– 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.
Notice:
White House deny watch charge.
BBC doesn’t believe them.
Bring on professional magician to study film.
In his opinion it was stolen.
QED BBC.
BTW, how’s the plastic turkey getting on Beeboids?
Clearly the BBC are astonished that these stupid Albanians are giving Dubya a great welcome. So let’s make a joke of it – expect MUCH more from Jeremy and Sandi on Friday! Can’t wait.
odd isnt it , how the term “civil war” is never applied to current events in gaza…
odd that.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/6747207.stm
its just “fighting” , and sometimes its “heavy fighting”, which means more terrorists are killing other terrorists. if its “extremely heavy” then i suppose that means that even MORE terrorists are killing other terrorists.
So let’s make a joke of it – expect MUCH more from Jeremy and Sandi on Friday! Can’t wait.
Abandon ship! | 13.06.07 – 8:49 am
Yeah – the ever so green BBC is going to recycle that watch ad nauseum.
dave hill/hunt
Basic rule: If you have to take drugs to enjoy music, the music’s sh*t…
yes i agree the beatles are shit..
news from the “civil war that dare not speak its name”
roof throwing seems to be the latest fad with the islamists. funny guys , eh? sure beats “car swarming” for sheer entertainment.
http://www.israellycool.com/
quote:
11:00AM: Hamas terrorists have gone all big bad wolf on Fatah, threatening to huff and puff and blow up a building on which some Fatahniks are entrenched. The Fatahniks are actually on the roof, so they are also at risk of death by tossing.
How BBC clones defend the indefensible
HH wrote;
“You really don’t like Islam. Neither does pounce, for understandable personal reasons.”
Thank you for categorising me in order to say that my views against the BBCs favourite faith were tempered as a minor and thus don’t stand up in a court of law.
To be honest I held no truck against Islam until post 2001 were I started joining up the many dots that litter my past and was horrified at the picture that presented itself in front of me.
As children taken into care I noticed that Islamic families blamed my Sister and I for dishonouring our fathers names. I didn’t blame Islam
Children at school threw abuse at our abandonment of Islamic life. I didn’t blame Islam
Wearing a cross a girlfriend had bought home on leave, a Muslim came across and ripped it off my neck. (Big mistake) saying I shouldn’t be wearing it. . I didn’t blame Islam
Home on leave during the 90s I meet my sis in town who on meeting me breaks down in tears and reluctantly informs me that her step brothers have a penchant for beating her as she is in her 30s and single. Begging me not to do anything I agree. I didn’t blame Islam
I ring my brother and the step brother who likes to beat women answers the phone and as my brother isn’t in refuses to hand over the phone to my sister-in-law as I am a man and not family. I get in my car and drive 200 miles where I ask my brother (who is home now) to call Mr Bully over. Walking through the door I kick the shite out him, and with a knife to his throat I inform said idiot that if he as much as much as looks in the direction of my family I will k-ill him. I leave. I didn’t blame Islam
I have another sister who was brought up my mother and whom I meet for the first time in also in the 90s. I am asked over for Ramadan in 2000. (Hey I was in the area.)
Afterwards Little sis phones me and informs me that HER family have requested that I no longer visit as I am not a Muslim. I start to blame Islam
But the biggest shock to the system came not from a Muslim but from a white officer in the British army. While on my EFP2 (Education for Promotion certificate) I was handed a topic by a young 26 year old female officer to discuss after lunch. The Topic
“Islam” This was in 1999 and I stated that how things are transpiring in the world there will be war between East and west in the not so distant future. At the end the teacher openly berated me coming out with the immortal line “Some of my best friends at Uni were muslims” I simply replied “And all of my family are, doesn’t prevent them been told at the mosque that as an Apostate that I have to die” and sat down.
I have many more stories about how I never blamed Islam. But my own sister who on the call of her family tells me never to visit her again, well that opened my eyes to the polarised nature of the BBCs favourite cult. Then the attack on the 11th September 2001 transpired.
