Today we hear from the BBC that ‘Terror ‘apologists’ must share blame – Hammond’ and that ‘
“Apologists” for those who commit acts of terrorism are partly responsible for the violence, Philip Hammond will say.
Security services have been criticised over their handling of Mohammed Emwazi – known as “Jihadi John”.
With a total brassnecked arrogance and disregard for Hammond’s words and the damning truth about the Islamist group Cage the BBC goes on to say this…
BBC security correspondent Gordon Corera said critics of the security services said they “could have done more” to prevent Emwazi travelling to the Middle East.
Cage, an advocacy group for those “impacted by the War on Terror”, has said MI5 played a role in the radicalisation of Emwazi.
Its research director Asim Qureshi told the BBC “harassment” by intelligence officers did not make Emwazi into a killer, but he said it was a factor in making him feel he “didn’t belong in the UK anymore”.
The BBC doesn’t even have the decency to call Cage ‘controversial’.
The BBC must be sailing close to the wind and many people will believe that its reporting does exactly what Philip Hammond wants to stop….acting as an apologist for both terror and its accompanying extremist rhetoric that brings in the terror recruits….the BBC of course thinks that ‘terrorism’ is too loaded a word…..unless it is British ‘terror’..
The BBC’s Gabriel Gatehouse talking to one of the, as he calls them, Mau Mau veterans:
‘I must say sir you sound very magnaminous considering what you went through.’
…the ferocity and barbarity of what went on at that time has left deep scars…on the victims of torture.’
Not the ferocity and barbarity of the Mau Mau but of the Brits.
The Terrorism Act 2006 surely suggests that the BBC’s pro-Islamist narrative could be construed as encouraging, indirectly or recklessly, the recruitment of Muslims to the Islamist cause:
Encouragement of terrorism
(1)This section applies to a statement that is likely to be understood by some or all of the members of the public to whom it is published as a direct or indirect encouragement or other inducement to them to the commission, preparation or instigation of acts of terrorism or Convention offences.
(2)A person commits an offence if—
(a)he publishes a statement to which this section applies or causes another to publish such a statement; and
(b)at the time he publishes it or causes it to be published, he—
(i)intends members of the public to be directly or indirectly encouraged or otherwise induced by the statement to commit, prepare or instigate acts of terrorism or Convention offences; or
(ii)is reckless as to whether members of the public will be directly or indirectly encouraged or otherwise induced by the statement to commit, prepare or instigate such acts or offences.
The BBC’s continued support for groups like Cage, giving them the credibility and authority that comes with BBC sanction, and its repeated portrayal of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan as illegal or immoral, its regular condemnation of Israel whilst turning a blind eye to Muslim terror, as well as its campaign to close down Guantanamo Bay all point to an organisation that has lost its moral compass and finds itself unable to see the difference between terrorism and justified military or police action…as evidenced by its naive reporting of the comments of ex-Chief Superintendent Dal Babu about the Prevent Programme. All of which is the staple diet fed to the Muslim community by people who wish them to see themselves as besieged and demonised by the ‘West’ and thereby be more open to recruitment for the Jihadi cause.
The BBC knows this and yet recklessly continues to peddle that narrative, a narrative which is demonstrably false but we hear day in day out on the BBC.
Maybe about time someone from the police started taking more interest in Lord Hall’s organisation and its ‘encouragement of terror’.
After all, as Philip Hammond says...’Apologists for terror must take some blame’.
the BBC are untouchable just look how the got away with savile,untill they have the fee taken off them nothing will change.
Islam Not BBC (INBBC) knows its responsibility in this:-
“Terror apologists who made excuses for Jihadi John have a ‘huge burden of responsibility’, Hammond warns.
“Foreign Secretary condemns critics who try to ‘excuse’ the terrorists.
“Campaign group Cage blamed MI5’s attempt to recruit Mohammed Emwazi .
“They said it led to him becoming radicalised and emerging as Jihadi John.
“Hammond says responsibility also lies with those who act as apologists.”
By MATT CHORLEY,
POLITICAL EDITOR FOR MAILONLINE.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2987734/Terror-apologists-excuses-Jihadi-John-huge-burden-responsibility-Hammond-warns.html#ixzz3TyQvuJ5F
I came through Gatwick yesterday and waiting in the queue at immigration, read the posters, headed, ‘Terrorism Act 2000, Section 7’
…or as the BBC would call it, ‘Radical Act 2000, Section 7…’
>The BBC doesn’t even have the decency to call Cage ‘controversial’.<
What, you mean like they called the proposed Tory plan to create 500 new Free Schools "controversial" three times on the 10pm News last night?
