Stand the Liberal Mosque Guard Down…False News News

Altrincham mosque stabbing: Surgeon attacked in ‘hate crime’ – BBC News


Muslim stabbed outside mosque…’s being treated as a race attack.

Oh hang on….after a day of constant headlines yesterday about a racist attack the BBC went quiet today…this story is now buried on the Manchester regional page…not the frontpage, not the UK page, not the England page…….you have to dig hard to find it…not a race attack after all…..

Altrincham mosque stabbing suspect remanded in custody

A 28-year-old man has been remanded in custody after appearing in court charged with assaulting a surgeon who was stabbed outside a mosque.

Ian Rook, of no fixed address, appeared at Manchester Magistrates’ Court charged with grievous bodily harm and possession of a lethal weapon.

A Greater Manchester Police spokesman said the force does not believe there was a racial motive to the attack.

Once again there is a massive hype from the BBC about a race attack on a Muslim but it turns out to be nonsense….the BBC complains about the Mail etc reporting ‘Muslim’ stories that are true but negative….the BBC on the other hand reports stories that are untrue and meant to paint a picture of rampant Islamophobia stalking Britain.

What does the BBC have against the British?




Bookmark the permalink.

41 Responses to Stand the Liberal Mosque Guard Down…False News News

  1. Fedup2 says:

    Al beeb can’t stop itself . Any thing involving Muslim as victim becomes whitee guilt . It really is mentally screwed – a horrible example of group thing . Al beeb has been successfully infiltrated by anti christian – pro Islamic enemies of Blighty . I hope – when it backfires – it will really screw al beeb.

    Our politicians , with a very few very honourable exceptions , do not have the courage to challenge the al beeb orthodoxy.


  2. Broadcasting-on-Behalf-of-the-Caliphate says:

    Hi Alan, any careful observer of the BBC should very rapidly recognise that what emanates from the BBC is not bias but propaganda. They have management systems and protocols specifically geared for generating and broadcasting propaganda. It is completely pervasive and includes their cbeebies, CBBC and newsbeat channels.

    However one thing that always surprises me is just how fanatical, zealous and absolutely thorough they are in churning out this propaganda. They are brazen and they are shameless. It is almost as if they have become delirious with their own sense of unchallenged power.


    • G says:

      “….just how fanatical, zealous and absolutely thorough they are in churning out this propaganda.”
      They’ve taken a chapter out of the Saudi Broadcaster’s handbook. But in this instance we don’t even hear if the police believe the perpetrator is suffering from a ‘mental health issue’…………..


    • Up2snuff says:

      Good post, BoBotC.

      Wonder if friend maxi will be along to comment?

      Will not hold my breath.


  3. Streetos says:

    At around the same time as this stabbing, a man was killed I’m my town, Boston, but because it was an immigrant killed by a another bunch of immigrants the Beeb wasn’t interested. If it had been a bunch of locals killed him it would have been major news.


  4. StewGreen says:

    Everyday in London a black kid stabs another black kid
    ..And every 2 weeks one stab victim dies.

    …yet people are busy looking for racism


  5. StewGreen says:

    Virtue signalled anyway


  6. maxincony says:


    Muslim stabbed outside mosque…’s being treated as a race attack
    …a day of constant headlines yesterday about a racist attack
    …a massive hype from the BBC about a race attack

    Nowhere does the BBC describe this as a race or racist attack.

    You’re lying, Alan. You know you’re lying.

    The police said they were treating this stabbing as a hate crime; that’s what the BBC reported.
    The police said they didn’t think the motive was racial; that’s what the BBC reported.

    This is what the victim (remember him?) told The Independent;

    “Mr Kurdy said, ahead of giving a police statement, that he could not say what his attacker said to him, but was in “no doubt” he was attacked because he was entering the Islamic Centre.”

    Is Muslim a “race” now? I seem to have missed that memo.

    And the purpose of your lies, Alan? Ah yes, when a Muslim is stabbed in the throat he’s not the victim you are.

    Poor little you.


    • Broadcasting-on-Behalf-of-the-Caliphate says:

      Hmmm – your use of “lying” Maxincony is overplayed, but your comment can be made into an interesting generalisation, suggesting the BBC are more crafty in there propaganda that some might overlook. Of course one story is no proof of propaganda or of an institutional bias. To demonstrate that one needs to analyse the whole body of work.

