Please use this thread for off-topic, but preferably BBC related, comments. Please keep comments on other threads to the topic at hand. N.B. this is not an invitation for general off-topic comments – our aim is to maintain order and clarity on the topic-specific threads. This post will remain at or near the top of the blog. Please scroll down to find new topic-specific posts.
Open thread – for comments of general Biased BBC interest:
Bookmark the permalink.
Now how about an expose of the suicide-bomber cult?
Sadly for the Beeb…….most peoples understanding of this, will come from YouTube……
A few 100 Thousand may watch it here in the UK…but so what?…….around the world, the clip thats going to get known, is the one of the Jack Booted Nazi, Goose stepping at the Nurenburg Rally……lol
And until the BBC do an equaly stern expose’ of Islam…….they ARE biased…for I’m not sure, but to my knowledge, no “Scientologist” has crashed an Airplane into a Skyscraper……strapped dynamite to their own children and used them as bombs, or shields…..and nor do they hack peoples heads off for being non- believers…..
No Scientologist has blown themselves up on the London Tube either…..in fact, I don’t think most people are even aware of it’s details…but they will be now thanks to the BBC…a great bit of publicity for Scientology…..watch it Grow in the UK now, after this…….
My thoughts exactly, Allan. Now it’s time for an in-depth investigative report of another cult/religion that brainwashes its followers, avoids all criticism, and engages in deception of its self-perceived ‘enemies.’ Somehow, I don’t think it’s going to happen on the BBC. Ever.
You don’t see many Scientologists waving a copy of Dianetics and blowing themselves up. I don’t think they would even be that bothered if I took a dump on their book, either.
Talk/Sport, discussing it now, Phone-In…..
First Caller….”Sweeney is a fat arrogant git, what right does he have to go to America, and attack someones religion”…..
James Whale, the presenter, seems to be agreeing with him…..
Not looking good for the BBC….and thats in the UK, where they get to tell it “their way”…….the man calling is a Scot by the way……not sure if thats important…..but I like it. 🙂
Oh Dear..it gets worse…lol.
Panorama “did not want to comment” on the show….so, TalkSport has run just the Audio from Sweenys meltdown…….it’s even worse when it’s just Audio……….
No clips from the actual Panorama played yet…just the Sweeny clip……..
Kids are going to love this…..when they see the old crusty farts at the BBC saying something is “bad”…they will be at it like a shot, as with booze, smokes and drugs……..
“Hmmm, I wonder what got the fat man so upset, lets look it up on the net”…..
Nice work BBC…lol. A great bit of publicity for a “dangerous” cult…..and your own reputation shattered again….seems to be a habit. 😉
I can guarantee that the next time a Muslim fanatic is interviewed (obviously not by the Beeb) they will be attended by their very own camera crew, with which to bolster their ‘Islamophobic’ victim hood status.
Come on Reith; we know you’re out there. We can smell you. How about a comment on the RoP cult and its non-investigation by the BBC?
i think he’s finding a ripe cherry to pick.
OH JOY…….ABC USA has pciked it up……see? Told Ya, a couple of days for it to hit the US Networks…and geuss what…no one is talking about Scientology….but EVERYONE is talking about Sweeney losing his rag….
“John Sweeney is famous for confronting despots, championing lost causes and traveling through the streets of Harare, Zimbabwe, in the trunk of a car. But faced with Tommy Davis of the Church of Scientology in Los Angeles, he totally lost his cool.”
http://abcnews.go.com/International/story?id=3172648&page=1&CMP=OTC-RSSFeeds0312
Hahahahahahha…nice work Beeb..they even have a big picture on the site of Sweeney, a link to the screaming outburst…with his wobbly chops flapping, and MOUTH WIDE OPEN AS HE SCREAMS!!!!!….
lol….
Mick in the UK:
In general, you’d be right, but, by chance, Little Green Footballs has this CNN clip of a surprisingly UNsympathetic interview with a failed Taliban suicide bomber (dd Monday, May 14, 2007):
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/
Cheers
There seems to be something about these lefties (John Sweeney, Howard Dean) that they like to vigorously exercise their vocal chords, given the right set of circumstances!
(At time of writing) there are just two photos used in these reports…
http://news.google.co.uk/news?hl=en&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&tab=in&ncl=1116292622
..A smiling John Travolta and a screaming Beeboid!
