– Dr Who was ace. Perhaps the best ever.
Apart from that, this is an open thread – for comments of general Biased BBC interest:
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.
Don’t blink.
The BBC, a radical Muslim and half a story
Anger as Australian sheikh quits
“Supporters of the controversial spiritual leader of Australia’s Muslims claim a government conspiracy has forced him to step down. Sheikh Taj el-Din al-Hilali has been replaced as mufti after a meeting of senior clerics in Melbourne.”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/6739811.stm
So according to the BBC this Mullah was forced to quit. What the BBc don’t say until the end of the story is that his tenure was up, he was offered another 2 year spot and he refused. He didn’t quit his time was up. But the BBC reinvents it as an attack on a peaceful Muslim by the racist West.
The sheikh caused outrage last year when he appeared to blame scantily-clad women for tempting men to rape them. In a sermon he compared immodestly-dressed women to “uncovered meat” who were inviting sexual assault. The Egyptian-born cleric said his remarks in Arabic were misinterpreted and taken out of context. He denied his comments could incite rape and apologised for them.
Again the BBC rewrites the story in which to play the victim card for somebody who has pushed race relations between Muslims and non Muslims in Australia back into the Stone-age. His remarks about scantily dressed women was in reference to the jailing of a gang of Muslim youths who were caught after a rape spree.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bilal_Skaf
Yet again the BBC promotes the vision of Islamic victimhood when a nasty piece of work is caught in the spotlight.
The BBC, a radical Muslim and half a story
“No doubt they’ll blame a Zionist conspiracy.”
LOL, there is definitely something going on though. Not so long ago the most recommended posts of any HYS on the Middle East tended to be of the ‘pro-Palestinian’ or at the very least ‘let’s all have a big hug and be fwends’ varieties. Now they’re all ‘pro-Israel’. Strange??
Cockney writes:
“Now they’re all ‘pro-Israel’. Strange??”
No doubt the recently revealed mighty database will soon be wheeled-out to provide ‘balance’.
Always said these phone-ins and audiences were skewed, didn’t we?
Fabio P.Barbieri 11.06.07 – 7:04 am
Fabio P.Barbieri,
Mark Steyn: “Under political pressure to “bring the 12 million undocumented Americans out of the shadows,” the immigration bureaucracy will rubber-stamp gazillions of applications for open-ended probationary legal status within 24 hours and with no more supporting documentation than a utility bill or an affidavit from a friend. There’s never been a better time for Mullah Omar to apply for U.S. residency.
Remember the 1986 amnesty? Mahmoud abu Halima applied for it and went on to bomb the World Trade Center seven years later. His colleague, Mohammad Salameh, was rejected but carried on living here anyway. John Lee Malvo was detained and released by U.S. immigration in breach of its own procedures and re-emerged as the Washington sniper. The young Muslim men who availed themselves of the U.S. government’s “visa express” system for Saudi Arabia filled in joke applications • “Address in the United States: HOTEL, AMERICA” • that octogenarian snowbirds from Toronto who’ve been wintering at their Florida condos since 1953 wouldn’t try to get away with. The late Mohammed Atta received his flight-school student visa on March 11, 2002, six months to the day after famously flying his first and last commercial airliner.
All the above passed through the legal immigration system. Whether they were detained, rejected, approved or posthumously approved, in the end it made no difference. Because U.S. immigration had no real idea who these men were.
But, don’t worry, they’ll be able to handle another “12 million undocumented Americans” tossed in for express processing.
The real “immigration fraud” is not Mahmoud abu Halima’s or John Lee Malvo’s or Mohammed Atta’s, but that of the politicians who attempted to foist this sham bill on the nation”.
http://www.ocregister.com/ocregister/opinion/nationalcolumns/article_1723669.php
Bryan, Pounce & Anonymous
Check out the Have Your Say comments on the Australian Mufti from an earlier article on his highly inflamatory comments blaming scanty dress for the rape of two teen Australian girls who were kidnapped and raped by Lebanses boys in broad daylight
http://newsforums.bbc.co.uk/nol/thread.jspa?sortBy=2&threadID=4482&edition=1&ttl=20070611095458&#paginator
Instead we get this attack on Australian MSM for Rejecting the Mufti’s Apology
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/6090462.stm
and calling them racists and bigots for disagreeing with him about its merits.
Fabio P.Barbieri
Do you have links to Bush making these statements?
I like this one from Greg S…….
————————————
This is ridiculous.
