I see that at a time when we have lost several more of our brave British soldiers to the Taliban scum in Afghanistan Richard Bacon over on Five Live is running a morale-boosting “Is it time to talk to the Taliban” item on his programme. He’s managed to find a Conservative MP in the form of Adam Holloway, who served there with the Grenadier Guards, and who believes the aim of destroying the Taliban is now “beyond Britain’s means”. This Vichy Conservative wants to cut a deal with the murderous Islamics and naturally Bacon latches onto this. I heard David Cameron speak well on the import of our mission in the Commons earlier today but the BBC drum beat is always surrender. The BBC institutionally opposes the idea of fighting terrorism anywhere and so the likes of Holloway is an absolute gift to Bacon. Even as several British military families are in mourning for their loved ones and in need of the support of the nation, the State Broadcaster – care of a cowardly Conservative – seeks to put the boot in and imply that the mission has been futile.
SURRENDER TO THE RHYTHM.
Bookmark the permalink.
Richard Bacon is a vile little man. The fact that Stephen Nolan is his weekend counterpart says it all.
On the subject of Afghanistan it’s quite interesting that the feminist left doesn’t seem to support freeing their sisters from being treated worse than dogs.
A bullet to the back of the head for a bit of nookie with someone other than your husband does seem rather extreme, so why is the sisterhood so quiet?
They were also quiet when that fat vile tub of lard Prescott caught caught shagging his secretary (could you imagine if it had been some capitalist pig of a man who ran a company cheating on his wife?)
I think this give us a clue (not my normal reading, I have to say). Hits the nail on the head, actually:
The Subjection of Islamic Women
And the fecklessness of American feminism.
by Christina Hoff Sommers
05/21/2007, Volume 012, Issue 34
One reason is that many feminists are tied up in knots by multiculturalism and find it very hard to pass judgment on non-Western cultures. They are far more comfortable finding fault with American society for minor inequities (the exclusion of women from the Augusta National Golf Club, the “underrepresentation” of women on faculties of engineering) than criticizing heinous practices beyond our shores. The occasional feminist scholar who takes the women’s movement to task for neglecting the plight of foreigners is ignored or ruled out of order.
Are we suprised?
ruperts (army officers) clueless idiots that cause the death of a lot of young squaddies thru bloody awful command and control skills / tactics
frag ’em
Am i the only one to notice how the BBC only reports British soldiers being in Afganistan. Therefore selling the image to the great unwashed that only British soldiers are dying, thus Britain should get out.
Yup it appears the BBC is the propganda general for the Taliban in fighting the good fight at home so hopefully getting the British public to vote to bring the lads home.
Meanwhile the BBC defends the likes of Qatada as a misunderstood but harmless man and how the only victims in China are Muslims.
Yup the message from the BBC is “Allah be priased”
It’s easy. Liberal women cast their lot with other liberals. Various liberal causes “throw-in” together in order to gain “coalition” power.
Gays help feminists help welfare freaks, help minorities, help dead beats, help unions, help educrats, help govt. workers…etc etc etc.
They overlook what it costs as long as they get their share.
Ah, another right-winger throws his lot in with the Taliban. Amazing how easy your comrades on the right bow down to them. First the US and now the UK. How long will it be before others on the right join in the chorus?
Why do the Sisterhood remain silent? Easy,their original target were western males brought up,in the main,to respect women.Like all the toy town revolutionaries,Tariq Ali,comes to mind,they won’t tangle with those who would kill them out of hand.
Check it out,the number of revolutionaries that won’t go within miles of real tyrants.Much better to earn kudos in the salons of Islington and amongst the Beeboids,besides the wine is better.
Is Korova a closet socialist?
And how come the BBC have only just mentioned that idea when it was first posed by a right-winger two years ago? Before things even deteriorated (or got better according to some here). Bit slow off the mark aren’t they?
Yup it appears the BBC is the propganda general for the Taliban in fighting the good fight at home so hopefully getting the British public to vote to bring the lads home.
Because the BBC posed the question:
‘Is it time to talk to the Taliban’?
Hmmm, very curious.
Which is not even as radical as some Republicans have suggested in the past.
Why is Korova the anarchist supporting the establishment BBC?
Hmmm, perhaps a more interesting question is why are so many right-wingers claiming that we should, at the very least, talk to the Taliban if not integrate them into the governement. That’s much more interesting.
pounce | 18.06.08 – 11:16 pm |
Am i the only one to notice how the BBC only reports British soldiers being in Afganistan. Therefore selling the image to the great unwashed that only British soldiers are dying, thus Britain should get out.