That kind of controversial?
I'm not trying to be controversial myself, just to emphasise the priorities within BBC world. They are a disgrace, they really are!
Hammond to Andrew Marr Sunday morning ‘A few fanatics giving a bad name to what is, after all, The Religion of Peace’
As far as I’m concerned, Hammond and his ilk are part of the problem. At least with Cage et al, we know where we stand.
Extremism in Britain: Now the crackdown is launched
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/terrorism-in-the-uk/11457174/Extremism-in-Britain-Now-the-crackdown-is-launched.html
From the link above
Last night details emerged of another example of alleged “entryism”. The Sunday Telegraph can disclose that an extremist who has called for the killing of British troops, Azad Ali, was joined in Parliament by the Labour MPs Yasmin Qureshi, Andy Slaughter and Gerald Kaufman and Sayeeda Warsi, the former Tory communities minister, to launch a “Muslim manifesto” for the general election.
“Muslim manifesto” will neecessarily be sharia compliant.
We are long past the time when such measures could have helped. Now with one party, Labour, which deliberately, and with malice to the UK, imported millions of Muslims, there is no way out except a brutal civil war , along the lines of Yugoslavia. The Serbs warned us, but we knew better. We bombed the very people who had defended Europe from Islamic invasions, and handed a part of their country to Muslims.
Following the Yugoslavia script, I suppose NATO will bomb us. London, Oxford, Coventry and many other towns and cities that are the symbols of our civilisation, will be handed to Muslims.
I know which side the BBC will be on.
2. Murdered Charlie Hebdo Staff Named ‘International Islamophobe Of The Year’
Charlie Hebdo has been named 2015 International Islamophobe of the year, despite many of its staff having been killed by Jihadists in January. The annual ‘award’ was given by Islamic Human Rights Commission (IHRC), a British group that claims to campaign against terrorism.
According to the Muslim website5Pillars the award was given to Charlie Hebdo because of its “continual stoking of Islamophobic sentiment by caricaturing Muslims as terrorists and ridiculing their beliefs.”
It continued: “Charlie Hebdo’s repeated mocking of Muslims is part of a culture of hate that is intended to marginalise, further alienate and further endanger a community that has effectively been ‘otherised’ in much the same way that Jews were in Nazi Germany.”
http://www.breitbart.com/london/2015/03/09/murdered-charlie-hebdo-staff-named-international-islamophobe-of-the-year/
This award is yet another indication how confident Muslims are of victory, and imposing sharia in the UK, subjugating us.
Actively recruiting muslims into the armed forces is also insane. It’s akin to injecting oneself with a virulent disease and expecting it to behaves itself.
Actually most of the Muslims in the Army are from the commonwealth (Africa mainly) and they have no chips on their shoulders like their British born fellow Muslims.
However, that may change as the PC crowd have ensured that they have their own religious club within the army. The army works on treating everybody the same when it comes to faith yet by giving religion a foot in the door we start the ball rolling in causing rifts within our ranks.
Is anyone surprised that the BBC take this very anti British stance and seek to damn one of our institutions doing its best to keep us safe and try to make out that we are the guilty ones? This is what they have been doing for years. In fact ever since they were aplologists for the IRA in the 80’s.
Recruiting Muslims into the police and other agencies including the state broadcaster is a long term problem. I can see that the BBC would be delighted to announce that x % of its senior staff are now from ‘minority’ groups. Other public sector bodies will be keen to follow , after all its so PC and so liberal left!
But it has often been said that we are locked into a decades long struggle with Islamic terrorists. If so, then just like the Soviets did, I am sure that Isil will insert agents into our institutions who will act as ‘sleepers’ working their way into positions of power/influence/knowledge and then do us the maximum amount of harm in 10 or 20 years time.
Of course there will be plenty of headline atrocities to keep us looking the other way , but it is the sleeper will cause us more harm in the long term. From that point of view therefore, the fewer Muslims we have in our institutions the better. But that will just increase the resentment felt by those Muslims who do want to live in harmony with us ( I believe that there are some) and give more recruits to isil and others.
