. 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.
Re – 4:22 pm above.
BBC’s pro-‘Liberty’, but Tory avoiding ‘report’ on Qatada:
“Cleric Qatada given compensation”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7898900.stm
Oh how the BBC used to split their sides with laughter at chimpie Bush remarks and cartoons.
Well goodness me look at this mass hysteria about a cartoon depicting Obama as a chimp.
I know the BBC are just ‘reporting’ it, but I feel they will run and run with this one just as they did with the motoons.
‘Racist’ US cartoon causes stir
http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/7898845.stm
mikewineliberal:
Thanks for the reply….
I’ve also had a look at the ‘1xtra’ and Asian Network websites. Not too sure if I’d class any of the DJ’s as White. Although one or two might be – and if they are, they are doing there best to hide it. Still that is the genre I suppose 🙂
So we are looking at 2-3%. Ditto MOBO award winners. Is this really balanced?
Still it is better than I had feared.
Thanks again for the info… I might even tune into the Adil Ray breakfast show tomorrow. Would be interesting to hear how they report the news. who know’s I might even like the music [it can’t be any worse than Radio 1.
Showing my age I fear:)
vicky | 19.02.09 – 4:23 pm
True that. Most great music has its origins in the blues. And Led Zep and the Stones ripped off delta and chicago blues off remorselessly
Jonathan | 19.02.09 – 4:24 pm
Kanya King has been interviewed on the bbc about this. She pointed out what i pointed out. Lots of white artists are nominated (amy winehouse) and win (joss stone). This in itself has been a source of protests for some.
Whatever bad words you’ve got for Jacqui Smith and her cashing in on the grey area of the second home, you’ve got to applaud her dislike of our friend Abu Qatada. He’s been awarded £2,500 compensation by the European Court. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/4696480/Abu-Qatada-awarded-compensation-by-European-judges-for-breach-of-human-rights.html
There’s a picture of him in the Telegraph today, doing his shopping, which consists of Coca Cola and bog rolls. He’ll be able to buy plenty more of that with his compensation, enough to last till we can get shot of him, maybe.
George R | 19.02.09 – 4:27 pm
Sorry, I see you noticed too.
mikewineliberal | 19.02.09 – 4:23 pm |
That’s a very sticky wicket fellow. There’s a long long and grim history and indeed present (google “christian-terrorist”) of the Bible giving succour and inspiration to violent acts. Evidence shows that the more civilised countries are secular. Religion isn’t the solution; it’s the problem – in all its manifestations
You are Justin Webb and I hereby claim my £10.
The BBC reveals its political position in the following report (‘liberal/left’, with a dhimmi attitude towards Qatada) and also its biased journalism (no reference to a viewpoint from the British political opposition:
“Cleric Qatada given compensation”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7898900.stm
In contrast, ‘The Sun’ gets it fairer, politically and journalistically; ‘The Sun’ does not describe Qatada euphemistically as a mere ‘cleric’ in its headline, and ‘The Sun’ does quote the views of the Tory opposition on the case, unlike the BBC:
‘The Sun’
“Hate preacher awarded £2,500”
[Extract]:
“Shadow home secretary Chris Grayling said today of the ruling: ‘This decision will horrify most reasonable people in the UK.
“‘It shows just how incompetent the Government has been at managing the problem of preachers of hate and, frankly, it makes a mockery of the concept of human rights if we can’t protect ourselves against people who are out to destroy our society.’
“Qatada • who is wanted for terror charges in Jordan • was first detained in 2002, when the UK’s Special Immigration Appeals Commission (Siac) described him as a ‘truly dangerous individual’.
“The Siac said he had given religious authority to numerous high-profile terrorists across the world, including Mohammed Atta, ringleader of the September 11 attacks. ”
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/article2253504.ece
David Preiser (USA) | 19.02.09 – 4:46 pm
I live near him. And, hell, i wish i was him too.
I count the USA as a secular country btw. A great source of its strength.
Unlike the BBC, which puts a Labour spin on the story, the ‘Daily Express’ is being realistic about Abu Qatada and the inability of Jacqui Smith to deport him:
‘Daily Express’:
“We’ll be paying for Abu Qatada for a long time”
http://www.dailyexpress.co.uk/posts/view/85457
Qatada:
Since the security services have loads of hours of surveillance tape on him • couldn’t we prosecute him for a lesser offence • e.g. speeding, littering, bin overflowing [I wonder if he has paid his TV licence fee?] Surely he must have committed one or two minor infractions that could be revealed in open court without disclosing our security sources and or their operations.