Yup it appears the BBC is the propaganda general for the Taliban in fighting the good fight at home so hopefully getting the British public to vote to bring the lads home.
That’s part of the “This is Bush’s War” narrative.
Hi korova,
Aren’t you a Russian Communist by any chance? As far as I know “korova” means cow in Russian. It’s a funny nickname, isn’t it?
Feline,
“korova” is a troll, that’s all you need to know.
Please don’t feed it.
The beeb are going to be upset..regardless of who is the next president,the Americans are now going to focus on Afghanistan.Petraeus is already in the planning stages with the new Pakistani govt…bad news for the bad guys..that includes the beeb.
“perhaps a more interesting question is why are so many right-wingers claiming that we should, at the very least, talk to the Taliban if not integrate them into the governement.”
The Taleban are not left wing.
It is very interesting that most of the commenters here are are far more anti-establishment than the anarchist.
Korova is a LIBTARD.
Libtards lack balls, common sense and moral.
They are the total package.
To quote the American rocker Steve Miller.
Libtards “make their living of people off other peoples taxes”.
They are quite amusing.
Talk with the Taleban? That’s a joke, right? Compared to the Taleban Stalin was a humanist (well, not quite but you get my drift, I hope).
Thanks for shooting straight, David. Since you’ve taken over most of the blogging I’ve started to enjoy my daily visits again.
P.S.: Maybe Al Beeb are running an internal contest… find the most atrocious bastards to talk to? Maybe they can all get together in the South of France.
Yes D.G. libs want to talk to the Taliban. We need to understand what motivates them. Maybe we can work out some sort of agreement with them.
How shocking, they find a faux Conservative who lacks a backbone. Wow what a surprise. Here in the States we have politicians that are utterly invested in our military failure. For purely political reasons. The LEFT in both the U.K. and U.S.A has so many and varied masters that it must serve, that it is hard to keep their line of bullshit straight.
What it really boils down to, is that the LEFT in both heretofore GREAT NATIONS, is bent on shitting on their own countries and determined to say ANYTHING to gain more seats of power.
The crap Obama says is hysterical.
But the left is already Kool-aid drunk.
For the love of God….R.Kelly was caught on video with eye witness testimony, and he walked.
The LEFT has a lot of extremely ignorant people that they keep ignorant.
‘…the aim of destroying the Taliban is now “beyond Britain’s means” ‘
Nothing new there, most things are. How about starting with something manageable and local, like decimating the DVLA or challenging cone zones? Strut one’s stuff and show the world, eh?
Is there not a contradiction between “Adam Holloway, who served there with the Grenadier Guards” and “a cowardly Conservative”.
If the bloke has been there, experienced it and thinks that we can’t win it using current tactics, then to me that cuts a lot more ice than the opinion of someone sat at home with zero first hand knowledge but a whole lot of ideological purity.
Not that I’m convinced that they tried TOO hard to find somebody with similar experience but an alternative view. And not that Richard Bacon isn’t a twat.
gus:
To quote the American rocker Steve Miller.
Libtards “make their living of people off other peoples taxes”.
On the nail as ever, Gus.
Just a couple of quibbles:
1. Miller had nothing to say about libtards, liberals or retards.
2. It’s a song about a police officer chasing a murdering bank robber.
3. It is the policeman who “makes (a) living of off of other peoples taxes”.
Are we now against paying the police because that involves taking taxes off freedom-loving people such as yourself?
And if you are cleverer than liberal retards, just how stupid are the liberal retards that you know?
Here in the States we have politicians that are utterly invested in our military failure.
That would mainly be the Democrat party, and its presidential candidate Barack Hussein Obama (don’t smear him by implying he’s a Muslim, he’s not as he keeps emphasizing).
Obama is so invested in defeat he hasn’t visited Iraq in case he has to admit that the Bush/Petreaus surge has worked.
Now that’s the Obama the BBC doesn’t talk about.
I can’t believe Richard Bacon hasn’t changed his surname yet. Doesn’t he realise how deeply, personally offensive that is to certain groups of people? If his head should mysteriously become unattached from his body, then he’ll only have himself to blame.
I think we should talk to the Taliban too. Something along the lines of, ‘Well, we’ve killed 95% of your men, destroyed your network, cut off your supplies – are you ready to surrender yet?’
The Taliban is the worst possible political entity you can imagine. Having it as part of any government will only serve to ultimately kill that government.
What amazes me is that not so long ago the left was firmly against the Taliban and their repression.
Email petitions like the one below were doing the rounds and every “liberated” woman was forwarding it on to their friends.
What happened to the left?