Jordan attacked Israel, Israel captured Jordanian land.
Egypt attacked Israel, Israel catured Egyptian land
Syria attacked Israel, Israel captured Syrian land.
What’s this “Palestinian” nonsense all about then?
Apparently in comedy timing is everything. But sometimes timing goes awry. (Taken from the last four threads over a two day period)
Saturday 9th June: No jr, just a bit of bullshit
Bullshit Dectective | Homepage | 09.06.07 – 4:24 pm |
Bullshit Dectective | Homepage | 09.06.07 – 5:23 pm |
Sunday 10th June: Lots of jr mixed up with bullshit.
John Reith | 10.06.07 – 3:21 pm |
John Reith | 10.06.07 – 3:33 pm |
Bullshit Dectective | Homepage | 10.06.07 – 3:33 pm |
Break for high tea
John Reith | 10.06.07 – 6:23 pm |
John Reith | 10.06.07 – 6:25 pm |
Dinner
John Reith | 10.06.07 – 8:28 pm |
John Reith | 10.06.07 – 8:48 pm |
John Reith | 10.06.07 – 9:06 pm |
Cocoa, biscuits and bed.
Jr you old comedy turn you. I didn’t realise that you did schizophrenia as well. Just leave out the bullshit and be yourself. Perhaps in the confusion of dual identity you didn’t spot your mistake. There’s only one ‘c’ in detective.
BBC & GUARDIAN FIGHT FOR THE RIGHTS OF JOUNALISTS
Here is the Guardian article on the Al Aqsa attack on Israel using the cover of TV jounalists …. hmmm no outrage here … in fact if you look at the headline one would think it was the Israelis at fault “Israeli bombers strike Gaza after kidnap attempt”
http://www.guardian.co.uk/israel/Story/0,,2099995,00.html
Al Jazeera also gives minimal coverage to the attack and use of an attack vehicle disguised as a TV van
http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/F614905C-C2E1-4504-90DE-8351A993BD9C.htm
and no surprise there is no outrage and just a highly qualified mention about this abuse of Journalistic cover on the BBC ….
“The jeep used in the attack was marked with UN insignia, according to a spokesman for the al-Aqsa unit, but the Israeli army said it was bore the letters “TV”, indicating a press vehicle.”
Indeed we have to turn to google
http://news.google.co.uk/news?hl=en&ned=uk&q=gaza+TV+journalists
and the venerable Gulf Times to realise what had happened
http://www.gulf-times.com/site/topics/article.asp?cu_no=2&item_no=154397&version=1&template_id=37&parent_id=17
Now just ask yourself how the BBC would have reported the story had the Israeli soldier shot a journalist or even shot at a journalist.
Anonymous: what on Earth did you think I was saying? Bush is trying to foist this disastrous immigration bill upon America, in strange alliance with Ted Kennedy. In doing so, he has implicitly insulted his own base, who are, to a man and woman, against it. Will: for a summary of what has been said about this bill, featuring more links, http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=ZWM1MDRjMmFiYTNmMDhhMzFiZTQ2Y2ZlYTk2Nzk3ZDk=.
Block813: Ah, but Egypt and Jordan had taken Palestinian land – all of it that was available – first. Which, of course, makes it Israel’s fault. You shouldn’t be so eurocentric and narrow-minded – this is not “nonsense”, it’s Muslim-Arab logic.
HEARD THE ONE ABOUT THE FATAH MILITANT AND THE HAMAS ACTIVIST?
I thought the correct term of people who killed Palestinians was was TERRORIST but apparently not ..
Palestinian presidential guard thrown off Gaza building
http://news.google.co.uk/news?hl=en&q=thrown%20off%20a%20building&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&um=1&sa=N&tab=wn
“a Hamas activist was thrown off another building.”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/6739691.stm
Full story here
http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/meast/06/10/israel.palestinians.ap/
An interesting story:
‘Political meddling’ ruining learning in schools
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml;jsessionid=X00H51123QZEVQFIQMFCFGGAVCBQYIV0?xml=/news/2007/06/11/ncivitas111.xml
The curriculum in state schools in England has been stripped of its content and corrupted by political interference, according to a damning report by an influential, independent think-tank.
I went to the BBC’s web page to see how they were spinning this story. It seems they are not. Not even in their education section. Apart from being a highly damaging revelation for the bunch of socialist buffoons who ‘run’ the country it doesn’t fit in with the Beeb’s perception of what constitutes education. That and the fact that the independent think-tank is Civitas.
