The BBC refused at first to report the ‘Muslim Patrols’ in London…but were quick to head off to Israel to report on Jews being racist.
The BBC are quick to report Sadiq Khan explaining Labour’s next great plan for the economy.
Not so quick to report death threats from Muslims to the very same Sadiq Khan because he voted in favour of gay marriage….apparently he is ‘selling out his religion’.
Mufti Muhammed Aslam Naqshbandi Bandhalevi, who is the head imam of the Jamia Islamia Rizvia mosque in Bradford, has issued a fatwa, or ruling, declaring Mr Khan an ‘apostate’ from Islam and said he should ‘repent before Allah’.
which leads perfectly to …..
bbcs The Big Questions …
is it too late to to renew islam and its genocidal world view to all non muslims?
and does islam, need to stop its commandments murder for apostasy, and homosexuals, and infidels, and jews, and christians. and anyone else non muslim?
shucks! bbcs head of religion doesn t like that, so no not really .. but we do have
Is it too late to renew the Catholic Church?
And do we need ten new commandments?
funny that
The BBC did ignore it until the target of the Muslim patrol was a young man who they perceived to be a homosexual.
I can imagine the soul searching and frustration of the BBC editorial staff deciding whether or not to report this conflict between their two most admired groups.
Bloody muslims.
‘Bloody Muslims’…You’ve used that one before Bandicoot…who said satire was dead…it’s just being recycled.
Alan, please don’t encourage this crap. Some of us use our full names here and have been personally affected by people hijacking this blog to focus exclusively on their hatreds.
David….Bandicoot is using ‘Bloody Muslims’ as an attack on people who complain about Islam, and the BBC’s response to it, on this site….he is being, or trying to be, ironic.
He is not some ‘Far Right Fascist’ or whatever hijacking this site…
He is not making an ‘islamophobic’ comment….he supports Islam….He is trolling.
He is a Leftwinger hijacking the site.
Hence I draw people’s attention to him…as he is deliberately trying to incite them to say things ‘Islamophobic’….in order to smear this site.
OK? Got that?
Are we sure it’s not yet another alias and email for Earls Court?
David – it’s part of a major denial of service attempt.
Clearly, the notion of ignoring it is unlikely to be discouraging, or work, given you appear to have already missed the intention and effect, and made a leap in conclusion 180 degrees to accuracy.
And the use of full names or not is irrelevant, frankly.
The power of the argument is all that matters.
Get into pedigrees beyond that and you are handing the Flokkers a second front.
Such allusion by association is what the BBC uses in its ‘sources say’ so-called reporting. Which is why so much is worth zippy.
I don’t care if a post is by HRH the Queen for real or Fred Flintstone, it lives or dies by how it adds up; no more, no less.
HM the Queen is the Correct style…
Noted.
Hate to get something like that wrong.
Yabba Dabba Don’t you go talking about my Fred like that.
Everything he says makes absolute sense, sort of … type of … thing.
“…………it’s part of a major denial of service attempt”………………….If that is the intention it would appear to have failed. As a designated “flokker” I have had no problem accessing the site.
‘….If that is the intention it would appear to have failed. As a designated “flokker” I have had no problem accessing the site.’
Well the failure aspect does appear borne out. But your confusion is between electronic & human versions. The e-version involves cramming a site with so much e-input nothing else can take place.
The human version involves multiple posts (from multiple posters) that aim to distract participants or drive away visitors with various contributions that can serve this aim. Irrelevance, abuse, semantics, pedantry, etc… That kind of thing.
Hence you being able to the access still serves the human DoS aim.
The failure comes from it being recognised, and accommodated or tolerated.
It is to this site’s credit that you have indeed seen no issues with access.
As discussed only earlier with one of your colleagues, it is a pity the BBC is less benign in how it tolerates alternative views.
“Irrelevance, abuse, semantics, pedantry, etc… .” Such an apt description of so many of the posts by members of the Biased-BBC clique.
“As discussed only earlier with one of your colleagues………………….”. Forgive me for asking but which “colleague” are you referring to? As far as I am aware I have no “colleagues” who comment on this site.
then again, candi-boots, on many occasions – very VERY bloody muslims, is the end result and sadly, for just those groups i outlined above …
never mind eh! “many a true word said in jest”
Pity the BBC missed a good opportunity to highlight a real Mohammedan politician and public figure being modern, tolerant, and integrated into British society as an example to those who won’t. They’re really intellectually unable to deal with the issue properly.
Has at least one odd friend:
“Former Deputy Leader of the Labour Group, Shadow Lord Chancellor and Shadow Secretary of State for Justice Sadiq Khan “is the lifelong friend of Babar Ahmad, a man indicted in the US on charges of ‘conspiracy to provide material to support terrorists, namely the Taliban and the Chechen Mujahideen; providing material to support terrorists; and conspiracy to kill in a foreign country’. Ahmad ran a website recruiting jihadi militants to go and fight the Russian in Chechnya and Coalition troops in Afghanistan. When arrested, he had in his possession plans for an American carrier battle group with written notations on it like ‘vulnerable to RPG’”.”
