Please use this thread for comments about the BBC’s current programming and activities. This post will remain at or near the top of the blog – scroll down for new topic-specific posts. N.B. This is not an invitation for general off-topic comments, rants or chit-chat. Thoughtful comments are encouraged. Comments may also be moderated. Any suggestions for stories that you might like covered would be appreciated! It’s your space, use it wisely.
General BBC-related comment thread!
Bookmark the permalink.
“Gerald Brown | 18.09.08 – 9:59 pm | ”
shorting is a good way of hedging your bets. which is why a lot of pensions funds have both long and short positions.
Question time is starting. What’s the chances one of the ceefax/red button texts will be a comment that the panel is heavily loaded to the right (when almost every week it isn’t)
What AL Beeb forgot to mention is that three of the five NCOs suspended were suspended BEFORE the programme as the MoD received complaints as per the system in place and took action. Funny how the BBC didn’t mention that. Funny how much of their ‘evidence’ relied on disgruntled weeds whinging as all soldiers do. Such evidence would be laughed out of court when it gets to courts martial! Now eagerly awaiting a brave BBCoid undercover expose of a mosque near you or the bullying regime in Broadcasting House…. not.
BBC – “forget the British bit!” It’s what we do.
Whose more irritatingly condescending Harriet Harman or Lynne Featherstone? The Question Time audience seem rather angry with Labour tonight.
But even more angry with Thatcherism…
Gerald Brown
Even the BBC News at 10:00 had an analyst on who disclosed that interest rates on HBOS shares (the cost of lending shares to short sellers) had not moved over the past week and that there was very little indication that unusual short selling had taken place. The analyst added that investors in HBOS (pension funds and the like) were selling HBOS shares because they didn’t want to hold them. So much for “smart arse get rich quick schemes run by wide boys” causing a melt-down at HBOS. Any spivs involved were running HBOS rather than speculating in its shares. And while HBOS (and Northern Rock) were testing their business models to destruction the FSA sat on its hands.
Now – as archduke comments – the FSA is applying a new business model to the City involving a ban on short selling. What’s next? A ban on profiting from rises in share prices? I assume you want your “wide boys” to be stopped from borrowing money in a rising market to buy shares (or, as you would call it, “manipulating the market”). By the time the FSA and its supporters – of which you apparently are one – have finished the City (and the taxes it pays and the employment it generates) will be a thing of the past.
Paxman bemoans that tonights newsnight cant have been easy watching for Gordon.
despite their best efforts
Actually I thought QT was typically pro Liebour again.
Gordon Broon was let off the hook for taking regulation away from the Bank of England, there was NO mention of Afghanistan (another Liebour failure)
But they manage dot get a dig in about Sarah Palin.
Did you see the wankstain who suggested Palin would bankrupt England (hasn’t the fat one eyed jock already done that?) and start WW3. Some of her views spouted the shithead at the back..
I wonder where he got that idea from? Frei and Webb no doubt.
I noted that no one on the panel poited out that Obama also believes in Georgia and the Ukraine joining NATO and therefore an attack by Russia on either nation would mean we’d have to fight Russia.
As I pointed out previously, the job the BBC has done on Palin is a disgrace, they’ve painted her in a light that just isn’t true.
If there had been a female Muslim candidate in the audience or runnig for President or VP would someone have attacked her for being anti abortion or believing in Creationism?
Anyone see Newsnight? That dopey twat who does the polling. So why are the Tories at 52% in the polls?
that fact they think Nick “ive never heard of Lehman Bros.” Clegg should run the country shows where that Newsfight audience is at.
adam: That was such a setup. The BBC are clearly going to push the Lib Dems forward in the hope of taking seats from the Tories.
What they want is to get a Lib Lab pact at the next election to keep the Tories out.
Problem is Clegg is such an asshole no one will vote for him.
Perhaps watchers of News24 will have seen today’s feature on Arizona’s Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s nasty crackdown on innocent illegal aliens.
I grew up in Arizona, I know all about Sheriff Joe, and I know all about illegal aliens. The BBC tells only one side of the story.
