Please tell me I’m wrong. I can’t find anything on the BBC about the message Geert Wilders has received from Irving N. Jones on behalf of the Secretary of State for the Home department.
(If anyone hasn’t seen Fitna yet it can be seen on Jihad Watch).
Wilders barred from UK: “would threaten community harmony and therefore public security”
The Telegraph’s report also seems rather inhibited, or am I imagining things.
“A spokesman told the daily Telegraph “The government opposes extremism in all its forms.” ” It will stop those who want to spread extremism hatred and violent messages from coming into our country”
So by stopping someone from coming into this country who wants to stop extremism hatred and violent messages, the government is stopping extremism hatred and violent messages?
Pull the other one.
Whatever side you’re on, it’s certainly a big news story, but maybe the BBC thinks making a big fuss would threaten community harmony and therefore public security.
If the BBC is not reporting this, or is playing it down, it is far more sinister than just another victory for Lord Ahmed.
Update:
A report has now appeared on the BBC website. Was I too quick to post or was the BBC a bit slow?
Nicola Campbell on Radio 5 just did a great defence of violent Moozie’s on Radio 5.
Campbell kept trying to compare the Bible to the Koran claiming that both have ‘violent bits in them’
But can anyone think of once single incident in the last 50 years where Christians have beheaded Muslims or blown up buildings, flown planes into office blocks in the name of the Bible?
I thought so.
Campbell and the BBC, we love cleaning Muslim bottom.
Deep joy.
Anyone hear Chris Huhne on Today?
John Humphrys was on our side.
Not a lot, but on our side!
By the way,
Rob Santiago | 11.02.09 – 7:58 pm
What you say may very well be true, but my point was that if there is any truth in the fact that, as moderate muslims would have it, ‘Not all Muslims espouse violence and hatred’ then they should speak out against the violence and hatred, and not against Wilders.
After all, they often say
1. Other religions have dodgy bits in their holy books.
2. There are issues over translation and interpretation of the Koran.
3. You can have a pick ‘n’mix attitude as a moderate Muslim.
Giving so-called moderates the benefit of the doubt, which one should do for argument’s sake, then there’s no grounds for banning Wilders who was after all merely putting real things together so that they made a case against extremism all by themselves. He did not incite violence and hatred, all he did was show fanatics doing it. Which moderates assure us they don’t support.
That’s why Chris Huhne was ridiculous. He says the film is revolting. Yes, it is, so in defence of free speech, he advocates banning the messenger. Completely bonkers.
Even if we are cynical about the existence of moderate Islam, it doesn’t alter the argument against banning Geert Wilders from coming and showing the film, and moderates should agree.
Everyone must stop appeasing Lord Ahmed or caving in to his threats, and if Chris Huhne loves free speech that’s what he should be getting all het up about.
David Preiser (USA) | 11.02.09 – 4:00 pm,
Sorry, didn’t check your comment before I wrote mine at 11:39 pm.
Jason | 12.02.09 – 12:48 am,
There are numerous fine examples of left wing extremism among these 2000 comments on The Editors blog, most of them directed in fury at Mark Thompson for daring to appear to be impartial in the Israeli-Arab conflict by not broadcasting the DEC appeal for Gaza:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/2009/01/bbc_and_the_gaza_appeal.html?page=4#comments
errr.. thats about it.
archduke | 12.02.09 – 12:27 am
Yeah, and maybe a couple of sports journalists.
Yes the wheel has turned 360 and we are living in a wold of total moral inversion maintained by this spineless corrupt government and its little helpers in state sponsored media.
Achmed should be arrested for threatening violence on the Houses of P.
All the thousands of sleeper jihadists we are told are being monitored in fact invoke the very verses shown in wilders film and the gov know it so they get the BBC to make out that Wilders is a racist and unwelcome.
30 million viewers have already seen the film.
talk about shutting the stable door!
A recent campaign in the States put the ‘Obsession’ film onto DVDs and into regional papers there, to be distributed free. Anyone have any idea who funded that?
We could do with something similar here. Although I doubt we’d be allowed to show the people of Britain the truth – regrettably, our lack of a written constitution guaranteeing freedom of expression, speech, association and thought makes the existence of Jacqui Smith, leader of the Second Home Office and her Unterführer, Jack ‘Boots’ Straw, possible.