A sympathetic judge could then fine him £2,500.01.
Or since he is in jail at the moment • why don’t we charge foreign terror suspects like him (who could leave if they wanted too) board and lodgings?
The Home Secretary should find a way (any way) of getting our money back; and while we are at it • can we do the same to his solicitors?
I know – wishful thinking – and where would it all end. The law needs to be upheld etc… but sometimes the law is an ass. I suppose we’ll just have to put up with it.
BTW when he does get deported back to Jordon – could the BBC run a live feed – so that we can see the look on his face when he is handed back to the Jordanian authorities… Not too sure if I’d believe their promise not to give him a good kicking either –
SHAME 🙂
Jonathan: Yes, 1extra is unique in that it actually plays worse music than radio 1. And the presenters…oh god, its an experience. listen to it once perhaps, the comedic value alone is worth i suppose.
I suppose what I object to is the term ‘black music’ to describe soul, or rap, or any kind of music really. I don’t think of led zeppelin or the beatles as ‘white music’ and i wouldn’t think anybody else does.
Jonathan: Because bushy bearded tosspots like Qatada are highly popular in the Muzzie community. So Liebour appeases them in the hope it keeps 4 million voters on side.
Why do you think Liebour allowed all these bushy bearded arseholes to come here in the first place?
Apropos of nothing here are some ideas that you dont hear on the BBC very often:
http://www.think-israel.org/fjordman.eu.html
interesting insight into radio4
just now on PM news there was a piece commenting on excessive noise in India.
The BBC types kept insisting on calling the city “Mumbia” whereras every single local called it “Bombay”.
Mummy knows best.
To be fair, the Indian government renamed in Mumbai, so that’s why the BBC call it Mumbai. The locals though, as you say, call it Bombay. Which in a way shows that the supposed anti-British/colonial feeling in India is not as bad as some make out.
Wow! Gus and I agree!
“I suppose what I object to is the term ‘black music’ to describe soul, or rap, or any kind of music really. I don’t think of led zeppelin or the beatles as ‘white music’ and i wouldn’t think anybody else does.
Gus Haynes | 19.02.09 – 5:30 pm | #”
When they launched 1Xtra, the BBC kept referring to it as the ‘Black Radio Station’ playing ‘Black Music’.
I complained at the time. I asked what is wrong with the term ‘Urban’ to describe the music/channel. I also asked if they would allow a black DJ to play an Eminem record or a white DJ such as Westwood to play a black rapper’s music.
Surprisingly, they didn’t even reply…
Although they were forced to make a grovelling apology over their trailer featuring (a white kid – natch ;-)) riding his BMX and miming a drive by shooting using his fingers as the ‘gun’. That was back in about 2002/2003. Do you think the BBC’s glorification of inner city violence may have had an effect on our youth?
A different angle to the BBC’s on Qatada:
“Abu Qatada’s Comfortable British Jihad” (by Raffaello Pantucci, 2008)
http://raffaellopantucci.wordpress.com/2008/07/10/abu-qatadas-comfortable-british-jihad/
Somebody please explain, cos don’t know..
We are a Democracy, right?
We have (at the moment) the right to vote in or out our political representatives, right?
Our Political representatives in Parliament enact Law and sign it in to the Statute book, right?
So, via OUR representatives the laws exist to govern and protect us, secure in the knowledge that if we don’t like them we can vote in people prepared to change them. Right?
Judges are appointed by our Political representatives, right?
Once the Judges are appointed, no one can remove them, right?
The Judges are supposed to “apply” the Law as written by our Political representatives, right?
My problem arises from the apparent fact that no matter what OUR Political representatives want (or say they want) to do about unpleasant people that somehow manage to walk into our Country more easily than we can walk out of it, they NEVER seem to be able to.
Judges seem to decide EVERYTHING these day’s, “Judicial review” seems to be the order of the day.
