I see that my old pal George Mitchell and EU foreign policy chief Javier Solana are in the Middle East to help “bring peace.” You can expect to see the BBC give the efforts of this pair of jokers a sympathetic hearing – they have always been kind to Senator Mitchell following his work in Northern Ireland. Now that Obama has recycled this Clintonian bagman him into this role I am certain that the BBC will use the Northern Ireland peace process as the preferred template for creating stability in this region. On News 24 last night I heard someone insist that Israel would “have to” talk to Hamas, just like the British government “had to” talk to the IRA. It’s a completely misleading analogy but the BBC are wedded to it and you can be sure that Israel will be cast as the intransigent villains if they do not set down and enter dialogue with the genocidal Islamic savages in Hamas. The BBC coverage of the brutal murder of an Israeli soldier by Hamas should have re-assured everyone that BBC faux protestations about its’ much vaunted “impartiality”on this issue are as shallow as they are insubstantial. Once again the narrative is that “both sides” have broken their cease-fires and so Hamas get a pass for their act of murderous aggression.
SEND IN THE CLOWNS…
Bookmark the permalink.
You know he’s the first to start slinging rude names around
More lies from the wannabe Abu Chuffer, who launched a personal abusive attack on me for doing nothing more than commenting on DV’s apostrophes.
NO has made no meaningful contribution in terms of identifying or linking to any case of bias at any point.
Illiterate nonsense. I have made a great many specific contributions that identified concrete bias. Do sue your teachers – they never taught you to read.
He is deliciously easy to windup though…
And then this sad asshole whines about ad hominem, when clearly that is her specific purpose.
Oh well, don’t say I didn’t try to make some sort of peace!!
David – it’s time for you to act, for the sake of this site. Anyone else agree?
I do.
However, you’re the boss, and I will bow to your comments. I’ll drop the ‘bear-baiting’ (bore-baiting, surely), and do my best to ignore him when he starts abusing anyone who dares to take a contrary position.
It’s 17.08, 29/1/2009. Take note everyone:
Nearly Oxfordian; pax nobiscum.
Chuffer | 29.01.09 – 5:14 pm |
Now that peace has broken out it’s time for a burst of Ode to Joy, I think. All together now…
Do you know what really makes me p***ed off ?
It is that most of you have many good points to make, so why waste time with bad language and abuse ?
I really don’t understand your reasons.
But, then , maybe I am feeding trolls !
This is now beyond my tolerance zone.
If people cannot comment here on topic without resorting to personal attack on each other, then we are just going to end up as a joke site with all sense of substance eroded.
I am way to busy to moderate every comment, remove every insult, issue yellow red or whatever cards. Please remember I do this in my few spare minutes and so when I see the threads go like this, it just deflates me.
I have tried to allow space for everyone and have only banned the worst trolls. But maybe the truth is that if all this ad hominem continues, then there is no space left for me? If you rather argue with each other and insult each other, you don’t need me anymore.
NO – compare your contribution to the site to pounce’s or David P’s or anyone of a number of others. You will see they are quite different. Even you may have sufficient self-awareness to achieve this, although I will not be surprised if you don’t…
Rather than shrieking ‘anti-semite’ and insulting people, nominally on the same side then screaming to teacher the second anyone calls them for poor behaviour, they fisk BBC articles and provide links. While they may not always have a point, some of them prompt me to suggest to fellow beeboidds that there may be something to address.
I know I will never be troubling my colleagues as a result of any of your contributions – although they do provide for amusing spectator sport. But even for a beeboid there is only so much poor manners and borderline mental illness one can stand. So do everyone a favour and FO.
“This is now beyond my tolerance zone.
If people cannot comment here on topic without resorting to personal attack on each other, then we are just going to end up as a joke site with all sense of substance eroded.
I am way to busy to moderate every comment, remove every insult, issue yellow red or whatever cards. Please remember I do this in my few spare minutes and so when I see the threads go like this, it just deflates me.
I have tried to allow space for everyone and have only banned the worst trolls. But maybe the truth is that if all this ad hominem continues, then there is no space left for me? If you rather argue with each other and insult each other, you don’t need me anymore.”
