religions.
They support a religion that fought on the side of National Socialist Germany.
They oppose a religion that was the main genocide target of National Socialist Germany.
Funny how the left never changes.
It’s typical of the commentariat on this site to issue such xenophonic statements…
Are you sure you don’t mean xylophonic?
As I said plenty of Israelis would think they’re government…
Anon | 03.10.06 – 3:10 pm
I believe that should be their
So there!
Anon:
If you want an argument about that being not an anti-semitic comment, you wont get one from me. It quite clearly was written by a fool and shouldn’t have got through, but my post was about the most recommended comment, you well know this but as usual have grabbed an opprtunity to apply your favourite defence.
Anon | 03.10.06 – 2:46 pm
I simply want to find out what you consider to be antisemitc and what is not. I haven’t actually heard you condemn “Palestinian” brainwashing and suicide bombing – you say instead it’s up to Israel to “create a peaceful middle east”,
What do you suggest… something along the lines of the ideas expressed by Iran’s president?
I think that a call for the murder of Jews “cause europe did not finish the job” is clearly antisemitic. When I point that out you however accuse me of “playing the antisemite card”.
Claiming that comment was written “by a fool” is on par with John Simpson’s description of the 7/7 bombers as “misguided”.