Just watching Nicky Campbell’s wonderfully awful “Big Question” programme.
Here were the two main issues that were covered.
“After 200 deaths, have we the moral duty to remain in Afghanistan.” The first guy Nicky interviewed was called Mohammed. (sic) The lead panellist on this, Rory Stewart, believed that we should be get out of Afghanistan. Listen to the debate and all you can hear is the dismal beat of surrender from the BBC and it’s selected audience, the same relentless beat that was heard during our time in Iraq. Ming Campbell was on to make it clear we cannot win the war against the Taliban. Good news for our troops out there, eh? Kaye Adams from garbage TV show “Loose Women” was also of the view we need to get out and should never have been there in the first place. (She’s obviously not bothered about “loose Afghan women” Listening to the debate, the conclusion is that the only real reason to be in Afghanistan is to uphold women’s rights. It seems that fighting Islamic terrorism is not really the issue and we need to chill out and be relaxed about the Taliban. Rory informed us Bin Laden was in Pakistan, not Afghanistan, though he did nor reveal his source for such a claim and Nicky Campbell did not question it, naturally.
The next issue for debate is “Does Evil exist.” An Iman was on to tell us that only Allah can determine evil and so he thinks we should not label people as evil. There was also a humanist on who was able to tell us it is wrong to label Tracey Connolly – the mother of Baby P as “evil”. Worthless was his preferred term. Another person on the panel, a Professor of course, suggested that she was a victim. There was a widespread consensus that all religion is evil. Naturally the Islamic scholar was there to put the moral argument for the application of the concept of evil. No Christians were to be found in this “representative” Edinburgh audience.
Just where DOES the BBC get these audiences from?
"No Christians were to be found in "this "representative" Edinburgh audience.
Just where DOES the BBC get these audiences from?"
– Christians are 'unclean', like dogs, menstruating women, Jews, and all unbelievers. If a BBC worker were to be touched by any of these filthy objects, they would be ceremonially defiled.
Just where DOES the BBC get these audiences from?
The canteen?
All religion *is* evil… it's just some are more evil than others.
I asked just this question yesterday, about the R4 Any Questions audience this week. It really is a wonder to behold, how the BBC consistently manages to find such hugely unrepresentative gatherings.
I suspect what happens is a twofold process. Only people with an 'attitude' want to go to these shows and, knowing they are nothing but celebrations of Leftism, only Leftists watch or listen and apply for tickets.
In that sense it becomes a self-perpetuating cycle.
What also takes place, I very strongly suspect, is that the BBC manipulates its audiences by making sure certain organisations (unions, local Labour associations, universities, schools 'n 'ospitals, etc) are invited.
Hey Presto! We have audiences composed of Guardian and Daily Mirror readers.
The BBC is evil.
Will Jones
But if you ever watch this piece of human crap of a TV show, notice this, when they discuss homosexuality the Muslims suddenly go missing, no big bushy beards to be seen. Instead we see Christian religious people present to whom the leftists in the audience can rage against.
I have NEVER seen a single Muslim ever have people shout at him for suggesting that homosexuals are evil or should be executed, yet we know that every single true Muslim believes this as they take every word of the Koran as fact.
I bet they have an 'evil volcano layer' paid for by the taxpayer!!!!
;D
…soz couldn't resist.
tho wouldn't surprise me either ;P
Yeah I saw a lot of this programme this morning. F***ing garbage. What was strikingly obvious was the sheer amount of dispropertionate time given to the same see-no-evil windbags, with little or no opposing viewpoint.
Does Evil exist? The BBC itself can be charitably described as evil in its relentless excusing of terrorists and demonization of Israel,
Is this what Brown means when he talks about British troops putting their lives on the line to defend Islamic Afghan 'democracy'?:
"Row over Afghan wife-starving law"
(By Sarah Rainsford)
BBC News ('South Asia')
[Extract]:-
"Afghan legislation allowing a husband to starve his wife if she refuses to have sex has been published in the official gazette and become law."
I note that (a) the story about the TORIES wanting to scrub bank bonuses has disappeared from the BBC website/politics page – only the LABOUR version of stopping Bank bonuses to be seen and (b) NOTHING anywhere about Dave Millbrand and his 'terrorism is justified in some cases' (ie when it's lefties against nasty white men) statement. Funny that.
Slightly less dhimmitude to be expected from BBC on reporting from Afghanistan in future?
It looks as though BBC's Sarah Rainsford has moved there from Turkey. Her report here (about the lack of women's rights) is more critical of Islamic law than any of her predecessors' reports from e.g. Barbara 'tears for Arafat' Plett, or from Lyse 'the humanity of the Taliban' Doucet would have been:
"Row over Afghan wife-starving law "
By Sarah Rainsford.
[Extract]:
"An Afghan bill allowing a husband to starve his wife if she refuses to have sex has been published in the official gazette and become law."