The BBC shows you a Mexican-American lamenting about how Sheriff Joe’s crackdown on illegal aliens disrupts the “local” Hispanic community. Apparently, if children of illegal aliens are afraid that Mama won’t be there when they get home, that makes them sad, and disrupts the entire school, including those with legal parents. Of course, this scenario takes as read the fact that there are illegal aliens – the vast majority of whom do not pay taxes in Arizona – are sending their children to taxpayer-funded schools, which is apparently perfectly fine.
The Beeboid doing this heavily biased report presents a laundry list of sadness. So many people and industries are affected by this horrible crackdown on illegal aliens. The only thing Sheriff Joe is allowed to say in his defense is that he’s crackin’ down on ’em. Also, he’s really mean and makes criminals (who, in the minds of Beeboids, are probably innocent, or at least need to be hugged rather than incarcerated) live in tents when it’s hot out. He makes them wear pink underwear, too. What a horrible, horrible ogre.
No mention of any legal citizen’s concern about the huge strain on community resources such as hospitals, shelters, and food stamps (the dole). No mention whatsoever of the very real crime infestation of the southern part of the state, brought there exclusively by the criminal element from south of the border.
Basically, the BBC pretends as if there are no repercussions whatsoever of an illegal invasion of Arizona. All they want you to know is that cracking down on them is bad, M’kay?
100% bias, 100% gross misrepresentation of the situation (okay, that should be 144%). 100% BBC dishonesty.
David Preiser (USA) | Homepage | 19.09.08 – 3:40 am | #
Given the explosion of savage crime in Mexico, how can any level headed person deny decent people the right to keep such a culture out of their country? You regularly see 20-30 killed in single gunfights in Mexico – I notice 19 were just killed in a jail riot, and who can forget the drug dealers who stormed a disco and dumped numerous severed heads on the dance floor not too long ago. If this kind of thing were happening in small town America, the Beeb would be all over it.
Latin gangs across America are making the old black gangs look like Sesame Street in comparison, and they’re behind epidemic levels of racial violence in some cities. Latinos are frequently attacking blacks who wander into “their” neighborhoods.
Yet you never hear any of this from leftist news outlets like the Beeb. They frequently represent Hispanic group “La Raza” as a legitimate human rights group, even though their very name translates to “The Race” and stinks of racial supremacy. They call anyone who points this out “racist”. If an American group called itself “The Race” there would be hell-on.
What also amuses me is the way the left excuses every single example of latino racism by explaining that since they’re a minority, they can’t possibly be racist since racism is only something that can be practiced by the majority. But if predictions are accurate and Hispanics become the majority in the US by 2050, will the left suddenly switch gears and divert the hatred and resentment they feel against whites in the direction of latinos? Will latinos suddenty get called “bigots” who abuse “latino privilege” and who “marginalize” the white minority?
Does anyone seriously imagine the left is going to change the dynamics of their racial views at the exact moment when the Hispanic population tips into the majority? I don’t. But all the while, Hispanics in America are encouraged to be tribal and nationalistic. It’s “part of their culture”. The exact same culture that the left has been trying to obliterate from whites for decades.
If these banks don’t want regulation, then they should not get any welfare handouts from the taxpayer.
Any true Conservative should be disgusted at the way Comrade Bush and Mr. Broon are handing out taxpayers money to rich bankers like candy.
Today’s climate change nonsense on the Climate Change Corporation – as third lead on the website – is that the Prince of Wales has persuaded a clutch of companies who benefit massively from carbon dioxide trading schemes and absurd subsidies on ‘renewables’ to write to the three main party leaders asking them to ‘act on climate change’ – ie to put more taxes on us and ensure that the said companies keep raking in their massive windfall subsidies.
The only journalistic ‘balance’? A Greenpeace vandal/lunatic who wants even more taxes and an end to all viable electricity production.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7624494.stm
Archduke and Umbongo.
Read my words. I did not say short selling was wrong just the ability to “sell” shares that you do not own in the first place. You obviously do not place any significance on the correlation of the proportion of shares on loan to attempts by short sellers to manipulate the market to achieve a profit by their actions. If not trying to make a fast buck without spending much of your own money why would you or I want to borrow shares? Answers on a postcard please to….
