“The worst thing would be if we ended up in three years with an acutely polarised social situation in a Western country, and the entire elite going: ‘Where the heck did this come from? Who is the bloke with a small moustache?’
You’ve got to arm yourself against these eventualities.”
Paul Mason, BBC
It must be with such a directive in mind that the BBC has set itself on a course of opposition to Authority, State regulation and administration, and civic order.
The BBC has stepped over the line and has joined forces with the Anarchists.
‘If they say I am a criminal then…I…will be one.’
‘I don’t care who you are….Your opinions matter.’
Those are two quotes which rounded off a BBC Storyville programme eulogising Anarchy:
How Hackers Changed the World: We Are Legion
This was more than a mere investigation or exposé, it was acclaiming, extolling, singing the praises of the hacker group Anonymous and associated like minded souls such as, naturally, Occupy…..for they are…
‘…contributing towards democracy around the world…..making a stand against censorship….it’s a very noble thing.’
Ironic from an organisation that does everything it can to limit free debate on immigration, Europe, Islam and Labour’s economic record.
The whole tone of the programme was one of subdued admiration and pleasure at their activities….an undertone of silent approval emanating from it.
Not only did it signal approval and endorsement of their actions the programme acted as a recruiting sergeant for them encouraging others of a similar bent to take up arms, or at least a keyboard with a belligerent attitude.
Anonymous are well known for their cyber attacks on whomever they perceive to be the ‘enemy’ acting against their world view by adopting various measures to ridicule, close down or just cause as much inconvenience and cost as possible to, in order to advance their political agenda.
The BBC’s attitude here is in stark contrast to its position towards the hackers who obtained the CRU emails…the BBC denounced them as criminals who had stolen the emails and claimed they were committing an act of political sabotage against the Copenhagen Climate conference.
Even within the programme there is a change of tone when the ‘hacker’ turns out to be ‘The Man’….someone who wanted to take down ‘WikiLeaks’ by cyber attacks and sabotage, the same techniques used by Anonymous….suddenly such acts were ‘villainous’. (43 mins in…Aaron Barr from HBGary)
David (Preiser) posted this link:
On the media: The protesters toolkit – revolutionary apps which shows how the BBC are involved quietly behind the scenes in activism, even anarchism.
We know Paul Mason has a soft spot for the anarchist from whom he has learnt a lot and that he freely admits he is “very enthusiastic about people challenging entrenched ideologies”:
‘I was inspired by an evening in the pub with the anarcho-squatters at London’s Really Free School. When I went to speak to them, I found a sign on their door saying “journalists f**k off” – they were pretty strict about enforcing it too. But they invited Mason to the pub. “Actually, they taught me a lot.” he says.
“The greatest source of hope for me is to see a generation rising who think all forms of hierarchical ideological activity are rubbish.
It seems that the BBC is out to encourage more such anarchy and protest and is here to help the budding anarchist to do so safely without fear of having his collar felt:
In association with BBC College of Journalism
Governments and security forces are becoming increasingly wise to the role of social media in organising and enhancing protest movements. As a result they are developing new ways to block, hack and track citizens tweets, Facebook and other social media tools in order to prevent unrest.
Protesters and citizen journalists the world over are able to stay one step ahead, however with the help of Open Source developed phone apps that allow them to communicate effectively without being tracked as easily.
Protestors can now safely share information without fear of identification.
But will apps really protect protesters, and are they any safer than traditional social media? What do mobile apps mean for citizen journalism? Join us at the Frontline Club for a lively debate about the latest technology for protesters and citizen journalists and how far technology could go in making protest safer and smarter.
Chaired by Rory Cellan-Jones, BBC’s technology correspondent and author of the blog, dot.rory. (@BBCRoryCJ)
What you won’t be surprised to read is that this is also in association with the Guardian in its ‘Guardian Project’:
About the Guardian Project
Secure Mobile Apps and Open-Source Code for a Better Tomorrow
While smartphones have been heralded as the coming of the next generation of communication and collaboration, they are a step backwards when it comes to personal security, anonymity and privacy. The Guardian Project aims to create easy to use apps, open-source software libraries and operating system modifications, and customized mobile devices that can be used and deployed around the world, by any person looking to protect their communications and personal data from unjust intrusion and monitoring.