I wouldn’t be at all surprised if Scientology had an upswing in membership on the back of this – almost certainly not what Screamer Sweeney intended.
Hitler and Stalin were the same too….I think it’s something to do with “Socialists”…Galloway is another foaming at the mouth Socialist…..
I think it’s because they were all spoilt children, who screamed at their mummys….lol.
Agreed anonymous…this has backfired in the BBCs face in a very bad/good way, depending on your point of view…..but back in their faces it is……
I often agree with Blithering Bunny, but I think he has got this one wrong……the BBC is coming out very bad in this….right or wrong, the BBC look like a bunch of scremaing lunatics……and thier message about Scientology, is’nt even getting a hearing…..
Kulibar:
Thanks for the link, it really is a shame the Beeb can’t do the same sort of reveal.
Kulibar:
Thanks for the link, it really is a shame the Beeb can’t do the same sort of reveal.
Sorry, I did of course mean …’WON’T DO’.
Strange. I must be one of the few commenters who was spurred to watch the Panorama show and came out of it thinking that it exposed Scientology an evil cult, rather than just chuckling about Sweeney flipping out. His flip-out was regrettable… but understandable.
Erm… one question:
What distinguishes Al Beeb from Scientology? As far as I’m concerned they’re both in the brain-washing business and both are damn good at it.
I was following the whole story since last week and while there is quote some aggression coming from Scientologist, the bottom line here is the biased and intentionally malicious reporting by one John Sweeney who can’t even hold his temper when – for a change – directly facing a live Scientologists. No wonder the Scientologists felt compelled to check into what Sweeney really is up to and documented that as well.
Have any of you watched the documentary the Scientologists put online on Freedom Magazine http://www.freedommag.org/bbc/video_flash.html ? Sweeney and co were clearly out of line.
I just watched it… One thing’s for certain – Sweeney needs a good psychiatrist and it’s not because of reporting on Scientology. I guess working for Al Beeb is bad for you in the long term. Definetely great proof for how biased Al Beeb actually is.
Correction: They’re clearly more than just biased. They create their own truth(s). Right from the Joseph Goebbels school of journalism and I’m not at all surprised. To be honest I trust the Scientology piece more than the Panorama programme.
Jeanne
Thanks for that “Panorama Exposed” video link. I have never seen the BBC trashed so brilliantly. Whoever put that together was clearly an expert. Quite a brilliant expose. John Sweeney and his producer, Sarah Mole, are revealed as Tabloid journalists, and the BBC is shown to be a total disgrace.
I understand that the police and the CPS are investigating the Tottenham Court Rd demo (organised by the BBC)and the threatening e-mails. After seeing Sweeney lose it, I would not be surprised if Sweeney himself wrote those emails.
What a sad day for the BBC. The range of voices in this video illustrate how corrupt this so called “news” organisation has become.
I think this must be one of the best exposes of the BBC ever undertaken. No wonder they are rattled. I actually saw snippets from this film on C4 news this evening.
No doubt about it – Panorama Exposed is a wonderful trashing of the BBC and the methods of Sweeney and his team.
Leaving aside for a moment Sweeney’s purple-faced rant, the way Panorama Exposed documents Sweeney’s contrived attempts to show the viewers how he was “rebuffed” (going to a building’s back door or an unmanned gate) punctures any credibility that Panorama might have had.
Congratulations must be given to BBC’s Panorama for their show tonight on Scientology.
Sorry – I don’t agree.
Well, if the readers of this site dislike the BBC so much that they’d take the side of a creepy cult like the Hubbardistas, then I’d rather be elsewhere. Bye, losers.
Clankylad:
SO sorry to lose you! But thanks for your scintillating contributions over the years…
How about –
“My son joined a cult; I never heard from him until he attempeted to blow up a plane with explosives hidden in his shoe”
OR
“my son converted to a cult and, while his wife was pregnmant, he blew himself up in London on the 7th of July 2005”
Two converts – let’s hear their story, BBC.
For what it’s worth, my opinion is that scientology is a cult, but much less harmful to non-adherents than another deadly cult which has been allowed entry into the west.
Manifest Destiny dictates a white-man’s prophecy – White-man’s world, white-man’s Apocolypse
Twenty-somethings are conditioned to respond positively to magic::::::they are the extacy generation.