Robin
As nuclear generation reduces CO2 emissions it is good to see the Government being encouraged along that road. It also increase security of supply. Every cloud…
In the UK, there’s the special pleading of the NATIONAL BLACK POLICE ASSOCIATION (whose representative has been getting plenty of air-time on the BBC):
“Met chief Dizaei suspended after ‘Mail’ revelations about his relationship with crooked lawyer”
[Extract]:
“It is likely to intensify the race war at Scotland Yard because Dizaei is the president of the National Black Police Association, which claims the Met is riddled with racism.
“The association is backing Britain’s top Asian officer, Assistant Commissioner Tarique Ghaffur, who was put on enforced gardening leave last week after launching a £1.2million race discrimination claim against Met chief Sir Ian Blair.
“But the news will be welcomed by scores of junior officers who have tired of Dizaei’s questionable conduct and relentless rants about alleged racism in the police on BBC Radio 4’s ‘Today’ programme.
“They feared the Iranian-born officer, known to colleagues as ‘Dodgy Dizaei’, would be allowed to remain on duty because of his role as president of the association.”
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1057853/Met-chief-Dizaei-suspended-Mail-revelations-relationship-crooked-lawyer.html
And, in the UK too, there’s the very special pleading of the NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MUSLIM POLICE:
“Muslim police anger over leaflet”
[Extract]:
“Muslim police leaders are demanding to know why no action has been taken over a leaflet which blames Muslims for the heroin trade…
“The leaflet says Muslims are ‘almost exclusively responsible’ for the manufacture, transport and sale of heroin, 95% of which it says comes from the Afghanistan and Pakistan region.
It says the process of ‘naming and shaming’ Muslims will have a ‘positive effect’ on bringing about the abolition of the heroin trade.”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7624523.stm
Where is the ‘WHITE POLICE ASSOCIATION’, or the ‘NON-MUSLIM POLICE ASSOCIATION’ to make their counter-demands? Or does Labour’s discrimination only allow ‘Blacks’ and ‘Muslims’ to have such lobbying?
Just a change of subject. I was in my car listening to BBC world news around 8.00 pm yesterday and could not believe the main story. Archbishop Tutu claims Israel shelling of Gaza in 2006 killing 19 Palestinians, two years ago constitutes a war crime. In these intervening two years maybe 100,000 have died in Darfur, over 1000 in Georgia, hundreds in India in Muslim bombings, and hundreds of thousands all over the world have died by violence and the BBC can consider this event of worldwide importance. I hate the BBC
“Launch day for new Gaelic channel”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/highlands_and_islands/7623280.stm
Isn’t this the sort of thing to be left to Salmond’s SNP, not to UK licence-payers? Cost?
BBC radio 5live phone in. What makes you happy today.
I emailed in seeing the Tories at 52% in the polls and Liebour down the pan.
Didn’t get read out.
However, the BBC decided that having a tax man come on to tell us how wonderful the Chancellor is for giving us back £60 is really good news.
You could just hear the ‘cheers’ from the beeboids in the studio. That’ll make a big difference in the polls. NOT
Of course Phil wanker Williams failed to challenge the tax man by pointing out that this £60 comes from the fat one eyed jock scrapping the 10p tax rate and not realising that millions of people don’t sponge off the state or breed kids and therfore got a shafting off the tax changes.
So in effect for about 5 million low paid workers, they are only getting back what the fat one eyed jock took off them in the first place.
But who cares about balance?
George R:
The BBC was mandated by parliament to set up Gaelic services almost 20 years ago. They are probably the most expensive broadcast operation per target listener in the world. All part of the wonders of our licence fee.
“Piracy on the High Seas”
http://www.newenglishreview.org/blog_display.cfm/blog_id/17130
Comment on BBC report:
“This may all sound very jolly but there ain’t much yo ho ho in this bottle o’ rum. Word on the high seas be that all this gold and treasure be goin’ to fund jihad and terrorism and that’s no joke, me hearties.”
ANNOUNCEMENT: THERE’S BEEN AN IMPORTANT DEVELOPMENT IN THE BATTLE TO EXPOSE THE BBC
Influential Americans are awakening to the untold damage that the BBC has inflicted, and is continuing to inflict, on their country’s global prestige. George Weigel, distinguished senior fellow of the Ethics and Public Policy Center in Washington D.C., posed eleven common questions to the two presidential candidates. And question seven reads:
7) What measures will you take to counter the barrage of anti-American agitprop that comes from new media like al-Jazeera and old, once-respected media like the BBC?
