MIDWEEK OPEN THREAD

By | |

Middle of the week and time for  new one of these. I see the BBC are enchanted by the news that few pages of a new Koran “may” have been found in Birmingham. So touching. Anyway, over to you…

Bookmark the permalink.

153 Responses to MIDWEEK OPEN THREAD

←Older Comments
  1. John Paul Jones says:
    July 23, 2015 at 11:58 pm

    Just watched Panorama 20/07/2015 “The Train That Divides Jerusalem” Well what a pile of steaming camel shit. This is the Mullah Islamic BBC at its ‘best’. How to make an anti – Israeli documentary.

    1. Take 1 Jewish boy. Let him proclaim his heritage and ensure this marinates, before adding any other ingredients..

    2. Add a powerful symbol of the economic and technological dynamism of the Jewish people/state i.e. a state of the art light railway.. Transform it into a lethal weapon with the true purpose of expanding Jewish dominance and the oppression of the Palestinian people.

    3. Introduce the the bitter ingredient of justified resistance by an oppressed and dispossessed people.

    4. Added the religious dimension. The demonic railway does not only serve the purpose of strengthening the Jewish grip on the city and expropriating Arab land but fuels the drive to to seize the Temple Mount, the site of the Al- Aqsa Mosque Islam’s turd (not a typo) holiest site. Enter Muslim exclusivity. The scarfed hydras proclaiming the the Muslim right to keep every other m…..f….r out. There on display is the the right to be offended. Draw a picture of the prophet, question his sexual morality (Ismail), raise the issue of his genocidal savagery etc.. and it is off with your head.

    Having simmered the stew it is ready to serve. The conclusions are set out on the Temple mount/ Al-Aqsa Mosque.
    This railway assault on Islam/Palestinians has led to “serious violence”. Instigated by whom? The railway children of course.

    It brings thousands of Jews to the turd holiest site of Islam, and in breach of of an agreement the Jews secretly pray on the site.

    There ensues righteous rioting and a justifiable attack on visiting Jews. The Jewish police in pursuit of the rioters enter the holy site. A red line has been crossed . I watched with horror, asking myself ‘did they stop to take their shoes off’? Where they any women police officers who did not put on a scarf? Alas the the de-culturized Jewish reporter did not think to ask or answer these theologically important questions. As I poured myself another glass of red wine I felt a rage of share anger at this desecration, but sipped and enjoyed the sense of sedition as the wine warmed my blood.

    Then there is the wall. Yes infidel and Jew you are ‘another brick in the wall’ (To paraphrase Roger Waters anti- culture masterpiece Another ‘Brick in the Wall’). The Israelis claim that the wall was built to stop suicide bombing attacks. Our man begrudgingly appeared to accept this. One could hear the two neurons click in his brain. To deny this totally would be a step too far given the evidence that the wall has been very effective in stopping suicide bombers. However of late some new low tech methods have emerged e.g. car rammings. However, our man finds another , more cynical and and vial reason for the construction of the wall. They built it to blot out the sites of Palestinian poverty,and suffering. The wall hides the Pal Slums and refugee camps from the the increasing prosperous Israelis. This costly, both financially and diplomatically project, is in reality a piece of ‘cosmetic surgery’ a distasteful act of gentrification.

    At this point I reached for another glass of wine and sliced opened a mango grown in Israel (whenever I encounter Israeli produce I take the opportunity to purchase. They are always of high quality). I sucked its sweet, delicious pulp. It felt liberating and act of oral violation of the sanctimonious shit being served up to me by this hair shirt wearing beboid.
    5. A new ingredient is added at the last minute. the abduction and murder by a number of Israelis of a Palestinian youth. A despicable and inhuman act. Cue stage right (or should that be left).A grieving Palestinian mother.She speaks of her beloved child. He was special. He was virtuous. God forgive me, but I have to say it. I am fucking tired of the convention that every gang knife victim , ever youth who dies would have found a cure for cancer, written a great novel or finally brought peace to the world, if only his/her life had not been prematurely terminated. I have four children, all over thirty now and they have done well in life. As a father I am obliged to love them. As a human being I am grateful to be able to say that I like them all. But none of of them has as yet done anything like find a cure for cancer etc.. However I have a 2 year old granddaughter who just might do one of the above great things.