Oh what a mess the stupid politicians have created over the past decades. This is exactly what Enoch Powell feared. Having very different cultures living alongside each other is never stable and can easily turn into open conflict ,particularly when one of those cultures in very hostile to the values of the other and wishes to imposes its values on the other .
How this pans out is anyone’s guess, but I feel it won’t be a very pleasant next few decades for anyone in the UK or Europe come to that.
You really need to check out the History of the middle East.
These terrorists were created with western support.
Moreover you fail to acknowledge the complicity between the west and oil states that have for decades promoting radical Islam. Further you ignore the active role that Britain has played in overturning democratic Muslim countries when its oil interests are at stake.
If you like Britain’s value system then you might like to consider what institutions are upholding those values and what institutions aren’t. Might like to start with the recent wars Britain has waged both on ethical and strategic grounds. Once you have done this you will be able to identify the rather empty polictical posturing carried out by some conservatives at the moment.
Interesting comments you make. But what terrorists did we create? Show us some evidence some facts. The Middle East has always been a blood bath as far as I can see.
I agree we were complicit in helping the Arab States get the oil out of the ground. Without us they would still be living in tents! Oh where is tesla and his unlimited energy sources, we would not have needed Arab oil then. Also why is it we are sitting on our own energy which would immensely benefit this country. I refer to fracking of course. Which would free us from ties to oil and gas in both Russia and the middle East. In Lancashire alone they estimate 50 years worth of energy. We could then leave the Middle East to destroy itself which it surely will eventually.
Big ears wrote:
You really need to check out the History of the middle East.
What you mean that region of the world which has been in conflict for over 3000 years
Persians
Greeks
Romans
Moguls
Ottomans
French
British
and of course Islam
have all stuck their boot in , I mean look up where we get the word assassin from. Trying to point the finger of blame at the West is so fucking yesterday, I mean do we bitch about the Normans /Vikings/Scottish invading England no. But for some reason Muslims and their bigeared acolytes feel their have the right to bitch about the Islamic right to murder death kill.
So what you are saying is that we in the UK are getting what we deserve from these fanatics and its all our own fault.
I have heard that silly analysis on numerous occasions from the state broadcaster. I am sorry that you swallowed it hook line and sinker, because believing that tripe must make being British intolerable. Perhaps you should leave the country , renounce your citizenship and go somewhere were they might believe you. Alternatively apply for a post at the BBC you will find friends there and fit in well.
“Following the Yugoslavia script, I suppose NATO will bomb us. London, Oxford, Coventry and many other towns and cities that are the symbols of our civilisation, will be handed to Muslims. I know which side the BBC will be on.”
They won’t be on the side of Islam; they will be jetting out of the UK, business class, to their Tuscany villas and apartments in New York and never coming back.
“Charlie Hebdo’s repeated mocking of Muslims is part of a culture of hate that is intended to marginalise, further alienate and further endanger a community that has effectively been ‘otherised’ in much the same way that Jews were in Nazi Germany.”
Doesn’t that just sum up the islamic pursuit of victimhood? (I nearly used “cult”, instead of “pursuit”, but islam is nothing if not a cult of death.) Everything about contemporary islam is calculated to make it as different and offensive to non-muslims as possible. For instance, there is the current craze for so-called “islamic” styles of dress for women: niqabs, hijabs, burqas. You’d think that the fact the muslims can’t even agree about what is proper for women to wear would sow a seed of doubt, but not a bit of it. Back in the 1960s, female Afghan university students dressed like French ones. If they’re still alive now, they are shuffling around in bell-tents, pretending to be less clever than the Morlocks around them.
You can say that it is the same for every unfortunate woman in a muslim country, but that is not true of those countries that have not yet submitted to the muslims. Any kind of islamic dress instantly distinguishes a muslim woman from a non-muslim one. If you’re trying to avoid being “otherised“, how about not wearing a flag saying, “I am a muslim!!!!” in the first place?
Of course, muslims actually rejoice in this “otherism“. That’s why they declare local sharia law. That’s why they force “Three Little Piggies” to be shunned from children’s lives. That’s why the words “Christmas” and “Easter” are shunned by the politically correct. It’s also why muslims build their mosques where they do.
There’s a hideous one in Reading, which looks as if it’s made out of bronze-coloured plastic. As with countless other recent mosques, it is specifically designed to be other. You can’t miss it. You haven’t the slightest desire ever to step inside the monstrosity, but there it is, proclaiming its otherness. There are plenty of communities in the West wondering why they suddenly have these alien mosques in their midst.
