Here’s a thoughtful reflection on the BBC’s recent adaption of “A Midsummer Night’s Dream”…
A militaristic dictatorship replete with red and black insignia. Guards bearing uncanny resemblances to storm-troopers. A fascistic dictator who might just be a psychopath…
Welcome to the BBC’s version of A Midsummer Night’s Dream.
Make sure you click the link and read the rest of this.
A Midsummer Night’s Nightmare: superb review – in a nutshell. This about sums it up for me, for almost every BBC drama in recent times. Only so glad I didn’t watch any of it – and hopefully never will, unless it becomes “required” viewing in some futuristic Orwellian dystopia.
superb review… I didn’t watch any of it
Oh, so revealing. A perfect review of something you didn’t watch – because it confirms your own prejudice, without you having to exercise your own mind.
As it is, it’s not a great review by any means. The writer has decided what narrative he wants Russell T Davies to have thought of. And then, when the facts don’t quite fit his narrative, he says, “Oops. Didn’t quite think it through, that one, did you?” as if it’s Davies’ fault that the reviewer has found his own premature conclusions are flawed.
He confuses Richard O’Brien and Richard Wilson. And it’s apparently all “Davies rather than Shakespeare” as well as “nothing we haven’t seen before”. And when he says that “a lefty-liberal paradise is established where everybody holds hands”, all he means is “there’s a coordinated dance”. So presumably righty-conservative people never hold hands while dancing. Well, I suppose it would mean coming into contact with other people, so I can understand why he doesn’t really understand the concept.
But hey – lack of consistency and inaccuracy: give that fella a job at Biased BBC. All he needs is to be an out and out liar and he can fit right in with the rest of Vance’s band of bigots!
Jerrod,
“superb review… I didn’t watch any of it”
Hilarious!
This site seems to get dumber with every passing day. Oh look, here’s “Thoughtful”…
@Jerrod @zero
I’m sorry that you found that confusing. Let me explain it in simple terms, so you can understand:
(a) it was a superb review, in my opinion. I enjoyed reading it, it was well-written and entertaining, and it summed up in a nutshell what I find so nauseating and unwatchable about the BBC’s output these days.
(b) I didn’t watch the programme concerned.
There now – is that all clear? Two statements, not mutually conflicting. You are welcome.
Is there anything either of you would like to add about BBC bias? So far it seems your entire input has been to pick on other posters and call names.
> (a) it was a superb review, in my opinion. I enjoyed reading it, it was well-written and entertaining
By being inaccurate.
> it summed up in a nutshell what I find so nauseating and unwatchable about the BBC’s output these days.
Yeah, its inaccuracies pandered to your base prejudices, didn’t they? Despite not being an accurate reflection of the programme concerned.
So a review is “superb” if it reinforces your bigotry. The fact it’s not an accurate reflection of the programme is somehow irrelevant – because who needs accuracy when you have a bigotry itch to scratch?
> (b) I didn’t watch the programme concerned.
So you can’t tell that the author was filling his review with inaccuracies. That’s the point you don’t seem to be able to grasp.
> Is there anything either of you would like to add about BBC bias?
Two things:
(a) Bias is more than “ooh, this broadcaster isn’t telling me lies in order to bolster my own prejudiced view of the world”
(b) If you’re going to say that a programme is biased, it really does help if you’ve watched it, and then tell the truth about it.
Do let me know if either of those concepts are too difficult for you to understand. Over the past few days you have shown that basic comprehension can be a struggle for you.
I am sick and tired of the BBC’s wall-to-wall propaganda war, thinly disguised as art, in which the recurring themes are:
a) Islam-has-nothing-to-do-with-terrorism,
b) migration-is-all-good,
c) multiculturalism-is-all-good, and
d) Islam-is-compatible-with-western-values-really.
Alternative views are generally not represented, and when they are they are condemned as being racist and xenophobic.
If this view is based on bigotry and prejudice, one would also have to condemn as bigoted and prejudiced such notables as the Dalai Lama, the former chair of the Equality and Human Rights Commission Trevor Phillips, and the BBC’s muslim Head of Religious Broadcasting Professor Aaqil Ahmed.
I don’t usually reply to bigots, but with you I’ll make an exception.
You talk about my “narrative” that I “want Russell T Davies to have thought of.” Really?
