You will recall that we discussed the story the other day of how an Anglican priest was viciously attacked by “asian youths” in Tower Hamlets in London. The BBC apologists that frequent this space immediately took issue with my suggestion that the “asian youths” were, in all likelihood, Muslims. They also cheered the BBC’s refusal to suggest that there may have been any Muslim involvement. But guess what – the BBC has now run a story entitled “Muslims denounce attack on priest”! Abdul Qayum, imam of the East London Mosque, also said: “Our congregation is united in condemnation. The imam described the attack as “cowardly and despicable.” Now naturally all condemnation of such brutality is welcome but isn’t it odd that whilst the BBC steadfastly refuses to suggest that Muslims may have been the perpetrators of this violence, it provides a soap-box for Muslims to make clear that they oppose all such attacks. The thing is that this same East London Mosque hosted Saudi cleric Abdul Rahman al-Sudais, who refers to Jews as monkeys and pigs and in 2004 was denied entry into Canada. It also has Muhammad Abdul Bari, the guy who believes the UK should adopt Islamic arranged marriages, as chairman. Moderation incarnate.
THOSE MYSTERIOUS YOUTHS – UPDATE.
Bookmark the permalink.
So Mr Reith is at last admitting that the BBCs coverage of all things Islamic is biased, but seems to be suggesting that it is being done with the best of intentions.
Does nobody at the BBC ever stop to consider what effect its constant propaganda concerning race issues has on ethnic minority communities?
Imagine you are a young muslim living a ‘parallel life’ somewhere like Bradford. If you have little contact with the general white population you must rely on the media for a wider picture. If that media happens to be the BBC all you get is a constant barrage of information telling you how racist the white population and the various institutions of this country are. Any ‘balencing’ stories showing ethnic minorities in a similar light are of course censored.
How does this promote community relations Mr Reith? All it does is lead to festering resentment amongst all creeds and colours.
Its also interesting how you broach the subject of inciting racial hatred. How do you think the BBC would fare against such a charge considering the wealth of information showing its bias against the white population relative to all others?
I don’t believe that ‘doing it for the right reasons’ is a legitimate defence.
Hang on, what exactly have Abdul Rahman al-Sudais and Muhammad Abdul Bari got to do with this attack?
John Reith,
I entirely disagree with your comments. Moderate Muslims can speak for themselves though I rarely here them speak out against suicide attacks on innocent Israelis, for example. However you express yourself politely and one can agree to disagree.
To all others,
There are one or two trolls infesting this site by inserting endless ad hominem comments on virtually every thread, and I do think we need to sort them out. I suggest that the following procedure be applied;
1. All trolls put on warning. Repeat the ad hominem and you are banned for a month.
2. After that period, you will be permitted back. Repeat the ad hominem and you will be banned for good.
The quality of debate and insight here is good, and I assume that makes little beeboid trolls gnash their teeth. But they do not aid debate, they add nothing of value, and for their own sake, it’s best they were flushed away.I look upon it as an act of charity.
Please feed back your views on this to me and we will then remove the infestation if it cannot behave itself.
A bit harsh on old pounce.
But thy will be done.
Awww, what’s wrong Fury? Don’t like people disagreeing with you? Don’t like having to justify your positions or making them stand up to argument?
If you ask me, having a few dissidents like Hillhunt and me floating around contributes far more to the debate than the enraged yes-men you usually get.
Don’t ban anybody, just delete their excess comments then they’ll go away of their own accord.
Pounce’s anger is a measure of the frustration these trolls are capable of inducing.
Un-ban “Biodegradable”. I never did understand why he was banned in the first place.
Is Alex no longer Young and Angry or has somebody hijacked his screen name?
so it isn’t ok for the BBC to speculate about the religious background of the attackers, but it’s ok for them to speculate about why young Jewish students were murdered in Jerusalem. The BBC were happy to remind us that they were killed because they were part of the Jewish settlement movement.
rtypeleo: We’ve been there. Don’t bother, trust me.