Owen Morgan – Great post
One aspect of Islam that is not realised, is that is that in Islam, only Islam is allowed to occupy the public square. In fact Muslims must dress in a manner to show the public presence of Islam.
By the same token, it is offensive for any other religion to show its presence in the public square by dress.
Now Christians do not dress in a manner that signifies Christianity in the public square. But Jews and Sikhs do. And that is one more reason why Jews and Sikhs are attacked in a Muslim dominated area.
What we have done by importing Muslims is as if we have imported an alien species, whose culture we have no understanding of.
Muslims cry peace peace, after each atrocity. This reminds me of the movie “Mars attacks”.
‘Muslims cry peace peace, after each atrocity. This reminds me of the movie “Mars attacks”.’
Or the line from the song Startrekking “We come in peace, shoot to kill!” In fact that is very apt to describe what is happening.
‘If you’re trying to avoid being “otherised“, how about not wearing a flag saying, “I am a muslim!!!!” in the first place?’
Bang on the money.
‘Doesn’t that just sum up the islamic pursuit of victimhood.’
Ha Ha ,and there’s me thinking that that was what Israel does with Holocaust memorial.
Because you are essentially a racist you clearly do not recognise that the vast majority of people are pretty much all the same . Sadly your racism will only cause greater division and that is what the quote at the start of your entry was alluding to.
‘Because you are essentially a racist you clearly do not recognise that the vast majority of people are pretty much all the same .’
In what way a racist?
And if we’re all ‘pretty much the same’, how come so many countries end up like Saudi, Zimbabwe, North Korea and Iran?
I see the bBC continues its re-branding of the bad as ..victims
WWII fire-bombing of Tokyo by US remembered 70 years on
The liberal mindset of the bBC continues to apologise for the really evil out there. At the start of the last century Japan embarked on a mission to carve itself an empire from the neighbours. While the left love to berate the US and the British for their so called Empires, nothing is mentioned about Japan. From 1894 to 1945 Japan was at war with somebody, It annexed Taiwan, Manchuria, Korea and parts of Russia. It left the UN of its day (The league of Nations) and it killed millions and enslaved even more. The population were brainwashed to accept this barbarity by the promotion of Japanese racial superiority, The Japanese indoctrination of children made the Nazis look like amateurs. The problem for Japan is they decided to take on the US and as such paid the price. However it took total war in which to kick the Japanese back to their homeland, a war which saw them fight tooth and nail every step of the way . A path which cost hundreds of thousands of lives and yet to the bBC, it is the Japanese who waged total war on their neighbours for over 50 years who are the real victims. Yes it this latest anti-US sop the bbC tries to present the view that the bombing of Japan was a …..war crime. Not the rape of Nanking Not the use of chemical weapons, not the torture and murder of prisoners.
Not Korean comfort women, forced labour, and the rest. No the blight that was the Japanese empire can only be a victim in the eyes of the liberal idiots at the bBC. To them only the people who defeated the Japanese imperial empire can be wrong. Its as if the bBC are apologising to the Japanese for how its victims fought back.
The bBC, the traitors within our midst
… to follow from the BBC, an in depth reprt on the Nanking Massacre. But then again, maybe not.
‘The liberal mindset of the bBC continues to apologise for the really evil out there.’
Spot on. They blame the West for everything and can find nothing positive about any part of our history which has involved fighting for democracy and survival, unless it’s to heap praise on the ethnic/foreign element of our WW1 and 2 forces. Same for our empire – all bad, whilst they wax lyrical about how multicultural and liberal the Romans were.
Absolute effing wankers.
Great post Pounce,
After the war the crimes of the Japanese were uncovered and were in the forefront of the Wests relationship with them for the next 30 years, they slaughtered anyone and everyone in their way and in many ways were a 1940s version of IS, this is how they delt with Sikh prisoners.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_war_crimes#/media/File:Japanese_shooting_blindfolded_Sikh_prisoners.jpg
For those interested there are many pictures and horrors stories out there. You will need a strong stomach. The bbc is beyond a disgrace, it is criminal in trying to rewrite history, our history, it does not belong to them.
And then we had the Kamikaze cult of suicide bombing.
Can you imagine a BBC programme entitled ‘Kamikaze Pilots – The World’s First Suicide Bombers’?
Nah, me neither. Can’t be going all judgemental on other countries’ cultures and traditions can we?