      What is the usual context of the BBC to take such locally obscure stories and highlight them? Oftentimes it is associated with a “race” attack or a “bigoted attack” and with those words the BBC also often associate “hate”. Such that when the BBC use “hate” and mention the skin colour and provenance directly or indirectly of the victim (photographs / video etc) the casual viewer already familiar with the BBC’s body of work might erroneously draw the inference that this was also a race attack – when the BBC don’t in fact explicitly mention race for this particular story. But that is the whole point of propaganda – it is also the build-up of associations and inferences.

      Two further points. I haven’t looked at the BBC video detailing the attack – and there may be inferences to race in there. Look around the BBC website and racism is a popular headline and subject of the BBC, as well as Muslim victimhood.

      In any case, Maxincony, I think your comment is useful in showing how the BBC operate and how they can deny certain accusations when it comes to complaints regarding a particular story.


    • Jerry Owen says:

      Ah Maxincony
      Remember a week or so ago you falsely accused Alan in quotation marks as stating :-
      ‘Muslims Muuslims Muuuslims’ on another blog.
      This was a false quote made to make Alan look bad and indeed incorrect on that story. I asked you to withdraw this falsely made quote. You never returned to that particular blog, you ran away.
      I ask you again to withdraw your false quoting.. if you refuse to do so then clearly we cannot take anything else you say as truthful can we? We will have to assume you are simply full of wind.


      • Rob in Cheshire says:

        Max often uses false quotes, it’s just a thing he does, and he never apologies for doing it.

        You might think Max is a liar, but that is an accusation he likes to fling around, so I shall not join him in it.

        Then again:

        “And the purpose of your lies, Alan? Ah yes, when a Muslim is stabbed in the throat he’s not the victim you are.”

        The muslim referred to was stabbed or slashed on the back of his neck, not his throat. We saw enough of him on the tv to be aware of that. It must be an honest mistake on Max’s part. I am sure he will apologise and correct it.

        By the way Max, that is a correct use of a quote. When you put something in quotation marks, it means it is a direct quote from something someone has written or said. It is not used to add emphasis to a comment you are attributing to someone to attack their point of view. It’s not a hard concept for most people to understand.

        Now, let’s talk about all the right wing bias you have uncovered on the BBC…


    • STEVONATRON says:

      BBC originally reported this as a “hate crime”:

      Do a quick internet search of the definition of Hate Crime and you’ll find something along the lines of: “A hate crime is usually a racially-motivated crime” in the very first sentence. So yes, Alan is correct in suggesting BBC materialised a racial motive behind this story.

      And since this site is based on BBC scrutiny, we don’t need to look to the Independent newspaper to aid our arguments.


    • Up2snuff says:

      Oh, maxi, there you are. Are you here to comment on the BBC relaying propaganda in peace-time?

      The BBC certainly DID claim it was a race crime in my hearing (actually by ‘reporting’ what the police supposedly said – the police were not interviewed) on Radio4. They have not updated it in my hearing on Radio4. That rather indicates that Alan appears correct in his above assertion.

      As to Muslim being a race, isn’t that what YOU say when you talk about ‘racists’ being people who are anti-Muslim? Do please come back with some debate, your arguments and reasoning.

      Just popping by to shout “Liar!” is really not good enough.


  7. BigBrotherCorporation says:

    Maxincony, whether appropriate, or not, the term previously used for attacks on Muslims, by the BBC among others, was indeed ‘racist’. I quite agree Muslims are no more a race than Christians, or Buddhists, but it was the term officially used. It has now been replaced by the equally confusing and meaningless ‘Islamophobia’, and ‘hate crime’.

    I believe Alan’s point is not that the surgeon stabbed here in any way deserved to be attacked, no one is denying he seems to be an innocent man and this was a vile attack, but rather Alan is aiming to show the glaring hypocrisy and blatant bias, even outright dishonesty, displayed by the BBC in reporting potentially religiously (or racially) motivated attacks, depending on which ethnic and religious group they seem to favour and what overriding message they want to propagate.


    • maxincony says:


      …but rather Alan is aiming to show the glaring hypocrisy and blatant bias, even outright dishonesty, displayed by the BBC in reporting potentially religiously (or racially) motivated attacks, depending on which ethnic and religious group they seem to favour and what overriding message they want to propagate.

      Alan said the BBC were repeatedly describing this as a “race/racist crime”.

      They did not.

      He is lying. He knows he’s lying.

      The police said they were treating it as a hate crime. That is what the BBC reported. The only “outright dishonesty’ here is by Alan.

      You will notice that at no point does the BBC mention the ethnicity, skin colour, nationality or religion of the person arrested.

      You will notice that Alan’s definition of “British” doesn’t include the doctor who was attacked.