This is a major development, make no mistake.
Gerald Brown
“correlation of the proportion of shares on loan to attempts by short sellers to manipulate the market to achieve a profit by their actions” Please supply a reference
While you’re looking please read what I wrote: I said that, according to an analyst interviewed on BBC News at Ten yesterday evening, there has been no indication that the price of borrowing shares in HBOS to sell short has risen ie there has been no inordinate selling of borrowed shares. There is no evidence (yet) of market manipulation: taking advantage of market conditions is not by definition “manipulation”. The precipitate drop in the HBOS share price was apparently due to investors (who owned the shares) bailing out.
The purpose of buying and selling shares is to make a profit (which you, apparently, categorise as “manipulating the market”) or limit a loss. There is no indication that short selling (of borrowed shares) has inordinately (or ordinately) affected the HBOS share price – it’s the owners of the shares selling. It’s wicked I know. But would you have preferred the owners of shares to be trapped in HBOS (by, for instance, a complete suspension of trading) to freeze the share price thereby, somehow, miraculously preserving a bust bank? Life in a free(ish) market (or even an unfree one) – or life itself – doesn’t work like that.
While the BBC News -Scotland pages has:
“Bank chief plays down job fears”
[Extract]:
“The chief executive of Lloyds TSB in Scotland has denied the £12bn takeover of HBOS would lead to thousands of compulsory redundancies in Scotland.”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/edinburgh_and_east/7624962.stm
-the ‘Times’ has (but BBC doesn’t):
“Outcry as ‘superbank’ puts saving Scottish jobs above English ones”
[Extract]:
“The architects of the £12 billion rescue of HBOS were accused yesterday of playing politics with jobs after a clause was inserted into the deal that appears to protect jobs in Scotland, despite no equivalent reassurance for workers south of the Border.
“Managers of the new superbank are under pressure to find savings by cutting tens of thousands of jobs, but analysts said that a deal that was easier on employees in Scotland would likely result in more redundancies in England and Wales.
“The clause on page one of the formal takeover document promises that ‘the management focus is to keep jobs in Scotland’. There is no similar reassurance about jobs in England and Wales.”
http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/banking_and_finance/article4783792.ece
Also:
“Darling accused of trying to save Scottish banking jobs at the expense of English workers”
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1057483/Darling-accused-trying-save-Scottish-banking-jobs-expense-English-workers.html
Jonathan Boyd Hunt:
“George Weigel, distinguished senior fellow of the Ethics and Public Policy Center in Washington D.C., posed eleven common questions to the two presidential candidates.”
Did he get any answers?
“What measures will you take to counter the barrage of anti-American agitprop that comes from new media like al-Jazeera and old, once-respected media like the BBC?”
what measure can they take? ban it? blow up the offices? praise the lord, the us government doesn’t have a lot of influence in this particular field…
The BBC turns ‘reporting’ into ‘editorial opinion’ opportunity for ‘leftist’, pro-mass immigration, Mr. Easton:
“UK to sign UM children convention”
[Extract]:
“BBC News home editor Mark Easton says since 1991 the British government has argued that immigration control should take priority over signing the convention.
The move will go down well with Labour’s rank and file, he added.”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7624450.stm
But that’s only the start for Easton’s propaganda on this conduit for mass immigration; if you can stand it, see his pro-UN, pro-Labour Party, long editorial opinion piece, which doesn’t go down well with most commenters:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markeaston/2008/09/uk_to_give_up_child_rights_opt.htm
A ‘Daily Mail’ report:
“Ministers set to sign away key powers over migrants”
[Extract]:
“Ministers have decided to sign away one of Britain’s key immigration controls, abandoning powers which they have guarded against international pressure for nearly two decades.
“They have decided finally to sign the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child in full.
“It means officers for the UK Border Agency tasked with deciding whether to put immigrant children in detention or deport them will be forced to put the youngsters’ welfare above all other considerations.”
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1058092/Ministers-set-sign-away-key-power-migrants.html
“George Weigel, distinguished senior fellow of the Ethics and Public Policy Center in Washington D.C”
a swift google suggests that this bloke is a bit of a crank. why should he expect to get any answers?