But just to put the story of honour crimes into perspective. (It appears you kind of refused to glean the gist of my message) Honour crimes are carried out in the full knowledge of friends, family and neighbours. The victim is condemned ,vilified, ostracised and punished.
Child abuse is done secretly and when the person is exposed is condemned, vilified, ostracised and punished.
Now contrast the above with the international stage.
Muslim countries remain silent on acts of violence committed by Muslims against Muslims.
Western countries punish countries who commit acts of violence against Muslims, be it Iraq, Iran, Hamas, Libya, Syria or even Serbia.
But according to the BBC that is wrong and a warcrime.
Please feel free to respond.
Good post pounce
I refer your honorable self to the answer I gave over a year ago: yes, I receive money from the BBC… for journalism
John Reith | 12.06.07 – 5:07 pm |
Thanks for confirming it jr.
Must confess that I missed it first time round. Either that or senility has finally set in.
Now where was I.
PS … watch that spelling (honourable)
It’s all in the headline
Black defendants get a good deal in court
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml;jsessionid=PAC3JXPI3TSX5QFIQMFCFGGAVCBQYIV0?xml=/news/2007/06/13/njury113.xml
Jury racism dismissed by research
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6746221.stm
Read and make your own minds up as to whether or not the PC blinkered BBC are tip toeing around this one.
Now I read this as an acknowledgement from the BBC trustees that all is not well in the trough of largesse that passes for a structured salary scheme.
BBC planning to review top stars’ salaries
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml;jsessionid=3RB3G2VI3GIWFQFIQMFCFGGAVCBQYIV0?xml=/news/2007/06/13/nbbc113.xml
Still I suppose they could always ‘donate a proportion of their fortunes to causes like the Royal Festival Hall’
Oddly enough, as it affects the BBC, I don’t seem to see this emblazoned over the BBC web page, at least not like ‘BBC scoops three Webbys’. I do so love that word ’scoops’
The BBC,its love for Islamic Terrorism and loaded questions.
Put your questions to Afghan villagers
Are things getting better for ordinary people in Afghanistan?
He told us that he was a firm supporter of the presence of foreign troops in Afghanistan to help bring about stability.
HAJI ABDULLAH SALEH, VILLAGE ELDERHe told us that he was a firm supporter of the presence of foreign troops in Afghanistan to help bring about stability.
Is he still happy with their presence, given the repeated incidents involving foreign troops in which Afghan civilians are killed?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/6740479.stm
90% of all Civilian deaths in Afghanistan are at the hands of the Taliban. Yet the BBC paints the picture that it is NATO which is killing them all. Loaded question or just the BBC blowing the flute of its Taliban Masters.
pounce:
I leave it to others to weigh the issues you raise and your attitude to Islam.
Western countries punish countries who commit acts of violence against Muslims, be it Iraq, Iran, Hamas, Libya, Syria or even Serbia.
But according to the BBC that is wrong and a warcrime.
Let’s break down that list:
Iraq: Invaded by Coalition Forces citing violation of United Nations resolution 687 on the development of weapons of mass destruction. No weapons found.
Iran: Not yet punished as such, but threatened for defying international pressure on its nuclear programme.
Hamas: Not technically a country, but the party elected to power in the Palestinian territories. Subject to international sanctions over its refusal to recognise Israel or renounce violence against it.
Libya: Bombed by the US over involvement in European terrorism. Subject to sanctions over refusal to comply with Lockerbie investigation. Now UK’s big friend.
Syria: Alleged Jihadi camp bombed by Irael in 2003.
Serbia: Bombed by Nato to halt ethnic cleansing of Kosovan Muslims.
Only one of these actions was in defence of Muslims. The others were not and were controversial for blindingly obvious reasons. That controversy would have existed without the BBC. It reports it. That’s its job.
pounce | 13.06.07 – 9:47 am
Outstanding post.
I know its not easy to post so much of a personal nature.