      What’s clear as day, is that Alan is projecting his own racist and sectarian bigotry onto others (the ‘BBC’ in this case) in order to justify his own.


      • taffman says:

        Maxi troll , what motivates you ?


        • Wild says:

          “Maxi troll , what motivates you?”

          He never has the intellectual integrity to address the central claims of this site, that the BBC is biased in favour of the establishment Left, and should not be funded by a compulsory tax, and instead spots somebody saying “trannies give me the creeps” or whatever, and virtue signals in response how much he hates Daily Mail readers, presumably concluding from this that BBC bias is justified, because it suits his prejudices. Why somebody who does not share his prejudices should be forced to fund the BBC he never addresses.


          • Rob in Cheshire says:


            You are correct, except Max will take a comment such as “there seems to be a lot of stuff about transgenders on the tv and radio these days” and reproduce it in quotation marks as “trannies give me the creeps”. It’s just a thing he does. I think it’s called “dishonesty” (the quotation marks here are, of course, my own).


        • taffman says:

          You must like promoting this link?……………………………..


      • BigBrotherCorporation says:

        Maxicony, I can’t speak for everyone else on this site by any means, and I’m not trying to protect Alan, what he posts is his opinion, not mine and he’s welcome to it. I pop in here from time to time and read a few posts, I agree with some, and not with others, but at the end of the day I come back time and again because I find the blatant propaganda machine of the BBC far more frightening and uncomfortable than listening to people state their minds openly – whether ‘racist’, or not.

        In other words, I come here to read what others who believe (like me) that the BBC is biased, think about our national broadcasting corporation’s latest output. Sometimes it has opened my eyes to bias that I would otherwise have missed, and I feel that’s an important ‘balance’ as the BBC is still my main source of daily news, but I don’t believe every example of ‘bias’ reported here by any means, and you do have to filter it through the sometimes aggressive personal opinions of the individual. The only commonality here is a belief that the BBC is biased, the clue is in the site’s name.

        Honestly, what is better in the long run, free speech (even if you disagree with what some say vehemently), or politically correct echo chambers (where people repeat what they think they ‘ought to’, but don’t really believe)?


        • Wild says:

          “Honestly, what is better in the long run, free speech (even if you disagree with what some say vehemently), or politically correct echo chambers (where people repeat what they think they ‘ought to’, but don’t really believe)?”

          If you are a Leftist who believes that people are blank sheets, and that we can mould society into any shape we like, you will inevitably move towards the belief that people and societies ought to be directed towards a better (egalitarian) society, and the enemy of all directed societies are people who have the freedom (and this includes wealth) to live in accordance with their own beliefs. Why should a Leftist pay any attention to you if he thinks you are the obstacle to creating a perfect society? The Left seek to use the BBC as a vehicle for eradicating every belief which conflicts with Leftist dreams of creating a perfect society. If you are not a Leftist you are scum. If people do not do as they are told, replace the society. That is why they believe in mass immigration. I cannot recall in the last 30 years a single programme on the BBC that has sought to challenge Leftist assumptions.


      • Up2snuff says:

        maxi, “Alan said the BBC were repeatedly describing this as a “race/racist crime”

        Let’s consider a different way of describing this.

        BBC: “A man has been attacked in Altrincham. The attacker stabbed him in the neck. Police have a man in custody and are continuing to investigate the incident.” The obvious update could follow as and when the Police supply the new information to the BBC: “Police investigating the attack in Altrincham have said they do not consider it to have a racial motive. The man stabbed was an Imam at the Mosque and also a Doctor at a local hospital.”

        Do you see the difference with the BBC’s actual radio News output, maxi?

        Understand now?


  8. Halifax says:

    The obvious question here is why did the BBC decide to make this their lead story ? May I suggest it was for no other reason than to show a muslim as a victim of a perceived attack by a white Christian male who in all probability voted for Brexit.


    • Charlie Martel says:

      Throughout the UK hundreds or thousands of people are attacked daily for all sorts of reasons. The fact the beeb zoomed in on this one and made it their headline story speaks volumes about the beeb’s obsession with hate crimes against Muslims, real or imagined. An attack by a muslim on a white non-muslim wouldn’t have made it into the news at all.


      • Emmanuel Goldstein says:

        Dog bites man. Not newsworthy and happens all the time.
        Man bites dog. Headline.

        Muzzie kills somebody. Not newsworthy and happens all the time.
        Somebody possibly upsets muzzie. Headline (for weeks)


    • charmbrights says:

      Halifax – you forgot ‘and denies climate change’!