Goodness me, the ‘right-wing’ Civitas as opposed to the ‘highly respected’ IPPR.
TPO | 11.06.07 – 10:40 am
I promise you that I am not -and never have been – BS-detective.
I am saddened that you think I am likely to do a Gary Powell on the spelling of detective.
Saddened too that you cannot tell my signature ‘voice’when it cries out in the wilderness.
And amazed you didn’t spot you own mistake: two of the posts you cite (one mine, one BS-Detective’s) are simultaneous.
You also seem to be returning to the well-worn theme that I comment here as a paid PR agent – with or without a huge staff of little helpers.
I don’t.
BBC plays the race card
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/motorsport/formula_one/6739559.stm
Hamilton is a brilliant new driver in an exciting and truly International sport but I had never even thought to notice or comment on his skin colour.
Good job we have the BBC to remind us of the following:
Hamilton is mixed-race
he is the first driver of Afro-Caribbean origin to race in F1
Young, black, articulate and good-looking
comparisons with golfing superstar Tiger Woods, and it has become clear very quickly that those were based on more than the colour of his skin
Thanks BBC for heaping upon Mr Hamilton all of your NeoSocialist baggage and drawing him into your eternal Race & Class War, I just thought that he was a great sportsman.
THE BBC KNOWS WHEN TO BE INDIGNANT ABOUT ATTACKS ON JOURNALISTS
Was reporter victim of a ‘war crime’ ?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6040372.stm
Israeli rocket hits Reuters car
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/3227819.stm
US ‘targets’ journalists in Iraq
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/5289984.stm
UK journalist detained in Israel
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3583534.stm
Swede ‘injured in Iraq air attack’
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/453935.stm
Media incensed at journalist killings
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/2931571.stm
BUT NOT A (HALAL) SAUSAGE BY THE BBC ABOUT THE NUMEROUS CASES OF PAlESTINIAN & IRAQI TERRORISTS USING JOURNALISTIC/RED CROSS/UN COVER TO LAUNCH ATTACKS …
Fabio P.Barbieri Will: for a summary of what has been said about this bill
Thank you for the link, but I fail to find evidence of Bush calling opponents to the bill, “racists & bigots”.
Am I supposed to accept your claimed Bush quote in a Piers Morgan “fake but accurate” sort of way?
Bridge-building with the Tardis: A joint BBC/Biased BBC initiative
In response to B-BBC’s olive branch of praise for Dr Who, the BBC has shown willingness to work co-operatively with B-BBCers. First initiative: An invitation to the broadcaster’s most respected critics to work jointly on plans for the next series of Dr Who. Minutes of the inaugural session below:
Jonathan Boyd Hunt opened proceedings by suggesting that the space-and-time saga was the ideal place for a drama-documentary on the hounding of Neil Hamilton, scripted by JBH. The Guardian and its staff were clearly nihilistic, all-powerful Daleks and the scary uniformity of BBC personnel made them ideal Cybermen. JBH suggested that he play himself as the champion of truth, ably assisted by the Doctor.
Much praise from the assembled, although doubts were expressed about whether a political tale about brown envelopes full of cash (or not) and misplaced computer fonts (or not) would really send British kiddies skittering behind sofas with delighted squeals of terror.
At this point JBH said he had better things to do than deal with trolls and stomped off, leaving rude messages on everyone’s answerphone before posting lists of semi-important people who had thoroughly endorsed his drama-doc.
archduke then pointed out the irony that the Doctor’s assistant was someone whose parents had clearly been born in Africa or somewhere like that. How ironic that she should be Britain’s leading representative in space and time, he said.
Biodegradable heartily agreed and suggested that the Doctor should find himself a more representative female assistant by landing the Tardis, say, at her cousin’s bar mitzvah, or perhaps at a kibbutz where she was doing a gap year. He also suggested that the Tardis should have a new weapon, a sonic destroyer which yelled You are an anti-semite at enemies of the Time Lord.
bijan daneshmand said that the monster in the story had to be called Ahmadinejad, and that the key sequences of the film should be constructed out of various video nasties he’d dug up on YouTube. Bryan made everyone laugh uproariously by suggesting that the villain be named I’monajihad or possibly “I’m a mad Jew-hater”.
pounce felt that the Doctor should lose his sonic screwdriver for the first episode, but, being the inventive genius he is, make do with pliers and electric cables, the better to get medieval on some Islamic ass. BBC ass, too. Biodegradable thought that another bad guy could be a horrible man called The Face Of Bo-Wen, who would try to poison young minds before meeting a horrible, cowardly, snivelling end such as Alan Johnston and Frank Gardner clearly deserved.
