Quite fond of getting onto all fours…
“Mr. Galloway kissed the ground after crossing into Gaza.”
“I have entered Palestine many times but the most emotional of these is after the 22-day genocidal aggression against the Palestinian people,” he told reporters, referring to the Israeli offensive which ended on 18 January which Israeli said was launched in response to rocket fire from Gaza.”
Making sure they mention the genocidal aggression etc. etc., they forgot to add that Gorgeous was donating direct to Ismail Haniya, leader of Hamas
“We are giving you now 100 vehicles and all of their contents, and we make no apology for what I am about to say. We are giving them to the elected government of Palestine,” Galloway said at a press conference in Gaza City.
Galloway said he personally would be donating three cars and 25,000 pounds to Hamas prime minister Ismail Haniya as he dared the West to try to prosecute him for aiding what it considers a terror group.
“I say now to the British and European governments, if you want to take me to court, I promise you there is no jury in all of Britain who will convict me. They will convict you.”
Galloway made the announcement at an outdoor conference in the presence of several senior Hamas officials, and his words were greeted by shouts of “Allahu Akbar!” (God is Great).
Aid for Gaza =Aid for Hamas.
Oh did anyone see on the news in the crows there were some Sikhs cheering the troops
martin | 10.03.09 – 11:14 pm
indeed – an the mayor of Luton is a sikh. was on the telly greeting and chatting the troops and quoted as being very proud of them.
Is this the reason that Galloway champions the muslim cause , is this where they want to start the next revolution?
d | 10.03.09 – 11:55 pm | #
you got it in one. that is part of the plan – to create the conditions for civil war, so that the Marxists can grab control under the Civil Contingencies Act.
that Luton liveleak video i posted above is proof of that.
think about it for minute – *somebody* high up thought it would be an “ok” idea for a bunch of jihadists to turn up at an army parade.
chief constables have powers that can refuse a demo if its deemed to be likely to cause a breach of the peace. somebody overruled that.
think about that luton video for bit. i note that newsnight does NOT show the reaction.. its only briefly mentioned – and the only clip is of the jihadists and NOT what happened afterwards.
pravda? you bet.
“Is this the reason that Galloway champions the muslim cause , is this where they want to start the next revolution?”
Yes.Check out links between the extreme left and the Muslim Brotherhood.Start with Respect,Galloway’s party.That is the most public connection but there are more sinister ones.
“The two, thought to be members of the public watching the parade in Luton, were held for public order offences.”
“The protesters then had to be protected by police as supporters of the soldiers turned on them shouting “Scum” and “No surrender to the Taleban”.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/beds/bucks/herts/7935049.stm
Could it be that those arested were not part of the “anti-war” protesters.?
Good job the police were there or the “anti war” protesters would have been lynched.
George Galloway is beyond absurd. His so-called “Respect” party is a sick joke. I can think of no public figure who irritates the hell out of me more than this self-righteous clown. Who can ever forget the way he addressed Saddam Hussein on that infamous occasion? Heaping fulsome praise on the tyrant with the words: “Sir, I admire your indefatigability”. George loves our enemies whereever they are.
I wonder how Galloway’s catsuit would go down ,if you will pardon the expression,with Hamas? To say nothing of his companion.
“there were some Sikhs cheering the troops”
No better friend, no worse enemy, as our enemies found out in WW2.
I spotted a few brown faces in the crowd of angry locals who were attempting to remonstrate with the Islamic scumbags. Now that’s what I call integration.
The “marxists in short trousers” at the BBC think of Respect as the HMG opposition party, just like they think Vince Cable is the shadow Chancellor of the Exchequer. Anything but face up to the double digit Tory lead in the polls, and that with a fair wind they shortly will be toast.
JohnA:
Of course it is relevant.
Bexause it goes to show yet again that there are fifth-columnists in Britain – and that they are wholly among one part of the population.
Which goes aginst all the RoP claptrap the BBC feeds us.
http://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/scotsol/homepage/news/article2311845.ece
Re that Luton demo, notice how the al-bbc are at pains to point out that they were only a “handful”!
Sir Oswald Mosley was also formerly a Labour MP and also one of the most sinister of populist politicians.