    • STEVONATRON says:

      They made it a leading story for two days. They told the world this was a !!!HATE CRIME!!! for two days. The identity of the perp is then revealed and they drop it like a hot potato; no retractions/admission that a “mistake” was made. Nothing.

      If you do an internet search of this story – it reached around the world, reports that used carbon copies of the BBC articles. But it doesn’t matter now, the BBC’s job is done. They’ve tarnished white Brits through insinuation yet again and they’ve gotten away with it.


      • johnnythefish says:

        It is becoming more and more obvious the BBC and Plod are Common Purpose collaborators.

        The ACC chose his words carefully, though still wrongly: ‘This was a crime motivated by hate’ which is not the same as saying it was a hate crime, which has its own very specific definitions. Still, it gave the BBC licence to headline it as a ‘hate crime’ and, like a lot of other BBC reporting which is agenda-driven, by the time the real facts of the case emerge the BBC has moved on – job done.


  9. Dystopian says:

    So, Maxincony, why did the bBBC even need to mention the religion of the man who was attacked?
    What was the relevance of his religion?
    A blatant attempt by the biased BBC to give the perception of Muslims being the victims of violent hateful attacks, when in fact, we all know that it is Islam that preaches hatred and instructs its followers to kill non Muslims.


    • Broadcasting-on-Behalf-of-the-Caliphate says:

      This story was also taken out from obscurity and highlighted in order to obscure, downplay, disguise another story – the naming of the 18 year old responsible for the Parsons Green Bombing when he was formally charged in court. Not only did the BBC act to obscure the fact that this 18 year old bomber was taken into Britain as an Iraqi child refugee and was of the Muslim faith, but the BBC also created two counter stories of Muslim victimhood: one being something to do with “abuse and threats” towards some Muslim run fast food chicken restaurant and the other story being the street attack on a Muslim surgeon – the present story. These two Muslim victimhood stories replaced the Parson Green bombing in the BBC headlines.

      Taken together I am uncovering the depths of the BBC deviousness. I find it both interesting (academically) as well as horrifying. That is why I talk of agendas and propaganda rather than bias.


  10. Nibor says:

    I think the best way to stop this confusion between Alan and Maxicony is for the police to go back to their previous principles , to enforce the law without fear or favour . So that means no more ‘ hate’ crimes given special attention .


    • MarkyMark says:

      Hate Crimes {}

      Hate crimes are the highest priority of the FBI’s Civil Rights program, not only because of the devastating impact they have on families and communities, but also because groups that preach hatred and intolerance can plant the seed of terrorism here in our country. The Bureau investigates hundreds of these cases every year and works to detect and deter further incidents through law enforcement training, public outreach, and partnerships with a myriad of community groups.

      Traditionally, FBI investigations of hate crimes were limited to crimes in which the perpetrators acted based on a bias against the victim’s race, color, religion, or national origin. In addition, investigations were restricted to those wherein the victim was engaged in a federally protected activity. With the passage of the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr., Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2009, the Bureau became authorized to investigate these crimes without this prohibition. This landmark legislation also expanded the role of the FBI to allow for the investigation of hate crimes committed against those based on biases of actual or perceived (questionable?) sexual orientation(questionable?), gender identity (questionable?), disability, or gender.

      … where will Hate Crime take us? …

      Christian couple ‘burned to death by Pakistani mob had legs broken to stop them fleeing and wife was wrapped in cotton so she’d burn faster’ {dailymail nov2014}

      Shama Bibi, 24, and Sajjad Maseeh, 27, were killed for alleged (perceived?) blasphemy

      Bibi was wearing clothes that would not burn so mob wrapped her in cotton

      Koran was desecrated day before the attack and mob blamed the couple

      Christians make up about four per cent of Pakistan’s population and tend to keep a low profile in a country where Sunni Muslim militants frequently bomb targets they see as heretical, including Christians, and Sufi and Shi’ite Muslims.


  11. Deborahanother says:

    I heard this briefly on the early news but knew it was probably not a racist or religious attack because the BBC would put whistles and bells on it and be shouting it from the rooftops.So I assumed it was Muslim on Muslim violence .Now it just seems it was street violence and nothing more.

    Amazing Isnt it you can tell what a story is or isnt just by the BBCs tone.They love a bit of Islamaphobia/racism to make them feel virtuous.Then they can wheel out all their favourite talking heads.


  12. Up2snuff says:

    Hello maxi,calling maxi, maxi where are you?

    Not interested in any discussion or debate?

    How about popping in to apologise?