Cop Out!
I like Nox. He strikes me as a splendid old bugger. But he – or lord help us she – seems to have had a chilling effect on Martin, whose Tourettic peak is but a distant memory. This site is big enough for two spleneticists.
David Vance 7:52
I perfectly understand your frustration. But, please don’t go.
There is no easy answer to the trolls, and I certainly don’t have one.
Not for me to say, but I think this website is more important than any on person.
Don’t give up !
Ostensibly Pavlovian | Homepage | 29.01.09 – 7:57 pm |
Yes, this is was exactly one of the main reasons most of you got tired of this blog. Although David Gregory probably mostly got sick of being the AGW whipping boy, never allowed to come here without having his personal credibility insulted over it.
And just the other day I was saying things had calmed down.
Even if no one else thinks so, I have to say that contributions from actual Beeboids (even part-timers) are valuable, and should be encouraged. It would be a shame to drive them away again over OTT, OT fights, started by something that wasn’t even a comment about BBC bias.
Chuffer, I don’t include you in my above remarks. I know you make valuable comments about BBC bias. Hopefully this blog will become a place where you let your offspring do so as well.
David Vance: “If people cannot comment here on topic without resorting to personal attack on each other…”
You’re absolutely right, of course. But I beg you to examine the site’s comment record. You’ll find a fantastic range of argument and disagreement, points for and points against. It’s like the best arguments in the pub, long and hard, but fundamentally mature and good-natured, with no ill-feeling. We can all leave together and share a taxi.
There is ONLY ONE PERSON (to borrow Atlas’ style) who is utterly unable to handle argument. There is ONLY ONE PERSON whose unshakeable conviction of his own mind-boggling intellectual correctness will tolerate no debate. There is ONLY ONE PERSON who takes counterargument as a personal insult, and feels that the only way to respond is to launch into a range of insults, and who thinks – bizarrely -that that will win the argument. He is the one who would spoil the whole evening in the pub – the one who would leave the whole evening….ruined.
And David, fantastic David (who has done so much for this site): you know exactly who that person is.
Oh well, don’t say I didn’t try to make some sort of peace!!
I do say so. Prefacing your ‘offer of peace’ by posting lies about me doesn’t count.
MWL,
Thanks for yours, but you did spoil it a little with your ‘god help us’ comment. What on earth is wrong with a woman posting the same statements that a man can post?
Rather than shrieking ‘anti-semite’
Well, I am sorry that my objections to racist attacks on my nation cause you such distress. On second thoughts, no, I am not the least bit sorry. Your vile organisation is awash with this racist attitude towards my nation, it spews out this racist hatred day in day out, and I will continue to highlight instances of it whether or not you find this inconveniently close to the bone.
I do not regard it as incumbent on me to copy the posts or style of other posters. You don’t like it? Tough toenails.
So do everyone a favour and FO.
You think you are ‘everyone’? Well, that’s hardly surprising in a self-important beeboid. But here is a newsflash: you don’t speak for anybody but yourself.
David Preiser 9:56
Well said. I totally agree with your comments.
from the Jerusalem Post
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1233050211884&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull
“Palestinians call to ban BBC from operating in Gaza
By KHALED ABU TOAMEH
A large group of Palestinians has signed a petition calling to ban the BBC from operating in the Gaza Strip because of the broadcaster’s refusal to air a charity appeal for the victims of Operation Cast Lead.
This was the first time that Palestinians called for boycotting the BBC – A STATION WHICH THEY HAD REGULARLY CONSIDERED TO BE BIASED IN FAVOR OF THE PALESTINIANS AND ARABS(my capitals)
The group, which consists of some 200 academics, journalists, human rights activists and prominent political figures, called on the Hamas government to expel all BBC representatives from the Strip.
On Thursday, the group organized a demonstration in Gaza City where they accused the station of being biased in favor of Israel.”
Morons, biting the hand that feeds them! Now who will Hamas turn to for airing its propoganda…oh whats that, hey, isnt that channel 4! 🙂
Mailman
“Well, I am sorry that my objections to racist attacks on my nation cause you such distress.”
