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.
Anybody else notice just how many Pakistani spokemens (no women bBC?) the bBC has trotted out in which to make a stance at Prince Harry. FFS bBC his mum shagged enough of them he can’t be a racist. In fact I’ve watched the video it isn’t racist he’s making a comment.
But heres something why is Harry deemd a racist for refering to his Friend as a Paki when last night gangs of Pakistani idiots not only rioted on the streets of london but had no problem shouting out stupid Jew,silly jew and Fing jew.
Oh I forgot they can only be victims.
MAN MAKES COMMENT THAT MIGHT BE CONSTRUED AS RACIST STOP PRESS.
TENS OF THOUSANDS OF RELIGIOUS FANATICS BRING CAPITAL TO STANDSTILL CALLING FOR ERADICATION OF JEWS NO COMMENT.
News 24 earlier interviewed a Yasser-Arafat-style-rag-wearing individual who was introduced as a member of this mob –
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fun-Da-Mental
Clearly a reliable individual with no axe to grind .
Note how the BBC has presented details of todays pro-Israel demonstration – it uses the same picture as it used for the Palestinian demo. Strikingly, nowhere is the demonstration referred to as “pro-Israel” – it simply states “Thousands Call for Mid-East Peace,” with a request for Israel’s perspective to be “acknowledged.” Further, it is stated that the demo “comes after prominent British Jews wrote an open letter calling on Israel to halt operations in Gaza.”
Pounce, I am curious – is there any significance to the fact that you spell it bBC?
Otherwise – agree with all the comments above.
Screw the antisemitic BBC: SHUT IT DOWN NOW.
This is what the BBC does not show:
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=kp-lwSe2llg&feature=related
The demo in London was nothing short of a muslim hate-fest directed at us, the kufr.
And over in Oslo, peaceful but naive Norwegians are seeing what it’s like:
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=-96Hp5yNu-Y&eurl=http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/024338.php
Personally I think Prince Harry is a bit of a tool (probably genetic. His father also couldn’t keep his mouth shut).
Still, where are the BBC scare quotes when needed? Why is it Prince’s racist term sparks anger and not Prince’s ‘racist’ term sparks anger?
Has the BBC injected an opinion or a value judgement into a news story. heaven forbid? 🙂
i dont see the problem of calling a pakistani a “paki” when i’m probably referred to as a “Brit”
in fact, theres a good film called East is East, and Brit born kids with pakistani parents call ppl from pakistan “pakis”
i’ll probably have anti terrorist police kick my door down at 5am tomorrow morning now
Pounce: If you can see it like that even better. If I understand Harry’s comments correctly he’s not a big fan of muslims and that’s fine by me.
Hugh Oxford it spot-on… a great way for Al Beeb to put the spotlight on Harry instead of reporting on the jihadists living in our midst.
forgot to add its all political correctness gone mad
P.S.: I still think the term “asians” Al Beeb love to use is racist, by the way.
pounce | 11.01.09 – 1:03 pm |
Pounce, Sky has been doing the same thing, including lots of ‘outraged’ muslim spokesmen. Harry was a dick for making this comment but really, the media are making 3 course meal out of it.
Slightly off topic, but why does the BBC keep refering to the rabble being at the gates of the Israeli embassy? The embassy is on a private road (Palace road) closed to traffic, containing the Israeli embassy and others, which runs parallel to Kensington Palace.
http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&hl=en&geocode=&q=kensington+paLACE&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=31.977057,79.101563&ie=UTF8&ll=51.503387,-0.187808&spn=0.002905,0.013733&t=h&z=17
They were are the gates to the road weren’t they?
SCIENCE AND ISLAM
Further to the above post (from 4.1.09) this American Thinker article, showing that medieval Christians were anything but the dunderheaded flat-Earthers of popular mythology, may be of some interest:
Christianity and the Round Planet
http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/01/christianity_and_the_round_pla.html
The Beebinator – agreed, I made similar comments on another thread. Who’s upset at being called a Brit., maybe we ought to start objecting. Do Australians get upset at being called Ozzies, Welshmen Taffies or Scottish Scots? I’ve never understood why these gentlemen and their beeboid and PC followers fly off the handle so easily. Still, as we’ve discovered, it keeps illegal and destructive demonstrations in London off the front page.
The bBC its love fest
for Pakis and half the story.
Prince’s racist term sparks anger
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7822883.stm
I see the bBC is trying to make a storm out of a Teacup with this story.