Davies seems more than capable of having “thought of” his own interpretation without any help from me. That’s what happens when you take another author’s work, you interpret and shape it. Davies shaped the Dream to his own “narrative”. I merely analysed that interpretation. With me so far?
As for my own “premature conclusions” which, according to your ‘analysis’ (heavy irony) were “flawed” please feel free to expand. Would be very interested to know what they were exactly and how exactly they were “flawed.” Think you can do that, genius? Oh, and please feel free to use as many “quotation marks” as you like…
O’Brien and Wilson? Big deal. Look the same and sound the same. ‘Sides, when have you ever seen them both in the same photograph. But “hey” very incisive critique. What do you do for an encore?
“All Davies rather than Shakespeare..?”
What I actually wrote:
The more this became Russell T Davies and the less William Shakespeare, the more it slid alarmingly into didacticism and the more nauseous it became.
Spot the difference, genius?
But “hey” who gives a stuff about “consistency” and “accuracy” now, genius?
So, what are we left with from your ‘analysis?’
– You know the difference between Richard O’Brien and Richard Wilson…
Poor little thing. Just can’t take the fact that this piece of trash was exposed for the unsubtle, lefty-liberal trash it was. Aww. Maybe find a safe space and suck thumb? Instead of spewing your hatred and ‘analysis’ here, why not just trot off to the Huffington Post where you can hold hands and group hug your fellow geniuses?
> As for my own “premature conclusions” which, according to your ‘analysis’ (heavy irony) were “flawed” please feel free to expand.
Your statement “Oops. Didn’t quite think it through, that one, did you?” suggests that Russell T Davies created a set of rules that he then immediately broke. But you’re the one who decided what rules that he was apparently breaking were.
> The more this became Russell T Davies and the less William Shakespeare, the more it slid alarmingly into didacticism and the more nauseous it became.
And yet we’ve seen it all before, as well. According to you.
> O’Brien and Wilson? Big deal. Look the same and sound the same.
Well, they’re both bald now. But I think most people would be able to tell the difference between the presenter of The Crystal Maze and Victor Meldrew. The latter’s Scottish for a start. So they neither look the same, nor sound the same. You’re really doing well with that hole-digging, aren’t you?
> Just can’t take the fact that this piece of trash was exposed for the unsubtle, lefty-liberal trash it was.
If by “exposed”, you mean “railed against by someone who made up his own mind and applied his own prejudices with a deluded sense of his own importance”, perhaps. But that’s not a definition that tends to exist outside the likes of Biased BBC.
Have fun never holding someone’s hand when you dance with them.
Is this all you’ve got? Seriously?
“Your statement….suggests that Russell T Davies created a set of rules that he then immediately broke. But you’re the one who decided what rules that he was apparently breaking were.”
Nope. Davies it was who adapted Midsummer Night’s Dream, not I. Try again.
Love this one:
“If by “exposed”, you mean “railed against by someone who made up his own mind…”
Yup, I did make up my own mind. You may yet be capable of writing a coherent response…
So, come on then genius, why don’t you enlighten us with your critique of Davies’ dream?
I mean the Dream that I “concluded” and “made up” but which Davies actually wrote. That Dream. Welcome to the world of critical analysis.
Or maybe just sing kumbaya while holding hands with your HuffPost pals?
Midsummer Murdered sums it up for me.
> Nope. Davies it was who adapted Midsummer Night’s Dream, not I. Try again.
I didn’t say you adapted it, did I? God, that’d be one version which, on this evidence, I’d probably avoid from the outset.
No, you decided that RTD was going for a particular aesthetic for Athens, and then when it turned out that included non-white characters, you accused him of “not thinking it through”. Because your idea of what he was going for was contradicted by what was seen on screen, you decided to blame him instead of your faulty belief.
Understand now, or shall I try and use shorter words next time?
Can I have the shorter words, please?
// …instead of you faulty belief. //
Wow.
So you haven’t seen it either then Jerrod?
There are any number of Shakespeare plays which can have a narrative imposed on them, and the thick heavy plot can stand it, Midsummer nights is not one of them.
It’s just one of those airy light away with the fairies plays in which you can easily suspend belief and not have to think too hard to enjoy it.
I do wonder if this was actually Russel T Davies’s idea though, because he’s made some of the most critical anti PC leftie programs under the radar of the BBC, – complaints were made.