It is not an oddity that the BBC is so in love with such figures and organisations such as Occupy and Anonymous.
They give them endless favourable coverage because their causes align with the BBC’s own world view.
How do other groups fare who do not similarly align with the BBC’s opinions? The BBC is after all impartial, fair and unbiased and should reflect all persuasions in its coverage.
That does not happen. Climate change sceptics, protesters against mass immigration, people who doubt the wisdom of being so closely tied to Europe, Jews, Tories and UKIP have no chance of getting a fair hearing from the BBC or a fair opportunity to state their own case.
It is not just the BBC that acts in such a way, it happens in Germany also.
Der Spiegel reports on the German Far Right’s attempt to circumvent such censorship by adopting the methods of the Left in protesting, activism and presentation:
‘Right-wing extremists in Germany are copying the methods of the leftist protest culture. Wearing masks like those of activists with the group “Anonymous,” they are organizing flash mobs and posting rousing videos online to attract young new supporters.’
This video shows a Far Right group that has taken on the mantle of the left‘s ‘Anonymous’ protesters and wrapped it up in a polished video.
If the Far Right start to hide their ulterior motives as the Left do and present themselves as reasoned and peaceful protesters will they get a voice on the BBC as the Far Left and Muslim extremists do or does the BBC’s activism and belief in giving voice to the people whatever their opinion only extend to those it approves of?
Would the BBC be so enamoured of Anonymous if they came after the BBC and closed their operations down…after all the BBC is ‘The Establishment’ when all is said and done?
Wouldn`t you think that when a campaigning P.M says that the BBC thinks itself more important that the candidates in the coming elections…might that not be newsworthy?
Not “plebs.”..not “calm down dear”.
Your list in the middle missed off mid-Staffs.
No North Korean camp I`ve come across has killed so many…and not even be seen to do this , even as Google Earth passes by!
Not even North Korea manages THAT level of hushing up.
These NHS hospitals are truly Labour Camps, when not actually death ones.
But there`s horse DNA in a prisoners halal pastie….so where`s Claims Direct?…up on the BBC website as you know!
Blowback is a `comin Beeboids..”.I feel it in my water, and even in my toes”
Blimey, it took you three minutes to click on your other browser tab and write that reply to yourself!
Ohhhh….you are so right Creamy
Thanks, Tart!
ChrisH I really enjoy your posts, but I have to ask, how do you cope with sharing your brain cavity with several hyperactive frogs?
Regards nonetheless
Regulars may remember a Victoria Derbyshire Radio 5 programme a few months before the 2011 riots. It featured activists from four different campaign groups, all strongly opposed to government policy, all advocating direct action involving varying levels of real actual violence. Derbyshire’s only response (and hence presumably that of the BBC) was whether such violence would be effective. The morality or legality was not even discussed. Their only concern was whether it would work.
It was much commented on here at the time. It was clearly encouraging violence, possibly encouraging riots. Incitement to riot is a criminal offence. An official complaint to the police might well have seen the BBC in court.
I think they were lucky to get away with it.
When a certain Professor of history concluded a documentary against the USA and Israel during the Blair years on Channel 5 with calling for “a campaign of civil disobediance to change the governments foreign policy” The police stated there was no problem with it and much later Offcom ruled that the professor only meant it in a “metaphorical ” sense and not literally. (Full details yet to put on my blogs)
But by burning bus shelter, bins etc. and tearing up kerb stones to throw at the police, they’re creating work for the public sector, and putting pressure on the government to raise police numbers.
Can’t you see!
It’s curious that this idiocy should come just as the conservative ideologues are being driven out.
Today’s conservative party is typified by Dave Cameron and Claire Perry.