Jonathan Boyd Hunt | Homepage | 19.09.08 – 11:21 am |
This is a major development, make no mistake.
Well, at least some Catholics are starting to notice what the BBC has been up to.
Anon 9.23 | 19.09.08 – 12:56 pm:
Did he get any answers?
A. He’s not posted any so far.
Cockney | 19.09.08 – 1:28 pm:
what measure can they take? ban it? blow up the offices? praise the lord, the us government doesn’t have a lot of influence in this particular field…
What can the U.S. do? Well, they can monitor the BBC and debate examples of its vile biases in the public arena.
(And should they ever come looking for a case study of sustained political censorship, in order to demonstrate to the U.S. public just how institutionally dishonest the BBC (and the rest of the British media) is, I’ll point one out to them.)
@ george R
radio 5 went mad on the leaflet story this a.m. with aasmah mir having a good rant with a muslim police leader ( one not currently suspended for corruption).
they rather hysterically suggested that the figure of 95% of all heroin production quoted in the leaflet was “was not even correct” and every beeboid agreed the leaflet was clearly racist.
there followed much abuse heaped upon the CPS for failing to prosecute said “racists ” etc etc.
except according to wikipedia and the us state dept about 80% something percent of heroin does come from adganistan so what is your point beeboids ?
Aasmah states on her webpage ( http://www.bbc.co.uk/fivelive/presenters/mir_biog.shtml ) that she once had a job cleaning the toilets in a fish and chip shop in the east end of Glasgow.
can i suggest she gets back to what she is good at ?
Umbongo
I am the holder of a modest porfolio of shares myself so do not need your lesson on the purpose of buying and selling shares.
I did not mention HBOS, only you have.
I notice your confirmation that there is a market in borrowing shares. I can only reiterate that if instead of borrowing the shares to trade the “wide boys” had to buy them first and hence put down a substantial slice of their own resources before being able to “sell” the market would be less manipulation prone.
If one wishes to gamble on the market movement of shares I believe there are mechanisms to do just that, but without borrowed share transactions of course you would have to rely on “real” buying and selling deals to move the market.
For every seller there has to be a buyer so when when a large volume of shares being “sold” appears at one time the buyer cuts his price quickly which gives the short seller the opportunity to make his fast buck. Fine by me if the seller owns the shares but not if “borrowed” in my book.
Lets get the market back to real buying and selling of “owned” shares. It was noticeable that when the requirement for disclosure of sellers names of a set percentage of shares started during the Bradford and Bingley “short selling” period occured the number of shares “traded” daily dropped quite suddenly and among those who did have to register I recall very few pension fund names. Perhaps publication of names and volumes allowed the market to see who the sellers of large quantities were and to check whether they were real sellers.
David Preiser (USA) | Homepage | 19.09.08 – 1:48 pm:
He’s not the only American to notice the impact that the BBC is having on the U.S.’s international standing – but I think he’s the first to say that it should be actively addressed.
Have a root around in here – you’ll find several interesting articles on the BBC’s anti-Americanism, including one from The Naples Daily News, by Tom Neumann of the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs, entitled “Why they hate us.” Check out a few and share your thoughts.
The BBC still gets it a bit wrong with their update about the Palin email hacker:
Hackers infiltrate Palin’s e-mail
As I commented yesterday, one hacker did this on his own. He is associated with the Anonymous group, and posted his results on their forum. They took that ball and ran with it, which is how the account got shut down.
The BBC still gets that wrong, even though the information is widely available. However, I have to say I am amused by their use of the word “miscreants” to describe them. In fact, it’s so silly that I might almost suspect that they’re being sarcastic, giving the finger to those of us who might think that hacking someone’s personal e-mail is wrong. I might even suspect that they actually think the hacker is quite clever, and good on him. But that would be me inferring something that isn’t implied, right?
After all, “miscreant” is a rather strong term. Come to think of it, when was the last time the BBC used that term to describe perpetrators of any other crime? Especially, well, you know…..
Answer: Never. Do a search and see what comes up, and the usage becomes curiouser and curiouser.