BTW Jerrod, has ‘bigot’ replaced waycist as the bully word of choice for the Fascist left because after Gordon Clown infamously called life long Labour voter Gillian Duffy a ‘bigot’ for failing to whole heartedly agree with him? I’m noticing this word in almost every post by a leftie, after all, it’s much easier to emit a bully word when you can’t put together a cogent argument isn’t it?
> So you haven’t seen it either then Jerrod?
Yes, I have.
> There are any number of Shakespeare plays which can have a narrative imposed on them, and the thick heavy plot can stand it, Midsummer nights is not one of them.
It didn’t have much imposed upon it that wasn’t already there. Theseus is generally presented as a war-like ruler, and that was the case here. And the relationship with Hippolyta, which remained antagonistic to the end, is far more believable than some offstage thawing between the first and last acts.
> I do wonder if this was actually Russel T Davies’s idea though
Well, wonder what you like. It’s not as if you have any history of actually caring about the truth, is it?
> complaints were made
Ooh, scary. That must mean those complaints were valid. And not, of course, the deluded rantings of, say, the sort of idiot who makes up the content of Desert Island Discs in a desperate attempt at attention-seeking.
> has ‘bigot’ replaced waycist as the bully word of choice for the Fascist left
You mean in the way “Facist left” is treated by you to mean “anyone who has the temerity to point out that Thoughtful is a quite obvious liar”?
Jerrod where is your input to Al Beeb’s Bias?
What do you think of this chap’s performance ?……………………..
Would you like to advertise it ?
Doubt he’d understand what Pat is talking about, taffman.
0.0 look it`s jerrod!!!
As usual jerrod has managed to disprove yet another thread title using his inability to directly address the content of a viewpoint on a topic he knows nothing about….
Can you please explain to me how you consistently manage to produce such flatulant remarks with a skull containing nothing but a vacuum? You have by now surely run out of s**t to spout so explain the flatulence characterizing your posts please….. I`ll bet your breath smells so bad that both your friends (or are you still liking your own comments) look forward to your farts and that when you burp your teeth have to duck….
Windfarm!!!
Do you have irritable vowel syndrome???? It may explain it….
> his inability to directly address the content of a viewpoint on a topic he knows nothing about
Well I did address the topic, and it’s one that I do know about.
Whereas you concentrate on attempting to insult me in childish ways. You poor, poor man, that the sole contribution of which you’re capable is to behave as if you’re twelve.
I reciprocate the underlying sentiment of your `renewable wind enargy based` reply jerrod ….. you need to try harder… still not producing any energy … that`s the trouble with windfarms…
Nice to see both your friends are still liking your comments….
Jerrod, Zero, I don’t want to distract from your discussion here. But the point about having an opinion on something without seeing it interests me.
Isn’t that the rationale behind the anti-racist, anti-fascist,, leftish attempts to no platform groups and political parties they deem to be racist? Stop them speaking, prevent them from entering the country, ban them, so that everyone will agree that they are what you say they are.
Jerrod aka Zero.
has it occurred to you that one can approve or disapprove of a of a review without seeing the production. I would not rate a review by someone who has not seen the play, but evaluating a review is different.
To give an example, albeit distracting from your argument. A BBC editor may approve or disapprove of a report from an eye witness reporter – of a battle, or piece of news – without ever being present at the event under discussion.
And you betcha they do that.
> has it occurred to you that one can approve or disapprove of a of a review without seeing the production
Don’t say you disapprove of DavidS’s review too? Careful. You don’t want to give him cause for another temper tantrum.
> A BBC editor may approve or disapprove of a report from an eye witness reporter – of a battle, or piece of news – without ever being present at the event under discussion.
I love that you think a witless Biased BBC drone thinking a misleading review is superb because its inaccuracies pander to this site’s prejudices is in any way comparable to trained people of any profession being able to trust each other’s work. It’s one of the funniest things I’ve read all day.
“…trained people of any profession being able to trust each other’s work”
The latest high-profile BBC BAME HR policy will certainly help nurture already carefully filtered talent, and deliver professionalism such as that from Doton, who can be trusted to ‘work’ precisely the BBC requires.
Thanks for that.
I wouldn’t waste my breath with Jerod-cum-Zero.
He truly believes the BBC don’t have any sort of prejudice of their own, probably thinks this bunch of lefty cultural Marxists are opinion-neutral. Bless.