At this point, JBH bounced cheerfully back in and said he and some well-connected friends at the Telegraph and Living Marxism had sorted the entire thing. The Earth had one, lone, decent leader left, named Nile Hamm-Elton, who was being zapped to death by the evil Alan Rubbisher (played by Peter Kay) and his Weeping Guardians. JBH would revive the role of Brigadier Lethbridge-Stewart, last seen helping Jon Pertwee with the cyber-folk, and save the day.
Meeting ends.
TPO | 11.06.07 – 11:03 am
I went to the BBC’s web page to see how they were spinning this story. It seems they are not. Not even in their education section. Apart from being a highly damaging revelation for the bunch of socialist buffoons who ‘run’ the country it doesn’t fit in with the Beeb’s perception of what constitutes education.
But it was covered on this morning’s Today programme!
Just a reminder.
Please do not feed the troll(s)
Jr
This has to be a monumental coincidence then. But I will not doubt your word on the issue.
However this I must take issue with as there is no mistake.
And amazed you didn’t spot you own mistake: two of the posts you cite (one mine, one BS-Detective’s) are simultaneous.
John Reith | 11.06.07 – 11:06 am |
I just wish that I could elaborate on something that took a year out of my life, poring over a deluge of telephone analysis, and six months in, suddenly realising that the recorded times could be out by as much as 90 seconds. No one had ever questioned this before. It led to a satisfactory conclusion.
As for this bit
You also seem to be returning to the well-worn theme that I comment here as a paid PR agent – with or without a huge staff of little helpers.
As I do not doubt your word would you answer this before I disappear and then I will drop the subject; Do you receive money from the BBC?
Also
But it was covered on this morning’s Today programme!
John Reith | 11.06.07 – 11:35 am |
But it wasn’t covered on the BBC web page
More sharp sightedness by the Not Proud one:
http://notproudofbritain.blogspot.com/2007/06/biased-broadcasting-corporation.html#links
Now we know why racism is a thing of the past for the Labour Party.
DEAR LEADER IN WAITING – IS NOW WAITING IN IRAQ
Dear Leader accompanied by BBC court jester and political ass licka in chief nick robinson.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6740067.stm
“”Palestinians shoot me and Jews treat me,” he laughs bitterly. “It was supposed to be different.”
No, it’s not Frank Gardener.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/06/10/wirq310.xml
Instead it’s a Palestinian man, but this type of report in the Telegraph is rarely if ever seen on the BBC. But then again, it would spoil the narrative, wouldn’t it?
APOLOGY FROM IRAQ WAR PROTESTOR WHO “NEVER MEANT TO HURT ANYONE” – BBC
A touching story about a “prisoner of conscience by the BBC.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6688375.stm
Pounce: With ref to the story about “forced Islamic conversions” in Birmingham.
As far as I know this was a story broken by the BBC in the Midlands. I was at the meeting where it was first discussed.
It’s a difficult story to tell for television because many of the main people involved aren’t talking or only issuing statements.
Still we pushed ahead with it, lead on it and continue to follow it.
As to why it hasn’t made the national BBC news? Well at the moment I think it’s a pretty strong regional story but there needs to be a bit more for it to break through onto the national news agenda. Perhaps the girl’s family could finally go on camera? Perhaps she could? Perhaps a really large protest?
But in the meantime we’ll follow the story and break more like it when we dig them out.
bijan
That’s what I like about the BBC – they treat every repentant sinner who turns to God the same. Well they do, don’t they?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/breakfast/3464549.stm
bijan daneshmand:
APOLOGY FROM IRAQ WAR PROTESTOR WHO “NEVER MEANT TO HURT ANYONE” – BBC
“IRAQ WAR PROTESTOR”, yeah, really!
Of course he meant to do harm.
The Guidebook for Taking a Life
bijan daneshmand:
APOLOGY FROM IRAQ WAR PROTESTOR WHO “NEVER MEANT TO HURT ANYONE” – BBC
A touching story about a “prisoner of conscience by the BBC.
Y-e-e-e-s.
Ever so slightly misleading… the BBC headline actually says…
Accused’s daily prayer ‘apology’
See the quotes around ‘apology’. That is reported speech which means the BBC is not claiming it as the truth, or even a reasonable opinion.