And when they were nuked, the Japanese gave up; they did not continue as vengeful fanatics. My physics tutor worked on the Hiroshima bomb and despite those who saw his work as a war crime the Japanese later embraced him and only a couple of years ago, in his nineties, he was given a prestigious award from the Japanese scientific community for his medical research team operating in Japan. His story will never be recorded by the west hating BBC.
Yet another example of how the bBC paints Islam as only a victim in the UK:
Syria girls: Families tell MPs of school letter anger
Families of three schoolgirls missing in Syria have told MPs they had no idea the teenagers had been radicalised.The families have complained that a police letter about a school friend of the girls who was already in Syria was not sent directly to them. Sahima Begum – sister of Shamima Begum – said her family would have questioned her, if they had received the letter.
So hands up here, those who have children? Hands up those who have received a letter from the school regards something? Hands up those who haven’t, but heard about it from from a fellow parent?
Now lets look at this case, the families are all Islamic, a social grouping which keeps mainly to itself in the Uk, they all live in the same area, shop in the same shops and pray in the same mosques. Are you telling me, that the fact that a young lady from this very close knit community who buggered off to Syria last year wasn’t discussed , that the letter at hand wasn’t discussed by the community : Outside Schools /by the families other children/at the local mosque/at the local shops/at work.
Yet here we are being told that the parents didn’t know about the risk of their offspring being radicalised .
Please!!!
Agree. Was speaking to some young muslim friends and they said that the girls acting independently of the parents was pretty impossible. They said at that age as boys they always had to get permission to go anywhere. So, they figure for girls it would be impossible. Further, you are right, muslim communities are tight and gossipy. Thus it is very difficult to keep secrets and if the police came into school regarding another girl it would have been the talk of the mosque because everybody would have complained about “harassment” of the muslim pupils. I found it interesting that they blamed the security services for not doing enough, yet they would complain if they had done so. So, my guess is that they figure they can get some compensation out of this. Further, the advisors behind these families see propaganda advantage here. The saps at the BBC treating these girls as if they were not muslim and as victims is part of this apologetic narrative. One can look at the airlines because the age of the girls was never hidden but, I think, there are probably thousands of children of the same age traveling independently as they visit relatives at “home”. Thus the airlines have got used to underage children traveling and don’t raise a flag. So, why doesn’t the committee get the airlines in?
‘Further, the advisors behind these families see propaganda advantage here’
Perhaps a ‘news’ entity whose credibility is not totally blown may look into who these backroom types are?
It was all looking desperate from the off, but the moment there was a ‘demand’ for an ‘apology’ it was clear these poor saps were no longer anything to do with their kids’ lives.
Where did they pick up the ‘un-Islamic’ values of stealing passports and jewellery, lying and deceiving their parents? Eastenders?
Why do our politicians continue to make excuses for Islam? Are the Saudis paying our self-employed guardians of moral rectitude something on the side? Where is Margaret Hodge when we need her?
If Margaret Hodge is the solution we are in deep trouble. It goes to show the times that we lack politicians of true independence. The result of this is that in our desperation as soon as somebody in the establishment shows a glimmer of rationality and awareness of reality, we fall on them in gratitude. If you look at her political history as one of those trustafarians of the left that had so much time in London to create our current situation, you will find a person that is part of the problem and not the solution. She has never recanted and said that the positions she espoused has lead to our current predicaments.
There is also the unexamined possibility that they were “radicalized” at home.
And yet another poor little misunderstood Islamic terrorist article from the bBC
Ex-hostage Nicolas Henin: Captors are ‘fragile’ jihadis
A French journalist who was held hostage for 10 months in Syria by the British militant known as “Jihadi John” has been speaking to the BBC about his time in captivity….He told the BBC’s Lucy Williamson his captors had little to do with the local Arab or Muslim culture but were “the product of our culture, of our world”.
‘He told the BBC’s Lucy Williamson his captors had little to do with the local Arab or Muslim culture but were “the product of our culture, of our world”.
And you know, he’s right! Our pub darts team can talk of nothing but Jihad between arrers.
“Islamist barbarism at the gate.
“It is baffling that some well-meaning Westerners still regard Islamist extremists as carrying the banner of the oppressed. But such is the nature of the ideological Left. These shabby, useful idiots need to be exposed, along with the barbarians they lie for.”
http://www.thecommentator.com/article/5693/islamist_barbarism_at_the_gate
Will INBBC own up?