    Please understand, I truly feel for this mother. To lose a child is, I imagine, and can only imagine, a unbearable suffering.

    However, this kind of reporting, the Jeremy Bowen human interest, forget the complexities of the dispute, pornographic journalism is immediately exposed. The savage murder of the Palestinian youth was an act of revenge for the abduction and murder of 3 young Israelis. I felt there was an attempt in the presentation to blur the chronology. I am not sure, but judge for yourself.

    Then he introduces that staple of left/liberal iconography. Palestinian children throw stones at high tech Israeli hardware. The cliché comes tripping off his tongue, as the footage of the rock throwing rolls and then the fire works you know its coming. Like Sally demonstrating how a women can fake an orgasm, you want to hit the table a scream YES! YES! YES! Say it!!! ” Fireworks the ammunition of the powerless” OOH God. That was climatic.

    Again the beboid fails to ask the stone throwers relevant questions. What are taught by Hamas and the PLO. If you do finally defeat the Jews what will be their fate. Will you let them live refugee camps or will exterminate them? Will sell they women into sexual slavery?

    The final issue. His nibs is not sure that his parents would be proud of the Israeli state that has emerged since those early days of 1948. I felt that he was indicating that the idealist of 1948 has been eviscerated by a new Jewish militancy and racism.

    There is no analysis of what Israel might be today had the Arabs accepted the 1948 two state solution. Had welcomed Israel and engaged with it instead of taking a rejectionist stance and pursuing its annihilation?

       16 likes

  2. John Paul Jones says:
    July 24, 2015 at 12:23 am

    Just watched Panorama 20/07/2015 “The Train That Divides Jerusalem” Well what a pile of steaming camel shit. This is the Mullah Islamic BBC at its ‘best’. How to make an anti – Israeli documentary.

    1. Take 1 Jewish boy. Let him proclaim his heritage and ensure he marinates, before adding any other ingredients..

    2. Add a powerful symbol of the economic and technological dynamism of the Jewish people/state i.e. a state of the art light railway.. Transform it into a lethal weapon with the true purpose of expanding Jewish dominance and the oppression of the Palestinian people.

    3. Introduce the the bitter ingredient of justified resistance by an oppressed and dispossessed.

    4. Added the religious dimension. The demonic railway does not only serve the purpose of strengthening the Jewish grip on the city and expropriating Arab land but fuels the drive to to cease the Temple Mount, the site of the al- Aqsa Mosque Islam’s turd (not a typo) holiest site. Enter Muslim exclusivity. The scarfed hydras proclaiming the Muslim right to keep every other m…..f….r out. There on display is the the right to be offended. draw the the prophet, question his sexual morality (Ismail) his genocidal savagery etc.. and it is off with your head.

    Have stewed the stew is ready to serve. The conclusions are set out on the Temple mount/ Al-Aqsa Mosque.
    This railway assault on Islam/Palestinians as led to “serious violence”. Instigated by whom? The railway children of course.

    It brings thousands of Jews to the turd holiest site of Islam, and in breach of of an agreement the Jews secretly pray on the site.

    there ensues righteous rioting a justifiable attack on visiting Jews. The Jewish police in pursuit of the rioters enter the holy site. A red line has been crossed . I watched with horror, asking myself ‘did they stop to take their shoes off’? Where they any women police officers who did not put on a scarf? Alas the the de-culturized Jewish report did not think to ask or answer these theologically important questions. As I poured myself another glass of red wine I felt a rage of share, but sipped and enjoyed the sense of sedition as the wine warmed my blood.

    Then there is the wall. Yes infidel and Jew you are ‘another brick in the wall’ (To paraphrase Roger Waters anti- culture masterpiece Another ‘Brick in the Wall’). The Israelis claim that the wall was built to stop suicide bombing attacks. Our man begrudgingly appears to accept this. One could hear the two neurons click in his brain. To deny this totally would be a step too far given the evidence that the wall has been very effective in stopping suicide bombers. However of late some new low tech methods have emerged e.g. car rammings. However, our man finds another , more cynical and and vial reason for the construction of the wall. They built it to blot out the sites of Palestinian poverty, squala and suffering. The wall hides the Pal Slums and refugee camps from the the increasing prosperous Israelis. This costly, both financially and diplomatically project, is in reality a piece of ‘cosmetic surgery’ a distasteful act of gentrification.