Of all the blindness evident from these pages, one of the weirdest is about court reporting.
Reporting of criminal trials is heavily circumscribed by law in the interests of justice for all. Reporters step outside the factual reporting of events in court at their – and their employers’ – peril. There are unlimited powers of sentence for contempt of court.
Only the dimmest – or most prejudiced – could possibly see the BBC’s account of evidence given by Ramzi Mohammed as anything but a fair summary of court proceedings, with Mohammed’s claims clearly marked as quotes, and the robust cross-examination given full weight.
Just to see which side of the line Bijan is on, consider his use of quotation marks around “prisoner of conscience.” Clear indication that the BBC report refers to him in those terms.
Only it doesn’t.
Police shooting
over at BBC on line at the moment the following question is being posed:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/kent/6740007.stm
“Do you live in Sevenoaks? Do you think police officers should be armed?”
I have replied:
“What a ridiculous question under the circumstances.
I think that in future, staff at BBC online should in future be called in the middle of the night, to similar situations, to disarm people with THEIR charm and bravery.”
Won’t get published, but f them.
Biodegradababble:
“Of course he meant to do harm”
On form as ever, and so good of you to usurp the function of the jury in a live case.
Helpful, too, to post information which makes no reference to Ramzi Mohammed or his alleged activities.
Biased BBC: Spleen over truth. Every time.
Accused’s daily prayer ‘apology’
See the quotes around ‘apology’. That is reported speech which means the BBC is not claiming it as the truth, or even a reasonable opinion.
…
Only the dimmest – or most prejudiced – could possibly see the BBC’s account of evidence given by Ramzi Mohammed as anything but a fair summary of court proceedings, with Mohammed’s claims clearly marked as quotes, and the robust cross-examination given full weight.
hillhunt | 11.06.07 – 1:04 pm
illc*nt has missed our discussions here about the BBC’s use of ‘scare quotes’, and the BBC’s use of quotes around words that the people ‘quoted’ never actually said.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/6688375.stm
“Yes, I should have apologised, I don’t know why [I did not], I can’t say.”
But Max Hill, for the prosecution, told Mr Mohammed that the only reason he failed to apologise was because he was an attempted suicide bomber.
illc*nt: red herrings and strawmen a speciality.
John Reith writes:
“But it was covered on this morning’s Today programme!”
It was also featured on last night’s The Westminster Hour, squeezed alongside the drooling coverage of the ZaNuLab deputy elections, that otherwise dominated the programme.
Montaquinn acquitted herself in true BBC fashion, allowing the government-supporting academic considerably more time than the government-opposing academic and not giving him the metaphorical clip round the ear he deserved for propagandising without due cause.
Neither edifying, nor balanced.
Bidoegradababble:
illc*nt has missed our discussions here about the BBC’s use of ‘scare quotes’, and the BBC’s use of quotes around words that the people ‘quoted’ never actually said.
“Yes, I should have apologised, I don’t know why [I did not], I can’t say.”
But Max Hill, for the prosecution, told Mr Mohammed that the only reason he failed to apologise was because he was an attempted suicide bomber.
Y-e-e-e-s. So the defendant claimed he should have apologised. And the BBC put it in quotes. And the report makes clear that the prosecution threw a great deal of doubt on its sincerity.
Which is the reason why the word is there in quotation marks.
Oh, and while you’re on…
Why does almost everyone posting at B-BBC assume that BBC court reporting should abandon its legal constraints and follow their prejudices? Convicting people before the evidence is finished; ignoring the distinction between court reporting and taking sides; ignoring the legal consequences if the BBC (or anyone else of significance) went out on a limb and started finding people guilty before the jury does?
Biased BBC: Robocop made flesh.
Helpful, too, to post information which makes no reference to Ramzi Mohammed or his alleged activities.
illc*nt | 11.06.07 – 1:14 pm
The Guidebook for Taking a Life
Here are six of the more striking jihadi tenets, as militant Islamists describe them:
Rule No. 1: You can kill bystanders without feeling a lot of guilt.
…
Rule No. 2: You can kill children, too, without needing to feel distress.
True, Islamic texts say it is unlawful to kill children, women, the old and the infirm. In the Sahih Bukhari, a respected collection of sermons and sayings of the Prophet Muhammad, verse 4:52:257 refers to Ghazawat, a battle in which Muhammad took part. “Narrated Abdullah: During some of the Ghazawat of the Prophet a woman was found killed. Allah’s Apostle disapproved the killing of women and children.”