Would someone like to explain to me why, if laws turn out to be totally counter productive to the wellbeing of US, the majority, (Democracy still means the will of the majority don’t it? Or was that changed by a Judge too?) Why the law making representatives fail to do anything about it above wringing their hands and wailing “it is an unintended consequence of the law”
Additionally, Judges seem to have all lateral thinking removed as soon as they don the wig. If they are going to apply some of this bloody stupid Law, you would think one or two would use some common sense. Why award this twat £2500 of our money?? Why not a fiver? They know how much he is costing the tax payer…
There we go; I have answered my own questions… no common sense, not the Politicians nor the Judges. If they had we would not have this ongoing carnival of idiocy that is making us the deserved laughing stock of the world. Even though it gets spun as “Democracy at work” it isn’t and it’s going to put an end to Democracy before too long.
mikewineliberal | 19.02.09 – 5:04 pm |
I live near him. And, hell, i wish i was him too.
You live in Maryland?
Jacqui Smith [Again]:
According to the BBC
“Sources close to the home secretary have told BBC News she spends the bulk of her time in London but had asked the police to maintain a “low profile” so the neighbours may not have realised she was in residence.”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7899201.stm
My summation in two words • Bull S**t!!
I’d also like to ask you Beeboids a question. On yesterday’s lunchtime TV news • a BBC reporter categorically dismissed the testimony of Ms Smith’s immediate neighbours on the grounds that a BBC employee who lived close by had noticed that the Home Secretary was in residence most nights of the week. But if Jacqui had asked the police to maintain such a low profile • that even her immediate neighbours were unaware of her presence • then how did the BBC employee notice that she was there?
There would seem to be only four possible explanations for this apparent discrepancy…
1. The BBC employee is super, super observant. Unlikely given that the BBC’s finest couldn’t spot a single Hamas terrorist, amongst the casualty lists in Gaza.
2. The BBC employee doesn’t exist. Unlikely • the BBC like to twist the truth to suit their political masters, they might also publicize propaganda or spin as fact (see all casualties in Gaza are civilian line) but I doubt they’d make something up entirely.
3. The BBC employee is lying. Plausible • it is reasonable to assume that most BBC employees support the GVN (given the corporations output). Perhaps, the said employee wanted to help Jacqui get out of a tight spot. He or she probably thought that they were doing the right thing, etc…
4. The BBC employee is Jacqui Smith’s sister (and or a boyfriend working for the corporation). Both or either would know the truth, but neither could be regarded as an impartial source. Surely, the BBC couldn’t be that foolish • could they?
If not • then why has the corporation failed to identify this source? More to the point, why have they publicized the testimony of someone who isn’t prepared to put their name above the parapet? And used their testimony to denigrate those who have? Now if this was a case of organised crime or terrorism, I could understand • witnesses need protection • but this is not the case here. So why doesn’t the BBC name there source or stop using them?
I notice that Martin Bell is leading the charge against Jacqui (see BBC article). So now that one of their own has raised some objections • the BBC seem to be taking it more seriously. Indeed, if the odious Mr Bell decides to don his white suit once more, and stands in Reddich (might this be why he has taken up the case?) against our dear Home Sec. • then what would the BBC do?
Answers on a post-card please…
Gus Haynes/ Jonathan:
Bonzo Dog Band (1968) “Can blue men sing the whites?” about sums it up.
To be fair, the Indian government renamed in Mumbai, so that’s why the BBC call it Mumbai. The locals though, as you say, call it Bombay. Which in a way shows that the supposed anti-British/colonial feeling in India is not as bad as some make out.
Yeah, it reminds me a bit of the way our Gvt tried to eradicate East Yorkshire.
Mumbai was rechristened in 1997 back to it’s historical name, but people still seem to prefer Bombay
Vaclav Klaus today made a fine speech to the EU parliament, he holds the rotating presidency of the EU yet his speech was ignored by the BBC, I wonder why the BBC would ignore him as they seem very keen to report on the EU?
Could it be that Klaus is a sceptic on AGW and the EU consitution, could it be that Klaus is being given the BBC cold shoulder treatment specially reserved for its ideological enemies?
In March there is a major climate conference sponsored by the heartlands institute, many highly qualified experts wil be in attendence, will the BBC cover it do you think?
If their are still people(MWL) who still think the BBC is not politically motivated and driven by political spite then all they have to do is look at the BBC news and what news they MISS OUT!
Sarkozy got the full on live broadcast when he spoke as president of the EU because he supports the full EU federal project, Klaus doesnt toe the BBC line so he is invisible to the BBC comrades, funny that eh?