Sadly it seems that some pathetic juvenile donkeys need that level of personal insight before they realise the woefulness of their so called contributions that are just plain ignorant and cease and desist.
Respect to you.
pounce | 13.06.07 – 9:47 am:
We all breeze in and out of this site and it’s likely I’ve missed previous posts in which you might have explained your background to put your interest in the BBC’s reporting in context.
From your post at 9.47am it’s now clear to me that you were once a Mulslim but are no longer. From your reference to the gift of a cross you say your girlfriend bought you, am I to infer that you’re also telling us you’re a Christian?
If you think I’m probing just ignore me.
(For your information I consider myself to be a Christian but I ‘m not that devout – I go to church usually once or twice a month, tops)
TPO:
It’s all in the headline
Black defendants get a good deal in court (telegraph)
Jury racism dismissed by research (bbc)
Read and make your own minds up as to whether or not the PC blinkered BBC are tip toeing around this one.
Indeed:
Does the Telegraph’s phrase good deal as in get a good deal occur anywhere in the 244 pages of the research findings?
Answer: No.
Does the report in any way echo the BBC headline Jury racism dismissed by research?
Answer: Yes. The main finding of the case simulation study is that the verdicts of racially mixed juries did not discriminate against defendants based on the defendant’s race.
Perhaps we need to launch a new website: Biased Telegraph.
One final thought: The research only covers mixed-race juries, which make up a minority of real-life juries.
What remains to be answered is whether all-White juries, which decide cases in most Crown Courts, also do not discriminate against defendants based on race.
I seem to recall that one of the more cretinous posters on BBBC was recently in denial over the ’Trenchant Critic’ calling for the destruction of Israel.
The lunatic (’Trenchant Critic’ that is) is now under attack from his own people.
Economists attack Iran president in open letter
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml;jsessionid=HXXK0X5KCDMD1QFIQMFCFGGAVCBQYIV0?xml=/news/2007/06/13/wiran113.xml
‘It was reported yesterday that Mr Ahmadinejad had appointed 15 advisers to study his “works and opinions” and have the best ones published. Rooze online, an opposition website, suggested the advisers would have little to choose from. The only known publication credited to the president – who has a PhD in traffic management – was a treatise about cold asphalt, it said’.
Is this the same Ahmadinejad who is on video telling his mates that ’all the assembled world leaders at the UN were held transfixed and unblinking for half an hour as an aura surrounded him’
Yep. Nothing to fear from this nutter, just hope he doesn’t next to you on the bus.
Give the BBC their due though. They report the story too. However they have omitted this bit:
‘The letter also said that his government’s handling of foreign policy, including its controversial nuclear programme and the president’s infamous calls to see Israel “wiped off the map”, had added to the economic woes.
UN sanctions against Iran’s nuclear programme had seen foreign investment and trade dry up, the group said.’
Now why did the BBC choose not to report that bit? Perhaps it was too trenchant?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/6744841.stm
The BBC is still trying to get rid of the Falklands:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/6545899.stm
islamic jihad and the PFLP are very upset that its just Hamas and Fatah doing the killing, and that they werent invited to the deathfest party…
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3412193,00.html
“Islamic Jihad activists and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) have decided to take to the streets in protest of the factional fighting in the Strip.”
we all know how THATS going to turn out…
(sounds of the Israelis mass ordering a load of popcorn…)
Pounce:
The recorded number of murders in the Uk adds up to around 12 a year.
Is that the estimated number of “honour killings”? If so, it’s a very interesting statistic.
The number of murders per annum in the UK is a fairly steady 500 or so per year last time I looked. Assuming the victims are distributed reasonably evenly among the population by ethnicity, then with an Asian population of about 4% you’d expect the annual murder tally to include about 20 Asians.
If 12 of those 20 are “honor killings” done by other Asians then it would say that the biggest single motive for murdering an Asian is religious, that the most prolofic murderers of Asians are other Asians, and that if you’re an Asian woman the likeliest threat of murder comes from your own family.