The MCB (they who say they speak for all british muslims) has no problem with this
The Pakisatni man at the centre of all this has no problem
Yet the bBC keeps on dragging out of the pits of Hell any muslim who feels his right to free expression has nbeen slighted in which express their horror at this racist term.
Yup lets feed the hounds of hell and keep this story alive in which to promote this view that Muslims can only be victims.
Have a butchers about the net on how many Pakistani people refer to themselves as Pakis.
http://www.paki.com/
http://www.pakirecipes.com/
http://suspectpaki.com/
http://www.pakimp3.org/
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=VgiNBlFjHL8&feature=related
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=IvkDAijJDdY&feature=related
Only in the UK is the term Pakis deemed racist” but then only if used by white people.
The bBC its love fest
for Pakis and half the story.
The counterdemo this morning was a model of peaceful protest and has been distorted and played down dramatiacally by al Beeb, who estimated attendance at 4000.
Utter nonsense. I’m no expert in crowd dynamics or estimating, but there were many, many more than that present – Trafalgar Square was totally packed.
I’d say the majority there were British Jews – but the wonderful, uplifting surprise of the morning was the number of non-Jewish Brits (like me) and foreigners that turned up to show solidarity with them. There were also a healthy contingent of Christians and some Hindus too.
There were a couple of hundred at most from the ‘other side’ there – restricted by Police to the North side of the Square, outside Canada House. A few keffiyeh wearing Alahu Akbar merchants showed up too, who appeared to be being directed by an American (I’m going to try and have him identified later today).
There was also a contingent of what I call ‘GuiltyJews™’ on this side – waving placards reading ‘Talk to Hamas’ (might as well have read ‘Talk to my Ass’), and other such nonsense. I’m surprised that they had the strength to hold their boards up with all the pain from the self-flagellation and the unbearable weight of the guilt they were carrying.
An the extreme of this, there was a small contingent from Naturei Karta there – but I suppose you can always count on a visit from Haredim for Allah at events like these.
All in all a great morning with a positive atmosphere that re-energised me and actually made me proud to be British again – it was heartening to see the Jews standing up for themselves – and to see Brits standing with them.
A chink of light may be shining through at last, in that at least some British people are seeing through the media Pro-Pallywood spin.
I’d also like to add that the Police and the CST appeared to be cooperating extremely well with each other to ensure crowd safety. The atmosphere was good.
Photos here.
I imagine that the word ‘Pakis’ is deemed racist is due to the fact that often it is used in a racist manner.
Political correctness at the BBC is rampant, the BBC’s anti-Israeli stance is obvious, however, on this occasion it is clear that they are in the right, as EVERY other news outlet are also calling Harry’s comments racist.
I know that this is not directly anything to do with the BBC, yet the writer is a regular guest on the BBC, and it looks to me that she is guilty of racist (I know she is Jewish) language, and she has distorted the facts (she does have previous history when it comes to faking the facts) about the entire conflict.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/jan/10/naomi-klein-boycott-israel?commentpage=11
Is this really someone the BBC should allow into it’s studios?.
I think saying it’s just the same as saying ‘Brit’ is slightly oversimplifying the matter, as the word Paki has been used in itself as a racial slur – it’s often applied to people regardless of their true background.
That some Pakistani’s use it themselves is probably down to appropriation, just like African Americans using the word nigger. Of course some white people get riled that they can’t refer to black people as a nigger, but that just disregards its historical context.
The USA’s replacement of the green Visa Waiver form with an electronic version is given a factual report in The Times
REMEMBER ESTA
Transatlantic travellers are reminded that the US Electronic System for Travel Authorization (Esta) goes live from tomorrow, replacing the old visa-waiver forms handed out to arriving passengers. Instead, all passengers heading for or transiting through America must apply online for permission to travel at https://esta.cbp.dhs.gov . Registration is free and authorisation, which lasts for two years, is usually granted while you wait,
But for the BBC News Channel it is yet more unnecessary bureaucracy & intrusion & could well deter people from travelling to the USA.
Bugger, I agree with the BBC | 11.01.09 – 2:40 pm
UK citizens of Pakistani extraction may well have encountered malicious uses of the term ‘Paki’ and therefore consider it racist.
In Pakistan, apparently, it doesn’t have that connotation at all. Pounce has cited numerous websites where Palistanis use it.
The soldier Harry was referring to is a Pakistani citizen in the Pakistani army.
Would the if H had calleda Russian a Ruskie or an American a Yankee?
What’s the difference?
A chink of light may be shining through at last, in that at least some British people are seeing through the media Pro-Pallywood spin.