    At this point I reached for another glass of wine and sliced opened a mango grown in Israel (whenever I encounter Israeli produce I take the opportunity to purchase. They are always of high quality). I sucked its sweet, delicious pulp. It felt liberating and act of oral violation of the sanctimonious shit being served up to me by this hair shirt wearing beboid.
    5. A new ingredient is added at the last minute. the abduction and murder by a number of Israelis of a Palestinian youth. Despicable and inhuman act. Que right (or should that be left).A grieving Palestinian mother.She speaks of her beloved child. He was special. He was virtuous. God forgive me, but I have to say it. I am fucking tired of the convention that every gang knife victim , ever youth who dies would have found a cure for cancer, written a great novel or finally brought peace to the world, if only his/her life had not been prematurely terminated. I have four children, all over thirty now and they have done well in life. As a father I am obliged to love them. As a human being I am grateful to be able to say that I like them all. But none of of them has as yet done anything like find a cure for cancer etc.. However I have a 2 year old granddaughter who just do one of the above great things.

    Please understand, I truly feel for this mother. To lose a child is, I imagine, and can only imagine, a unbearable suffering.

    However, this kind of reporting, the Jeremy Bowen human interest, forget the complexities of the dispute, pornographic journalism is immediately exposed. The savage murder of the Palestinian youth was an act of revenge for the abduction and murder of 3 young Israelis. I felt there was an attempt in the presentation to blur the chronology. I am not sure, but judge for yourself.

    The final issue his nibs is not sure that his parent would be proud of the Israeli state that has emerges since those early days of 1948. I felt that he was indicating that the idealist of 1948 has been eviscerated by a new Jewish militancy and racism.

    There is now analysis of what Israel might be today had the Arabs accepted the 1948 two state solution. Had welcome Israel and engaged with it instead of taking a rejectionist stance and pursuing its annihilation?

       4 likes

  3. taffman says:
    July 24, 2015 at 12:40 am

    According to Alibaba telly, Jeremy Corbyn responded to his critics with a call to end to “silly remarks”, and that politics should be “comradely and friendly”.
    Corbyn is doing quite well in the leadership contest, thanks to what I think are the ‘comrades’ in the Tory and UKIP infiltrators that have ‘joined’ the Labour Party just to ‘vote’ for him. Thus ending Labours chances of winning the next election.

       13 likes

  4. Stuart Beaker says:
    July 24, 2015 at 7:22 am

    Praise where it’s due!

    John Humphrys’ Today item this morning with Kate Jennings of the RSPB, about the possible EU review of the Birds’ Directives. Ms Jennings was talking about ‘Nature under Threat’ in the usual general and apocalyptic terms. She seemed somewhat taken aback when Mr Humphrys tackled her repeatedly and effectively, challenging her to be specific and realistic about ‘threats’ in particular situations, rather than indulging in wholesale alarmism. I kept expecting him to abandon the task, but he kept on coming!

    Importantly, you could not tell what his politics were from this interview – it was just apparent that he can, if roused to it, fulfil a proper journalistic function, to challenge and discomfort those who are used to having their every word hung on by collusive pseudo-journalists. It was like listening to Mr Neil.

    I wish Mr Humphrys had been interviewing the anti-neo-nic person the other day when she was claiming, quite spuriously, that repeated, ‘large scale’ experiments had ‘overwhelmingly’ shown the harm that these chemicals had on bee populations. All unchallenged, but the farmer whose rape-seed crop had suffered from flea-beetle infestation invited her to visit his farm to see the harm that banning neo-nic’s has evidently caused. She accepted, but I wonder if the BBC will follow up with them? I hope so.