But militant Islamists including extremists in Jordan who embrace Al Qaeda’s ideology teach recruits that children receive special consideration in death. They are not held accountable for any sins until puberty, and if they are killed in a jihad operation they will go straight to heaven. There, they will instantly age to their late 20s, and enjoy the same access to virgins and other benefits as martyrs receive.
…
Rule No. 4: You cannot kill in the country where you reside unless you were born there.
Militants living in a country that respects the rights of Muslims have something like a peace contract with the country, says Omar Bakri, a radical sheik who moved from London to Lebanon two years ago under pressure from British authorities.
Militants who go to Iraq get a pass as expeditionary warriors. And the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks did not violate this rule since the hijackers came from outside the United States, Mr. Bakri said.
“When I heard about the London bombings, I prayed that no bombers from Britain were involved,” he said, fearing immigrants were responsible. As it turned out, the July 7, 2005, attack largely complied with this rule. Three of the four men who set off the bombs had been born in Britain; the fourth moved there from Jamaica as an infant.
Mr. Bakri says he does not condone violence against innocent people anywhere. But some of the several hundred young men who studied Islam with him say they have no such qualms.
“We have a voting system here in Britain, so anyone who is voting for Tony Blair is not a civilian and therefore would be a legitimate target,” says Khalid Kelly, an Irish-born Islamic convert who says he studied with Mr. Bakri in London.
Rule No. 5: You can lie or hide your religion if you do this for jihad.
Not relevant to Ramzi Mohammed or his alleged activities?
‘Scare Quotes’
Scare_quotes
The Jawbone of a Scare Quote
Biodegradababble:
Rule No. 5: You can lie or hide your religion if you do this for jihad.
Not relevant to Ramzi Mohammed or his alleged activities?
Actually, no, whilst he remains innocent in the eyes of the law. If the above was introduced as evidence, it would be legitimate to report it. But if it’s not, then it’s prejudicial in law.
Simple words again:
The law stops peo-ple from tak-ing the law in-to their own hands until a tri-al is fin-ish-ed. It is con-tempt of court to do so. The BBC would get both barr-els from the law if it tried to un-der-mine the jury by tell-ing ev-ery-bo-dy that some-one was guil-ty be-fore the ev-id-en-ce is fin-ish-ed, the jud-ge has sum-med up and the ver-dict ann-oun-ced.
Were it not for the fact that B-BBC is largely the daft talking to the deaf, their worships may well be tempted to get medieval on your asses too…
Biased BBC: Ignorance is our excuse
President Bush has dithered for to long on this one. It has been known for some time that Iran is funding terrorism in Iraq and has threatened to wipe Israel and America of the map decisive action should have been taken to eliminate the threat.
“Military plan against Iran is ready”
“Predicting that Iran will obtain a nuclear weapon within three years and claiming to have a strike plan in place, senior American military officers have told The Jerusalem Post they support President George W. Bush’s stance to do everything necessary to stop the Islamic Republic’s race for nuclear power.
Bush has repeatedly said the United States would not allow Iran to “go nuclear.”
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1181228588702&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull
Satellite imagery links Iran to the Karbala attack which resulted in five U.S. soldiers killed:
http://billroggio.com/archives/2007/06/us_finds_karbala_pjc.php
.
Why does almost everyone posting at B-BBC assume that BBC court reporting should abandon its legal constraints and follow their prejudices?
hillhunt | 11.06.07 – 1:41 pm |
I think most poster here just want the BBC to stop using euphemisms and avoiding relevant facts.
Hillhunt. Puerile and unfounded generalisations. All the time.
Apoplectic:
I think most poster here just want the BBC to stop using euphemisms and avoiding relevant facts.
Help me. Where are the euphemisms and avoided relevant facts in the court report Bijan quoted?
Helpful hint: Contempt of court would prevent the BBC from dragging external opinion – such as BioD’s quotations from the Guidebook for taking life – into a court report, on pain of unlimited fines.
BBC QUOTES STYLE BOOK
OK “illc*nt”
You are being a little more stupid that your usual self arent you. BBC is a habitual quotes manipulator …. for instance when it comes to George Bush Israel or Islam the BBC Journalist Style Book must have 3 rules guiding its staff:
(1) anything stated by an Israeli/Bush/Republican must not be taken at face value and m-u-s-t b-e p-la-c-e-d i-n q-u-o-t-e-s.