Date: Fri, 03 Mar 2000 15:23:59 +0000
Subject: Women in Afghanistan
Since the Taliban took power in 1996, women have had to wear burqua and have been beaten and stoned in public for not having the proper attire, even if this means simply not having the mesh covering the front of their eyes. One woman was beaten to death by an angry mob of fundamentalists for accidentally exposing her arm while she was driving. Another was stoned to death for trying to leave the country with a man that was not a relative.
Women are not allowed to work or even go out in public without a male relative; professional women such as professors, translators, doctors, lawyers, artists and writers have been forced from their jobs and stuffed into their homes, so that depression is becoming so widespread that it has reached emergency levels. There is no way in such an extreme Islamic society to know the suicide rate with certainty, but relief workers are estimating that the suicide rate amongst women who cannot find proper medication and treatment for severe depression and would rather take their own lives than live in such conditions, has increased significantly.
Homes where a woman is present must have their windows painted so that she can never be seen by outsiders. They must wear silent shoes so that they are never heard. Women live in fear of their lives for the slightest misbehaviour. Because they cannot work, those without male relatives or husbands are either starving to death or begging on the streets, even if they hold Ph.Ds.
There are almost no medical facilities available for women, and relief workers, in protest, have mostly left the country, taking medicine and psychologists and other things necessary to treat the sky-rocketing level of depression among women. At one of the rare hospitals for women, a reporter found still, nearly lifeless bodies lying motionless on top of beds, wrapped in their burqua, unwilling to speak, eat or do anything, but slowly wasting away. Others have gone mad and were seen crouching in corners, perpetually rocking or crying, most of them in fear. One doctor is considering, when what little medication that is left finally runs out, leaving these women in front of the president’s residence as a form of peaceful protest.
It is at the point where the term “human rights violations” has become an understatement!! Husbands have the power of life and death over their women relatives, especially their wives, but an angry mob has just as much right to stone or beat a woman, often to death, for exposing an inch of flesh or offending them in the slightest way.
David Cornwell has said that those in the West should not judge the Afghan people for such treatment because it is a “cultural thing”, but this is not even true: women enjoyed relative freedom, to work, to dress generally as they wanted, and drive and appear in public alone until only 1996 – the rapidity of this transition is the main reason for the depression and suicide; women who were once educators or doctors or simply used to basic human freedoms are now severely restricted and treated as sub-human in the name of right-wing fundamentalist Islam. It is not their tradition or “culture”, but is alien to them and it is exteme even for those cultures where fundamentalism is the rule. Besides, if we could excuse everything on cultural grounds, then we should not be appalled that the Carthaginians sacrificed their infant children, that little girls are circumcised in parts of Africa, that blacks in the US deep south in the 1930s were lynched, prohibited from voting and forced to submit to unjust Jim Crow laws. Everyone has a right to a tolerable human existence, even if they are women in a Muslim country in a part of the world that Westerners may not understand.
If Iife can threaten military force in Kosovo in the name of human rights for the sake of ethnic Albanians, then NATO and the West can certainly express peaceful outrage at the oppression, murder and injustice committed against women by the Taliban.
STATEMENT:
In signing this, we agree that the current treatment of women in Afghanistan is COMPLETELY UNACCEPTABLE and deserves support and action by the people of the United Nations and that the current situation in Afghanistan will not be tolerated. Women’s Rights is not a small issue anywhere and it is UNACCEPTABLE for women in 2000 to be treated as sub-human and merely as property. Equality and human decency is a RIGHT, not a freedom, whether one lives in Afghanistan or anywhere.
250: Gerry Black, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
1: xxxxxxxxxx, Bristol, UK
2: xxxxxxxxxxx, Manchester, UK
3: xxxxxxxx, Manchester, UK
4: Liz Davies, Labour Party National Executive Committee (personal capacity)
5: xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Aberystwyth, UK
6: xxxxxxxxxxxx, UK
Please sign to support, and include your town and country. Then copy and email to as many people as possible. If you receive this list with more than 250 names on it, please email a copy of it to:
Mary Robinson, High Commissioner, UNHCR, webadmin.hchr@unorg.ch
and to:
Angela King, Special Advisor on Gender Issues and the Advancement of Women, UN
daw@undp.org
Even if you decide not to sign, please be considerate and do not kill the petition. Thank you.
It is best to copy rather than forward the petition.
Sarah Cotterill
14 Cromwell Avenue
Whalley Range
Manchester M16 0BQ
Gibby Haynes:
I can’t believe Richard Bacon hasn’t changed his surname yet.
Funny. Is he also a bit of a porker?
Yes D.G. libs want to talk to the Taliban. We need to understand what motivates them.
Perhaps we ought to try and understand the right-wingers who were arguing in support of this very idea a couple of years ago. This is certainly not a lefty idea given that it originated from a right-winger.