The bBC its love for Hamas and half the story.
Hamas ‘sends Barack Obama letter’
John Kerry visits the destroyed American International School in northern Gaza
http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/45493000/jpg/_45493878_kerrygaza466.jpg
So from that healining picture what impression do you get. That the IDF blew up the school. (Well actually they did but here is what Abu Bowen isn’t telling you)
Gaza’s American school attacked
Several rooms at the school were ransacked
Armed men have raided a privately-run American school in the north of the Gaza Strip, setting fire to buses and stealing computer equipment.
It was the second attack on the school, in Beit Lahiya, in the past two days. On Thursday a rocket-propelled grenade was fired at the building.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/7185015.stm
and a few more stories about that school.
American Int’l School blown up in Gaza
Masked gunmen on Saturday morning blew up large parts of the American International School in the Gaza Strip after stealing equipment and furniture.
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull&cid=1176152845990
Previously unknown group claims Gaza school attack
A hitherto unknown group called Mujahidi Beit al-Makdes (Holy Warriors of Jerusalem) said its men were behind Thursday’s rocket attack on the American International School in the Gaza Strip.
RPG strikes American school in Gaza
The group said the school was targeted because it was “the last symbol of the US administration and its allies in the Gaza Strip.”
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull&cid=1198517341829
Yet according to recent Al Beeb reports only the jews have damaged it.
The scale of the damage wreaked by Israeli air strikes and armour is becoming clear. Many homes and buildings were badly damaged, like the American International School in Beit Lahiya.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/in_pictures/7837155.stm
The bBC its love for Hamas and half the story.
I have just received this link which is a short film about spread of a ‘non violent’ Islam; worth watching.
http://blip.tv/play/AdmXMI6nSg
David p – no, although I love The Wire.
He has a uk bolthole too.
Cassandra | 19.02.09 – 6:19 pm
The bbc did a long interview with Klaus two years ago about his views on climate change.
BBC Radio Times asks
Media Revolution
Thursday 19 February
7:30pm – 8:00pm
BBC2 North
3/3 – Tomorrow’s TV
The final episode of Media Revolution, a three-part series from the Money Programme, looks at the UK TV industry. Max Flint charts the extraordinary rise of Britain’s global tele-industry, but learns that like print, British TV’s existence is threatened by plummeting advertising revenues, the internet, and the explosion of information sources. What will it take to keep one of Britain’s chief creative industries alive?
Answer: Keep on giving us your £billions
I have just watched the 6pm News (Thursday) Never has so much time been spent on yesterday’s news -helicopter crash happened yesterday – but the helicopter will be recovered soon. So what happened to 18 men (thankfully who survived) is much more important to the rest of the population than the worsening of the government finances. Either the bBC needed to find a good news story or protect the government.
MWL,
TWO YEARS?
That makes it all OK does it? Two years pass, the speech by Sarkozy that was covered live by the BBC yet Klaus is ignored and you seem to think that because Klaus got a spot two years ago it exonerates the BBC?
The climate conference coming in March will be ignored by the BBC because it doesnt fit with their prejudice and the Klaus speech was ignored for the same reason.
The BBC found time to cover imadinnerjacket live at the UN but cannot find time to cover the head of state holding the EU presidency?
Sorry MWL the two year old interview doesnt begin to cover the BBC bias my friend.
.
Cassandra | 19.02.09 – 6:47 p
“Sorry MWL the two year old interview doesnt begin to cover the BBC bias my friend”
Two months any better?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/7792317.stm
On Radio 5 Drive there was a soundbite from some bloke from Grant Thornton claiming that McSnot’s VAT cut had worked as VAT tax receipts hadn’t fallen by as much as expected.
What I was surprised with was the beeboid didn’t question this statement.
Perhaps the real reason VAT receipts didn’t fall as much was down to heavy discounting before and just after Xmas by shops, the massive sell off of goods by Woolworth, Zavvi and MFI to mention 3?
I find it interesting that if someone had said the VAT cut was a waste the beeboids would have attacked that.
A tale of two BBC stories and the Brownie….