The latter is part of an interesting love trianle related in: “My Evil Temptress” at
http://john-moloney.blogspot.com/
As a climate sceptic, I’m always reminded of Pilate’s words with Jesus in the musical ‘Jesus Christ Superstar’. When Jesus is paraded before an unwilling Pilate, having been kicked out of Herod’s court, the following exchange occurs:
PILATE: Then you are a king?
JESUS: It’s you that say I am. I look for truth and find that I get damned.
PILATE: But what is truth? Is truth a changing law? We both have truths. Are mine the same as yours?
The BBC has it’s own idea about ‘truth’ – what it is, how it should be interpreted and who should be allowed to express it.
The BBC’s much loved UAF/SWP bag-ladies, acne-ridden students and dirty old men who stink of piss, chant death threats whilst continuing their campaign against freedom of speech:
http://www.mrctv.org/videos/labour-supporters-chanting-death-marine-le-pen
You forgot dole scum and sex offenders.
Yeah! Those too!
Let me be the one to state the obvious: for all Paul Mason’s apparent fear of the country being taken over by Freddie Mercury, the BBC’s position is implicitly fascistic.
There’s no attempt to suggest that these morons represent anybody other than themselves or have even the shadow of the ghost of a coherent ideology. Nope, their moral authority doesn’t come from anything as squaresville as a democratic mandate or logical arguments, it arises simply from their drive to inflict misery and mayhem on anyone they decide is an enemy, or as more honest observers would put it, their ‘will to power’.
Yep, these cretins stand for nothing, yet oppose everything.
Why don’t they stand for election using their true red colours.
I’ve been in the ‘hideously brown’ central America for the last six weeks, to avoid the ‘negative warming’ that this winter’s been throwing at us, but managed to get online occasionally and kept up with the SWP Martin Smith rape saga.
Before the SWP changed their website so as not to have any policies whatsoever, they wished to abolish the age of consent.
Perhaps this explains why they, along with the other violent thugs from UAF, have been taking to the streets to support the Muslim rape gangs. (As well as the fact that they despise the white working-class, obviously)
There`s a guy works down the chipshop swears he`s Freddie!
Brilliant!
Hope you all got the 8a.m news headline about Eve Pollards Book of Many Pages coming out about Savlon…he popped by the BBC on a few occasions a few days, but there`so much fuss…so there`s 500 pages on download, you rotters!
Chew the bones out of that and we`ll feign some embarrassment and discomfort by the time the Review Crap gets on tonight…
Oh, and my point is?
Well the big black bits( not racist dez!) in the report have been “redacted”.
Ah, but you see…that`s only because “”LAWYERS” have made it so…oh, sub judice and all that “protecting the sources”..but of course Hugs!
Now…FoI and all that-will the BBC tell us exactlyWHOSE lawyers these might be…or is that sub jure as well?
Would they be
a) Those of Mr James Savlon,( formerly of this parish)
b) Mr George Entwhistle (of this bailiwick in a previous era)
c) All those lickle `ickle children, as caringly and appropriately counselled in a really meaningful way by Judge Esther Rantzen, so don`t need a lawyer at all…what else was Childline/Children In Need set up for , you ingrates and whingers?
or
d) the coverarsing might of the British Broadcasting Company(soon to be downsized!), that would rather we not know what Paxo said of Sconnie?…Kirtsy…Fatty Pang
Twitter, text your votes in NOW!
Judge Henry Hodge will count them once Ant n Dec have had their cut!
Rankers,,,,Rankers every man jack and jill of `em!
No jokes either, I roll my arse when I blog…and will see you in court colditz if you take the “yourwine”-or should I just call it piss and be done with it?
“Is it safe then…is it safe “(to quote dear Larry)
The BBC’s “will to power” as DJ puts it evokes images of Teutonic supermen, rather than gay boys with fancy camera phones and gelled hair who linger in Salford for a bit of rough trade before returning to Hampstead. If BBC hacks are the master race who Nietzsche thought would take over the world no wonder he went mad.
Quote: ‘If they say I am a criminal then…I…will be one.’
How would they feel about ‘If they say I am a racist then…I…will be one.’