Ah, it all makes sense now, bless his pooor little cotton socks.
Nox – Nothing against women, whatsoever. It’s just you are so very male in your ponderings that the thought of you being a woman (which you’ve never ruled out) gave me a bit of a chill. But you are a chap, I can tell.
As am I for the record. Chap that is.
The BBC seems to have been trying to inject a bit of humour into the Davos conference. Or maybe the original broadcast was censored and so they came up with this last minute substitute:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/davos/7859054.stm
Whatever the case, this short clip is a fine example of the BBC at its most idiotic.
No, it was a 7th century typo. It should have said “a 72 year old virgin”.
Too bad.
Iain | 28.01.09 – 1:58 pm
This reminds me of a cartoon I saw in a newspaper at the height of the Second Intifada.
It depicted a suicide bomber, complete with explosives belt, descending into hell with a grinning Charon stirring a boiling cauldron next to the Styx.
The caption read:
Where are all those virgins I was promised?
Sometimes one really regrets not cutting and pasting a cartoon into a scrapbook.
In America, and sometimes over here, you see notices: “This Building is Alarmed” Of course that gets me going. I know how it feels, I say to myself. So am I.
Some of us are concerned about BBC bias because of that. We are all alarmed now. Some of us see gathering storms. We see that our National Broadcaster, or public service broadcaster or whatever it’s called, is part of the snowballing of antisemitism here, sparked off, reignited if you will, by the vilification of Israel that the BBC is so fond of engaging in.
When Nearly Oxfordian is abusive it’s no good getting rattled. For one thing, he’s not the only one who can be bad tempered and volatile.
Some of us feel beleaguered and threatened, and I often feel like saying some of the things he says, and I contend that some of his tourettes style outbursts ought to be seen in that context, and dare I say it, tolerated and understood.
I have always said that my main grievance is not that I have to pay the telly tax, because I don’t. We have an oldie in our household. My fear is that our most respected broadcaster, resting on the laurels of its long-gone reputation, is abusing the power that it has been landed with, and is as dangerous as a child with a machine gun.
Some of us are comparing the 1930s with the present day. Everything we hear is ominous. We are frightened for the future, for ourselves and our children and their children. That’s why some of us wish to engage with the BBC rather that just use this as a cathartic vehicle for letting off some steam.
End of sermon.
Sue 8:24
I also like the one ” This door is alarmed ” !
as there EVER been a report from one of Al Beeb’s 384746 reporters in Israel/Gaza about the use of human shields?
What a shame that the Palestinian (West Bank) press dares to go where the fatuous, hypocritical and cowardly BBC does not…
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1233050211857&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull
OK, MWL.
Ah, it all makes sense now, bless his pooor little cotton socks
Abu Chuffer: “I offered peace, but I lied. It’s what I do. I can’t help it. Ask my psychiatrist for further details”.
Yes, you sad little wanker. I object to racist attacks on my nation.
Now fuck off, you waste of protoplasm.
Nearly Oxfordian says:
——
In a different way, your indiscriminating insults about all NHS staff are just as bad. But hey, that’s OK: it’s you doing it, so it must be just dandy.
Nearly Oxfordian
—–
I am not trying to wind him up, or provoke an outburst, but I predict that one day N.O. or someone close to him will experience the incompetence of the NHS full on, even if it is about some minor medical condition. For example, being removed from a queue deliberately and sneakily in order to increase the number of successful outcomes in their meaningless stastistics. Then he will come back to this blog and apologise to everyone to whom he has shouted abuse for slagging off the NHS.
I agree with Sue’s sermon 8:24.
I did not say that N.O. did not make valuable arguments, I said he should just reduce the abuse, as it has a knock-on effect. Imagine if a new person who did not know what he was like arrived on this blog and said something negative about the NHS in his very first post. N.O.’s response might frighten them off the blog forever.
Hope Unimpressed of Litchfield comes back.
NO
“I object to racist attacks on my nation.”
And so you should but where on this thread did I attack your nation.