       11 likes

  5. nogginator says:
    July 24, 2015 at 8:00 am

    Obama/Kerry -BBC view.
    Obama – President Obama turned “Yes we can” into – OBAMA: “Yes we did.” SOPEL,(BBC): “Yes we did.” OBAMA: Yeah. Its unfinished business” etc.
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-33646542
    Kerry BBC – A better deal ‘a fantasy’ says Kerry

    Obama/Kerry – Another view
    Time to Call Obama and Kerry What They Are: Traitors
    We have met the enemy and he is in the White House.
    http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/259466/time-call-obama-and-kerry-what-they-are-traitors-daniel-greenfield

       13 likes

  6. AsISeeIt says:
    July 24, 2015 at 8:01 am

    Virtue Signalling

    Even if you haven’t been made aware of the term ‘virtue signalling’ you will certainly have witnessed examples made by left-of-centre media types. Some subtle, some less so.

    This is not a BBC instance – it would almost certainly be deemed a flagrant breach of their impartiality, well, maybe.

    Keep in mind I’m talking about the review of the documentary here – not the programme itself – which I didn’t watch.

    Metro (free newspaper) TV review, Thursday:

    ‘Hunted:Gay and Afraid, C4 [Channel 4] 11.05pm
    Reporter Liz MacKean investigates how America’s Christian Right is involved in promoting pro-family laws around the world – and backs homophobic attitudes in societies as diverse as Uganda and Russia. If you can keep your cool while Larry Jacobs, leader of the World Congress of Families, justifies it, then you’re made of sterner stuff than us’

    Clearly what ought to be a short synopsis of the show has been turned into a shouty statement of the writer’s opposition to what is termed here the ‘American Christian Right’ (whatever that means?) and an impassioned declaration of personal support for…. well, that’s not as clearly defined, but for simplicity let’s call it by the general phrase – ‘gay rights(?)’ In fact what the journo is doing here dosen’t require any meaningful argument or debate, it is simply saying: I hate the above mentioned ‘American Christian Right’ and I’m a good person. My hatred of above is a virtue signal. I hate – therefore I’m good.

    British newspapers, within the law and taking account of certain codes of conduct, are not oblidged to be balanced in their social or political views. However, these virtue signalling sentiments – usually more carfully put – are echoed again and again through the BBC.

    Does the BBC commentator talking about wefare reform unthinkingly raise the spector of ‘child poverty’ and tip his report in favour of the Labour Party because he is a supporter of that party’s arguments – or is it because he is actually a performer and needs his audience to believe he is a good person?

       15 likes

  7. Guest Who says:
    July 24, 2015 at 8:33 am

    The BBC seems to be throwing an entire B&Q’s worth of kitchen sinks in trying to spin its case for things staying just the way they have always been, if maybe with more money for Mark Byford’s pension.

    Their latest was a daft tweeted graph trying to show their global influence vs. often hardly comparable brands.

    Sadly for them, this has been quickly turned into their worst nightmare in the form of this clever response:

    Moore’s Monacle (@NoMoreEds)
    @aboutthebbc @bbc How about this graph instead. Number of UK households forced to pay the license fee. http://t.co/tXUTTeVu1I
    (https://twitter.com/NoMoreEds/status/624153493121691649?s=02)

       9 likes

  8. Stuart Beaker says:
    July 24, 2015 at 9:01 am

    Language, language..

    Not bias in the usual sense, so apologies.

    Two instances of the influence of language, both from the Today programme this morning.

    1. Interview with originator of new Malaria vaccine for children, together with (WHO?) administrator involved in delivery programmes for African preventative health-care. Both of these exclusively used the term ‘kids’, rather than ‘children’, throughout the interview. This despite the interviewer (JH, I think) using ‘children’, and neither being apparently native English speakers, so presumably ‘kids’ would be a conscious choice rather than unconsciously idiomatic. Strange.

    2. Later on, piece with two studio scientists (JH again). The woman using the near-ubiquitous ‘so’ prefix for every utterance. It occurred to me, as it always does, that this was significant. This time, I think I understand why.

    ‘So’ is the second part of an implication. It is the verbal clothing of an insinuated chain of rational thought. Crucially, the first half of the implication is never expressed, ‘so’ the quality or justification of the inference that is hinted, can never be examined or challenged. It is as though one were ‘taken for’ a scientist by wearing a white lab-coat: a form of passing off.