Sorry to tell you but you seem to have been ‘hacked’ again. I had you bookmarked but yesterday was directed to ww5.biased-bbc.org. Most attempts to clear and re-install the bookmark failed.
Now I can only get through to you via Google
Government is so big and so expensive now, and interferes in so many areas of life, that the anti-government “right wing” is as much the anti-establishment rebels as the anti-privilege “left wing”.
(ibertarian) Right is the new Left. Why should the Marxists have a monopoly of “protest”?
Somewhat ironic that Alan appears to have become “Anonymous”.
So now the BBC is plotting an anarchist takeover. This site becomes more anarchic every day.
Total bonkers.
chilly nipples
from what I’ve seen of your inane scribblings,the bonkers one is clearly you
and your ilk
“Would the BBC be so enamoured of Anonymous if they came after the BBC and closed their operations down…after all the BBC is ‘The Establishment’ when all is said and done?”
It would seem that Anonymous and Biased BBC share the same view as to whom they “perceive to be the ‘enemy’ “.
http://tv-licensing.blogspot.co.uk/2013/01/anonymous-plans-bbc-protest.html
Can we now expect Alan (whoever he may be) to support Anonynous in their attempts “to ridicule, close down or just cause as much inconvenience and cost as possible to” the BBC.
Did you see Peter Hitchens last night on Q.T Albaman?
The tumbleweed, the pursed lips , the condescension of a melted Spitting Image puppet, that bald Jesus creeper, that Nazi dentist in Marathon Man and a blacked up Ann Widdicombe in Camilla Batmanghedghlis yurt of a frock, yet without the brain, the heart, the dancing…sends her lad private,…that one!
Now listen Albert!…those deathly silences as the Hitch held forth…the goonies in the audience with a few brave exceptions?…THAT is BIASED BBC, you arse(sorry-woll my “R”s when I`m peeky!
Now woll away the stone and tell dez and the colditz the news…sure as hell the BBC won`t be telling ya!
It is of course Lent, and the St pauls spirit is with me so
“Go forth and multiply”…will`ya pal?
It is always a joy to behold the response of the stalwarts of Biased BBC when one of their own is shown to be wrong. I could resort to telling you to “Go forth and multiply” and call you an “arse” but then again it is not my style to mock the afflicted. Have a good day and try to calm down and post comments that at least make a little sense.
Where has Alan been shown to be wrong?
His claim is that the BBC programme was supportive of Anonymous’s style of activism. That Anonymous has issues with the BBC is neither here nor there.
“Where has Alan been shown to be wrong?”
He hasn’t, of course. It’s the old leftie trick of repeating a lie often enough.
1. Stalwart of Biased BBC?
Wow…that`ll be one for the obits!
H igh praise…when I first started here in 2009, the best I`d been called back then was a Nemanja Vidic…something in football, so they say!
2. Wrong in what way?…do give me an answer, because we do care about feedback from our supporters.
3. Yes, bit harsh on the “arse” bit, I am about to download a 500 page pdf to enable us all to draw a line under it all and move on.
$. Go forth and multiply…an old Christian idea for swearing…it is Lent, as I said-and I
The site appears as normal to me. Doesn’t mean it hasn’t been hacked. I doubt the BBC have a hacking department, it’s more likely some well meaning person working independently of the BBC, after all there seems to be plenty of BBC apologists around working hard for them at the moment.
I have to ask coldtits, what compels you to continually defend auntie beeb? Your efforts appear to go well beyond that of a normal supporter of the BBC, they verge on the obsessive compulsive. How are you coping with your mental disorders ?
he’d have trouble enumerating them,never mind coping with them 😉
“I have to ask coldtits, what compels you to continually defend auntie beeb?”
Quarter of an ounce of weed a week and a free subscription to The Socialist Worker?
They’re not all on Nickie Campbell’s wage you know. Times are tough since that bastard Hunt froze the licence fee!