Davids sneers at Obama’s attempt to find a resolution. He refers to Mitchell and Solana as a pair of jokers. The posting is called “Send in the Clowns”. He hates Mitchell because his efforts brought peace to NI without completely sidelining Republicans and Nationalists.
I sarcasticly post “It would be awful if a solution were found, wouldn’t it?” and off you go with your ad hominem rants.
There is actually a lot of good will towards you on this blog. Are you too proud to acknowledge that?
Abu Chuffer – you’ve been busted. Now that it’s out in the open my controllers just wanted you to know that while they loved your programme idea for ‘The Influence of Islam on Agrarian Society’ they did feel that one 5 minute docco on goats was maybe a bit light?
NO – DG says keep up the good work, the cheque’s in the post.
And so you should but where on this thread did I attack your nation.
Antisemitic sneers are still racist, however subtle.
I sarcasticly post “It would be awful if a solution were found, wouldn’t it?” and off you go with your ad hominem rants.
With the emphasis on sarcastially, indeed – implying that supporters of Israel don’t actually want a solution; which is an ad hominem rant, boyo.
There is actually a lot of good will towards you on this blog. Are you too proud to acknowledge that?
Are you too dim to read? Look up my comments to Sue – and even to MWL.
I have no idea who DG is. I suspect it’s simply another lame attempt to be witty.
DG = Dictator General
“Yes, you sad little wanker. I object to racist attacks on my nation.
Now fuck off, you waste of protoplasm.”
Ah, bless his little cotton sweary socks. It’s a syndrome thing, isn’t it? It’s like Tourette’s, trying to offend with copious swear words. Perhaps we should call it NOxic Shock Syndrome. Anyway, now we know know that there’s a bit of, ahem, a problem, we can smile at him sweetly and say ‘Yes , of course, dear,” at every outbreak of profanity. Bit like we do with the village idiot.
“I climbed onto to an adjoining roof with Marc Garlasco, who is a weapons expert for Human Rights Watch. He found pieces of a high explosive anti-tank round.
From behind the building you can see through the holes the shells made as they passed through the flat and beyond it to a hill where Israeli tanks were deployed. It was a straight shot.”
deegee | 29.01.09 – 8:49 am
When Bowen first mentioned his “military expert” I took a guess that it was Garlasco, this Garlasco:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marc_Garlasco
Star of this other blood-libel, for which the BBC still has not published an apology:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaza_beach_blast
Sue | 30.01.09 – 8:24 am |
Thanks for that. I’m obviously in the same place.
Although, I would appreciate a bit less venom in the comments. I have to restrain myself as much as anyone, and am just as guilty as NO for jumping on certain things. But I have mostly cooled it on the tone after a couple of respectable commenters said something. Not to mention the fact that BBC employees keep coming here to tell us they’d pay a little more attention otherwise. If nothing else, I think they ought to be made to understand the feelings you describe. Calling everyone an anti-semite just reinforces their mindset. That certainly doesn’t mean the anti-Jew sentiment is never there, but that shouldn’t be our first reaction.
NO
“Antisemitic sneers are still racist, however subtle.”
You are delusional.
“implying that supporters of Israel don’t actually want a solution; which is an ad hominem rant, boyo.”
Whatever. You will not accept any implication of any critisism of Israel at all.
My sarcasm was directed mostly at David, as I explained above.
So you lot going on killing each other forever and a day. Whatever you do, refuse any help offered in case of resolution. Insult anyone who has a different view to your own on the subject.
Shalom!
Bit like we do with the village idiot.
This screeching little shit has the nerve to claim that I am the ‘only one’ who uses insults. You’d have to admire the impertinence – if, that is, you admire lying little shits. I don’t.
David,
Calling everyone an anti-semite just reinforces their mindset.
This is disappointing. I expect this from the idiots here, but not from you. I don’t call ‘everyone’ an antisemite, only those who express antisemitic sentiments, from deranged Nazis like Bilal to sneering tossers (e.g. on this thread) who claim that 1000s of rockets on Sderot are ‘a few rockets, storm in a teacup, dear boy’, or that it’s ‘delusional’ to claim that there is increasing antisemitism in this country, both subtle and overt.