Whoever came up with the idea of throwing bacon at the jihadists is a fricking genius.
Shaz, Bacon is expensive. How about urine filled glass bottles instead?
Go to the Honest Reporting archives and look up the GeeGee being interviewed on Syrian TV. His comments on Jews and on Israel, even surprised his Syrian interviewer who asked him to repeat them. Like Tom Paulin he uses foreign stations to air his nasty views.
Ethan | 11.03.09 – 12:14 pm | #
Did that Muzzie BritPak already use that formula on supermarket food?
There is no doubt that Galloway is in someones pocket (originally Sadaam, now someone else)
What his paymasters don’t realise is that there could be no worse advert for any faith than that pompous airhead.
Perhaps he is actually paid by the Yanks to ensure Muslims are unpopular for ever.
Nice to hear both Brown and Cameron condemning the Luton ‘protesters’ at PMQs.
Frankos
Indeed they did. I think it’s time to get Biblical on those demonstrators. Eye for an eye etc.
But will the BBC put the story of the Luton loonies back on its front page – or keep it relegated to the Beds/Bucks/Herts page ? Strong condemnation by lots of senior politicians – nah, that ain’t national news ?
Ethan
I fear all this is building up to a bust-up. More confrontations and riots anytime this summer.
The idea of bacon throwing is genius – might I also suggest balls of pork mince and economy sausages.
Don’t know about the economy sausages, I don’t think there’s enough pork in them to count as hell-worthy.
Go to the Honest Reporting archives and look up the GeeGee being interviewed on Syrian TV.
Ricky Martin | 11.03.09 – 12:56 pm
Couldn’t find it. I will appreciate a URL.
The News that Didn’t Happen Part 1
The story of the BritPak extremists insulting our troops in Luton yesterday was, of course brushed aside by the Sharia Broadcasting Corporation.
Today, the Watford parade – which attracted thousands of patriotic Brits – appears to have been airbrushed out of the Sharia news. Can’t find it anyway – on BBC/SBC teletext, BBC/SBC website or main news programmes.
Strange that – despite it being the lead story everywhere else. And who claimed the BBC/SBC hasn’t been infiltrated??
Can the scum who demonstrated against our troops in Luton be prosecuted for treason? I damn well hope so.
so those of who upset about Luton don’t support freedom of speech then?
if it was up to me i would have let them protest at another time and place, and told them that to protest in front of the troops was inflammatory and insulting. but to ban them full stop? no, not for that. if they are members of a radical organisation, and if that organisation supports terrorism, then yes they should be arrested for that.
Not much coverage of yesterday’s protests in Luton by the BBC apart from the two interviews on Today R4.
Abdul Malik of Luton Town’s Race Advisory Forum thought the timing of yesterday’s demo was insensitive, but he supports it, being anti-war. He argues that demos are preferable to violence. http://news.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/today/newsid_7936000/7936532.stm
Later, Luton’s Labour M.P. Margaret Moran http://news.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/today/newsid_7936000/7936870.stmsaid the demo was disgusting, aplogised “on behalf of the majority.” and said the protesters are “members of Al Mujaharoun.” A sort of explanation, or excuse for their behaviour.
The BBC is playing down the significance of this, colluding with the government to reassure us that ‘it’s only by a tiny minority’.
They want to downplay this as though it’s a one-off, local issue.
The Daily Mail graces its pages with a gaggle of burqua-clad femail demonstrators.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1160958/Now-Muslim-hate-preacher-mocks-British-troops-dead-comrade-shame-homecoming-protest.html
Al Mujaharoun is a pro-terror Islamist organisation. A worrying adjunct – I came across it while Googling – is that Douglas Murray has been banned from speaking at the LSE, while Al-Mujaharoun have not, earning themselves the name, ‘The London School of Appeasement.’
http://www.nowpublic.com/world/london-school-appeasement-banning-douglas-murray
It seems that Prince Alwalled bin Talel Saudi Billionaire has bankrolled the LSE to the tune of ££££s. What with Gordon Brown wishing to make London the capital of Sharia finance, before we know it the Saudis will have bought us all and bushy beards and burquas will be de rigueur.