Interesting that he spends so much time trolling on this site.
His type remind me of a BBC reporter I once had cause to encounter on Twitter. This BBC regional reporter tweeted me when I dared to suggest that had the ex-footballer Adam Johnson been of Muslim extraction, the BBC would have buried the news of his case rather than been parading it over every one of their news outlets. I wondered why the Rotheram Muslim sex attacks had not received similar coverage.
His response: “We covered that, too”
my response: “On the 9 o’clock news?”
His response “I’m sure we would have…”
When I suggested that the BBC were less than objective with regards to what they choose to present as news, and that their news coverage is dictated by a strong lefty-liberal bias, he said:
“I’m not political.”
“Oh” said I, “You really ought to use your vote young man. People died so you could vote.”
At which point this ‘unpolitical’ BBC reported withdrew from the conversation never to be heard from again…
Could this troll Jerod-cum-Zero be one and the same?
You will really upset them ( Jerrod etc) if you say anything about the BBC’s dramatic output. They get very defensive and it is not a nice thing to do to them. They all need the work and who else is going to pay for it other than the taxpayer? Everyone has to eat.
Next time just say it was wonderful and moving and inventive and -you get the drift. That keeps them quiet .
I agree of course with everything you wrote but then my opinions are well known.
A rare accolade from me . Jonathan Meade last night on BBC4 showed the rest of the kids how to do it. Very very good indeed. Literate and informative and a complete lack of patronising comment.
If one listened closely one caught the odd statement that could well give a hive BBC drone a fatal shock.
> They all need the work and who else is going to pay for it other than the taxpayer?
I don’t work for the BBC. I’ve repeated myself numerous times to say this, but it doesn’t seem to get through to some people. I guess they must have an allergy to truth. Or maybe they’re just very, very stupid. Which is it in your case, do you think?
> Next time just say it was wonderful and moving and inventive and -you get the drift.
I have no problem with people giving negative critiques. It’s dishonest critiques like DavidS’s that annoy me. I realise that honesty doesn’t go for an awful lot around here though. Far better to write something that provokes a Pavlovian response among the Biased BBC sheep (can sheep jerk their knees in unison?) than to tell the truth, eh?
It is obvious you do not work for the BBC Jerrod aka Zero, but your diligence – you hope – may land you a job there.
Bless
You work for the BBC, am I right or am I right?
He works there part time, then spends of the day digging holes for himself here .
> He truly believes the BBC don’t have any sort of prejudice of their own, probably thinks this bunch of lefty cultural Marxists are opinion-neutral. Bless.
I see you’re applying the same “I’ll just decide what everybody I don’t like is thinking” style of analysis to me now. With just about the same accuracy rate, i.e., none.
But hey. If DaveS and David Vance think you’re great, then that’ll probably be enough for you. Must be fantastic, having such intellectual leviathans hang on your every lying word.
Still waiting for your reading of Russell T Davies’ adaptation of The Dream…? You know the one you think I made up.
You have got a reading haven’t you? For someone who is so certain that my opinion is wrong, can’t wait to hear your analysis. Let’s start with the totalitarian symbolism and finish with the death of Theseus.
Feel free to share, whenever you like…
Will this one do you? https://eyesawtheatre.com/2016/05/31/a-midsummer-nights-dream-bbc1/
And of course, I’ve gone into detail about the faults I found with your own “review”. But it appears you’re less prepared at taking criticism than you are at dishing it out.
Reading your comments on here it’s hardly a surprise that you are the author of this gushing “review.”
Yes, I really enjoyed it. MND is a play that’s easy to get wrong, but it came across on TV very well, I thought.
Someone who’s upset that a totalitarian Athens isn’t completely Aryan, and who makes that the cause of a jibe against the adapter, will obviously disagree.
Nah, like I said Davies wanted it both ways.
On the one hand he and his BBC paymasters saw an opportunity to parody a (right-wing) fascist state, (even though National Socialism and Italian fascism are actually inventions of the left) while insisting that this thinly-veiled Nazi dictatorship was a multi-cultural dream. The court of Theseus resembled some BBC utopia.
Having directed this play many times, I have found nothing to suggest that Theseus is a right-wing fanatic. Davies and his production team decided to push this interpretation to the hilt. It does not exist anywhere in the text. That’s why it was purely a decision by Davies and the producers, the BBC.