Cool reception for Olmert ‘offer’
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/6519735.stm
Israel ‘tests’ Syria peace aims
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/6737065.stm
Olmert ‘suspends’ withdrawal plan
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/5262334.stm
(2) Any assertion stated about Israel and/or Jews no matter how insulting/outlandish stated by an Arab or adherent of the Relgion of Peace can be reported as long as it is p-la-c-e-d i-n q-u-o-t-e-s.
Why did Israel attack USS Liberty?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/6690425.stm
In quotes: Iran’s Holocaust conference
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/6172889.stm
(3) Anything vaugely suggestive as inimical to RoP or its leaders and follwers MUST be p-la-c-e-d i-n q-u-o-t-e-s.
Living with Iran’s terror label
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/talking_point/6638929.stm
Iraq Shias ‘attack’ Sunni mosques
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/6731303.stm
Ahmadinejad accused of indecency
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/6619077.stm
‘Mass purges’ at Iran universities
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/6196069.stm
hillhunt | 11.06.07 – 1:53 pm
Let me try to make it simple for you, you know, small steps for little people.
The BBC headlines its piece about an “alleged” Jihadi Accused’s daily prayer ‘apology’.
The actual court report shows that said “alleged” Jihadi has actually refused to actually apologise (no alleging here) to actual victims of his (alleged) attempt at mass murder.
He says that he apologises in his prayers.
I say he’s bullshitting, and I don’t believe you can say that I am in contempt of court for expressing my opinion of what he allegedly says to his alleged god.
The accused can no more prove that what he says about what he asks for in his prayers is true than I can present evidence to disprove him.
Why the BBC gives so much credence to this alleged man’s alleged prayers and so little to, say, George W Bush’s religious beliefs, is another story altogether.
Shocka! Think tank reports that schools are pushing PC garbage:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/6740527.stm
Double Shocka! BBC edits out the most obnoxious charge:
Teenagers studying for GCSEs are being asked to write about the September 11 atrocities using Arab media reports and speeches from Osama bin Laden as sources without balancing material from America, it reveals.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml;jsessionid=I2US20SMZC5Q3QFIQMFCFGGAVCBQYIV0?xml=/news/2007/06/11/ncivitas111.xml
I wonder why the HYS debate on the 1967 war has been closed?
I realise that the war itself only lasted six days, but come on!
Could it be that it wasn’t going the ‘right’ way?
Maybe all those READER RECOMMENDED postings are not sufficiently pro-Palestinian.
http://newsforums.bbc.co.uk/nol/thread.jspa?sortBy=2&threadID=6444&edition=1&ttl=20070611151706&#paginator
“illc*unt”
You never explained to why the BBC is so outraged by incident such as this
‘This is just a scene from hell’
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/2921807.stm
Was reporter victim of a ‘war crime’ ?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6040372.stm
US ‘targets’ journalists in Iraq
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/3227819.stm
but either white washes or doesnt report this
Timeline: Alan Johnston missing
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/in_depth/world/2007/alan_johnston/default.stm
“missing”! dont think so …
New twist in Iran jail death probe
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/3932753.stm
“died from a fainting fit” dont think so ….
http://www.nctimes.com/articles/2007/06/11/news/nation/61007144405.txt
“TV Journalists” dont think so ….
BTW the only brief passing referece to the above violation by Islamic Jihad and Al Aqsa Martyrs has now been removed by the BBC … its officially a non-story …
Biodegradababble:
The actual court report shows that said “alleged” Jihadi has actually refused to actually apologise (no alleging here) to actual victims of his (alleged) attempt at mass murder.
He says that he apologises in his prayers.
I say he’s bullshitting, and I don’t believe you can say that I am in contempt of court for expressing my opinion of what he allegedly says to his alleged god.
I’m afraid we’re heading for the sort of Homer Simpsonesque dead-end which is your stock in trade, BioD.
1. It’s a court report, not investigative or authored journalism. It has to be a factual account of proceedings.
2. Fact is, the defendant Mohammed says he does apologise in his prayers. That is his evidence to the court and is placed in quotation marks.
3. You omit Mohammed’s quote that he should have apologised, I don’t know why [I did not]. This is also evidence given to the court.
4. Court reporters have to report evidence; not what they or I or you think: The evidence given on oath, no second guessing. The punishment for contempt of court is potentially unlimited.