Notizie Notte
Last night, through gritted teeth, Newsnight tackled the very thorny issue of British ‘home grown’ terrorism. Mr Nice Guy Gaven Essler kept the tricky politics at bay by chatting about process with a couple of technocrats – nothing there to scare Auntie into having any accidents in her voluminious pink bloomers.
Far more revealing of ‘home grown’ BBC attitudes was a bit of what I would imagine was planned to be light relief – Katya Adler in her rather strained pan-Euro tones took a look at that inexplicable phenomenon – Silvio Berlusconi.
We were confidently told that both Britain ‘and the rest of Europe’ regard him as a bit of a joke. Naturally the BBC is uncomfortable with his centre-right politics. ‘Euroskepticism’ has crept into his rhetoric recently – so of course we are invited to disapprove. Ms Adler ensures that all the slurs are there: mentions of Mussolini ‘on Holocaust Memorial Day’, bunga-bunga and fakes tans.
So how to ‘BBC-explain’ his continuing popularity?
Now this gets interesting. Italians receive 80% of their news from TV and Burlesconi owns and controls half the media and has ready access to the rest. I will leave that idea there – enough said.
His appeal is not logical; it is emotional, we are told. Italians don’t really want a democracy – they want a ‘King’ a leader.
Italian politics are broken. Graft and tax avoidance are rife. Post WW2 Ms Adler tells us the system was designed to ensure no one man could became a new Duce. So to navigate the system you simply have to manipulate, to bride, to go around the system. No politician can ever be strong enough to push through structural reforms.
Although we received frequent dark reminders of the Blacks, the Italian right we leave out all reference to Italy’s Reds – the strong Left in the country who (credit to them) actually call themselves Communists.
Now I like to see the BBC looking into European news and politics. I would like to see more. I think it would give us plenty of cautionary tales about how we really ought to preserve the good things about our own society and politics and would warn where we don’t want to go.
But you have read between the lines of what the BBC serves up. Italy is far from atypical of Europe in its shallow democracy and graft economy. When you have done with laughing at the bunga-bunga this is remember the Europe within which the BBC is so keen for us to dilute our British democracy and sovereignty.
Mason said “The greatest source of hope for me is to see a generation rising who think all forms of hierarchical ideological activity are rubbish”.
Does that clown think that there won’t evolve a form of hierarchy within that group? It is natural human or even animal behaviour for a hierarchical structure to develop within groups and populations.
This is the very reason that so many left-wing protest movements tend to be so chaotic. In their obsession with appearing to be ‘non-hierarchical’ they eschew formal leadership and instead form endless committees and sub-committees. They end up spending most of their time indulging in petty squabbling and power struggles to fight over who gets the right to set this week’s agenda.
But real Communism hasn’t been tried yet. These mass murderers keep spoiling it for us.
It seems to be a clear case of identity theft, a fruit and nut cake masquerading as a jam sponge.
“BBC acting like ‘secret service’ by censoring criticism, Lord McAlpine says.
Lord McAlpine, the former Conservative party treasurer, has accused the BBC of behaving like the “secret service” by censoring criticism of senior executives over the Jimmy Savile scandal.”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/bbc/9886485/BBC-acting-like-secret-service-by-censoring-criticism-Lord-McAlpine-says.html
We can see whose opnion matters to the BBC as Today brought on Jahan Mahmood, who works with young Muslim men in Birmingham on anti-radicalisation projects, and assistant chief constable Marcus Beale to discuss the latest manifestation of home-grown
terrorismmilitancy. First Beale – a “policeman” – spouted an extended apologia for the water in which these terrorists swim (ie the largely passive and arguably objectively supportive Muslim population). Then Mahmood extended the apologia by claiming that those who, by their inaction, enabled these militants had no idea why – or even whether – these guys had gone to Pakistan.Even John Humphrys seemed surprised (although why he should be considering the position of the BBC on this kind of thing and thus why these two had been chosen for interview) that his interviewees were determined to maintain the PR defence of Moslems on the basis of the “tiny minority” argument. His questions relating to the failure of terrorists’ families, friends and wider co-religionist community to inform the authorities were not answered but were, rather, brushed aside in a welter of claimed ignorance or failure of trust in the authorities. The impression left by Beale and Mahmoud was that we (that’s you and me) have to change so that Moslem Britons can feel secure and trusting enough to turn in their community’s gangsters.