Theseus’ death is pure Lefty-liberal wishfulfilment. Not in the text and thus an invention of Davies and Davies alone. it’s not a very subtle message is it, snarling right-wing psycho blocking racial inter-marriage? Or perhaps you think this insistence on racial inter-marriage was purely coincidental? You do, don’t you?
Egues, as I noted, escapes any censure. Note, it is the cardboard cut-out Theseus who is punished for daring to stand in the way of multi-cultural Athens – a very big sin in BBC land.
Well I could go on, but I’ll leave you to chew over that.
No doubt you think the BBC is apolitical.
But then again you probably believe that Europeans invented slavery, right?
> Nah, like I said Davies wanted it both ways
Remarkable that you know what he was thinking.
> On the one hand he and his BBC paymasters saw an opportunity to parody a (right-wing) fascist state… while insisting that this thinly-veiled Nazi dictatorship was a multi-cultural dream.
As I said, you’ve decided what the vision was, and when the facts don’t match up, you blame everybody else. There’s clearly no point repeating this any more, since it can’t get past that narcissistic block in your thought process that makes you think you know what everybody else is thinking.
> Egues, as I noted, escapes any censure. Note, it is the cardboard cut-out Theseus who is punished for daring to stand in the way of multi-cultural Athens
Ah, the “multicultural” jibe again. Careful, or you’ll look like a grubby little racist who can’t abide seeing black faces on TV. And I’m sure you won’t want that, will you?
If Theseus’ death is a punishment for anything, it’s surely the imprisonment of one of their own, tying into the portrayal of Hippolyta a supernatural figure Nothing to do with your obsession about having too many black faces in a fictional representation of a fictional city that only happens to share its name with a European capital.
Or were you too busy being irate at the thought of dancers holding hands that you didn’t really watch?
> But then again you probably believe that Europeans invented slavery, right?
It clearly doesn’t matter to you what I think. I’m sure you’ll make something up and tell yourself that you’re right. But a lie, however often repeated, is still a lie. And a racist wanker who thinks he was a good director will still be a grubby little man who was hated by every single actor who was unfortunate enough to be subjected to his narrow-minded, pedestrian, belligerent direction, I imagine.
I’m just guessing, of course. Unlike you, I don’t really believe I know what people I’ve never met are thinking.
“It clearly doesn’t matter to you what I think.!”
Hurrah! The penny finally drops, genius.
Now off to the Huffington Post you trot and take your bigotry and hatred with you. Group-huggy and mutual thumb-suck anyone?
Seriously take a hike, you know you’re just gonna torture yourself logging on here every day. You’re just going to get all worked up. Remember what the doctor said.
You vile, racist, misogynistic, anti-semitic, far-lefty, child-eating, Morris-dancing, giraffe-wanking, cunt. So there! My names are worse than your names. my names are worse than your names…
Right dipstick I’m going to make this very, very simple for you:
Will Shakespeare or Chris Marlowe wrote AMSND, savez?
RTD adapted the same play, savez?
The BBC produced Davies’ adaptation, savez?
In the original there is no reference to Theseus presiding over a far-right fascist state, savez?
Nor are there any stage directions calling for far-right Nazi insignia etc., savez?
RTD killed off Theseus, savez?
You see where this is going, genius?
I had nothing to do with this particular representation. Nula. Rien, Nista. Savez? Now fuck off.
If you ever come to Liverpool, I’ll take you down Scotty road. You’ll love it.
Somebody got angry overnight, didn’t he?
I never said you had anything to do with the adaptation. I said that you falsely ascribed intentions to the adaptation, and then whined when your imagined intentions weren’t actually met.
That you can’t grasp this basic concept is becoming increasingly clear.
Please keep the insults coming. This whole MSD thread is hilarious. Immensely enjoyable and as today I finally finished persuading a very rusty machine to come apart for overhaul I am in a particularly good humour. Also I had a treble up at Fairyhouse.
I think by now you might have realised that none of us really care that much about the BBC’s drama or it’s output generally. Culture war you know and sides have to be taken.
I did like Meade’s show though. Excellent.
Yep, enjoyed Meades as ever.
One of the few who doesn`t patronise or talk down to you-he expects us to rise to his expectations, and he`s a clever so-and-so with a fine independence.
So well done BBC for still employing him-way above their current output.