I see the bBC continues with its pro Labour party agenda:
Justine Miliband: I’m up for election fight
Justine Miliband, the wife of the Labour leader, has said the personal attacks her husband has faced will get “really vicious” during the election. In an exclusive BBC interview, she said she feared criticism of her husband would get “really personal” but that she was “totally up for this fight”. She said she wanted to defend the “principle of decency in public life”.
The bBC, the so called Impartial News Org which for some reason favours Islamic Terrorists, their liberal and labour defenders and anybody who who hates the West. Paid for by the British taxpayer.
Under Scameron immigration has massively increased and he is fanatically pro-EU. when was the last time you heard him speak out against the BBC! did he ever criticize the wettest Tory in history Chris Fatten when he was Chairman of the BBC Trust! The Useless Tories have absolutely no intention of scrapping the licence-fee.
To the OP: the BBC hasn’t been prosecuted under the Terrorism Act. I wonder why not? Could it be because this only exists in Alan’s own mind?
The BBC will continue to give such groups and individuals airtime because it is a news broadcaster operating in a democracy. It won’t compromise such a fundamental principle, regardless of how much you really, really dislike CAGE.
So posts like this or one’s about Mehdi Hussein are pudding in the wind. And how come we don’t hear Alan making calls for the same censoring of extremists with whom he does agree? Odd that isn’t it?
But they are supposed to be impartial. Which they aren’t. That is the point, something you seem to have missed in your reply.
And the kind of ‘extremists’ with which Alan no doubt agrees with are extremely unlikely to need censoring from the BBC as they are extremely unlikely to even be on the BBC due their views not corresponding with those of the ‘impartial national broadcaster, paid for by us whether or not we want to’. E.G. Anything slightly right wing.
So, whilst we’re on, care to give a counter argument as to the following assertion?
“The BBC effectively functions a favourable propaganda broadcasting service for Islam as it does not want to be seen upsetting Muslims, and thus could be judged to be a contributing factor to Islamic extremism in the UK”.
You can hardly claim they’re not impartial while at the same time arguing they shouldn’t give airtime to people you really, really don’t like. Its rather contradictory.
CAGE knew Emwazi, they have something to contribute. By all means disagree vehmently, dismiss them or despise them, but don’t tell me I can’t heat what they have to say.
And what can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.
The BBC are apologists and therefore have played, in my opinion, their part in the rise of Islamic fascism.
I wonder when the bBC will get round to reporting the latest murder at the hands of ISIS
ISIS release sick new video of boy executioner, aged around 10, shooting dead ‘Israeli spy’ captured in Syria
I’m sure as the victim was a so called ‘Jew’ the bBC will have no problem promoting this Islamic thug as..a Hero abeit a victim of the white non Islamic British population and that he should be brought over here to put into child care at Tower Hamlets under their award wining social services.
Everybody knows that the BBC and the likes of Channel 4 News won`t stop until the black flag of sharia flies over Buck House.
The liberal elite are so self-loathing, so supine stupid, so guilt-ridden and craven in the face of a sniff of Turkish Delight that they would condemn we little people to jizya, Jew burning and halal butchery in Parliament Square-and all in return for a chance to suck sherbet fizz with Al Jazeeras finest or Memri.
Witness tonight-Channel 4 News claims that disturbances in Yarls Wood, failed efforts to deport “Afghan children”(well over 20-but thats youth work where they come from apparently)-are “due to this programme highlighting “abuses of processes”.
In other words-riots and criminal efforts to flout the laws are bigged up by the tinderbox twats at Channel 4…and they openly tell us all, expecting us all to thank them?
Sorry Snowjobby…Longstocking…only fellow braindead liberals from Hampstead, quangotwats from Mile End etc will be grateful to you…you don`t have to LIVE with the parasites, as we do.
Basically-women, gays,Jews and Christians only-not MORE bleeding jihadists too moochy to go to the frontline….not when there`s a soldiers back exposed to them.
Channnel 4 is Satans sphincter.
Maybe we should start publishing where these leftwing twats live, hold protests outside their homes, infirm their neighbours that they are being investigated for pedophillia and tell their children that they are apologists for terrorism.
Shocked at what I have written, the left have been doing that for years against anybody they don’t like, in fact the Met will even give you a Police escort to protect you from the public if you are happy to scream ‘Allah ackba’ five times a day
Get help Pounce.