What a country – we are a laughing stock around the world today.
Campbell kept trying to compare the Bible to the Koran claiming that both have ‘violent bits in them’
martin | 12.02.09 – 8:04 am
But the difference is that if a western religious leader made a speech to a crowd in the West saying ‘the Bible says smite your enemies so that means we must immediately start wars against muslims’ the crowd would say ‘Boo Hiss, get off, stupid! Let us get on with our lives’.
But when a Mullah incites a crowd by quoting from the koran, like in the FITNA film, they crowd responds enthusiastically to say the least. A strange sense of honour and a maturity of thinking stuck at the age of a 10 year old is a dangerous combination. Look at that muslim doctor in Scotland for example. One minute a hard working doctor, then he listens to the mullah’s speeches, and he responds with ‘yes! yes!’ and proceeds to drive his car at an airport. What kind of effect does that religion have on the brain to make it do that to someone with such good prospects of wealth and status?
And who is this person in our midst who is threatening to call up 10,000 enemies of Britain at the drop of a hat to join him? Shouldn’t he be deported or in Gitmo?
Some good posts above, eg Jason’s 9:07
So what does our great British democracy do? Ban anyone who tells the truth, to appease evil. For Gods Sake – these people are disgusting, beyond contempt.What is wrong wiith you stupid bastards?
AndrewSouthLondon | 11.02.09 – 9:16 pm
Yes, we have a democracy, and the fact that voters have voted in these types to rule us, shows how stupid the voters are.
If only they would think about the policies of the Labour politicians they vote for, they would realise they agree with them on very little.
martin:
Perhaps fatty Spliff should remember just WHO blew up the tube trains and bus on 7/7
martin | 11.02.09 – 8:21 pm
yes, it is hard to give them a positive spin sometimes, but the BBC are doing their best.
I think it is about time the BBC got out their grainy old black and white pictures of the Ku Klux Klan again to remind us of the real threat. It is a good job we have digital recording, as otherwise the film would be completely worn out by now.
frankos:
The true identity of England has now disappeared without anyones consent.frankos | 11.02.09 – 3:34 pm
But they did have consent.
We have a democracy. People voted for this. Voters are stupid.
For decades they have voted for politicians who have the opposite views to their own.
TPO:
Oh the joys of Islam.
A Saudi judge has ordered a woman should be jailed for a year and receive 100 lashes after she was gang-raped, it was claimed last night.
According to the Saudi Gazette, she eventually ‘confessed’ to having ‘forced intercourse’ with her attackers and was brought before a judge at the District Court in Jeddah.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/…g- adultery.html
TPO | 12.02.09 – 12:09 am
One bizarre aspect of the muslim way of thinking is that this woman, when she gives birth, will, I predict, remain totally loyal to Islam. The child will be sent to the mosque almost daily (like most muslim children in Britain are) for brainwashing.
She will rejoice when he fasts and recites pages of the Koran.
I know muslim women who have been treated like dirt by their religion, and even abandoned by their ‘religious’ husbands, and yet all they can think about is having a son who is a ‘proper muslim’.
In 1997 a relatively small proportion of voters felt it was time for a change – mainly in the South East, youngish white collar professionals – the demographic ABC1 under 35’s.And their rebellion against “mummy”. They bought in hook line and sinker to the mendacious “sleaze” label generated by the Guardian. “Cash for questions” – seems a joke compared with todays Labour aristocracy. Cash for anything.”Laws bent while you wait”.
So no – I don’t think “The People” voted for this kind of Britain, in which the police mass-moonwalk in reverse from an embolded crowd of young Muslims, because they know if thay lay a glove on any one of them, their labour-appointed bosses will hang them out to dry.
We were lied to, it was our mistake. We will soon put that right, and we will uproot “new Labour” and all its apparachniks – the BBC, the public sector placemen, the quangos, the red pigs in wigs, whole sodding lot of them, and put them on a very large raft and tow it out to sea. Wherever they land they can start their own country. We want ours back.