Still:
There are one or two trolls infesting this site by inserting endless ad hominem comments on virtually every thread
I’m glad you agree. The number of people associating me with female private parts is shocking and is defnitely ad hominem (and probably ad feminem, as well).
pounce and Martin also seem to publish a kind of gay soft porn every time they get fired up, which does nothing for the tone of this board, either.
And as for Baggie J’s quivering rages… has he ever considered beta-blockers, or possibly supporting a better football team? There’s never any need for such personal abuse and bad language, however miserable it is down there in the Second Division.
I do hope you can do something to sort this out.
Yours ever,
HH
John Reith:
Despite my little hints over the past months, you lot just don’t get it, do you?
……………….
You just don’t get it, JR, do you?
It’s the BBC bias and manipulation we mind about.
As aviv said, ‘I thought that the Beeb’s job was to report the news rather than to bring “ordinary Muslims onside”‘.
The BBC should not be acting as an arm of governmment. It should not be pursuing a political agenda, let alone one divisive, discriminatory, polarising and hostile, and we should not be forced to pay for it.
We are no better than slaves so long as we do not have the freedom to decide that for ourselves.
“Ena B. Maxwell (Mrs):
Has anyone noticed the remarkable resemblance between Craig Meehan, Shannon Matthews’ step-father, and David Vance of Biased-BBC? Could they possibly be related?
Meehan:
http://video.aol.com/video-detai…inds/ 4068052341
Vance:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/ pages…in_page_id=1770
Ena B. Maxwell (Mrs) | 18.03.08 – 3:02 pm”
David,
Hopefully you have the ISP of the truly pathetic timewasting troll who posted this so you can not only delete the post but ban the poster indefinitely.
PS Bring back Biodegradeable, what he did but these trolls did not is quite beyond me.
hillhunt
im 100% happy to register, and be banned if i disobey the rules, only as long as it applies to you too, i know who will get the push first and isnt me
in fact in my opinion the sooner the better
Yes, ban the trolls.
Any chance of a new general thread please!!!!
Here’s a marvelous example of the BBC adding in background information to a story for the purpose of justifying violence against a religious man.
Of course the Palestinian could, at a stretch of the imagination, be a Palestinian Christian, but somehow I doubt it.
Now what was the beeboids excuse for not including background information on the attack against the Christian priest in East London?
Rabbi stabbed in East Jerusalem
A rabbi has been wounded in a stabbing attack in the Old City area of East Jerusalem, Israeli police say.
The Palestinian attacker escaped. The rabbi was not badly hurt, but the attack is expected to raise tensions.
…
Israel occupied East Jerusalem during the 1967 Arab-Israeli war and claims the whole city its capital.
Palestinians want the occupied portion, which includes the walled Old City and its holy sites, as the capital of a state which they want to establish in the occupied West Bank and the Gaza Strip.
Hilhunt: Are you denying that there is not a “gay mafia” operating at the BBC?
Clearly stupidity is a requirement to work at the BBC if you are a typical example. I’ve lost count of how many BBC journalists have been described as gay.
Oh and just looking to the righthand side of this blog page is a rather nice quote.
I’ve repeated it here, just so you see it.
“The BBC is not impartial or neutral. It’s a publicly funded, urban organisation with an abnormally large number of young people, ethnic minorities and gay people. It has a liberal bias not so much a party-political bias. It is better expressed as a cultural liberal bias”. ANDREW MARR
And by the way, why doesn’t the report say this:
Palestinians want the occupied portion, which includes the walled Old City and its holy sites, as the capital of a state which they say they want to establish in the disputed West Bank and the Palestinian administered Gaza Strip.
❓
The BBC ties in the stabbing of the rabbi in Jerusalem to “the settler movement”, while in truth the reason, if there is one, may be completely different:
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1205420714593&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull
The attack comes despite an increased police presence throughout the country ahead of Purim.