Under the headline ‘Recession reduces total tax paid’ the BBC accurately report on today’s debt figures from the Office for National Statistics [ONS]
“Government borrowing now stands at 47.8% of the UK’s economic output. Last January, it stood at 42.2%”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7898871.stm
However, in a subsequent article today, the BBC also report on Gordon Brown’s Press Conference with Silvio Berlusconi. Not only was there no mention of the Italian PM bribing the husband of a UK cabinet minister • I wonder if a Tory PM would be afforded the same leeway • there was also this little nugget: “Mr Brown defended Britain’s levels of debt claiming it was one of the lowest of the major economies at 40% of national income”.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7900193.stm
So Brown claims UK debt is only 40% of GDP. While the ONS reveal that it is 47.8%. It wasn’t even 40% last year and nor would it be anywhere near 40% today, even if Northern Rock was taken out of the equation. Add in the fact that the ONS has just announced that “…the debts of the Royal Bank of Scotland and Lloyds will be included in the public finances. It said this could add between £1 trillion and £1.5tn to public sector debt – between 70% and 100% of the UK’s GDP….” And the true level of Brown’s brownie becomes apparent.
Now given that the ONS reported today & given that this is one of the major news stories of the day (even on the BBC) then why didn’t the BBC challenge Brown’s obvious lie… either in person at the press conference (I assume a BBC reporter was present • in fact there were probably several • BBC News 24, Five Live etc…) or on the website. I presume both the writer and editor of the second story were aware of the true ONS figures • and if not, why not!
Surely, if nothing-else, it is the job of our national broadcaster to correct deliberate falsehoods laid out by our political masters. And please Beeboids don’t us the ‘impartiality’ defence. These are the FACTS • our National debt is officially 47.8% (even without PFI, Pension Liabilities); Brown claimed it was only 40%. Now 7.8% might not sound much between friends, but in terms of national GDP • the discrepancy is huge!! You can’t even argue that Brown was legitimately rounding down • otherwise it would have been 45% – if he was rounding to the nearest 10 • then he should have said 50%.
So come on then BBC • why wasn’t this lie challenged. The very least you could do, is draw your readers attention to the discrepancy in your on-line article…
Because its a career-limiting thing for a BBC hack to do perhaps? It must be like a job at Pravda or Isvestia in the 50’s: just repeat the tractor production statistics and think of the pension.
Deborah 6:43
In contrast Channel 4 news led with the news that UK debt will “double overnight” and Sir John Gieve’s comments that the UK may be heading for a 10-year Japanese style depression.
Maybe that will be the lead on BBC news at 10 tonight.
With regard to Vaclav Klaus people..
EUReferendum has this..
http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/2009/02/in-heart-of-our-democracy.html
The BBC’s Obama Diary continues to be a disgrace. Among today’s entries from the usual suspects are Kevin Connolloy’s blatant propagandizing for the “stimulus”, plus a little white lie, and Richard Lister’s failure to tell you the truth. I’d link to the diary itself, but HaloScan seems to have cut my allowed number of links to 3, all of which I need to link to actual reporting and not BBC drivel. The Obama Diary can be easily found through a search on the BBC website.
Kevin Connolly:
Lots of Americans were horrified by the absence of a detailed plan in anything George W Bush said. They voted for interventionism, and Mr Obama is supplying it.
If fewer homes are repossessed, the market won’t be flooded with properties being sold off cheap by the banks and values will stabilise.
And less widely reported today were the latest figures for new housing starts. They are down by 56.2% on last January.
Ordinarily, that would seem rather shocking but it does mean that the problem of over-supply is being corrected too, and in the long run that should help stem the catastrophic drop in house prices.
The market is beginning to correct itself. It doesn’t mean an end is in sight, but at least we know what an end will look like when it comes.
He opens by just making stuff about a supposed lack of detail in Bush’s plan, and that people were “horrified”. With this statement he’s denying that the details of his beloved Obamessiah’s “stimulus” plan were not only mostly hidden from the public until just before it was passed, but not even the politicians who voted for it had a chance to read it before voting on it. Then Connolly goes into obvious salesman mode. He’s already seeing Robert Peston’s “green shoots of recovery”. Why does the BBC think it’s necessary to explain the “stimulus” package of a foreign country in such glowing terms?
And then Richard Lister makes two entries about President Obamessiah’s visit to Denver to sign the Spendulus Bill into law. Not only does Lister get in the obligatory “renewable energy” reference, but his entry was essentially an edited version – sometimes seemingly word for word – of Justin Webb’s report on the signing from the other day.