I will continue to highlight antisemitism, and I would have hoped that you of all people would be in favour. But if you aren’t, you aren’t. There is a huge amount of Jew-hatred on the BBC – I and others have provided plenty of proof over time. And the figleaf of ‘We only hate Israel’ or ‘We only hate Zionists’ won’t wash. Not in my eyes, any road.
You will not accept any implication of any critisism of Israel at all.
Delusional, ignorant and mendacious crap.
What I don’t accept is double standards. Demanding perfect behaviour from Israel or else it’s the sneering superiority about those bloody ingrates the Joos, but allowing the genocidal scum of Hammas et al a free hand.
“Demanding perfect behaviour from Israel or else it’s the sneering superiority about those bloody ingrates the Joos, but allowing the genocidal scum of Hammas et al a free hand.”
And where exactly have I done this?
You are delusional.
“I don’t call ‘everyone’ an antisemite, only those who express antisemitic sentiments”
Your definition of antisemitism is different from everyone elses I fear.
Look, ladies and gentlemen: sitting over by the village well, on that bench. See him? he sits in his tatty coat, packet of choocy bisuits by his side. And if you listen carefully, you’ll hear him a-swearing and a-cursing at anyone who comes past, or dares to talk to him. Yes, he’s got a nasty syndrome.
NOxic Shock, they call it. Very nasty indeed.
Nearly Oxfordian | 30.01.09 – 4:13 pm |
I will continue to highlight antisemitism, and I would have hoped that you of all people would be in favour. But if you aren’t, you aren’t. There is a huge amount of Jew-hatred on the BBC – I and others have provided plenty of proof over time. And the figleaf of ‘We only hate Israel’ or ‘We only hate Zionists’ won’t wash. Not in my eyes, any road.
I hear what you’re saying. I totally agree about the hypocrisy of saying “Criticism of Israel isn’t anti-Jew” and then saying it’s perfectly reasonable to expect Jews worldwide to come under attack because of Israel’s actions. I’m also aware of the double standards at play, as I’m sure you know. I’m coming from the same place you are on these things.
All I mean is that sometimes the “A” word is raised too soon, or too many times in an argument, and so has almost become a corollary to Godwin’s Law. And many people, like the BBC and some of their defenders, are coming from a more simplistic, emotional perspective, and don’t really understand (never thought through?) the consequences of the way they criticize Israel. Calling them anti-semites up front doesn’t compute.
Anonymous (not Chuffer) | 30.01.09 – 3:37 pm
“So you lot going on killing each other forever and a day. Whatever you do, refuse any help offered in case of resolution.”
Sorry, but you’ve lost credibility with that. That analysis cruelly misrepresents the situation. You have turned reality on its head, attributing a long history of Palestinian behaviour to Israel. If you come up with statements like that no wonder NO reacts in the way he does.
Antisemitism might mean little to you until someone accuses you of it.
To us the BBC seems to be steering the ship towards the stormy waters of pre war Germany. Your ill-informed remark puts you firmly in the Israel bashing camp, or as Nearly says, makes you a you-know-what.
“Insult anyone who has a different view to your own on the subject.’
Different view? The view you expressed IS an insult.
David P.
I don’t buy those BBC excuses for not coming here. They just don’t ring true.
I do prefer it when they come and defend themselves, but they’re not really in a position to set preconditions before coming to the negotiatinng table, are they? Who do they think they are?
Talk to Hamas, but don’t talk to B-BBC?
Thanks, Sue. You have expressed my feelngs about that first statement (So you lot …) perfectly. It is a sickening display of sneering antisemitism.
I made a conscious effort not to respond to it. Had I done so, I would have said pretty much what you.
Your definition of antisemitism is different from everyone elses I fear.
You are the delusional one. Sue agrees with me, for one – and many others, here and IRL, do also.
You are a perfect example of the antisemite who refuses to accept that he is one: “How can I be antisemitic? I am only insulting Joos, FFS!”.