    I think this is a significant shift in language – it hints at a wish to appear scientifically respectable, without necessarily backing this up with any genuine commitment to scientific thoughtfulness.

    It contrasts with my memory of scientists from years ago, who either prefixed everything with ‘Well!’ (qv Patrick Moore), or who simply said ‘er..’ all the time. The ‘Well!’ speakers always struck me as showmen and entertainers, whereas the hesitators, I think, were unconsciously demonstrating a genuine scientific hesitancy and scepticism, about their own following thoughts and remarks.

    There are potential ‘bias’ consequences to this shift, I suppose – maybe it just shows (a) a diminishing understanding of science as, above all, a sceptical discipline, and (b) a naive trust in the mere appearance of rationality (qv the over-blowing of GCMs and their dire influence on the CC debate).

    Apologies again if this is OT..

       10 likes

    • AsISeeIt says:
      July 24, 2015 at 11:45 am

      ‘So’ is the second part of an implication. It is the verbal clothing of an insinuated chain of rational thought.’

      You may be onto something here. I have assumed this growth of the ‘so’ is just a verbal habit encouraged by media training courses to buy a moment of thinking time for the interviewee and to attempt to sound a tad less dumb than ‘er, well’.

      For example:
      Question: ‘Your company’s activities are wrecking the enviroment!?’
      Answer: ‘Er, well, (pause) the disposal of toxic waste is a complex issue…’
      Or: ‘So, (pause) the disposal of toxic waste…… ‘

      But I’m beginning to think the ‘so’ is more of a quasi-scientific sounding pose, mainly employed in the quasi-scientific areas of social and economic policy. Probably propagated through Common Purpose.

      Remember the recent spreading (particularly among youngsters) of the Australian rising inflection at the end of sentences? This seemed to signal an insecurity about the statement.

      In contrast ‘so’ seems a bullish confident, ‘trust me I’m a scientist’ form.

         1 likes

  9. Dover Sentry says:
    July 24, 2015 at 9:24 am

    The BBC regularly advertise on TV how wonderful they are with an expensive trailer.

    It’s content includes Doctor Who, Lenny Henry and Paralympics.

    Should they be permitted to do this?

    No mention of Jimmy Savile and the host of other criticisms such as blatant political bias.

    The BBC is not a self-funded private company. We pay for it.

    ..

       15 likes

    • Old Goat says:
      July 24, 2015 at 10:18 am

      Channel 4 are doing much the same thing, with Jon Snow in conversation with a dog (no, not Cathy Newman, this time). It’s utterly bizarre, then they insist that the public is paying for it! Not me, I’ve escaped to France…

         11 likes

  10. Umbongo says:
    July 24, 2015 at 10:11 am

    I listened to the 8:00 am news on Radio 4 this morning and reflected on the idea – or practice in this case – of bias by editorial selection. The main item was the pronouncement by the Sage of Washington (in an EXCLUSIVE interview by John Sopel) that he’d like to see the UK remain in the EU. Then we were told that His greatest regret was over gun control. Then – as if by magic – we were told of another shooting followed by suicide in the US. So 2 strikes in the Narrative so far – stay in the EU/get those guns off US streets.

    Then Harrabin came on to anathemise the wicked Amber Rudd (quoting Greenpeace – or was it FoE? – as disinterested evidence to the effect that the UK government was putting up 2 fingers to warmism) for doing taxpayers a small favour by insisting that solar power suppliers should lose inordinate support from the taxpayers: strike #3 for the Narrative – keep the UK on course for the issuing of a gigantic cheque in Paris in November but, meanwhile, subsidise grossly uneconomic “renewables”.

    Then we were informed that the left-leaning (not mentioned) Sutton Trust has damned academies. Apparently – the Trust says unchallenged on Today – sponsors have too much say: strike #4 for the Narrative – all schools should be run by local authorities (preferably Labour).

    In all, not one item of genuine “news”. In fact no surprises at all. We’ve heard it all before. After all what would you expect the Sutton Trust to say about academies? What would you expect Obama to say about the UK and the EU? What would you expect Obama say about gun control? What would you expect Greenpeace to say about warmism subsidies? Mind you, a piece of genuine news revealed in screaming headlines in the Times (but not mentioned in the “news” or the Today newspapers survey) was the £500,000,000 thrown down the international aid toilet through the UK taxpayers’ gift to the massive and corrupt Global Fund in Switzerland. Mind you, what would you expect the BBC to cover up?