You won’t hear that analysis on the BBC, nor even one with the right numbers interpolated into it.
BBC female sex organ;
Yet again you fudge the theme of the thread by pointing in the direction that leads furthest away from the spotlight I hold. The point I was making is that the Western societies will act in which to try and address transgressions which they believe is causing pain and suffering. Islamic societies do not. While the BBC has no problem portraying the West as on an Anti-Islamic crusade. It kind of omits (As do the radical Idiots out there) All the organisations which club together in which to help their fellow man. As rich as the Arab states are and the one of the Pillars of Islam which stipulates that charity giving is a must. You will find that the US alone give far more in Aid than all of Muslim countries combined. (Which begs me to ask the question why are so many Muslims living in poverty)
Rightly or wrong the west invaded Iraq. But the people killing Muslims are Muslims.
Where is the bitter condemnation from the Muslim world.?
Where is the bitter condemnation from the Muslim world over the civil war in Gaza.
(If you look at the current BBC page they blame the jews. Right at the end.)
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/6747841.stm
So please spare me your sanctimonious cods wallop about Western aggression against Muslim countries. Those countries I listed, I listed for a purpose and not the reason you push as just.
Oh yes did I ever call you a “bhenchod’ I’m sure you understand its meaning.
If you look more closely at the ’ Economists attack Iran president in open letter’ articles in the Telegraph and on the BBC’s web page you will see that someone hasn’t got their facts right.
Telegraph version:
’UN sanctions against Iran’s nuclear programme had seen foreign investment and trade dry up, the group said.’
BBC version:
’At no point does the letter mention international sanctions or foreign banking restrictions as responsible for Iran’s economic woes.’
Oh dear BBC, wrong again. And if you believe the letter didn’t mention sanctions why make mention of it?
GBEHB
if you’re an Asian woman the likeliest threat of murder comes from your own family.
But isn’t that true of black/white and any other ethnic group you’d care to mention?
When any woman is murdered isn’t the cops’ first instinct to regard the husband/boyfriend as the prime suspect?
BBC Berkshire just now
Richard Skinner and “Jane Isaacs” chit chatting about the Woolmer case.
“and then there’s the racial element to this .. of course people wouldn’t have been as quick to point the finger if it had been the English or Australian team” …
I believe I heard it right, this is from (recent) memory
JBH wrote;
“From your post at 9.47am it’s now clear to me that you were once a Mulslim but are no longer. From your reference to the gift of a cross you say your girlfriend bought you, am I to infer that you’re also telling us you’re a Christian?”
Actually I’m not religious at all. On my docs it says C of E. (but that is simply so people know I’m not a Muslim) However the last time I went to church was about 6 years ago. (and that was a remembrance parade) I don’t look down at people who follow a faith and if the truth be told I respect them for having some sort of direction in their life. However when that direction starts to impinge on my way of life then I become concerned. (Be it JW, Mormons or even Muslims.)
As for once being a Muslim, nah I was born into a Muslim family.(big difference) Bummer of a birth mark.
odd that Pallywood seems to always go begging to the EU and UN for “aid”, and yet they seem to find the money for rather large stockpiles of ammo, RPGs and machine guns.
odd that…
hillhunt:
pounce:
I leave it to others to weigh the issues you raise and your attitude to Islam.
Western countries…
hillhunt | 13.06.07 – 10:36 am
pounce took the trouble to write that extensive reply just for you in the light of the remarks you directed at him, and you ignore it.
Then you change the subject and go off on a tangent.
You really are a despicable ass.
pounce:
So please spare me your sanctimonious cods wallop about Western aggression against Muslim countries.
There was nothing, sanctimonous or otherwise, in my posting about Western aggression against Muslim countries. So I’ve already spared you.
Those countries I listed, I listed for a purpose and not the reason you push as just.
Not sure I fully understand your point, but the reasons for invasion/sanctions involving those countries were as stated.
Perhaps it’s your perception that we, say, rolled into Iraq to punish countries who commit acts of violence against Muslims. Trouble is…that’s not what we said we were doing.
