Have a look at this fascinating Alistair Burnett BBC blog discussion of the terminology “so-called war on terror” at the BBC.
I see this formulation not as qualification, but denigration- and I think with good reason
The prompt for this came from a Newsbusters post.
We have dealt with it before
Also, I wonder how balanced the BBC would consider Dennis Boyles? In what I would consider not a coincidence, one of his recent articles for City Journal takes the BBC to task and is sprinkled liberally with “” and the odd “so called”- it isfor effect, who can doubt it? Which is ok if you’re writing opinion…
Also, he pointed out just how much money the World Service gets direct from the Foreign Office- a cool $400 million.
They don’t get the money from the Foriegn office…they get it from Us in the form of TAXES!!!!!
So on top of the Beebs extorted 3.5 Billion a year…we now find our there is another half a billion going their way…..
Fascist thieves, steeling from the poor……they make me sick…..
truth is, the BBC is just a propaganda machine for Left wing losers, who are still crying because Hitler and Stalin are dead…….at least now they can cheer on the mussies……..until Uncle Sam sorts them out….lol.
Bye Bye BBC…no one is listening, and all are attakcing you…..the most hated “Broadcaster” in the world….bar none……..
The only thing a BBC empolyee is good for is….er…can’t think of anything…..lol.
they won’t be missed when they are gone in a few years…….we all know that extorting money from poor people is illiegal and against human rights….the BBC is dead….and in fact, a great embarassment to the UK and europe……
Vile pukes…thats what the BBC are……Vile Pukes….
I see that Gary Powell has gained access to a spellchecker.
The most depressing thing about that Burnett discussion is the furious anti-americanism in many of the posts. What do these rabid stalinists think they’re going to gain from opposition to America? When push comes to shove they’ll soon realise the horrifying truth that there is no honour amongst theives- they’ll have their infidel heads sawn off just like everyone else…
It’s so easy to blame America for everything, just like the media tells you to, rather than thinking for yourself and questionning where all this terrorist hugging is actually going to get us in the long run.
In my quest to find 10 articles critical of Radical Islam by the BBC … I checked the World Service website where I came across Liliane Landor’s “Blog” (notice that in the spirit of the BBC I am using quotes to qualify the tripe that Liliane passes off to the world as a Blog.
Liliane is the Editor of World Service News programmes, and on the anniversary of 7/7? Liliane was a bit “troubled”
And what exactly was she troubled by? Perhaps the senseless death of innocent Londoners, or maybe the inexcorable rise in Islamic violence and fanatism in the UK. No.
Liliane’s biggest fear on the anniversary of that infamous day occurred after listening to Muslim Rapper MC Riz’s ‘Post 9/11 Blues.’ Liliane fear is that we the British public may be guilty of pushing Muslims to the “Middle of the room.” By labeling some Muslims as “moderate” and by implication condemning the rest as Radicals.
“Muslims have been pushed to the middle of the room. [because their beards have a different meaning now]. That sentence stayed with me. With Friday upon us, I need to make sure that we’re not pushing anyone to the middle of the room.”
WHAT, COME AGAIN?! What is she on about? And what did she mean by “With Friday upon us?” Let Liliane explain:
It all started on Tuesday when I came across the phrase “moderate” Muslims in one of our stories. Why the need to qualify, I found myself thinking? Are Muslims automatically radical unless we stick “moderate” somewhere visible? And what is a “moderate” Muslim exactly? Do we mean Muslims we can identify with, whatever “we” means? Or perhaps secular not-so-Muslim Muslims? And in any case, aren’t most Muslims in this country British? So what are we actually saying when we describe them as Muslims? Why don’t we describe Christians or Jews in the same way?
Here is a clue Liliane – Maybe its something to do with the fact that Christians or Jews have not tried to terror bomb British trains and planes and recently looked to kill upwards of 4000 innocent travellers.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_transatlantic_aircraft_plot
And whats wrong with distinguishing between moderate Mulsims and Radical ones. I for instance am a moderate Muslim. I know an opportunist radical Muslim when I see one. MC Riz doesnt quite make the grade. But these shits – (Fun-da-Mental and Dirty Kuffar) do. You can see their videos here. http://hotair.com/archives/2006/06/29/jihad-rap/
and this ugly freak is not too far off the mark either
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=22788_British_Insanity_Watch&only
But Liliane is too far down La La Land to allow us to make the distinction, and so she manically scans all her BBC output to ensure that no Muslim gets labeled.
Which is why when in the wake of Tony Blair’s remarks on the defeat of extremism and the need to “mobilise the moderate majority within the Muslim community”, every one of my programmes decided they had to look at Islam, extremism, moderation and identity, I made a point of listening to everything.
Which is odd – Alistair Burnett goes to great lengths to to label the War on Terror as the “So Called” War on Terror.