In that case, Evan Davis should be questioning him about how his support for homosexual marriage squares with this.
“On 3 February 2008, The Sunday Times[21] claimed that a conversation between Khan and prisoner Babar Ahmad (a friend and constituent) at Woodhill Prison in Milton Keynes was bugged by the Metropolitan Police Anti-Terrorist Branch.” wiki
It’s no doubt on par with Warsi being connected by marriage to someone who attended Hizb ut Tahrir meetings (although, in her case, she used to have a reputation for being sweetness and light at Westminster, while condemning all homosexuals to hell when talking Urdu to prospective voters). I understand he was concerned to have safeguards for religious minorities built into the bill: no doubt Muslims would have ignored it anyway.
Alan wrote:
“The BBC refused at first to report the ‘Muslim Patrols’ in London…but were quick to head off to Israel to report on Jews being racist.”
I noticed that, but sticking to the beautiful game , while Israeli Football fans can only be racist. Egyptian Football fans murdered 79 and injured over 1000 a year ago.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Port_Said_Stadium_riot
I won’t even mention how Egyptians treat Algerians when it comes to football. Yet the bBC can only point out Jews as the real nasty people out there.
The bBC, the traitors within our midst
The Egyptians do seem to have significant racism in football http://cifwatch.com/2012/01/09/what-the-guardian-wont-report-egyptian-soccer-fans-call-for-a-new-holocaust-against-jews/ – yet no sign of it in the MSM in general, or on the bBC.
‘The BBC are quick to report Sadiq Khan explaining Labour’s next great plan for the economy.’
They do seem to like him, and do indeed seem quick to share his wisdom with us…
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-21492430
‘Shadow justice secretary Sadiq Khan said: “I’m sure if you asked him now whether he [Mr O’Farrell] agreed with that [the comments] now he would say no.”
He said the book was written 20 years ago, adding: “Some of it is in bad taste and should not have been said, but he was writing a book that was at the time, very funny, very witty.”
He said the comments were “probably bad humour – him trying to be funny, but clearly not funny’
See Sadiq knows the score and, like the BBC, is blessed with knowing what people would say vs. what they have, or get asked to confirm which, as far as the BBC goes is pretty much SOP.
Odd this little aspect of his busy career seems… redacted.
But, but, …..he couldn’t possibly have written that murderous, traitorous poison in 1998….. everyone knows that, as far as political history is concerned, the Labour Years of 1997 – 2010 just didn’t exist, figmant of your imagination…it’s all to do with the Nasty Conservative party which has been in permanent government since 1979 – and it’s all the Tories’ fault.
INBBC, Bangladesh and Londonistan.
INBBC does report this demonstrators in Bangladesh against the Islamic jihadistist party, Jamaat-e-Islami, with demand of the death penalty for its leader, Abdul Mullah, for war crimes in 1971:-
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-21492198
BUT, INBBC does not report the international political connection to LONDONISTAN.
Nick Cohen does (but unfortunately defers to Islamic Quilliam Foundation):-
“The agonies of Bangladesh come to London.
Shahbag protests in Dhaka are reflected in the demonstrations in London.”
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/feb/17/bagladeshi-protests-reflected-londons-east-end
The war criminal Chowdhury Mueen-Uddin is just one aspect of the Augean stables that is Tower Hamlets / UK Bangladesshi politics, at the moment. If you look up Tower Hamlets, Lutfur Rahman, East London Mosque on the BBC website you will not get an inkling that anything at all is amiss in that neck of the woods. The only mention of Uddin is old stories where he was a spokesman for Muslim Aid, for which he is a trustee.
Hate preachers, a mayor in league with an organisation advocating sharia and diverting large amounts of public money in its direction, voter fraud, a 100% Bengali council cabinet in a borough whose population is 35%, Bengali etc etc etc etc are completely non-existent for the BBC.
An extraordinary indictment of Lutfur Rahman by Andrew Gilligan here
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/andrewgilligan/100200249/lutfur-rahman-some-facts-the-guardian-forgot-to-mention/
Gay marriage and Islam did always seem to be on a bit of a collision course…
Not according to al Beeb!
“Asra and Sarah decided upon a ‘nikah’ – a Muslim matrimonial contract……other gay Muslims had followed this route and the couple decided to investigate further. ‘A few friends said you don’t really have to have an official Imam, but you need someone who is knowledgeable enough about the Qur’an to do it. Fortunately, one of our friends was, and she offered to do it. She’s a lesbian herself’.”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-12486003
Hello there, just changed into alert to your weblog through Google, and found that it’s truly informative. I’m gonna be careful for brussels. I’ll be grateful if you proceed this in future. Many people will probably be benefited out of your writing. Cheers!
Its not my first time to visit this web page, i am browsing this web site dailly and obtain nice information from here all the time.