Police were put on high alert on Monday out of fears that Hizbullah would try to perpetrate a terror attack to coincide with the holiday. In February, Hizbullah leader Hassan Nasrallah blamed Israel for the assassination of the organization’s terror chief, Imad Mughniyeh, and vowed to avenge his death.
When Mr Orange stops importing the vile lessons he learnt from Irish sectarianism into this blog… moniker.
Biased BBC: The Future’s Bright
But the cap does fit. Does it not?
Hillhunt | 18.03.08 – 2:22 pm | #
……………………………….
Now you’re smearing the Irish, as well as David V, equating the two: Orange and Irish. Shows how much you know (not).
Martin:
Clearly stupidity is a requirement to work at the BBC if you are a typical example. I’ve lost count of how many BBC journalists have been described as gay.
An excellent point….
Except I don’t work for the BBC and never have.
Of the many BBC journalists I’ve come across, only a small proportion fulfilled your fantasy. I’ve met far more among C4 and ITV types.
Can it be true that you actually bother counting the numbers of gay journos?
There must be something more constructive for you to do… Like playing retro video games like rtypeleo, or supporting the Baggies, or digging up old Elvis Costello videos in the belief your devotees will spend Valentine’s Day watching them.
That sort of thing…
Biased BBC: Gaydar (closet version)
JR
“Now, when the authorities are trying to get ordinary UK Muslims onside in the struggle against Islamist extremism”
How would you define “onside” JR? I’d be interested to know.
1. All trolls put on warning. Repeat the ad hominem and you are banned for a month.
David Vance | 18.03.08 – 3:52 pm
The dead giveaway that the BBC ius leftist is the instant sneering its shills resort when this is pointed out.
If it were genuinely impartial this would simply not happen. It is the reaction of the leftist who’s been exposed as such.
The evil of the BBC is not that it is leftist, but that it pretends not to be while being funded by extortion.
Galil, is the West Bank actually “disputed”? I thought the Israeli settlers were just keeping it warm or something pending a handover once the Palestininans learn to behave themselves. Otherwise I agree.
I’m not sure about the ‘gay mafia’ thing. Unless we’re going to start arguing about whether it’s morally acceptable to be gay (which I was under the impression even conservatives had abandoned – except Iranian ones 😀 ) I can’t see evidence that the gays operate as a homogenous block with an inherent hostility to heterosexuals?? Unless you know different.
Yes Cockney, while the BBC and others like to tell us that certain areas are “illegally occupied” in fact they are not.
The West Bank was in fact part of the proposed modern state of Israel as envisaged by the League of Nations (now the UN) and the famous Balfour Declaration. It was annexed by Jordan (itself newly established) in the war declared by the Arabs following Israel’s declaration of independence. When peace was made with Jordan it refused to “take back” the West Bank. The “settlers'” claim that the West bank is part of Israel is not only based on biblical claims.
East Jerusalem is also “disputed” rather than “occupied”.
Again, following Israel’s declaration of independence, Jordan occupied East Jerusalem. That occupation was never accepted as legal by the UN and was only recognized by two countries but the BBC claims that it is Israel illegally occupying Jerusalm. That period of 22 years until 1967 was the only time that Jerusalem has ever been out of Jewish control, and it has never been the capital of any country other than Israel and the Jewish people. Even under Jordanian rule it was never suggested that it was or would be the capital of the mythical “Palestinian people”.
International Law says that occupation exists when one state “occupies” territory belonging to another state. Israel argues that land it “occupies” never was part of another state, much less the state of “Palestine” which doesn’t exist and never has existed as such.
There are some interesting comments here:
Jerusalem Diary: Monday 17 March
Tim Franks
BBC News, Jerusalem
WHAT’S IN A NAME?
But notwithstanding the BBC insists on calling the rabbi’s attacker “Palestinian” while the Israeli media correctly identify him as “Arab”.
Tell me again that the BBC is unbiased…
1. All trolls put on warning. Repeat the ad hominem and you are banned for a month.
2. After that period, you will be permitted back. Repeat the ad hominem and you will be banned for good.
David Vance | Homepage | 18.03.08 – 3:52 pm |
DV: For sillybunt this is a no-brainer in more than one sense.