Still don’t see why the BBC (or any other free medium) should be criticised for reporting the wide range of opinions for and against the invasion. Isn’t that why we fight to defend our freedoms?
This reminds me of Frank Gardner:
http://drybonesblog.blogspot.com/2007/06/blabbermouth-gaza-2007.html
🙂
Biodegradabble:
pounce took the trouble to write that extensive reply just for you in the light of the remarks you directed at him, and you ignore it.
Then you change the subject and go off on a tangent.
You really are a despicable ass.
To be frank, I was trying not to respond as I really feel. However…
It’s clear as day that pounce’s bitter and obsessive postings about Islamic matters, some of them so wide of the mark that you worry for his eyesight, are driven by a barely-suppressed rage. The infamous posting about which we must not talk (for very good reason) was sadistic beyond reason, and telegraphed something dark and deep-seated.
It’s also clear that most B-BBCers tolerate his wild inaccuracies and misanthropic assumptions because it fits their own prejudices and because they have a culture of only attacking liberal outsiders to the group.
Personally, I don’t think pounce’s stuff is healthy, and if I knew him better I’d recommend he seeks help.
Further to the great Time Out event they have a double page spread in this week’s edition devoted to the (overwhelmingly hostile) response, which I guess is a tacit acknowledgement that the f***ed up.
It’s also clear that most B-BBCers tolerate his wild inaccuracies and misanthropic assumptions because it fits their own prejudices and because they have a culture of only attacking liberal outsiders to the group.
Do I detect the sound of you “whinging”?
You are not attacked because you’re “liberal”, you’re attacked because you are a tiresome troll who has a culture of attacking everything and everybody here.
Personally, I don’t think pounce’s stuff is healthy, and if I knew him better I’d recommend he seeks help.
hillhunt | 13.06.07 – 12:03 pm
If you knew him better, as many of us here do, perhaps you would appreciate the service he has rendered to this country, and by extension to you, in the defence of the freedoms and liberties that allow you to rant here and elsewhere.
Then again perhaps not.
In my opinion pounce has contributed more to our country and society, so far in his life and his career, than you could in twenty lifetimes.
Iran going nuclear would be the death knell of civilization as we know it:
“Can the Israel Defense Forces in fact disrupt Iran’s nuclear program”?
“Top secret analyses from intelligence agencies normally reply to such a question. But talented outsiders, using open sources, can also try their hand. Whitney Raas and Austin Long studied this problem at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and published their impressive analysis, “Osirak Redux? Assessing Israeli Capabilities to Destroy Iranian Nuclear Facilities,” in the journal International Security”.
By Daniel Pipes
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=28718
.
I subscribe to media lens alerts, so I can check the Lefts view of currant affairs. Today, they are saying that Chevaz is badly done by, and that people should write to the following. I don`t pretend to know much about the goings on in Venezuela, but someone may find this interesting.
—————————————
SUGGESTED ACTION
The goal of Media Lens is to promote rationality, compassion and respect for others. If you decide to write to journalists, we strongly urge you to maintain a polite, non-aggressive and non-abusive tone.
Ask the following journalists why, for example, they cite Chavez as the source for a mere “claim” that RCTV was deeply involved in the military coup to overthrow Chavez. Why do they not state RCTV’s involvement in the coup as an undeniable fact?
Write to Catherine Philp
Email: catherine.philp@thetimes.co.uk
Write to Richard Lapper
Email: richard.lapper@ft.com
Write to James Ingham
Email: james.ingham@bbc.co.uk
Write to Alan Rusbridger, Guardian editor
Email: alan.rusbridger@guardian.co.uk
Write to Simon Kelner, Independent editor
Email: s.kelner@independent.co.uk
Please send a copy of your emails to us
Email: editor@medialens.org
Please do NOT reply to the email address from which this media alert originated. Please instead email us at
Email: editor@medialens.org
This media alert will shortly be archived here:
http://www.medialens.org/alerts/07/070613_chavez_and_rctv.php
I have no problem with this ruling:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6747869.stm
except to note that our Law Lords are rather predictable in their decisions these days – must be Guardian readers.