Just as a matter of interest, why was no-one from the EDL or a similar organisation – or just some commentator agnostic (or “right-wing” in the BBC’s limited store of descriptors) concerning the wonder, tolerance and peacefulness of Islam – brought in to express an opposing view? This would have made uncomfortable listening for the Birmingham constabulary and the inhabitants of Islington but, at least, we’d have been spared the nonsense of a policeman and a community organiser acting as effectively unopposed defence lawyers for prima facie enablers of terrorism.
.
BTW as of 10:46 the BBC Today page (navigation of which has become ridiculously ponderous recently) seems not to have/allow access to the recording of this item.
Talking about the English Defence League and Tommy Robinson:
Pamela Geller’s ‘Atlas Shrugs’ has:-
“ROBINSON IS FINALLY FREED”
http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2013/02/robinson-is-finally-freed.html#comment-6a00d8341c60bf53ef017c370734e7970b
Can this be the same Marcus Beale as interviewed on the BBC R4 Today programme?:
“Assistant Chief Constable of Staffordshire Police Marcus Beale added: “Making …. Common Purpose – The Truth, Not The Conspiracy.
“Marcus Beale Nov 2, 2012 – @LouiseTeboul invited me to an excellent #brum common purpose >> … Don’t miss any updates from ACC Marcus Beale WMP
More INBBC pro-Islamic propaganda, with editorial disguised as ‘reporting’.
INBBC:
“City University London removes Muslim Friday prayer room”
By Secunder Kermani
(Note: INBBC censors out the word ‘Muslim’ in its editorial ‘reports’ on Birmingham Islamic jihad bomb plot, but headlines the word ‘Muslim’ when linked to ‘prayers’, as here.)
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-21542041
The political editorial tone is set by BBC’s Kermani in the very first sentence: it is pro-Islamic. The first sentence is not to explain why the City University prayer room has been closed down, but give a political platform to Muslims. And so the propaganda by Kermani for the Muslims continues.
As usual in matters Islamic, INBBC Kermani defers to Muslim outfit Quilliam Foundation to re-enforce the Islamic propaganda.
It is hinted that City University may have problems with Islamic threats, but INBBC doesn’t provide the details. I wonder why not? I wonder why there is more INBBC censorship on Islam on this?
“Universities Act Against Islamist Extremism and Bigotry”
http://hurryupharry.org/2013/02/22/universities-act-against-islamist-extremism-and-bigotry/
George R has posted about a BBC article he considers to be biased. Did you want to suggest why you think he is wrong, or do you just want to forbid him talking about it?
It is quite rare for jam sponge’s to care very much about truth, they just spill out their hot red contents when cut, a bit like that Christian having his head cut off the other day.
It seems Sponge wants to dictate what is discussed here. Cant think why!
He does not want the topic of islam to be aired. But if it is relevant to the inbbc then why not? Or alternatively, even if not, we will decide what subjects are raised here.
As names on blogs mean nothing, yours can only suggest you are a Sponge.
If you are content to absorb your opinions from the BBC, you are therefore perfectly suited, and have 100% nothing to worry about.
Trust them.
Especially when holding people to account is only for others and censorship of propaganda gets called redaction… but this time it’s simply A-OK.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-14891439
The BBC – Questions can’t get asked.
Wonder if he’s related to the Private Sponge who served with no great distinction in the Home Guard platoon at Walmington-on-Sea?
I’d send back your version of google translate sponge, it is faulty.
The translation of the name is ” a learner of the Welsh language” and to deduce a persons nationality from that is flawed logic.
I (with the unanimous support of other tarts of each and every colour) would like to dissociate myself from the remarks made by the jam sponge.
It’s not biased.
The article quite clearly states the following:
“Three years ago, the counter-extremism think tank the Quilliam Foundation released a report on the sermons at Friday prayers at City University, in central London.