As for this:
‘The number of people associating me with female private parts is shocking and is defnitely ad hominem (and probably ad feminem, as well).’
Hillhunt | 18.03.08 – 4:45 pm |
Just go to his infantile blog and his state of mind will be revealed. He even has the delusion that Tony Benn was a war hero (or is he trying to be funny).
Cockney:
http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/MFAArchive/2000_2009/2003/2/DISPUTED+TERRITORIES-+Forgotten+Facts+About+the+We.htm
http://www.acpr.org.il/ENGLISH-NATIV/issue1/einhorn-1.htm
I stand corrected, it was 19 years of Jordanian occupation, not 22.
http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/Jerusalem+Capital+of+Israel/40th+Anniversary+of+the+Reunification+of+Jerusalem.htm
http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/MFAArchive/1990_1999/1999/3/The+Status+of+Jerusalem.htm
Martin,
Sure – general thread coming up.
BaggieJonathan,
I have not banned anybody since I started writing here. I hate the idea but can just how disruptive some troll are. However the B-BBC blog deserves to have freedom to flow without the sheer stupidity the trolls bring and I will deal with it.
The BBC supporters here, like John Reith and a few others are entitled to express their opinions and it’s my view they do so politely and with general good grace. I am sure they too must be dismayed at the drivel spotted by the trolls.
Not going to make me popular I fear, but Hillhunt made a fair point – it seems hard to justify banning him for ad hominem remarks given some of the abuse metered out by regulars here. I’m not opposed to such a rule but it should apply to everyone. A rule on repeated irrelevancies (to stop the likes of Aussie Bystander’s repeated demands for an answer to completely off topic questions) wouldn’t go amiss either. On both counts it should be consistency or nothing, though.
Hugh,
Hillhunt concerned appears unable to address me without bigoted/racist references which I find offensive for starters. Most others seem to be able to have a civil conversation. I don’t expect agreement I do insist on civility. I do agree that all need to observe the rules of civil conversation however, and you’re right to say that we need to ensure that this must be fairly policed.
Still:
Hillhunt concerned appears unable to address me without bigoted/racist references which I find offensive for starters.
Several thoughts:
1. I had no idea the Loyal Orange Lodge constituted a race. I always thought membership was voluntary, rather than genetic.
2. It’s a fair swap. You stop your bigoted behaviour towards Muslims and others who fall foul of your, um, high standards, and…
3. I would not wish anything to be offensive for starters. Would it be better for dessert?
I don’t expect agreement I do insist on civility.
Presumably you’ll join me in condemning the constant reference to female pudenda which has become commonplace?
And the assumption of promiscuous homosexuality as a character trait in people who don’t share the majority’s assumptions?
.
The quality of debate and insight here is good, and I assume that makes little beeboid trolls gnash their teeth. But they do not aid debate, they add nothing of value, and for their own sake, it’s best they were flushed away.I look upon it as an act of charity.
Please feed back your views on this to me and we will then remove the infestation if it cannot behave itself.
David Vance | Homepage | 18.03.08 – 3:52 pm | #
————————————–
I like having Beebies on here to debate and put the Beeby points of view – it is good for the site to have a variety of views. Moderation policy is up to the owners of the site. I don’t generally like name-calling.
Don’t ban the trolls as besides giving often too explicit a view of the beeb/lefty mindset..they are a constant source of amusement.
2. It’s a fair swap. You stop your bigoted behaviour towards Muslims and others who fall foul of your, um, high standards, and…
Hillhunt | 18.03.08 – 6:55 pm |
The mindset revealed.
It’s an old trick of the left. Any critisism is recast as bigoted utterance.
Just as when socialists are caught with their fingers in the till it becomes a ‘witchhunt’.