Thanks Philip. I for one am hoping this incident brings to light to the British people the true nature of what has happened under the auspices of NL, and that we unite and resolve to do something about it before it is too late.
In that sense, I do NOT want a ceasefire in the ME, I want Hamas to be routed, and I want even more disorder on the streets of Britain. Only when nobody is unaffected, only when the truth is plain to all will the parasitic barbarians be removed from our shores once and for all.
I caught five minutes of a programme on sat night, it was a shameless copy of a Japanese game show Takeshi’s Castle, with the annoying Richard Hammond.
If this is prime time public service broadcasting then i would like to float an idea to commissioning editors, how about getting a collection of students and annoying twenty-somethings with nothing to say, dressing them in diapers and getting them to make their best baby noises, then the audience can vote on who is the best.
I expect to be paid royalties when my idea is taken up.
Afghans come from Afghanistan.
So who comes from Pakistan?
will | 11.01.09 – 3:05 pm |
Typical Al Beeb nonsense. Once you’ve supplied your data the Visa Waiver is valid for two years. Until now I always hated filling out these green forms on the airplane. The electronic registration process is a great alternative to the old system.
If you’ve got something to hide don’t travel to the States. They should add the question “Have you ever worked for the BBC?”
Tom | 11.01.09 – 3:13 pm |
It’s only a problem because Pakistanis are mainly muslims. Al Beeb’s favourite “victim group”. I actually preferred the “rag-head” quote 😉
Richard Lancaster: Of course some white people get riled that they can’t refer to black people as a nigger, but that just disregards its historical context.
——————–
What is your evidence for that?
I think that some people question why black people maintain that it is grossly offensive and then use it themselves.
That is a very different thing from wanting to use it. Saying that they do simply because they ask that reasonable question is bit of a spin and a slur.
BBC militants confronting the IDF:
As someone who served in the forces I get really frustrated at the morons in the military that seem to want to photograph anything. Soldiers do daft things from time to time, however why they want to photograph or video the fucking things amazes me.
Suppose a soldier on a battlefield decided to pop a few wounded Muslim terrorists (and I’m quite happy for them to do that) why would anyone then want to photograph it or film it? That could easily then lead to a court case later on. Same thing with journalists. I’d just refuse to have journalists we me. You can’t act as you would normally with some fucking Communist from the BBC following you around trying to film you breaking the Geneva Convention every 5 minutes.
As for the whole ‘Paki’ thing. We used to get told not to use certain names all the time. So we’d just call them ‘stills@ which meant “Still a fucking….” whatever it was you were not allowed to call them.
What the camp left wing cunts in the ‘meeja’ don’t seem to understand is that our soldiers have been fighting Muslims for years now. You don’t call your enemy nice names.
And no one seems to mind the vile things ‘we’ the British people get called by Muslims every time they fucking riot in London.
When I served in the forces we never had any time for journalists (who are basically a lower form of life that paedophiles in my view) and I don’t understand why the military is so ‘friendly’ now.
Just how did they get hold of this tape?
Nice comment from Sky News. They pointed out the Pro Israel protest in London today is far more peaceful than the anti one yesterday.
on this occasion it is clear that they are in the right, as EVERY other news outlet are also calling Harry’s comments racist
Complete non-sequitur, I fear.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/pakistan/4217690/Taliban-underlines-its-growing-power-with-killing-of-dancing-girl-in-Pakistan.html
what a difference one letter makes,good job whoever wrote it wasn’t dyslexic.
Martin | 11.01.09 – 3:39 pm
Dead right.
Your comment gives me an idea – why don’t we start calling THEM kufr or infidels, see how they like it?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/
wrong link whoops.
Prince Harry’s ‘Paki’ comments ‘completely unacceptable’, says David Cameron..
any more offensive than calling a person from Newcastle a Gordie a Welsh man a Taffy?
I see those Lefty’s at the BBC who hate their own country (and British Royal Family)..are in full hype on this politically correct nonsense. What a pity the leader of the opposition David Cameron had to join them in criticising a member of the British Royal Family..
I often wonder if David Cameron is a Guardian reader
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/theroyalfamily/4216808/Prince-Harrys-Paki-comments-completely-unacceptable-says-David-Cameron.html
.
The only people that seem to really think his Army banter was offensive are the pundits (yes I’m talking to you, journos) and bureaucrats (yes, I’m talking to you, Trevor Philips and the rest of the ‘Perpetually Offended’ industry); who need desparately to keep this non-story alive and justify their high salaries.
What about the hideously offensive things some some so-called ‘pakis’ call non so-called ‘pakis’? What do you mean you never see stories about things like that in the press?