Wasif Sheikh leads the group Muslim Voices on Campus. It claimed hardline views and a confrontational atmosphere were being encouraged.
In one sermon, which was recorded, the speaker said: “The Islamic state teaches to cut the hand of the thief. Yes it does. And it also teaches us to stone the adulterer.
“When they tell us that, the Islamic state tells us and teaches us to kill the apostate, yes it does.”
Dr Usama Hasan from the Quilliam Foundation said: “If there was no past history at the university, I think what the students are saying would sound extremely reasonable.
“However, there has been quite a vicious and nasty history there. They have to deal with that and give a bit more to the university.”
Therefore, the article makes it clear why the University took the decision to lock the prayer room and it also details the type of behaviour that the University finds unnacceptable.
Why GeorgeR is unable to read this I really don’t know.
In addition, he asserts that in the headline ‘Muslim’ is used to describe the prayer room, but not used to describe the terrorists in the Birmingham bomb plot report.
This is because if the descriptor ‘Muslim’ was not attached to ‘prayer room’ then it would not be clear what specific religion was practiced in that prayer room.
The descriptor ‘Muslim’ was not attributed to the Birmingham terrorists because to do so would imply that they represent the beliefs of most Muslims. Which they do not. I am quite confident that if you asked random Muslims in whether blowing up innocent men, women and children on Britain’s streets is acceptable, the vast majority would say no.
If GeorgeR really thinks that we should ascribe the word ‘Muslim’ to all terrorists who profess that faith, then should we call Anders Breivik a Christian terrorist? Has anyone on here berated the BBC for not describing Breivik’s heinous crimes in those terms, or is it just a one way street?
‘It’s not biased…
I am quite confident that if you asked random Muslims in whether blowing up innocent men, women and children on Britain’s streets is acceptable, the vast majority would say no.’
To get from oddly familiar certainty as stated fact to ‘quite confident’ may frame just how much your ever-moving personal opinions, especially as the basis of a rigged poll only the BBC could frame with a straight face for publication, matter.
And that laydeeeez and chaps, is why there’s no point in engaging with the likes of you.
After being criticised for not doing so, I provide a reasoned response to one of you and good old GW pointedly ignores everything I type and responds with some weird tripe that doesn’t actually mean anything.
Please reread what you’ve typed. It’s nonsense.
I can only assume, GW, that you think most Muslims are happy to see men, women and children on Britain’s streets blown up. For that pathetic and wholly wrong outlook, I truly pity you.
‘I can only assume’
Steve, I know it’s just business what you get up to here, and when you pull a Doctor and respawn it will be the same over and over again, but if you throw stuff into the wind you really can’t sulk if you’re covered in your own mess.
You can assume about me what you will. You can huff and you can puff all you like.
But you are drive-by troll and most know it, save the kindergarden kids.
If you have a smidgen of a decent point to make on occasion you leave it embedded in so much baggage of your own biases it gets lost.
The pity is the energy and resources that could be deployed to the cause of impartial, accurate news broadcast are devoted to whatever the heck it is your think you are trying to achieve here.
“Steve, I know it’s just business what you get up to here, and when you pull a Doctor and respawn it will be the same over and over again,”
Nope, sorry – no idea what you mean.
You’ve done a bang-on job pointedly ignoring any of the points I made in my OP in response to George’s post. Well done. Great ad hominem stuff. Almost worthy of myself.
Carry on the good work GW. The world needs people like you.
And don’t be tempted to use ‘drive by’ too much. I quite like it here. It makes me laugh. It’s also nice the see that the few dozen of you can congregate all in one place – a bit like a day centre for the deluded.
‘You’ve done a bang-on job pointedly ignoring any of the points I made… Great ad hominem stuff. Almost worthy of myself.‘
There’s a great bit at the end of ‘A Few Good Men’ where the guy who has actually caused the mess but stayed silent outs himself.
Your work here is clarified.
My work is done.
“After being criticised for not doing so, I provide a reasoned response…”
Wait a minute. I criticised Jam Sponge. You’re Steve Collins.