I used to think of hillhunt’s interjections as mildly amusing in their juvenile content. Now they are just boorish.
aviv:
JR- so ergo, it’s justified to censor any news story that might portray Muslims in a negative light. I thought that the Beeb’s job was to report the news rather than to bring “ordinary Muslims onside”. Thanks for clarifying.
aviv | 18.03.08 – 12:31 pm | #
Hit the nail on the head. The BBC can no longer be trusted to report the news. It is reporting only that portion of the news it thinks will bring ‘ordinary Muslims’ on board.
Whatever happened to impartial journalism?
When lefty trolls rear their heads I just cast my mind back to the time an Angry Young Alex type castigated my mate for “racism” after overhearing him talking to me about health tourists being treated more favourably by the NHS than his own critically ill son.
It wasn’t a pretty outcome and just goes to show why the left keep their smart-assery and sneering solely for the internet – where you can be as much of an idiot as you like without a burly steel-fixer grabbing you by the throat and bouncing your head off a wall 🙂
Others might just go, but I am going to make a statement before I do.
I am more than prepared to go by the same rules already said so, seems it’s not enough, not enough to secure action.
I have absolutely no problem with contrary views, in fact I dare say I hold contrary views to most on this blog on many things.
I welcome the real bbc employees and those fairminded as much as I welcome those of different political persuasion including the majority who hold more right wing politics than I do who still have points to make about the biased bbc.
But in fact I just cant stomach the trolls trolling any longer and especially one lying troll.
There seems to be plenty that want the trolls as opposed to merely opposing views to have full vent to their spleen.
I’m off to other sites, like David’s Vance’s own, where the registration stops it being ruined.
Maybe moderation will improve things here but until it does I’m afraid the hijacking means the site will do very little good and I’m sorry but I’m not coming back till it does get better.
As woad said before I will try not to let my ass hit the door on the way out.
Good luck guys you are probably going to need it!
Bye BJ
Oh, one thing before you go: I still don’t get the lying bit…something to do with West Brom, I think, but what?
.
The trolls are amusing but they pollute the threads. BBC’ers like John Reith and others sneer sometimes but at least they have substance.
The more the trolls lie..the more this site is relevant…if the little lefty troll world gravitates here it just makes it to borrow a phrase a”target rich enviroment”.The al beeb lovers slowly going off their pointy little heads is a joy to behold…embrace the little buggers!
This troll discussion should be moved elsewhere. Everyone has got distracted and David “The Fury” Vance is yet to explain to me why printing information unconnected to the case and that could serve only to undermine the Muslim speakers’ condemnation is a sign of bias.
The madmen are running the asylum!
The trolls are running (and ruining) this blog!
This troll discussion should be moved elsewhere.
Alex | 18.03.08 – 8:18 pm
PS: BaggieJonathan, I understand you 100%, but by leaving you’re giving the trolls what they want.
Galil:
PS: BaggieJonathan, I understand you 100%, but by leaving you’re giving the trolls what they want.
An iPhone?
How kind.
.
Trolls…without them life here would just be dull…they continue to remind what we are up against…enablers for those that would see the end of us all.as for ruining or running site…I just don’t see it.It takes more than the present bunch of appeasers and cowards to see off some here.
thud, my comment about the trolls running the blog referred to Alex requesting a whole new thread to discuss trolls.
But they do ruin the blog, just look how they’ve derailed this and other threads.
if you feel that life would be dull without trolls perhaps you could find more entertaining conversation elsewhere. Personally I don’t find intelligent discussion of BBC bias dull, and I need trolls like I need a hole in the head.
David,
These trolls and part trolls do provide the WWW with a historic and amusing record of their perculiar mindsets.
However, personal abuse from either side should be rebuked, though abuse of trolls is forgiveable imo!
GBS
BaggieJonathan,
Hang around, we’ll hang a few trolls.
David – please keep the Trolls. Their comments are great to copy and paste to people to show how biased the BBC really is – and how misguided and deluded their supporters are.
galil..I’m staying here…regardless of you or trolls…I like the humour they engender..I prefer the fact that the left comprises of humourless droids unlike the various free thinkers here,plus did alex get his wish?