Like a mixture of Brian Sewell, Martin Durkin with a bit of Adam Curtis(yes, I know he`s a creep-but his montage themes do get you thinking-rare enough with the left).
> think by now you might have realised that none of us really care that much about the BBC’s drama or it’s output generally.
Careful. You’re not supposed to admit that Biased BBC isn’t really about BBC bias! The real purpose, allowing a few bigots to pretend that they’re important, isn’t supposed to be made public!
How WILL Vance ever get his talking head back on the BBC if his real purpose for gathering a group of thick villagers with pitchforks and flaming torches is revealed to the world? Think of all that lucrative licence fee money you’re denying him if he can’t collect those appearance fees! Won’t somebody think of a failed politician’s wallet?
At last you are getting it. In the culture war that is engulfing the West the BBC is a major player on the side of the bad guys. At least many of us think this is so.
Knowing your enemy is a prerequisite of a successful campaign and this site is one way we can do that. You are beginning to understand that the BBC you defend is not universally respected or admired.
For me it’s ignorant anti Israel attitude ( the Balen Report ) was a major factor that led me to want it sold off or dismantled. Add to that the liberal left cultural marxist underpinning of nearly all it’s shows and news . The comedy shows are formulaic and predictably left wing in tone. They are still hating the departed Mrs T for God’s sake.
It’s funding method is a throw back to feudal days and cannot be defended in 2016 .
It does not permit real dissenting voices or opinions that confront head on the PC consensus that has bought Europe to the edge of catastrophe.
It is out of date and as the world is turning again it will soon be out of time. What is left of the old Europe is going to defend itself and do what it knows has to be done for future generations. New men and women are on the way and we are the revolutionaries now .
London and it’s attitudes mean nothing to me.It is as if the place no longer exists.
We will have to see who is victorious.
The metroplitan cultural marxist left sees us conservatives as defeated and bitter old has beens. Saint Exupery said in he 1940s
“The defeated have no right to speak. No more right to speak than has the seed’
Ah. Pitchforks, flaming torches *and* tinfoil hats. Gotcha.
Still here? Still torturing yourself?
No dancing to go to tonight?
I can just imagine our Jerrod, sat at his desk at Broadcasting House, charged with the task of trolling Biased BBC.
So, let’s keep him busy…
Let’s see..
Here we go. What’s in a name? Jerrod….sounds like….Herod! Or maybe Gerard, as in Steven Gerard?
Come on “Jerrod” spill the beans old chap. What is the etymology of our name? Pray, why do you spell it with two ‘Rs’? And can you roll your rs? When, that is, you’re not talking through it.
You got comments to troll, so look sharp!
I don’t work for the BBC, never have, never will.
Just chalk that up as another tick in the “things DavidS makes up because his grip on reality is increasingly tenuous” column. If there’s room.
‘I don’t work for the BBC, never have, never will’
Given apparent motivations and posting history, that is without doubt.
Race and Faith: The Deafening Silence
Trevor Phillips, May 2016
For more than half a millennium, Britain has managed diversity through a process of organic integration, with newcomers and their traditions gradually absorbed into the culture. But in this new age of ‘superdiversity’, with more people of very different backgrounds arriving in greater numbers than ever before, is that enough?
Trevor Phillips, the former chair of the Equality and Human Rights Commission, argues that Britain has become complacent about its ability to manage its diversity, and that integration is not treated as the priority it should be.
There are two principal problems, he argues. One is that while overt bigotry has declined, society is becoming more and more stratified by racial and ethnic differences. The other is that the world-views of very different groups are colliding.
Incompatible attitudes to sex, religion, belief and the rule of law are producing frictions for which the tried and tested social lubricants now seem just too thin.
The response of our political and media elites has too often been evasion, driven by a fear that talking about the issues will stigmatise vulnerable groups, and to blame the historic prejudices of the dominant majority.
Phillips warns that this stance is dangerously misguided and will not do any more. Squeamishness about diversity risks the country sleepwalking to catastrophe, setting community against community and undermining Britain’s tradition of liberal democracy.
http://www.civitas.org.uk/publications/race-and-faith/
In the Media
Ethnic segregation is leading to catastrophe, says equality tsar, The Times
Britain ‘sleepwalking to catastrophe’ over race – Trevor Phillips, The Daily Telegraph
We’re heading for an immigration disaster, says former race tsar, Daily Mail
‘Sleep walk to disaster’, The Sun
Divisions sparked by mass immigration could lead to catastrophe, Daily Express
http://www.civitas.org.uk/publications/race-and-faith/
Why does the BBC persist with its blinkered, prejudiced view?