From the BBC’s article, this is also predictable:
“Shami Chakrabarti of Liberty, one of the human rights groups which helped to bring the cases to court, said: “There could now never be a British Guantanamo. The British will never be able to build a prison anywhere in the world and say it is a legal black hole.”
She said: “The significance of this decision is that individual soldiers cannot be left as scapegoats and left to carry the can for the failures of our government and our military high command…the Human Rights Act protects anyone detained by British authorities anywhere in the world.”
Ms Chakrabarti said she expected a full independent inquiry to examine the legal advice given to the military about how they could treat prisoners and the training and resources given to military personnel.”
But will our Shami be helping any soldiers involved? I think not.
Liberty – for some.
@ John Reith
But isn’t that true of black/white and any other ethnic group you’d care to mention?
When any woman is murdered isn’t the cops’ first instinct to regard the husband/boyfriend as the prime suspect?
Well, yes, but no. When a woman is murdered it quite often turns out to be the husband that did it. It’s comparatively rare, though, for the step-brother, the brother-in-law, or the father, or all of the above acting together to have done it. It is pretty much unknown for the “offence” to be that of, oh, consorting with a less fundamentalist Muslim, for instance.
Don’t you think that’s interesting? That “honour killing” is the motive for most murders of Asian women in the UK?
Should the BBC connive at keeping this ugly fact out of sight?
For bonus points, are multiculturalism or diversity ever bad?
pounce | 13.06.07 – 11:17 am:
Thanks for that. Just curious.
“Personally, I don’t think pounce’s stuff is healthy, and if I knew him better I’d recommend he seeks help.”
They always end up diagnosing you with MENTAL ILLNESS.
Here’s something you’ll all appreciate:
THINGS WHICH ALL TRUE MUSLIMS AND THEIR IMAMS HATE
1. They HATE our democracy, and are trying to overthrow it.
2. They HATE our national symbols, and it offends them beyond endurance to see them worn by us.
3. They HATE our Flag, as they grossly insult it.
4. They HATE freedom of conscience.
5. They HATE freedom of the Press.
6. They HATE freedom of speech.
7. They HATE our School system.
8. They HATE the Bible, and would blot it out of existence if they could!
9. They HATE our religion, and are sworn to exterminate it from our country and the earth.
10. They HATE all rulers that do not swear allegiance to their religion and its leaders.
11. They HATE to support their own poor and they are left to be supported by the tax-paying British.
12. They HATE, above all, the patriots who are determined to rid this country from their accursed power.
Anyone disagree?
Anyone disagree?
i like idries shah..
i hate this…
http://www.blaketashi.com/persecution.htm
http://www.mindspring.com/~altafb/sufipers.html
Click to access RS21745.pdf
so mr hilly black and white..
whose side am i on ?
Anyone disagree?
hillhunt | 13.06.07 – 1:30 pm | #
What has this got to do with BBC bias? I thought this list was moderated?
ill*unt
“Isn’t that why we fight to defend our freedoms?”
Actually people like Pounce have fought for our freedoms.
I see no evidence that you have fought for our or anyone’s freedoms.
Desist in using ‘we’.
Anonymous:
What has this got to do with BBC bias? I thought this list was moderated?
So did I, but you wouldn’t believe the rubbish most people post here of no direct relevance.
None at all.
.
“Further to the great Time Out event they have a double page spread in this week’s edition devoted to the (overwhelmingly hostile) response, which I guess is a tacit acknowledgement that the f***ed up.
Cockney | 13.06.07 – 12:03 pm ”
interesting – so it wasnt just me wondering if i was being a bit too po-faced about it…
on another note, over in Pallywood , they’ve shot dead 2 UN workers.
http://www.israellycool.com/
and it looks like Hamas has blown up the fatah security hq, killing 13.
fighting has also spread to nablus.