5. It is not for the BBC – nor you nor I – to make decisions about his evidence such as I say he’s bullshitting. That’s the jury’s job alone, guided by the judge. The law is quite clear on it.
Once the case is over, the media are free to comment and undoubtedly will do, bringing in whatever facts are relevant.
Until then, the words spoken in the witness box are the evidence and that’s what the media must bring you. Like it or not.
As for:
Why the BBC gives so much credence to this alleged man’s alleged prayers and so little to, say, George W Bush’s religious beliefs, is another story altogether.
Bush is not a witness in a live court case in which his beliefs are offered as evidence. D’oh!
Nor is it a matter of the BBC style book, as Bijan wittily asserts. All media are obliged to honour the court reporting rules, regardless of their house style or political opinions.
.
Scottish parents who have the intiative to read to their children are obviously privileged. Another piece of bizarreness from the BBC.
More privileged
The research also found that more Scots fathers read to their children and four in five Scots parents in the survey thought their home area was either an excellent or good one in which to bring up children.
Scottish mothers were also more likely to have jobs (62%) than mothers in other UK countries and were more likely to to have rules in place to govern their child’s behaviour.
Across the UK, the report found that many children from disadvantaged backgrounds were educationally already up to a year behind more privileged youngsters by the age of three.
The vocabulary scores showed that the sons and daughters of graduates were 10 months ahead of those with the least-educated parents.
There was a 12-month difference in the school readiness tests.
The equivalent gaps for children in families living above and below the poverty line used by the researchers were five months for vocabulary and 10 months for school readiness.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/6740159.stm
Nice piece of Fisking “illc*nt” Biodegrade …
Stuck Record you are on to something here … ever wondered why the BBC rarely uses the most Reccomended Quotes in the quote that they select to accompany a story?
It would damage “Goodthink”
http://www.newspeakdictionary.com/ns_frames.html
BBC REPORTS SHOW IRAQ WAR PROTESTORS TO BE VERY CONSIDERATE
Another couple of quote jems from the BBC “reporting” of the 21/7 “consciencious objectors” trial ..
[above quotes mine … as there are still a few cynical people .. none of whom thanks be to Allah are at the BBC … who doubt Omar’s peace actavist sincerity and want to label him as a terrorist … all other quotes are those of the BBC … what facinating about the BBC court transcript narrative is that the innocence and decency and community spirit of of Yassin Omar shine through].
Yassin Omar, 26, from north London, has admitted setting off a device on the Tube, but says it was in protest at the Iraq war and not meant to be deadly …
when his device was detonated it sounded like a champagne cork and some fellow passengers “thought it was a joke”.
“Some of them, they looked alarmed. Some of the ladies, they panicked,” he said.
“I felt quite bad – my intention was not to do that to people.”
He fled to Birmingham by coach, dressed in a long black burka – a garment that covers the face and body – and carrying a white handbag.
“I was very scared, I thought they would have shot me dead,” he said.
“I realised that this thing had taken a wrong turn and now an innocent man had been shot.”
Mr Omar said he took one of his mother-in-law’s burkas because she “had lots of them”,
“Foreign policy needs to change.”
“I hope the new prime minister Gordon Brown has the vision to make this country the best,” he said.
Giving evidence for the fourth day, he was asked if he wanted to die with the Koran on his back.
“That is not the case,” he replied.
“If they saw I had a rucksack on me then they would think twice before they shot me, and it worked. Allah answered my supplication,”
“ill aunt”
Noticed How the BBC has not put a quote to this heading
21/7 accused in Muslim bias claim
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6654467.stm
hhhmmm … BBC could have opted for a title such as
21/7 accused claims “muslim bias”
but then that would have undermined this consiencious objector’s claims that
“That is the truth. There is a man sending mail letter bombs and everyone says it is only to cause a bit of harm and to scare people.”
“But if you are Muslim, you must be a terrorist and wanting to kill people.”
also admitted much of what he told police after his arrest on 27 July was fabricated, saying that he had made up a fictional character called Hassan in order to provide an alibi for the night of 20 July and the morning of 21 July.
He said: “Hassan was a complete invention. I told the police what they wanted to hear. I was scared, I thought they might torture me if I did not co-operate.
Notice how the QC Humiliates this peaceful Muslim man by stating that his statement to the court is “Hogwash” … Hogs as we all know are HARAM .. and filithy to Muslims … the QCs implication is cruel but clear!