    It appears that the BBC – during the current infighting by its traditional parliamentary representatives – has taken on the mantle of both Her Majesty’s (not so) Loyal Opposition in exile and expanded its roles of preaching political environmentalism (from the left natch) as well as being the primary international cheerleader for the charlatan presently in the White House: and all at the UK taxpayers’ expense.

       14 likes

    • Old Goat says:
      July 24, 2015 at 10:19 am

      Sopel (and Obama) was cringeworthy. I had to visit the bathroom, then switch to Classic FM. Mind you, the toadying there wasn’t much better…

         6 likes

  11. John says:
    July 24, 2015 at 10:18 am

    Just checking I could post.

    (Apologies for the self-indulgence!)

       2 likes

  12. JimS says:
    July 24, 2015 at 10:22 am

    Being bored with the BBC’s on-going debate over their new leader I have been reading some ‘wireless’ magazines of the late 1930s.

    Hot topics in those days include:
    1) the impenetrable BBC management structure
    2) the waste of money in expanding Broadcasting House; why couldn’t they build in a cheaper part of London
    3) obsession with America; what does the ‘man in the boulevard’ think?

    Eighty years on and nothing changes!

    Following on from the ‘scandal’ of Princess Elizabeth’s straight arm salute I was ‘shocked’ to see a picture of Reith and his family with his daughter exposing her knickers! A different time. But much the same.

       8 likes

  13. ObiWan says:
    July 24, 2015 at 10:26 am

    So, on to last night’s ‘Reggie Yates’ Extreme Russia: Far Right and Proud of It’ (BBC1 22.35).

    What to make of this? I began by wondering how the programme planning meeting must have gone…

    Drone 1: Great idea! We send Reggie Yates, a black liberal progressive, into the centre of a Russian far right white supremacist march.
    Drone 2: Erm…why?
    Drone 1: Sh*ts and giggles!
    Drone 3: Plus, Reggie can look perpetually offended by it all.
    Drone 2: Yeah – and turn those big sad brown eyes on to the camera every five minutes as if to say ‘are you seeing this?’
    Drone 1: Yeah! Like he had no idea he would be spat at and called names!
    Drone 3: …Hmmm. Is Reggie up for it?
    Drone 1 & 2: You Betcha!

    This is the kind of thing the BBC is reduced to. I wonder when Mr Yates is going to take his ‘investigative reporting’ into the heart of those other racist, homophobic, rapists and murderers, Islamic State..? Will he go on a march with them, too? Sit down for a cup of tea and chat? Ask them, too, why they don’t like queers? Maybe even ask them why they rape and kill so much of the time?

    Hmmm. See, it’s not that Mr Yates’ programme is offensive (it isn’t), it’s just that it was cowardly and hypocritical beyond words. Targeting white supremacists of the Russian far right was a soft, easy (and even accommodating) target compared to You Know Who. Mr Yates’ programme wasn’t ‘looking for answers’ because there was never any danger Mr Yates and his team would find anything other than what they expected: a bunch of disenfranchised white yobbos with knives and a distrust of Russia’s gradual Islamification.

    So how about it, Mr Yates? Next stop Islamic State – I’ve heard those nutjobs actually do throw queers off the top of tall buildings (and then stone them to death if they happen to survive the drop) – and that’s just for starters.

       12 likes

  14. Umbongo says:
    July 24, 2015 at 11:11 am

    I don’t expect Yates to do anything outside the Narrative. As you imply, exposing the Russian far right is TV for Kids. Notice though that the BBC has more or less ignored the meltdown of one of its (and uncoincidentally Corbyn’s) favourites, Venezuela. Why doesn’t Yates go there and show us the result of socialism in all its gory detail? To ask the question is to realise that exposing the sores of the BBC’s favourite (actually second favourite after Islam) ideology is just not on the horizon. It’s way too far outside the BBC comfort zone and might cause collateral damage to its friends in Parliament.

       8 likes

←Older Comments