MoveAmericaForward Holds Press Conference in DC to Unveil Advert that Attacks Obama’s Decision to Close Detention Camps at Guantanamo Bay
Video http://www.moveamericaforward.org/
.
WILDERS is my hero. Today we are all Wilders.
AndrewSouthLondon | 12.02.09 – 3:15 pm |
We can uproot New Labour all we like. The sad truth is that nothing will change. Witness the utter silence from the Tories on this.
Dusgraceful coverage on Sky. I’m not sure I’ll be able to watch al-Beeb for fear of having an embolism!
Geert is Hero. Today he shows up Nulab Project for what it is -a Marxist Banana Republic Government.
How easy it is for some people to walk into Britain, and to stay permanently, although the BBC doesn’t report such examples:
‘Evening Standard’
“Migrants who walked into UK just by saying ‘family'”
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23640534-details/Migrants+who+walked+into+UK+just+by+saying+%27family%27/article.do
The politically opportunist Labour government, together with sections of the ‘liberal-left’ (and sections of the BBC) is complicit in opposing the principle of free entry of a Dutch MP, and opposing free speech, and such people are, in effect, expressing dhimmitude towards those pictured here:
‘Jihadwatch’:
“Wilders flying to Heathrow this morning, defying ban”
[Extract]:
‘Wilders is the maker of the film Fitna that depicts Islamic jihadists preaching hatred and violence, and acting hatefully and violently, in accord with passages of the Qur’an. In barring him from the UK, British officials are giving aid and comfort to Wilders’ detractors and foes. And what sort of people are they? Do they ever traffic in “extremism, hatred and violent messages”? Judge for yourself…..’
http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/024808.php
Roland Deschain: “We can uproot New Labour all we like. The sad truth is that nothing will change. Witness the utter silence from the Tories on this”
This is time for the people to speak, not the Tories. Labour know they out-vote the Tories – thats how seats in the Commons work. They also know they can’t out-vote the People. They are falling off the tightrope of political correctness in slow motion in front of 42 million British voters.
I don’t konow how they sleep at night
.
Nothing will change. The Tories will win the next election and nothing will change.
AndrewSouthLondon:
About 20 years ago if every single MP had been a Conservative, Parliament would have roughly represented the people on most issues.
But the people chose to vote for people with the exact opposite views to their own. Norman Tebbit was always making this point.
Just one example from that period, capital punishment:
% voters in favour 80%
% conservative MPs in favour: 80%
% Labour in favour 0%
% Liberal – just one: Cyril Smith MP for Rochdale
incidentally, at the time of the last vote on this subject, all 5 Question Time panel – against. All the Any Questions panel on Radio 4 – against
Most people make voting the decisions with the same brain that watches tv adverts. It’s all about image.
Hi Sue, welcome!
So the BBC was biased because the story wasn’t on the BBC website when you checked? But the BBC is still biased when it does publish the story later, or discusses it on Today, or on the day’s main news bulletins or has a question about it on QT?
You are always going to run into problems in alledging bias when it comes to the choice of news stories.
Bulls**t Detective | 14.02.09 – 10:27 pm
Thank you for your welcome.
No, the BBC wasn’t biased “because” it wasn’t on the BBC website when I checked.
I comment on BBC bias “because” it is biased.
I suspect it was reluctant to put the story on its webside until coverage in other media made doing so inevitable.
People who share the BBC’s outlook stubbornly refuse to acknowledge the existence of its bias. So you’re right that we ‘run into problems’ in alleging BBC bias.
That’s what this website is for.
(B-BBC; it’s what we do.)
When about 30 million have seen a video, even the BBC cannot pretend it does not exist.
Here is an example of bias on this subject though:
Question Time panel:
Number supporting the video – zero
Number against the video – 4
In effect, the BBC QT panel was taking the side of extreme muslims on this issue. Balanced? Balance would be a moderate muslim on the panel who wanted the video shown in the UK as a warning.
Is “Bulls**t Detective” seriously saying that in any way represents the views of BBC licence payers? Are we not entitled to get even one single audience member, let alone panelist, to give an alternative point of view?
If you think QT was fair and balanced on this subject, you are just the kind of person they are looking for to join the audience.