This is not by accident. Expect they will be an important generation (“in charge”, etc) when the battle between the Anti-Christ and Second Coming of Christ ocurrs.
This of course will be a 20-year war-revelry cycle distraction theater, and they want these people consumed by the high level of magic that will ocurr.
This generation is The Damned.
You’re all going to die PEAKING like you’re on X.
———————-
Italy’s boot is a clue showing the god’s intent with the Romans AND their active involvement::::The gods micromanaged the Eutruscans into their role as Romans, just as they micromanaged me with Artificial Intelligence into the role they scripted for this Situation.
Oshkosh is a clue just as Lake Michigan and Green Bay are clues. Oshkosh is the ejaculate clue:::Life springs forth from this region.
Expect your traditional Second Coming of Christ to come from the region. The gods dirtied me up but the Second Coming will be squeeky clean. Consistant with the possibility of matrilinial lineage it may be the mother’s family from the Lake Winnebago area fulfilling some “Manifest Destiny” theater:::The gods emphisize the evil, utilizing “magic” as they will during the Second Coming of Christ, and they minimize the good, as you see with boss, for the people’s collective favor has fallen sufficiently to justify this behavior, justified with the masculinization of women, sexual deviacy, etc.
You see Manifest Destiny all around you (corporate)::::Manifest Destiny dictates a white-man’s prophecy:::::White-man’s world, white-man’s Apocolypse. Expect The End to ocurr EXACTLY as it reads in Revelations.
When this happens in 30 years there will be no more black Jesus freaks. Attrition will have eliminated this population.
This of course is a good sign for the bottom-of-the-barrel who will be betting on the Second Coming of Christ.
Since the gods don’t respect Christianity I wouldn’t be surprised if they have the Second Coming lead the people to the center of a star, but this is far less likely with blacks out of the picture.
Women are the favored gender:::Those who understand what it means to be a woman are already halfway there.
The purpose of the masculinization of women of the last 40 years was to pave the way (justification) for The End, for it brought mankind’s collective favor down.
This isn’t about reals and clones. This is about the brains and the brain-less:::The brain-less are people whose families have been OUT FOR GENERATIONS, families lucky enough to avoid this disturbing age and its accompanying abuses. ALL of them got out back when they were peasants, even the royal families and Pharrohs, and the gods used these tools to create this stratigic history here on Earth:::There is no such thing as Earthly-management. Also the gods replace strategic individuals frequently as a risk/benefit managerial tactic.
This is the key which unlocks the god’s puzzle.
The Italian brain-less clones were used as monsters because of their gross disfavor::They were the first group of people inflicted with Chrisitianity; incurred the scourge of opera, Italy’s hip hop; experienced the masculinzation of Eutruscan women, justified with Catholicism (I suspect this is why the gods inflicted them with the scouge of the preditory Roman Empire).
I think the Jewish brain-less clones who were used as monsters were used as such out of convienience::::The Southern man is grossly disfavored, and the gods were able to manipulate their perception of Jews, creating ill-will, stoking anti-Semetic attitudes among the grossly disfavored.
I don’t know why Austrian brain-less clones were used as monsters. Maybe for one of those reasons, maybe both, maybe neither.
Hitler and Stalin were the same too….I think it’s something to do with “Socialists”…Galloway is another foaming at the mouth Socialist…..
And don’t forget Gordon Brown’s famed screaming fits – if only someone could video one of those.
I don’t know anything about scientology but it’s obvious to me that including screeming Sweeney into Panorama was a damage limitation exercise after scientologists put him on YouTube. MSM now know what it feels like beeing filmed and edited in unfavourable way – such democratic process can be only welcomed. They will be more cautious in their rampant bias afraid of being zombified.
I’m surprised that OFCOM aren’t investigating this to be honest.
What role do Austrians play in | 15.05.07 – 8:53 am |
???? Ronny Rayguns wife was right when she said “Just say no” to drugs.
However much I criticise the BBC for bias and crap journalism, Sweeney’s programme provided a timely exposure of Scientology and the money-grubbing, sinister cult that it is: an accurate reflection of and monument to its founder. I don’t blame Sweeney for losing his rag: he admitted that it was unprofessional and apologised for it but the scientologist tactics were to provoke Sweeney (and they succeeded).