Funnily enough, Jerrod also persisted with the same blinkered, prejudiced view (no wonder he likes the BBC). Here’s just one of his Violet Elizabethesque outpourings: ……doesn’t matter that you’re a prejudiced little worm who can’t treat people with fairness and equality, because MUSLIMS….We all know from all your previous rantings that you’re an obsessed little bigot who is clearly so insecure about his own place in the world that he has to obsess about anyone and everyone who is different from you.
Challenged as to whether the above also now applied to Phillips, Jerrod suddenly went quiet and has avoided the Islam debate ever since.
What a hypocrite.
Although I’n new to this forum it’s pretty clear to me that this deranged idiot who goes by the name of Jerrod is on some sort of BBC contract, maybe probationary, until his lefty-liberal right-think can be properly established. He/she/it certainly flings around the language of BBC group-think with alarming fervour. His favourite seems to be bigot (takes one to know one Jedward, or whatever daft-arsed name you’re using these days).
Anyway the coast is clear, for now. He’s probably trolling on Brietbart, munching away on his ethically-sourced gorilla paste sandwiches no doubt, waiting to unleash his lefty-liberal psychosis on some poor unsuspecting poster before reporting back to Auntie:
“Did I do well, oh high and mighty one?” (pant, pant, pant)
Jerrod’s favourite word next week? Islamophobe? Or ha he already discovered that one?
Welcome back! After your increasingly bizarre rants last night, I wondered how long it would take for your hangover to wear off.
> Although I’n new to this forum
If you say so.
> it’s pretty clear to me that this deranged idiot who goes by the name of Jerrod is on some sort of BBC contract
As I replied to you before, that’s not true. Don’t say your ability to comprehend the written word is as poor as your ability to comprehend the audio-visual?
> or whatever daft-arsed name you’re using these days
Curious turn of phrase for someone who claims to be “new to this forum”, isn’t it? Almost as if you’re lying. Sure that’s not it, of course. No right wing lunatic on Biased BBC _ever_ lies, do they?
> He’s probably trolling on Brietbart
Wrong again! You’re good at making stuff up, even if your fantasies are increasingly dull. Actually, I was at work, and then at my local theatre, enjoying a rather good ballet production.
You wouldn’t have liked it. Some of the dancers weren’t white.
Welcome back, bigot.
You just can’t resist coming here can you? Just think of all that time you waste being ridiculed here when you could be group-hugging at the Guardian or the HuffPost. Bit sad I’d say.
Nah, despite your constant denials we all know you work for the BBC.
Aw, ballet ok was it? Oh how twee – typical little BBC acolyte. Enjoy the sight of all those fleshy tights did we? So cultured, yet so hate-filled.
Don’t tell me, it was just all so fabulously wonderful and you gushed all the way home on your eco-friendly fold-away bike? You couldn’t wait to get home and dash off a gushing review which confirmed the Lefty-liberal group-think which you are taught at the BBC.
Then, you paraded around your bedroom in your fluorescent white Y-fronts doing a little pirouette every so often in your bedroom mirror. Once or twice you stopped in front of the mirror where you performed a huge theatrical luvvie bow and blew kisses to a fawning audience who you’re sure want to stroke your pimply arse.
“Some” of the dancers weren’t white? I’d flag that up with your BBC colleagues then. Can’t have that. You’ve clearly been offended in some way.
btw I don’t remember divulging my ethnicity. You’re jumping to “conclusions” based upon your own “prejudices” you racist, bigot.
Night-night Nureyev. More torture coming your way tomorrow.
PS. Remember to take off tights before bed. You know what will happen if you don’t.
> Nah, despite your constant denials we all know you work for the BBC.
I’d love to see you try and prove it. Given that I don’t work for the BBC, and never have, this’ll be fun.
> Then, you paraded around your bedroom in your fluorescent white Y-fronts doing a little pirouette every so often in your bedroom mirror. Once or twice you stopped in front of the mirror where you performed a huge theatrical luvvie bow and blew kisses to a fawning audience who you’re sure want to stroke your pimply arse.
You’re drunk again, aren’t you?
You seem to have perception you feel free to express that you would deny others.