But I digress. Here’s the article I linked to yesterday, in case any Beeboids are lurking about who want to help their colleagues do their jobs properly:
Palin E-Mail Hacker Says It Was Easy
The BBC is still trying to frame the hacker’s actions within the context of “questions are being asked about whether Mrs Palin used her personal e-mail accounts to carry out state business.”
These are really rumors, nothing more, but the BBC wants to drive home how serious these non-existent allegations are by citing US law about it. Oh, and by the way, she is being investigated in Alaska for alleged abuse of power, even though we all know what that’s about, and that it’s nothing, and has nothing to do with this. It’s just that we hate her and she deserves to be investigated thoroughly. Right, BBC?
I hope everyone is not too preoccupied with US politics to remember the Free Gaza Movement particularly the individual that the BBC itself referred to as “Hello habitué Lauren Booth.”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/newsnight/archive/1899402.stm
Well, she remains stuck in Gaza, since you asked.
Has anyone else noticed two differently nuanced Beeb articles on Sept 2nd and 3rd.
On Sept 2nd, the writer is sympathetic to the peace activist, quoting heartrendingly from her children “Mummy, why can’t you come home? Have you done anything wrong?” “No, under international law I’ve done nothing wrong, but for some reason I am effectively being imprisoned here by authorities who wish to punish human rights activists who have come to view the situation in Gaza,” she said – in reply, as you would, to children aged about 5 and 7.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/7593921.stm
The next day for no apparent reason a small amount of cynicism seems to have crept in.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/7596702.stm
However, sources claim that Ms Booth was offered an opportunity to leave Gaza over the weekend, but she declined to take it up.
Ms Booth could not (sic) reached in Gaza, where she is thought to be staying in a hotel while officials wrangle over her status.
What is happening? Real story (probably) is here.
http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/tony-blairs-sister-in-laws-gaza-media-show/2/
I’ve been away, so apologies if this has been discussed before.
I hope everyone is not too preoccupied with US politics to remember the Free Gaza Movement particularly the individual that the BBC itself referred to as “Hello habitué Lauren Booth.”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/newsnight/archive/1899402.stm
Well, she remains stuck in Gaza, since you asked.
Has anyone else noticed two differently nuanced Beeb articles on Sept 2nd and 3rd.
On Sept 2nd, the writer is sympathetic to the peace activist, quoting heartrendingly from her children “Mummy, why can’t you come home? Have you done anything wrong?” “No, under international law I’ve done nothing wrong, but for some reason I am effectively being imprisoned here by authorities who wish to punish human rights activists who have come to view the situation in Gaza,” she said. – in reply, as you would, to children aged about 5 and 7.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/7593921.stm
The next day for no apparent reason a small amount of cynicism seems to have crept in.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/7596702.stm
However, sources claim that Ms Booth was offered an opportunity to leave Gaza over the weekend, but she declined to take it up.
Ms Booth could not (sic) reached in Gaza, where she is thought to be staying in a hotel while officials wrangle over her status.
What is happening? Real story (probably) is here.
http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/tony-blairs-sister-in-laws-gaza-media-show/2/
I’ve been away, so apologies if this has been discussed before.
As the doomed Labour Party ‘activists’ descend on their high security enclave in Manchester (protected from an enemy which these same Labour Party activists refuse to mention by name: ISLAMIC JIHADISTS), what guffe will Brown and Smith come out with on national security, and how uncritically will the BBC report it? How about AL-MUHAJIROUN?:
“Islamist sect banned as security threat ‘is recruiting teenagers'”
[Extract, from ‘Evening Standard’ report]:
“A militant Islamic sect banned by the Government as a threat to national security has launched a campaign to radicalise teenagers in east London, the Evening Standard can reveal.
“Al-Muhajiroun, headed by exiled cleric Omar Bakri Mohammed, tonight begins a recruitment drive targeting young Muslims – despite being outlawed under terror laws introduced in the wake of the 7/7 suicide bomb attacks on London.
“Several members of the sect have been jailed in recent years for terror-related offences but there are fears the group is thriving again under a new name.
“The group has launched a website, Islam4uk.com.
“It is advertising its first youth conference, entitled Muslim Youth: The Spark of the Fire, at a community centre in Walthamstow – close to the homes of six men who face a retrial over a plot to blow up transatlantic airliners. Islam4uk.com is a reincarnation of al-Muhajiroun in all but name. It is headed by Bakri Mohammed, now living in Lebanon, and his deputy Anjem Choudary, its official spokesman.”