Well Sue, the luton protests were the third item on the news at ten last night, dominated my local news (I live near Luton) and have been on news 24 at various points today. And, they have been referred to as Islamic, and their radical organsiation has been mentioned too. So I know you want to find bias here, but its just not happening.
Leave it out Omar, you can’t argue with them here. It could be on BBC news all day long, they’d still claim it wasn’t given enough coverage, or that the exact word use was wrong. Or if not that, then maybe they only cover it as a token gesture.
When you believe in conspiracy theories like the crackpots here, you look for evidence to support your warped world view. Logic doesn’t come into it my friend.
hilly omar
the bbc reported them as anti war protesters
again and again and again
they are not
they are not peaceniks
they are pro war
pro jihad
what they are is anti just about any war britain is fighting now
ask them what they thought of our war against serbia/yugoslavia for example, our wars in bosnia and kosovo and they would applaud us
ask them about the insurgents side in afghanistan or iraq and they agree with it
ask them about war in somalia chechnya or kashmir and they favour it
stop calling them anti war it is a disgrace to the term
and that goes to colin haynes as well as hilly omar
Gus Haynes:
So why do you bother then, you said excuse of an ‘individual’?
Get a life you crackpot.
hilly omar
freedom of speech?
so you werent too pleased at the muslim communitys reaction to the mohammed cartoons or rushdies book then
and you think wilders should have been let in
and you think its fine for the nf to march and demonstrate (‘peacefully’) outside a mosque on eid
and, oh well you get the idea
or is it just when it suits you?
It’s Gus Haynes sir, you should pay more attention. And they were anti-War, as well as islamist. The BBC coverage on the tv referred to them as radical islamists several times. Stop denying it.
ok gus i will take your solemn oath one of your other nom de plumes is not colin and you werent just having a conversation with yourself
they were not originally referred to as radical islamist at all, not when it was first reported they didnt, just anti war and members of the crowd
it was on line in black and white
then it was changed but no word of a correction just changed
in true 1984 style it therefore didnt exist
except of course you cant hide on the net and it was already seen and captured
dont get me wrong i am pleased they changed somewhat and decided to tell some of the truth even though they never admitted their earlier falsehoods
and lets get this clear THEY ARE NOT ANTI WAR, they are pro war, they are just anti certain sides of certain wars, stop denying it
who cares how it was first presented online when it happened? isnt the 10 pm news (when most people watch) far more relevant? oh not in this case cos it goes against your angle….
they are anti war in iraq and afghan. thats clear. i’m not defending them by the way. I’d kick those people out the country tomorrow if i had evidence they are members of a radical group. don’t assuem i support people like that shouting abuse at our troops. don’t you even think of tryin to play the partiotic card
No, wrong again Gus, they are not anti war in Iraq and Afghanistan, that is not clear at all.
They are pro war in Iraq and Afghanistan. Its just they are pro the insurgents, pro the taleban, but anti the British.
Very different from nearly all of those who are genuinely anti Iraq and Afghan war in this country.
oh yeah? show me proof about then please?
who cares how it was first presented online when it happened? isnt the 10 pm news (when most people watch) far more relevant?
Gus Haynes | 11.03.09 – 7:07 pm
I for one. BBC reporting generally follows a pattern. It starts off as close as possible to the BBC’s agenda, often offensively so. Then it gradually changes, generally without changing the date stamp at the website – ‘stealth changes’.
Why this should happen is not clear. Possibly the changes occur in response to complaints whether from the public or internal or top down. It may also be the consequence of the editing/subediting system. Perhaps there are people in the BBC who, with an eye on renewal of the charter, who say stop.
The BBC is a world network. The 10PM news is only relevant to the British Isles. The Middle East, for example receives the incitement a full two hours before. The more unbalance text is often copied and spreads virally.
Gus Haynes | 11.03.09 – 7:23 pm |
One banner read “Anglian Soldiers go to Hell” – you think that is showing pacifism ?
Do you think that the consensious objectors in the last war would have held banners saying things like that? You really are bereft of any common sense.
ngg | 10.03.09 – 4:38 pm |
did anyone else enjoy the irony of george getting attacked by his muslim buddies in eygpt?