After reading Liliane “Blog” twice I began to wonder if taking too much anti-depressant or a steady diet of good Lebanese shit has caught up with her – having looked at her pictures my money is on the hash.
You can read her “Blog” (tripe) here.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/2006/07/moderate_meaning.html
Oh yes and if you want “more interesting turns of phrases and crap raps by MCRiz you can get them here:
http://www.myspace.com/rizmc
including “wot i think of danish cartoons” , “my first article – New Statesman 28th August”, “I WAS DETAINED UNDER ‘ANTI-TERROR LAWS”
personally I wouldnt charge this clown under the terrorism laws. I would hold him for crimes against music.
“!!Oh Allah, in your infinite mercy give me strength!!” — for the slow amongst you the last quote is mine.
Maybe we need the phrase “so-called moderate muslims”?
or:
“self-styled prophet, Mohammed….”
I prefer “moon-god cult-leader” Mohamed.
Don’t start.
Tut, it’s about time you lot took my lead and were a bit less provocative in your statements.
I’ve noticed recently that the BBC now tend to say ‘the American led’ War on Terror rather than the ‘so called’ war on terror. This is of course just more bait to set off those rabid anti-americans yet again (if they needed it).
Self-styled Palestinians would be a completely appropriate term, but I doubt that BBC would ever use it. ‘Palestinians’ as a people and nation are a fairly recent invention. It can safely be argued that this invention is based on political purposes.
Alan Man
You’d have to say then that ‘Israeli’ is a pretty recent invention too.
“You’d have to say then that ‘Israeli’ is a pretty recent invention too.”
The concept of Land of Israel is thousands of years old.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Land_of_Israel
However, ‘Israeli’ is a term used for referring citizens of modern Israel that was founded in 1948.
Modern Palestinians on the other hand tend to refer to Philistines as their ancestors. However, they are clearly Palestinian Arabs, whose presence can be trace to Arab conquests.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philistine
Absolute rubbish!
Philistines have nothing whatsever to do with “modern Palestinians”, neither can they be traced to Arab conquests. Most of them came to Israel shortly before 1948 encouraged by the British.
See http://www.haloscan.com/comments/patrickcrozier/115988745768569889/#310337
and http://www.middleeastfacts.com/Articles/Yashiko/Palestinians.html
“Philistines have nothing whatsever to do with “modern Palestinians”, neither can they be traced to Arab conquests. Most of them came to Israel shortly before 1948 encouraged by the British.”
I agree. Palestinians have referred to ancient Philistines as their ancestors. I did not mean to imply that this is an undisputed fact.
Both Arabs and Jews have lived in the territory between Mediterranean and Jordan river for centuries. The number of Arabs did also increase when the Jews started moving in before and during the British Mandate.
The number of Arabs did also increase when the Jews started moving in before and during the British Mandate.
Alan Man | 05.10.06 – 7:17 am
The British actually encouraged Arab immigration from neighbouring Arab states while at the same time prevented the entry of Jews attempting to flee the growing persecution in Europe during the 1930s.
MYTH
“Palestine was always an Arab country.”
FACT
Palestine was never an exclusively Arab country, although Arabic gradually became the language of most the population after the Muslim invasions of the seventh century. No independent Arab or Palestinian state ever existed in Palestine. When the distinguished Arab-American historian, Princeton University Prof. Philip Hitti, testified against partition before the Anglo-American Committee in 1946, he said: “There is no such thing as ‘Palestine’ in history, absolutely not.”5
Prior to partition, Palestinian Arabs did not view themselves as having a separate identity. When the First Congress of Muslim-Christian Associations met in Jerusalem in February 1919 to choose Palestinian representatives for the Paris Peace Conference, the following resolution was adopted:
We consider Palestine as part of Arab Syria, as it has never been separated from it at any time. We are connected with it by national, religious, linguistic, natural, economic and geographical bonds.6
In 1937, a local Arab leader, Auni Bey Abdul-Hadi, told the Peel Commission, which ultimately suggested the partition of Palestine: “There is no such country [as Palestine]! ‘Palestine’ is a term the Zionists invented! There is no Palestine in the Bible. Our country was for centuries part of Syria.”7
The representative of the Arab Higher Committee to the United Nations submitted a statement to the General Assembly in May 1947 that said “Palestine was part of the Province of Syria” and that, “politically, the Arabs of Palestine were not independent in the sense of forming a separate political entity.” A few years later, Ahmed Shuqeiri, later the chairman of the PLO, told the Security Council: “It is common knowledge that Palestine is nothing but southern Syria.”8
Palestinian Arab nationalism is largely a post-World War I phenomenon that did not become a significant political movement until after the 1967 Six-Day War and Israel’s capture of the West Bank.
Myths & Facts Online