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23557570-details/Islamist+sect+banned+as+security+threat+%27is+recruiting+teenagers%27/article.do
Sue | 19.09.08 – 3:04 pm |
Other than being disingenuous about the fact that Lauren Booth and her “peace boat” buddies arrived illegally, and acting as if she’s imprisoned or something (“working hard to free Ms Booth”), at least they seem to be reporting responsibly in the second article. No direct statements that Israel controls Egypt this time around, no blathering about genocide. The mere mention that she might have been able to leave but didn’t is a huge step forward for the BBC.
Too bad Tony Blair is useless.
Main item on BBC TV World News today -‘ destruction of innocence – how the war in iraq has damaged children ‘. Followed by item on financial crisis with newsreader asking so-called expert ‘ is this the end of capitalism ?’ nuff said.
Gerald Brown
Since this thread is in the context of short selling and that various commentators have blamed the HBOS debacle on short selling it’s hardly surprising that I mentioned HBOS. However, your point then is a general one that only people who own shares can sell. Taking that principle a bit further, as far as you’re concerned, we can forget about futures markets.
To fix a US$ rate for purchase of US services in December (which, coincidentally I have recently done) I have used the futures market in US$ to sell sterling and buy December $s. I don’t “own” the December £s: it might be that come delivery I will borrow £s to pay for those $s. Is this illegitimate trading? According to your view, as I understand it, since I’m selling £s I don’t own to purchase $s (at a locked-in rate) in the hope that I will profit if the spot December £/$ rate goes in my favour I am “manipulating the market”. The locked-in rate acts as a “stop-loss” in this transaction.
As I understand you, it also seems that if I borrow to buy shares I’m also “manipulating the market” since I would borrow in the hope that when it comes to repaying the loan I will have made a profit on the shares (which is a mirror image of the lender making a “loss” on lending money to me since he could have bought the shares with his owm money). In a real market although short selling appears to be profiting at somebody else’s expense, unless there is insider trading or somebody with deep pockets and a taste for enormous gambles is deciding to borrow (eg HBOS) shares and dump them against market sentiment then trading in the shares – any trading in the shares – is legitimate. Selling into a falling market which you expect to fall further, whether it’s with your own shares or somebody else’s is not only legal (well it was until yesterday) but sensible.
Umbongo
Congratulations on your successful placing on the futures market. I do not see your point in raising this. It is a normal business transaction between two willing parties and eminently sensible for those trading internationally. If the price moves “in your favour” good luck to you but in a “normal” market that movement is as likely to have been caused by macro economic factors as your trade. If you have to borrow the full amount to settle the deal so be it, assuming you have sufficient facilities available but then of course you will own the dollars but owe somebody the full amount in pounds. I’m sure your bank would fall over itself in the rush to offer you facilities if you said you wanted it to try to make money wheeling and dealing in the shares or currency market!
Your final paragraph is strange. If you borrow to BUY the shares that will mean that you OWN the shares and I have no problem with that but you would had to arrange a very large loan from somewhere at some cost or commit much of your available capital in order to have the ability to trade in a large volume of shares which seems to be a feature of the short selling. I agree any trading in the shares should be legal as long as the buyer and seller actually own them. If you don’t want to go to the trouble of owning the shares before selling them you can do in shares what you have done with your currency.
Presumably if those not already owning a particular share wanted to have a punt at short selling that share the buying rather than borrowing would of course make for two way trading meaning those who owned them and wanted to get out would be selling to those who wanted to buy the shares for shorting. Now that really would be a touch of schadenfreude.
BBC bias by omission.
Not a word on this story that I can find anywhere on the BBC.
Read it and despair at the fact that they will not report this corruption.
It involves a corrupt labour politician of south Asian origin, Keith Vaz, and a couple of corrupt Iranians, one a ‘police officer’, Ali Dizaei, and the other a convicted criminal masquerading as a lawyer in the UK, Shahrokh Mireskandari.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1058575/Labour-MP-Keith-Vaz-faces-sleaze-inquiry-outrageous-bid-sway-judge-behalf-crooked-lawyer-friend.html