And even if the hop or grape have been sampled of a Friday evening, at least he will awake sober.
You however will doubtless remain unchanged, not working for the BBC, on stupid shifts.
He’s about as likeable and with the same winning personality as this wanker
http://i4.mirror.co.uk/incoming/article6394937.ece/ALTERNATES/s1200/CJ-de-Mooi.jpg
> You however will doubtless remain unchanged, not working for the BBC
Well that bit’s true, at least. So you’re not being completely dishonest. Good start.
“I’d like to see you prove it.”
A defence straight from the primary school playground.
Don’t be embarrassed old chap, so you work for the BBC. You and you’re 8 friends are just
defending your organisation. That’s loyalty, that is.
Hold your head high, troll.
> Don’t be embarrassed old chap, so you work for the BBC.
If I did work for the BBC, I don’t think I’d be embarrassed by it. But I don’t, and no amount of repetition by a pathetic liar will change that.
And looking back at what you’re written, I don’t think I’m the one who needs to be embarrassed. After all, I’m not the one who clearly spends a lot of time thinking about me dancing around in my pants, you drunken perv.
On clearly spending a lot of time, yours from dusk to dawn not thinking but churning out diatribes on a site you profess dislike for is impressive, especially forgoing precious time with all those friends and family you have.
Unless they are with you here too? Which is nice.
Notice how whatever this bigot says, he always gets his 8 likes from his fellow trolls. Funny how none of them ever post or bother to debate. Haha… even know I can see Jerrod copy and pasting this very sentence, tights straining under his excitement..
I can just see them all, sat in their plush BBC office, all 8 of them, trolling on behalf of their fascist bosses. One of them trolls Biased BBC while the others troll any other sites that dare to criticise lefty-liberal inspired BBC group-think. A sort of BBC funded mutual mastubatory society.
Then, trolling for the day finished, they pirouette their way down to the ballet where they think pure and lovely thoughts.
Can’t seem to get the image of you dancing in your tights out of my head, bigot. Do they have the BBC logo on the crotch? Go on, tell me….
Notice how whatever this bigot says, he always gets his 8 likes from his fellow trolls. Funny how none of them ever post or bother to debate. Haha… even now I can see Jerrod copy and pasting this very sentence, tights straining under his excitement..
I can just see them all, sat in their plush BBC office, all 8 of them, trolling on behalf of their fascist bosses. One of them trolls Biased BBC while the others troll any other sites that dare to criticise lefty-liberal inspired BBC group-think. A sort of BBC funded mutual masturbatory society.
Then, trolling for the day finished, they pirouette their way down to the ballet where they think pure and lovely thoughts.
Can’t seem to get the image of you dancing in your tights out of my head, bigot. Do they have the BBC logo on the crotch? Go on, tell me….
“Can’t seem to get the image of you dancing in your tights out of my head, bigot. Do they have the BBC logo on the crotch? Go on, tell me…. ”
Seek help DavidS. It may not be too late.
What a surprise, Jerrod makes a comment and Marvin comes close behind him.
Scott, you really are a sad little man.
> Notice how whatever this bigot says, he always gets his 8 likes from his fellow trolls.
Well now you’re not even trying. It only takes a scroll up this page to demonstrate that you have trouble distinguishing the number “8” from any other (usually smaller) number…
Poor DavidS. To add innumeracy to the long, long list of faults you’re too busy being a pompous narcissist to bother correcting.
Do make sure Sister gives you the correct medication today. On the evidence so far, I think your prescription may need adjusting.
Phillips may well have had his road to Damascus moment, far too little far too late though, why didn’t he pipe up when he was better situated and had a louder voice? How much influence the erstwhile equality zsar ever had is moot, he took direction and followed the agenda just like the rest of them, and very well looked after he was too. His latest change of direction could be a sudden attack of conscience rather than ulterior motive, but I doubt it.
Oh good, I seem to have found a web site belonging to some clown called Jerrod.
Didn’t watch it as Russell T. Davies was involved and having watched then given up on the plot hole riddled, CGI over story travesty he turned Dr. Who into. I knew the Midsummer nights “adaptation” would be rubbish.
Jerrod
what’s your opinion on Al Beeb’s bias ? A succinct answer would be suffice.
Bbc employee trolls are best ignored….
i agree Dysgwr – even if they are “sugar plum fairies”