Still, best to take Biodegradable’s advice or else you could end up claiming that Sheikh Yassin was some loved up hippy involved in ‘charity’ work who suddenly woke up one morning and decided to be a terrorist.
The Republicans floated this idea first. It is a right-wing idea. It has no connection with anyone on the left. Wonder why this is so hard to grasp. Truth hurts I guess.
I’ve warned you before about mis-quoting me and using my name in this fashion.
Still, best to take Biodegradable’s advice
What exactly are you referring to troll?
Ok, where did I mis-quote you?
http://www.haloscan.com/comments/patrickcrozier/6980329790174376469/#400248
Although I didn’t actually quote anything so it is impossible to ‘mis-quote’ you.
You are just fucking pathetic!
http://www.haloscan.com/comments/patrickcrozier/6980329790174376469/#400252
Leave me out of your delirious off-topic ramblings.
Yeeeees. Anyway, this right-wing idea of engaging with the Taliban. Why did figures on the right take a lead on this?
Biodegradable, at the risk of being accused of misquoting you 🙂 may I suggest you take your own advice regarding trolls:
Please don’t feed it.
http://www.haloscan.com/comments/patrickcrozier/3589966912246726281/?dt=1213894800#405097
Hmmm. Curious that no-one has an answer to this, particularly as it undermines the entire point of the post. Everyone must be a bit embarrassed that the right came up with it first. I guess that is understandable. It might give the game away.
Yes, and the right were first to support the grand project of the EU – opposed at first by the left. I suppose that means it cannot demonstrate a left-leaning bias if the Beeb is relentlessly pro-EU.
In this country we have something called ‘free speech’ which means people are free to discuss subjects.
Radio 5 hosts phone-in debates. Discussing ‘Should we talk to the Taleban’? does not mean the BBC agrees that we should talk to them, just that this is the subject for debate. Listeners then phone in with their opinions.
I’ve tried to word this in a simple way, I hope that helps you all understand.
I was interested in the statement ‘The BBC institutionally opposes the idea of fighting terrorism anywhere’.
It seems to me that people have thrown around the term ‘institutional’ ever since the McPherson report, without actually having any understanding of what it means. I be interested in hearing how the BBC ‘institutionally opposes’ fighting terrorism rather than simply opposes fighting terrorism?
I will hazard a guess that it’s because you think the BBC employs some staff through the Guardian newspaper employment section and that these people because they happen to be looking at the Guardian for a job, must be the type of person who are ‘dhimmis’, and that this applies to every one of the 17,000 people that work for the BBC, including independent production companies?
Surely institutional bias would be “the collective failure of an organisation to provide an appropriate and professional service to people… [which] can be seen or detected in processes, attitudes and behaviour which amount to discrimination through unwitting prejudice, ignorance, thoughtlessness, and…stereotyping.” (isn’t wikipedia great!)
Seems that “institutionally” is being used perfectly correctly in this case. What did you think it meant?
Hugh – Yes, that’s a leeettle bit different. This was only two years before tjis debate. The right-winger in question went even further than this debate. And this right-winger was close to the current administration (who were opposed to the Taliban apparently). Like I say, seems a bit odd to use this as an example of left-wing BBC bias when it is a right-wing concept. Very odd indeed.
korova,
Which part of the Republican leadership or the Bush Administration is or has been advocating dialogue and concessions to the Taleban? Any sources? Any right wingers of consequence? Pat Buchanan doesn’t count. Let’s have some solid evidence that this is originally a right wing idea.
If you can prove that right-wingers originated this idea – that’s not the same thing as being a Leftoid idea that a couple of fringe conservatives have discussed – then let’s see it.
Not at all odd, seeeence calls for dialogue with terrorists – Hamas, Taliban, IRA etc – tend to find more welcome on the left than the right. Or do you want to dispute that?
To go back to the EU anology, Ken Clarke’s a big fan, but that isn’t the right wing position.
Dave – Ok, how about a former chairman of the National Republican Senatorial Committee and former Republican Senate Majority Leader? I’ll give you a couple of minutes to think about why his views should be dismissed.
“how about a former chairman of the National Republican Senatorial Committee…”
The operative word is “a”.
“On the subject of Afghanistan it’s quite interesting that the feminist left doesn’t seem to support freeing their sisters from being treated worse than dogs.”
Feminism is used as a stick to beat the nuclear family. Gay rights is used as a stick to beat the nuclear family. Islam is used as a stick to beat Anglo-Saxon culture. It wouldn’t do to have these groups set about each other. It is middle-England that is the enemey. For the cultural Marxist, his enemy’s enemy is his friend.