It is unfortunate that some posters here appear to believe that a mistake (in behaviour not in his journalism) by Sweeney outweighs his undoubted success in exposing the nastiness of scientology. This is the mirror image of the mindset which believes that being kidnapped by Palestinian gangsters and being the subject of endless vigils prove that Alan Johnston’s biased reportage from Gaza was accurate and impartial.
Of course, the BBC should do similar exposes of the outer shores of Islam in the UK and, while we’re about it, the MM climate change gestapo, but I’m not optimistic that there’s any desire at the BBC to offend its minority of choice or challenge the convenient untruth of its favoured junk science.
What role do Austrians play in | 15.05.07 – 8:53 am |
I’m sure Matron will be along in a minute.
Anyone who reads this blog knows I am ardent in exposing IBC bias, but I have got take issue with some of this.
Sweeney may be a prize lefty plonker and have completely lost it in the screaming match with the scientologist but I do have some sympathy with him given the nature of the scientologist specifically and the scientologists in general.
These moonbat cultists needed exposing, end of.
Perhaps a Louis Theroux type let them expose themselves as moonbats might have been more in order but I welcomed the attempts made by Panorama.
All that being said the much better panorama on scientology was done years ago, about 1987?, back in the days when the BBC made some attempt to live up to their name before they became the IBC.
I agree with all of those sentiments that this should be the first of such a run that should then be followed by programmes exposing cults such as the mormons, gnostics and falun gong but most of all the varying groups within the ROP-MA that are clearly the most dangerous cults of all.
All religions were cults once. Some just never grow out of it.
Clankylad
Maybe you should not visit this site as you clearly don’t understand what it’s about. The comments are not ‘siding’ with the Scientologists. As far as I can see and read the comments are made in the context of exposing and highlighting the BBC’s bias towards one religion or another. So maybe you shouldn’t get involved in things you don’t understand. Bye
The Scientology/Sweeney clip leaves me almost in sympathy with the clones who have been trying to waylay people on the Tottenham Court Road for over 20 years now (who would have thought that possible?). Sweeney displays the arrogance of the liberal media elite in the UK and proceeds to bully where he thinks he can get away with it (….not with RoP adherents , one suspects).
Isn’t it ironic , when the BBC producer complains about Scientologists not being open to argument , having closed minds ,and (horror!) filming the interview ?
How many interviews have the media edited to skew the result the way they wanted?
Oscar,
We already have glorious colour footage of Gordon Broon picking his nose, eating the results, and wiping his fingers on his trousers. So how long will it be before the man loses it in public in an equally amusing way?
I can only think that Gordon misunderstood what Cameron was on about when he began to focus on “green” issues.
Rather in common with Umbongo, I’m a little troubled by the tone of some of this. Scientology is a cult and it does deserve investigation.
That the BBC is hopelessly partial in which cults it decides to investigate and that its journalism can be manifestly inadequate at times, shouldn’t obscure the validity of Scientology as a subject.
Of course, it’s too much to hope that the Leftist hacks at the Corporation treat people equally (plenty of effort against the BNP, none whatsoever against Leftist thugs), and it would be a blissful relief if they would stop toadying to Moslems, but none of that should obscure the fact that Scientology deserves close scrutiny.
It’s just a shame they gave the job to a fool.
Toadying to Muslims? Anyone remember John Ware’s critical account of the Muslim Council of GB? Attached for anyone prepared to challenge their liberal-bias assumptions is the previous Panorama editor’s sterling letter in response to the MCB’s complaints of bias. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/panorama/4297490.stm
I have never worked for the BBC, but to smear it as this blog and its adherents do is to do down one of the finest achievements of the free world.
But Sandy Smith, editor of Panorama, responded: ‘The head of current affairs, George Entwistle, has viewed all footage complained of and, with the exception of the point when Sweeney shouts, he found nothing that stood outside BBC guidelines.’
The BBC’s reviewed itself and decided it’s not biased.
So that’s all right then.
Hillhunt writes:
2I have never worked for the BBC, but to smear it as this blog and its adherents do is to do down one of the finest achievements of the free world.”
What utter rubbish!
The contributors to this blog unearth reams of blatant bias from the BBC, day in day out.
Do you take issue with it when it is presented? No, you do not. You simply swan in with your (as far as I can see) first ever post and airily dismiss the countless individual examples with an airy generalisaton.