No, because the BBC didn’t mention that it was Egyptian Muslims doing it. All they allowed the license fee payers to know is that there were “reports” that some stones were thrown and vandalism done about 40 miles from the border. Yes, the lazy defense is that anybody with a brain can figure out that it was in Egypt, and so the attackers must have been Egyptian. But the BBC makes sure to point out little details like that when it suits them.
Even when mentioning the stone throwing, the BBC took care to remind everyone that the convoy included “a fire engine” and “ambulances”, as if to paint it as a callous attack on an aid convoy, and not a protest against Hamas. All the dishonest BBC editor wants you to know is that some vehicles were “defaced”. How, BBC? Did somebody write Romani ite domum! all over them?
Gus Haynes | 11.03.09 – 7:23 pm |
How about the Baner which reads “Muslim rise up against British Opression” – anti-war? I don’t think so.
I never said they were pacifist, neither did I say anti-war was their only motivation. It is possible that as well as protesting against the war, they are also yelling some crap about rising up against British oppression. Come on, don’t try the classic – ”if you don’t shout against them as loudly as I do then you’re one of them” argument.
jesus, talk about lame. I’m not defending the protestors – I’m pointing out that the BBC have not been biased in their reports about them.
deegee: that sounds like conspiracy nonsense you spout there. facts? no, opinion of yours. so many people here confuse their opinion with facts. startling.
Gus Haynes | 11.03.09 – 9:43 pm |
You are a fool.
“oh yeah? show me proof about then please?”
Gus Haynes | 11.03.09 – 7:23 pm | #
I did
Gus
Why did the BBC hide away on their Befordshire page the condemnations of those Luton scum by the Prime Minister, the Sec for Defence and the Shadow Sec for Defence ? (As shown by links on this blogsite). How can that editorial decision be justified – other than to minimise things ?
It was front page news on half the British press today.
Oh, I forgot. You do not know how to deal with a straight question, you scurry away and skulk for a few days.
Troll.
so many people here confuse their opinion with facts. startling.
Gus Haynes | 11.03.09 – 9:44 pm
You clearly should have lurked more on this blog before commenting.
Try googling stealth editing BBC and you will find 303,000 entries! if this is opinion I am clearly not the only one holding it.
For an example, and over the years there have been many read BBC Digs Another Hole or start checking NewsSniffer.com occasionally.
The problem, as has often been stated in this blog. The ‘errors’ are not random but completely predictable.
I expect that David Vance’s new book will have a chapter on the phenomenum it occurs so often and almost always in the same direction. Perhaps you could get off your backside and find counter examples?
Gus Haynes | 11.03.09 – 7:07 pm |
They ARE members of a radical group. It’s called Al Mujaharoun, and they are pro terror. They are not an anti war group, they are an anti-west group. They may or may not be a minority, but their extremist ideology is widespread. Melanie Phillips understands that we are dealing with a far bigger problem than a few isolated extremists who intend to commit violent acts.
“The driver of Islamist extremism is not ‘grievances’ but religious ideology.” The government have realised this late in the day and are backpedalling on their policy of trying to isolate extremism by engaging with so-called moderates.
The BBC has gone to great lengths and spent a great deal of time and effort normalising Islam and trying to make alien cultural practices appear friendly and cuddly, but demos like Luton, and news of Islamic fighters in Afghanistan with Yorkshire accents show we are getting to the stage when the wool is beginning to fall from everybody’s eyes. Who knows, one day it may even fall from yours.
What we are doing on B-BBC is trying to draw attention to this, and what you are doing is trying for some reason to deflect it. Amongst the dissident voices we hear you seem particularly ill informed. If you are genuinely interested in debate you should arm yourself with some facts, then I’m sure you’d get plenty of debate.”
Yeah, it was on news 24 all day, the PM condemning it. Thats really hiding it away isnt JohnA.
It was totally hidden away on the website. Which is the point under discussion. Obviously a deliberate editorial decision.
I don’t watch News 24 all day, very few people do.
And it certainly was not on Radio 4 news programmes.
So stop trolling, Gus.