I be interested in hearing how the BBC ‘institutionally opposes’ fighting terrorism rather than simply opposes fighting terrorism?
Joel | 19.06.08 – 3:21 pm
To start with the BBC’s guidelines forbid calling terrorists, well, terrorists.
I don’t see anybody, not even GWB, advocating a war on ‘militants’ or ‘radicals’ or ‘extremists’.
The BBC opposes fighting terrorists by denying they even exist. You know, “one man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter”.
“On the subject of Afghanistan it’s quite interesting that the feminist left doesn’t seem to support freeing their sisters from being treated worse than dogs.”
Oh but they did, until something was actually done about it, then those doing the freeing became the bad guys. See my post above:
http://www.haloscan.com/comments/patrickcrozier/3589966912246726281/?a=23369#405163
Korova you replied to my post about how the BBC is the propaganda general for the likes of the Taliban with a somewhat strange remark. So for somebody who has no problem berating the posters of this blog/MB please allow me to explain why I see the heavy hand of Islam behind anything the BBC promotes nowadays to that end please correct me if i am wrong with the following image that the BBC is promoting to the great unwashed the impression that;
a) The Brits are the only people in Afghanistan
b) The Taliban are the rightful rulers of the country.
c) WE will never defeat the Taliban
d) The Taliban must be returned to their position of power.
1) Well for a start contrary to what the BBC pushes out as the news rather than solitary Britain defending the Kyber pass , there are actually 39 other nations in theatre.
2) The Taliban when in power were only recognised by 3 countries. Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and the UAE. The rest of the world refused to acknowledge them. Add the fact that the vast majority of the so called management were not Afghans and that the vast majority of terrorists classed as Taliban fighters by the BBC are actually Pakistanis.
3) A moot point. Everybody knows that in counter insurgency warfare the only people who can defeat insurgents are the local populace. As in Northern Ireland the Military are only there to keep the peace until the Locals are strong enough to stand on their own two feet. So while ISAF /NATO and the UN cannot defeat the Taliban on the ground. (However they can give them a good kicking) Only when the locals say no will the Taliban realise they are not wanted.
4) Finally I do enjoy how so called visionaries say we must give a bunch of oppressive theological idiots the right to sit at a table which they do not recognise.
I mean would they allow a Muslim immigrant who raped their daughter (giving her a good kicking in the process) to settle in the spare room and insist they had a say in the running of their house. Yeah right. The so called liberals who are currently crying crocodile tears for British servicemen are the same f**ing idots who have called me a child murderer, a bully and a tool of British imperialism. (OH and because I’m Brownskinned an Uncle tom) The real agenda for the likes of the BBC isn’t concern for our troops rather it is to weaken the international mandate for Afghanistan because that is the doctrine of Marxism.
If you cannot understand what I wrote above allow me to put it in a language you will. Last night on Big brother a stupid Muslim bitch was kicked off the show.
She a so called lapsed Islamic convert berated another lapsed Muslim (But a born Muslim) for dressing up and enjoying himself as young British people do. She in a rant berated him for his un-Islamic behaviour stating it really embarrassed her to see a Muslim man having fun. Mohammed (The Muslim guy) asked her if she was so pious why was she walking round in short skirts? No answer from the foul mouthed bitch
That Korova is how Muslims control other Muslims by playing the religion card. She only expects Muslims to behave in a certain manner anything outside that criteria is forbidden and usually attacked, verbally and finally physically.
Now why was she kicked off the show? Because she threatened to have people shot. “Pow,wow,wow.” (Her words not mine)
Now you see why I accuse the BBC of promoting racial hatred as acceptable when it comes from the Koran.
P.S
Ever had a bunch of Muslim lads come up to you and tell you to change your name as it is a Muslim one and because you are not. Happened to me at Uni a few years back. Problem for the jihad squad was I was more than prepared to go out fighting. So they backed down. Yup f-ing cowards the bloody lot of them. Must be why the taliban go round blowing girls schools and such. And the BBC actually defend these tossers.
Finally I do enjoy how so called visionaries say we must give a bunch of oppressive theological idiots the right to sit at a table which they do not recognise.
Exactly why I bring up the fact that the right first brought up the idea of the Taliban being brought into the Afghan government. Clearly that is lunacy and I am wondering whythe BBC is accused of being a left-wing institution over this when the idea was first suggested by a high-raking Republican. Strikes me as a bit odd.
As for the Big Brother thing, I have no idea about that because I never watch the ‘show’.
Korova
“… the right first brought up the idea of the Taliban being brought into the Afghan government.”
Proof?
We’re still waiting…