But Ms. Rainsford, whose last BBC posting was Turkey, was uncritical while there of Muslim demonstrations against Israel, and, like the rest of the BBC, uncritical of the lobby for Turkey's entry into the E.U., and the consequent increased Islamisation of Europe and of the UK.
David: I noticed that as well. No mention of Darling being rubbished by the BBC the way Osborne was.
And yes if a Tory MP had said what Millipede had said it would be the top story all over the Bum Bandit Corporation.
There are days like this when you wish it was like that scene in "Bridge over the River Quai", a set of wires leading to the BBC News Television Centre, and a large plunger….
Go on. You know you want to…
(I should add, for clarity,I am not actually suggesting this!)
BBC HYS: "I am reasonably intelligent. I do not understand what we are doing in Afghanistan. Bring the soldiers home"
Thank you, "HYS Selective Headline Quote". See any non-sequiturs here?
How about rephrasing it. "I think of myself as intelligent but I am also ignorant and ill-informed. Stop fighting back against our enemies, I wish it would all go away"
Sorry but seeing our soldiers slaughtered daily for these effing Muslims is pointless.
Fine, just nuke Afghanistan to get Bin Laden, I'm all for that.
If it was just about saving effin muslims I would agree.
Who did 9/11? Al Quaeda. Who gave AlQuaeda a safe house? The Taliban in Afghanistan. What do we need rid of? Taliban and Al Quaeda. Where do they all hang out, apart from remote Pakistan? Afghanistan. Where are all the Jihadists who have given up in Iraq moved to to fight the West? Afghanistan.
Its not just us – there are many countries commiting forces to this front line between the West and medieval barbarism/ Jihad.
What I would like to do is conscript Guardian readers to fight to defend the British way of life (which includes the freedom of the Guardian to tell us lies)
Every day the Lord Haw Haw BBC updates the body count – 200, 201, today 204. Tomorrow, 205? The traitors and treacherous keep telling us the price, without mentioning why we are doing it.
Having once applied to be part of an Any Questions audience, I can answer how the BBC makes sure to get a majority leftwing audience. In my case, back in 2004, it was asking on the application whether I thought the invasion of Iraq was justified. While my answer made sure I was in the minority there, it made clear how the BBC ensured its partiality.
Very interesting, Teddy Bear. Thank you.
It seems it's even more blatant than I'd thought.
Support for the war is of course at an all time low, history tells us that afghanistan is unconquerable, and yet the BBC run down the glorious campaign
Only B-BBC are your voice for reason – propping up the government line against public opinion by calling the rest of us ignorant, because only they know better
Isn't it amazing that for all the pointless slaughter in Afghanistan the gay Scottish one eyed twat escapes with out any criticism?
The BBC just obligingly repeat the lying jocks words. We all know he detests the military, their wasteful spending on things like guns and body armour when he could be giving that money to the BBC or Muslims or asylum seekers, people who will correctly vote Liebour time after time after time.
Support for the war is of course at an all time low…
…because like Iraq, the media have decided that we shouldnt be in Afghanistan. Thus the continuous drip drip drip of negative stories, of death and destruction (like Iraq) and no attempt to join the dots, add context for the people back home, or emphasise, as mentioned above by ASL, explain why we are there in the first place.
The media hated Bush because he had the courage of his convictions, right or wrong, to do something without the the liberal media consensus. One so weak with moral equivalence, it has lost the sense of understanding of right or wrong.
Our govt while appearing to back the war in Afghanistan are equally guilty, depriving the army of what it needs to carry out this campaign and showing their true colours.
The media wont be happy until they see another retreat from Basra, because they hate the fact that we are still fighting in Bushes war, despite electing their hero Barry and dont really understand what we are doing there anyway.
I am total agreement with DV and Martin – this programme was a total disgrace, it always is.
Ian
equally were the media to back the war they would be seen as pushing government propaganda – when even reporting deaths is seen as 'biased' you cannot win
for my money it's better for the media to be against the establishment, especially when you think of the non-answers Brown and his cronies have given about the war, the lack of equipment and view of the generals – were the government able to show real progress in afghanistan (which the beeb do try to show occasionally, and then get shouted down on here for being nice to muslims) then more people might start to believe in it, but for now the media are right to be sceptical
Anonymous asked … 11:36 AM, August 16, 2009
Just where DOES the BBC get these audiences from?
The Big Question is produced for the BBC by independent production company Mentorn.
As they don't provide an email contact address perhaps some enterprising (and polite) UK-based B-BBCer might like to contact them at …:
Mentorn London
Elsinore House
77 Fulham Palace Road
London W6 8JA
Tel: +44 (0) 207 258 6700 ; fax: +44 (0) 207 258 6888
… and ask them how do they decide on the composition their audiences?
It's difficult to get hold of Catholic priests on a Sunday morning, they are so few in number now they can't get anyone to stand-in for them in their parish while they appear on the show.