Islam and the West
BaggieJ:
people like Pounce have fought for our freedoms.
I see no evidence that you have fought for our or anyone’s freedoms.
Desist in using ‘we’.
Quite right. Our manifesto should demand a four-tier freedom of speech.
1. People who have fought for our freedom
2. People who have been in the armed forces, but not actually fought for our freedom
3. British citizens, except…
4. Anyone who goes to a mosque. And their mates.
Not clear from his postings to date whether pounce is cat#1 or cat#2. But I’m happy to give him benefit of the doubt…
.
“The Jihad has been the most unrecorded and disregarded major event of history. It has, in fact, been largely ignored. For instance, the Encyclopaedia Britannica gives the Crusades eighty times more space than the Jihad.”
http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/2185
Not clear from his postings to date whether pounce is cat#1 or cat#2. But I’m happy to give him benefit of the doubt…
.
hillhunt | 13.06.07 – 2:35 pm
The Royal Marines commando is well aware that he can’t do his job on the front line without the company quatermaster who organises his supplies, or indeed the truck driver who delivers them to the stores.
The RAF fighter pilot is well aware that he can’t deliver his hi-tech precision missile to its target without the mechanics who service his aircraft and the bloke who fills his tanks with fuel.
Only a useless pr*ck like you would even think of drawing such distinctions.
illc*nt: all mouth and trousers, red herrings and straw men a speciality.
hillhunt:
“Here’s something you’ll all appreciate:
THINGS WHICH ALL TRUE MUSLIMS AND THEIR IMAMS HATE
1. They HATE our democracy, and are trying to overthrow it.
2. They HATE our national symbols, and it offend…
etc…”
http://www.haloscan.com/comments/patrickcrozier/760953733203267066/#359825
You mean, people used to be afraid of Catholics, and now they’re afraid of, Muslims? Good grief! I hadn’t thought of that. What an incredible parallel to draw.
Look what he’s done. He changes Catholic to Imam. How INCREDIBLY SUBTLE!! He must be a professional writer, or somefink.
See original source here…
http://amhist.ist.unomaha.edu/module_files/Nativist%20Reaction%20to%20Irish%20Immigration.rtf
THINGS WHICH ROMAN CATHOLIC PRIESTS AND ALL TRUE ROMAN CATHOLICS HATE
Providence, July 22, 1854
1. They HATE our Republic, and are trying to overthrow it.
2. They HATE the American Eagle, and it offends them beyond endurance to see it worn as an ornament by Americans.
3. They HATE our Flag, as it manifest by their grossly insulting it.
4. They HATE the liberty of conscience.
5. They HATE the liberty of the Press.
6. They HATE the liberty of speech.
7. They HATE our Common School system.
8. They HATE the Bible, and would blot it out of existence if they could!
9. The Priests HATE married life, and yet by them is fulfilled the Scripture, to wit: ‘more are the children of the desolate, than the children of the married wife.’
10. They HATE Protestants, and are sworn to exterminate them from our country and the earth.
11. They HATE the name of WASHINGTON, because he was a Republican and Protestant.
12. They HATE all rulers that do not swear allegiance to the Pope of Rome.
13. They HATE to be ruled by Americans, and say ‘WE WILL NOT BE RULED BY THEM!’
14. They HATE to support their own paupers and they are left to be supported by the tax paying Americans.
15. They HATE, above all, the ‘Know-Nothings,’ who are determined to rid this country from their accursed power.
—UNCLE SAM
Pathetic. Poor Hillhunt. Can’t win arguments. Always in a hole. Always digging.
ill*unt
‘In Your 35 postings’
In your 35 postings to date on this thread alone the majority are irrelevant or constantly repeat the same point.
‘Your Assertions’
You never post any links to back up your assertions.
‘The Only Quotes You Make Are’
The only quotes you make are of other peoples posts.
‘Abysmal’
I know some of your postings constitute replies in your opinion, but no quotations or links in 35 posts is beyond abysmal.