Oh noes!!! You’re one and the same!!!! Who could have guessed? You blew your cover.
Er… in reply to GW you stated you had given a reasoned response. Which was a reply to me – except I had been addressing Jam Sponge.
Do keep up with yourself.
Islam Not BBC (INBBC) habitually defers to the Islamic Quilliam Foundation, on any issue pertaining to Islam. Only Muslims judging Islam for INBBC.
On the Islamic jihadists in Brimingham (or INBBC’s ‘three Birmingham men’), INBBC decides to censor from its report wherever possible all references to words’Muslims’ and ‘Islam’ because INBBC has a political agenda which entails denying the use of those words in political situations deemed detrimental to Islam.
“95 things that fuel Muslim extremism”
By Hugh Fitzgerald.
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2006/10/fitzgerald-95-things-that-fuel-muslim-extremism.html
“The Muslim population has grown from 1.65 million to 2.87 million since 2001, say researchers. What does this mean for liberal Britain?” (2010).
By Damian Thompson
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/damianthompson/100069830/the-muslim-population-has-grown-from-1-65-million-to-2-87-million-since-2001-say-researchers-what-does-this-mean-for-liberal-britain/
As we await the new thread to spare any gems being lost in the tail end wastelands being lost in the last, on the matter of opinions… er… mattering… I have just finished my morning surf of the MSM to see what caught their fancy on twitter, and how they chose to repackage for their audiences. Here’s a sample:
BBC News (UK) (@BBCNews)
22/02/2013 06:51
Driver dies after police check bbc.in/15zOnTa
BBC News (UK) (@BBCNews)
22/02/2013 06:25
Children’s body parts kept by police bbc.in/15zLVMl
BBC News (UK) (@BBCNews)
22/02/2013 06:13
Baggott defends protests policing bbc.in/15zKwpi
All, one supposes, accurate, though post P*lla*d who can really know, but I do have to wonder if their desire to cram the story into a small space was governed more by agenda-motivated heat over professionally competent light?
Seriously – do you spend most of your time surfing the BBC and the web trying to find things you disagree with?
Do you not perhaps feel that you are missing something? A life perhaps?
I’ve only been on here a couple of days, but I’ve become genuinely concerned for your welfare.
Steve, the irony of most of your latest person vs. ball playing will doubtless pass you by, and may even not register with the majority of Flokkers (poised to give you your half dozen default likes in the next 5 minutes) who live only on this site, but my job involves reviewing all that is out there, including what the BBC serves up.
Which is how I come to be aware of what is, and how the BBC seeks to serve their versions to those of a more restricted view in life.
I also have reason to doubt the sincerity of any concerns you may express, and the word ‘genuine’ would really only apply in advance of certain descriptive terms that may be applied to you I’ll resist for now.
You seem to have been assigned the task of following posters here and sniping pointlessly.
Good job.
How it serves the BBC to have such support one can only leave to others to assess.
But you are coming across either incompetently venal or obsessively barking, or both.
Seriously.
No, ‘only joking’, if maybe in a BBC way?
‘Please look up the word ‘venal’ and deploy it more accurately in future.’
‘Venal – Mercenary, capable of being bought or obtained for money or other valuable consideration’.
Ah, apologies. So you are a BBC staff member then.
Steve Collins (aka Nicked Emus) is a freelance journalist. Not hard to see why he does not get much work. A jam sponge has a better chance of getting a job at the BBC.
Nicked Emus/Steve Collins,
You assume that people are as dim as you, but people of normal intelligence do not find it hard to spot that posters writing in the same style, using the same phrases, and saying the same things, are in fact one and the same person.
“And don’t be tempted to use ‘drive by’ too much. I quite like it here. It makes me laugh. It’s also nice the see that the few dozen of you can congregate all in one place – a bit like a day centre for the deluded. ” at least it isn`t a few hundred `deluded` people congregating five times a day at the local Mosque….
I am hoping the same high-grade blog post from you in the upcoming also.