As for citing a single example of an investigation into militant Islam, have you read a single word of the literally hundreds of examples of the BBC’s craven cowardice towards Islam that have been posted here during the past year or so?
Where do you think phrases like ‘the religion of plumbers’ came from?
If, as seems to be the case, you are completely impervious to evidence, why come here at all?
Gordon_Broon_Eats_Hez_Bawgies:
Intrigued by your moniker I visited your supposed “Homepage”.
I’ve not laughed so much for ages. Absolutely priceless. Captions and music were perfect.
Hillhunt:
If the BBC is not biased then how did all these come about?
Imaginings?
(Argument won in ten seconds flat.)
Did anyone notice the audio dubbing when Sweeney followed the scientology guy past the yellow van while he walks off after quoting the US constitution? When that clip was shown on the news Sweeney is clearly saying to him “I’m from the UK where we have something called freedom of speech.”
However, in the Panorama programme that had been dubbed to remove that comment and replace it with something else. Very dishonest editing. Who’d have thought it!
Hillhunt
Are you another John Reith sockpuppet? You don’t get it, do you? It’s all about the general tenor of the coverage. One swallow (either way) doth not a summer make.
Let’s look at what else al-BBC has reported about the MCB, shall we? In particular, let’s look at how it reported some recent offensive remarks by “Sir” Iqbal Sacranie.
Muslim head’s gay remarks checked http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4603474.stm
“Checked”? “Checked” for what – accuracy? Completeness? Timeliness? Doctrinal consistency with the Koran?
Er, no. “Checked” for being possibly criminally intolerant in content. Buried well below that anodyne headline is what the ghastly creep actually said:-
“Certainly [homosexuality] is a practice that in terms of health, in terms of the moral issues that comes along in a society…is not acceptable.”
Sounds like a pretty intolerant attitude to me, but of course the mandatory inclusion of other religions is in there too:-
…other religions such as Christianity and Judaism held the same stance,” Sir Iqqy is reported to have bleated.
Actually that comparison, in respect of Christianity at least, is the Clinton truth: that is, it’s an elegant, well-crafted, utter and total lie. Christianity does indeed oppose the practice of homosexuality – but only the practice. It’s not a sin to be a homosexual, like it’s not a criminal offence to be a paedophile. It’s the acting on it that gets you into trouble – a distinction absent AFAIK from Islam, which just advocates liquidating gays out of hand for what they are, regardless of what they do.
Now just imagine what al-BBC would have said if a member of the Catholic Church had expressed the same prejudice. Would we have had a neutral headline like “Cardinal’s remarks checked”? Actually we don’t need to imagine. We can check (pun intended. Geddit?)! Here’s an al-BBC headline about a cardinal who brought up the subject of faggotry:-
Cardinal denies ‘blackmail’ claim
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6292315.stm
The difference being that in the article about the MCB member, the actual fact of a possible criminal offence was airbrushed out of the headline altogether, whereas in the one about the Catholic, the idea of a criminal angle to his remarks was introduced into the headline where none actually existed. Read the rest of the article and it becomes clear that the “blackmail” claim comes from an MP, not a law enforcement official, and was a figure of speech.
The Reith approach to this blog, and indeed al-BBC’s approach to news, is exactly similar to David Irving’s approach to history.
JBH:
Ain’t it a classic? Send the link to everyone you know!
GCooper: I have contributed before – to the recent discussion on Somali women and their veils. Truth is that many of the comments on this site betray a bald intolerance of dissent from a narrow political (and racial) worldview.
Thirty years ago, Catholic (and Protestant) extremists were causing death and destruction here in the UK for political ends. Yet the majority of RCs and Prods were as revolted by the terrorists as the rest of us. Would you then have rounded on the BBC every time it found something positive to say about the Vatican or the C of E? Should we damn Songs of Praise because of the Shankhill butchers or the Pope’s Easter blessing because of the Provos? Should we prevent history programmes which talk about victimisation by one side or the other?
Well, er, no. So why shouldn’t the BBC cover, for instance, the Muslim world fully? Isn’t there value in undterstanding the tensions and the sense of victimisation that drives Islamist fanatics? Would it be worth trying to find out how we might meet tolerant Islam to reduce the recruitment of fanatics and isolate those who remain.
Nah…let’s just bash the Beeb instead.