What Lister fails to inform his diary readers is that there was a tax protest in Denver. It wasn’t all stimulated unicorns and bunnies and a pot of taxpayer gold at the end of the rainbow.
Funny, the other tax protests which have followed President Obamessiah to Seattle, and little old Mesa, AZ, seem to have escaped the all-seeing eye of the BBC. I would have expected an international media organization, one with at least eight reporters covering this, to be able to inform the public.
Agenda, what agenda? I quote again from Paul’s letter to the Corinthians:
Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand;
2 By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain.
I Corinthians 15:1-2
Why is the BBC even doing this diary? What purpose does it serve? Whom does it serve?
Grant
Yes the BBCs lead item on the news was about the record government debt and the comment about a 10 year recession.
I love it here when people try to pre-empt bias, and it always backfires…
Don’t know if anyone’s spotted this, but some sinister shilling for the eco lobby again by the BBC. Some eco-facist has now decided that families with more than two children are recklessly damaging the environment, and thus proposes an urgent passing of a UK “two-child only policy”. No surprise to see the BBC behind him. The sheer arrogance and effort to undermine traditional family values under the ubiquitous banner of supposed “climate change” beggars belief. Welcome to the Socialist Worker’s Republic of the United Kingdom. BBPravda reports tractor figures are above target and Chairman Brown is the red sun in the worker’s hearts!
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/7884138.stm
I love it here when people try to pre-empt bias, and it always backfires…
Even the BBC has to tell something approximating to the truth occasionally.
Trouble is it’s generally done with more spin than a West Indies bowler
Gus 10:37
I was delighted that my prediction backfired. Let’s hope the BBC keeps up this improvement and one day achieves its goal of impartial reporting.
Question Time and Jacqui Smith:
A member of the QT audience claimed that his home office directly overlooked the front door of Jacqui Smith’s Peckham home. According to his testimony, her protection squad was only there for about a third of the week • and then only for about 35 weeks of the year. In other words, his account totally supports the complaint made by Ms Smith’s immediate neighbours.
Yet, remember the BBC tried to rubbish the neighbours account by referring to the testimony of an unnamed BBC employee. In light of this corroborating account, I ask again who is this mysterious BBC employee? And furthermore, why have the BBC placed such great store by his or her account?
Is the mysterious one – Jacqui Smith’s sister?
Come on Beeboids answers please….
frankos 10:55
I agree with what you are trying to say, just that I guess you are not much of a cricket fan !
The West Indies are more renowned for fastbowlers arent they?
Were in my day anyway, the current lot aren’t much good compared to the 70s team.
“Have you read the old testament? A far more unsettling collection of fairy stories than the Koran.” MWL
This ‘all religion’s are the same; they are all as bad as each other’ attitude to Islam should not be allowed to pass unchallenged but since it would involve a lengthy screed I would just like to point out that, with regards to Islam, it is unique in its mandating of aggressive religious warfare, its condoning of lying, its dual morality (one for dealing with believers and one for dealing with infidels) and its fetishisation of its seminal sacred text as the verbatim word of the creator, among whose instructions, and not the least of them, is that one should follow in detail the examples set in life and conduct, of a brutal and slightly debauched autocrat. I might add that many its immutable prescriptions, frozen in time as sharia law on which any fundamental debate was closed down a thousand years ago, happen to be incompatible with a liberal democracy.
Most of the crimes committed in the name of Christianity have been tangential to the true message of the gospels: most of the crimes committed in the name of Islam have sprung directly from the sacred texts and are not regarded as crimes at all by believers.
Come on Beeboids answers please….
Jonathan | 19.02.09 – 11:54 pm
Bbc london a couple of nights ago interviewed two neighbours: one said she wasn’t there for the majority of the week; the other said she was there 3-4 days. No bbc employee
Grant | 19.02.09 – 11:49 p
The report had a visual showing a red houses of parliament. An
impartial bbc would have shown a blue one too.
wally | 20.02.09 – 12:45 am
As you imply, not a debate for this board. But the historical record suggests christianity is far more beligerent than islam.
MWL,
Thanks for the link, the typical BBC attack piece it reserves for BBC enemies, Klaus is painted as an unpopular whacko firmly in the minority, the BBC just cant help themselves can they?