Oh, wait….
Great photos Philip.
I was also there today & felt proud to be British. “The streets were reclaimed” to coin a phrase.
BBC are wrong in their estimate of the crowd – there were several thousand there.
Inspiring words from the Chief Rabbi:
“All it took to avoid this suffering was for Hamas to stop firing rockets on Israeli citizens.
“Let a voice go out today from here in Trafalgar Square, and other gatherings being held, that we want peace.”
“We say to those who criticise Israel: You want Palestinian children to grow up with hope, so do we.
“You want Palestinians to be able to live with dignity, so do we.”
He said the day would come when Israelis and Palestinians would live together in peace.
“It could be hundred years away, or it could be today, it is up to Hamas and the people that give them arms, for the sake of Israeli children and the Palestinian children, we say, let it be today.”
Like I give a shit about Prince Harry and what he did or didn’t say about Pakistanis. I’ve got enough on my plate with rising antsemitism and Nazi-style antisemitic attacks on property by Muslims.
La Cumparsita – thanks.
n this occasion it is clear that they are in the right, as EVERY other news outlet are also calling Harry’s comments racist
Complete non-sequitur, I fear.
Nearly Oxfordian | 11.01.09 – 3:50 pm
—————————————
I fear that you totally missed the point, funny that!.
As you only ever spout cliches, and according to you my comment is the converse of a cliche, looks like you need to piss off.
It’s not just the word but the way it’s said and who says it that makes it racist. I very much doubt Harry’s a racist but from a privileged white dude it’s pretty poor judgement. He’s got history too (the Swazstika outfit). I’m sure the context shows he wasn’t racist but context vanishes in a puff when the media get stuck in.
So… as an act of contrition, is he going to visit Pakistan and do a reality TV show there?
I really don’t give a toss about it.
The BBC is too pre-occupied with this whole ‘race’ business.
It is odd that the BBC only ever have technical problems when interviewing Tory or right of center people? The Andrew Marr show was disgusting in stopping Camerons flow, and barely apologised, having succsessfully demeaned the whole interview.
As you only ever spout cliches, and according to you my comment is the converse of a cliche, looks like you need to piss off.
I made a polite point and some 12-year old acne-covered tosser tells me to piss off.
You don’t get to give me orders, lowlife.
Great example of hypocrisy here. Young Trustafarian protester whingeing that police are wearing balaclavas “to conceal their faces” (it’s cold and they have identifying numbers on their uniforms, prat!) while most of the protesters are covering their faces with kefiyahs (seen behind him) and the video ends with a masked hoodie protester being led away by police.
“On this occasion it is clear that they are in the right, as EVERY other news outlet are also calling Harry’s comments racist.”
It is not clear at all. If Harry’s comments are not “racist”, which is what I would say, then all these outlets, including the BBC, are behaving like idiots. They don’t dare to take the common sense line.
Most nicknames (which are usually only abbreviations of ethnonyms) are only considered offensive if the group so designated thinks itself as threatened or disliked in some way by the other. ‘Aussie’ and ‘Kiwi’, and even ‘Canuck’ are happily used as self-designations. The Allies routinely referred to ‘the Japs’ and ‘Jerry’ during the war, but most would now frown at that usage.
Referring to South Asians as ‘Asians’ has always seemed strange to me, and quite unfair to 2 billion other Asians.
‘Raghead’ seems a fine term to me. It has nothing to do with race and everything to do with sartorial choice.
So ‘Fuck off’, ‘Bugger off”, and ‘Go stick your fingers in a wet socket’ don’t qualify as orders, do they, Dreary?
Or are you the only one, with your toe-curlingly immense intellectual capacity, qualified to order us about?
I’ve had a jolly afternoon looking up your comments on other sites; it’s somehow reassuring to see that it’s not just here that your are as welcome as a boil on the knob.
THE DEMONS OF GAZA
It’s not about American sins or Israeli intransigence. It’s about a sickness in the soul of a civilization – of Middle-Eastern Islam – that can only be cured from within. Until Arabs or Iranians decide to cure themselves, we’ll have to fight.
Instead, we want to talk. We convince ourselves, against all evidence, that our enemies really want to talk, too, that they just need “incentives” (the diplomat’s term for bribes). The apparent belief of our president-elect that it’s possible to negotiate with faith-fueled fanatics is so naive it’s terrifying.
http://www.nypost.com/seven/01102009/postopinion/opedcolumnists/the_demons_of_gaza_149549.htm?page=0