Sky News v Beeboid News,
this evening:
Two top TV news reports this evening-
A.)
Sky News:-
1.) Interview with masked ex-Islamic State jihadist in Turkey;
2.) Analysis of Philip Hammond’s speech on ‘terror apologists’.
B.)
Beeboids News:-
1.) BBC ban Clarkson;
2. ) Hillsborough.
ok, it is time for my apology,in fact i am going to apologise for everybody in this blog,i apologise to jihadi john and his family,these 3 muslim girls and there familys who have gone to join isis and cage and all there membersi,it is all are fault why these people are becoming so radicalised and we drove them to join isis and commit acts of savage murder in syria and northern iraq,yes it is all fault that these people have turned into terrorists because they did not feel they belonged as part of are soceity that drove them into the hands of isis,i am so sorry,please accept my apology.>>>>pukessssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss
It appears that the bCC has a bee in its bonnet about how the Prime Minister wants so called people in authority (But in this case Social workers) to be held to account for their inability to protect those child at risk of being groomed by Islamic rape gangs for fear of being called a racist:
Mark Easton: Standing up for social workers
A week after the prime minister threatened social workers with jail if they fail to protect children, the man his government appointed to keep an eye on children’s services has warned that growing criticism of social workers is adding to the pressure on a strained service.
and the reason the bBC offers why Social workers don’t protect little white girls from Pakistani child molesters ;
“Stretched budgets are putting additional strain on these crucial services,”
Really? but here the bBC repeat that statement:
But councils have also seen significant cuts to their overall budgets and, despite efforts to protect children’s services, many are struggling to cope.
Which is strange as the above is followed by this:
Figures in today’s report show that spending has remained constant at around £7.8bn since 2010, but that £300m has shifted from prevention to intervention – from schemes that keep children safe to dealing with children known to be at risk.
£300 million out of a budget of £7.8 billion, wow.
Funny enough, I had a white social worker who removed me from my Islamic father who had a penchant for physical abuse agaisnt his children. The local council on finding out young pounce had brown skin, black hair and no foreskin replaced that social worker with an Islamic one. On our first meeting she informed me I had brought great dishonour to my family and community , that my father loved me and that I should ask to be returned to him. The funny thing is from that day a 10 year old child refused to ever speak again to that Islamic cunt.
So much for
cunts..cuts ehThe bBC runs with an article about British Foreign policy which has a very strange midsection:
Is the UK still sure of its role on the world stage?
The United Kingdom seems well placed to punch above its weight in the world. Is that what we do? Or should want to do? Or is the reality that the country has lost its way in foreign policy? There has been a slew of parliamentary reports in the past few weeks and much comment besides, pointing to all sorts of alleged failings: that the Foreign Office has suffered such severe cuts it can’t do its jobalternatively, that Britain took its eye off Russia and missed seeing President Vladimir Putin’s redrawing of Europe’s borders comingor that spending on the armed forces must be increased to avoid Britain becoming all but toothless
Yup another lovefest from the bBC which will no doubt use this article in which to get the UK to hand over its UN SC seat to..Pakistan/Iran/Syria/ etc.. and then they come out with this:
Got to love the bbC with its pro Islamic stance.
I see the bBC have got round to reporting on the murder of an Israeli Arab who packed his bags and buggered off to Syria in which to fight for Allah.
Islamic State posts Israeli Arab ‘spy death video’
Funny enough the bBC make sure you know they murdered the right man:
Islamic State (IS) jihadists have posted a video online appearing to show the killing of an Israeli Arab man who they accused of being a spy.
Sorry bBC i didn’t quite get the message there:
It said he later confessed to being a spy for Israel’s Mossad – a charge denied by Israel and by his family.
Ah, so he was a spy and the proof is where exactly?????, yet 3 Islamic spilt arses who fucked off to Syria in which to get rodgered silly by the same fuckers are promoted as fucking victims. No bBC, this murdered man was a victim not 3 silly little western girls who buggered off east for Allah.
The bBC, the propaganda arm for Islamic terrorism
‘Muslim families demand apology from police after their three daughters were stopped and questioned at airport, in Islamophobic profiling incident’
“Can’t Muslims even go on holiday to Turkey without being harassed because of the way they dress” screamed one outraged mother . . . .
In their attitudes to Islamic terrorism the BBC and the liberal left in general have become more and more like the idiots on the British left who eulogised Stalin in the in 1930’s.
True.