Article

2004-09-25 Britain

Hostages and who is to blame (guess who)

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Sock Puppet of Doom 2004-09-25 01:24|| || Front Page|| [3 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 I am just getting so fed up with all this. Sorry Howard, Bulldog I really like you guys.

This crap is beyond the pale and the statements made are just so blindly ignorant of the facts. This goes on every day. It's not something one should just say "well thats the way they are." and move on about. Most of it is pure falshood. These people are so freeking clueless and ignorant they publish. It's like the BBC thinks the truth is a matter of group consensus. What is worse is the BBC has an apperent policy of publishing this nonsense and suppressing any rational responses it gets. This amounts to state sponsored propaganda against my country.

If the US goverment funded news and opinion against the standing U.K. government and the people of the U.K. all hell would break lose. Just look at any WoT item or any topic that might remotely be related to the US on this web page called Have Your Say It's nothing but attacks on the US that are published. FOAD BBC and the sheep like citizens of the U.K. who allow this crap to be put out.

Posted by Sock Puppet of Doom 2004-09-25 2:20:16 AM|| [http://www.slhess.com] 2004-09-25 2:20:16 AM|| Front Page Top

#2 It's not just the BBC. Alex Salmond, the recently re-elected leader of the Scottish Nationalist Party (SNP) yesterday blamed Blair.

Posted by Bulldog 2004-09-25 6:37:12 AM|| 2004-09-25 6:37:12 AM|| Front Page Top

#3 The Telegraph has a good opinion piece pointing out the ~~stupidity~~ confusion of those who strive to blame a Western politician for the hand-movements of a Jordanian murderer: The man with blood on his hands is not Blair but Zarqawi

"...The hard thing that needs saying is that this cry against the wrong people has been led by some members of Mr Bigley's family. On Wednesday, Philip Bigley said that Mr Blair "was posing yesterday with Richard Branson over a train that cuts 14 minutes off a journey to London. He should have been devoting that time to saving Ken's life... only he has the power to save Ken now." Paul Bigley, another brother, delivers fiercer condemnations: "The whole war was a sham," he has said, and, "If my brother dies, his blood is on Blair's hands." It is not true - the blood, if it is shed, will be on the hands of Zarqawi. Everyone recognises the intolerable stress that the family suffers at this time. But we should not allow our compassion for those that face these horrors to allow such falsities to be established. People should remember that when men like Mr Bigley go to places like Iraq they do so mindful of the dangers, because they consider the reward worthwhile or the work, for other reasons, worth doing. The British authorities cannot protect them from all adversity and would distort their country's interests if they tried to do so. When something as horrible as this happens, they should do everything possible "on the ground" to find out what is happening and seek solutions. This they have been doing. But they probably cannot do a deal to save Mr Bigley and, even if they could, they shouldn't. It is rather shocking that this obvious point needs to be stated.

...

Yet even now, one finds too few Muslim leaders who speak out without qualification. Yes, most do condemn, but in the same breath they attack the occupation of Iraq, the policy towards Palestine, the refusal of Cat Stevens's entry into the United States, or whatever other grievance occurs. It may be legitimate to make these points, but not in that context. Religion is invoked here, and it is religion that should find its true voice. When will we hear a fatwa emerging from the UK Council of Mosques or, better still, from the sheikh of Al Azhar university in Cairo, the intellectual centre of the Sunni Muslim world? When will it be stated on authority that men like Kenneth Bigley's kidnappers have no warrant for thinking that their deeds will bring them to paradise, but rather risk hell?"

Posted by Bulldog 2004-09-25 6:52:22 AM|| 2004-09-25 6:52:22 AM|| Front Page Top

#4 let's keep this in perspective - we have plenty of these types in the US too. Too bad these guys weren't all having a meeting in the WTC on 9/11.

Posted by 2B 2004-09-25 6:55:44 AM|| 2004-09-25 6:55:44 AM|| Front Page Top

#5 We have U.S. citizens attacking the people of the U.K., it's government and leaders on a daily basis funded by a compusory tax on an international news site here in the U.S.?
Please direct me to it. I want to see it.

Posted by Sock Puppet of Doom 2004-09-25 7:22:47 AM|| [http://www.slhess.com] 2004-09-25 7:22:47 AM|| Front Page Top

#6 I'm a bit of a Beeb apologist but I have officially changed my mind.. Their views on Iraq have pissed me off for too long now. One of the other things to do it was their coverage of the Beslan siege. Enough is enough is enough. The Beeb have seemingly taken this extreme tack post Greg Dyke's sacking & the WOMD debate. They need to clear out their entire team of news editors immediately to restore any credibility. My apologies SPOD.

Posted by Howard UK 2004-09-25 9:28:19 AM|| 2004-09-25 9:28:19 AM|| Front Page Top

#7 Look, this is the reality of elitism, nothing more. Journalists, as writers, sincerely believe they are part of the arts community and as such were exposed in their education and peer associations to liberal leftist thought in other writers, philosophers, historians and essayists. Yes, there are some exceptions (i.e. Mark Steyn) but they are in the minority. Now given that background, you throw public funds at them and because they are state-sponsored, they believe they are tamper-proof since if there was discipline or control, they could cry PROPAGANDA or CENSORSHIP!

Posted by Jack is Back 2004-09-25 10:14:47 AM|| 2004-09-25 10:14:47 AM|| Front Page Top

#8 The problem with the BBC isn't the fact that it has a disgraceful 'Liberal' left-leaning bias, it's simply that it's been allowed to foist it on viewers in a monopoly-holding situation for so long. You've only go to look at the newspaper circultion figures, and US TV (now that Fox is on the scene), to see how in a media ecosystem where different viewpoints and supposed biases play farily against each other, whose such as infect the BBC, lose. The BBC's world-view is akin to the Independent or the Guardian, the Express or the Mirror, none of which attract anything like the audiences of the Times or the Telegraph, the Mail or the Sun. The fact is the BBC can put out more news and current affairs BS than its one-hand-tied-behind-their-backs opponents.

The majority of Brits do want the BBC to stop being tax-funded. Ironically, it's the current Government (one of the BBC's main argets of vitriolic propaganda) which maintains the status quo.

Anyone who's seen how ridiculously arrogant and unprofessional the erstwhile DG Greg Dyke's allowing himself to be now that he's been kicked out of Broadcasting House will be aware just how infantile and irresponsible the BBC has become.

Posted by Bulldog 2004-09-25 11:21:09 AM|| 2004-09-25 11:21:09 AM|| Front Page Top

18:34 Flash Whagum2399
20:47 Travis Horn
20:41 Travus Horn
00:49 lex
00:42 lex
03:59 Sock Puppet of Doom
23:40 VAMark
23:33 Heartless Bastard TROLL
23:32 Deacon Blues
23:31 Heartless Bastard TROLL
23:25 tipper
23:19 Zenster
23:13 Anymousse6646
23:12 Deacon Blues
23:11 Anymousse6646
23:09 Anymousse6646
23:04 Deacon Blues
23:04 Zenster
23:01 Comment Top
23:01 Heartless Bastard TROLL
22:59 Sock Puppet of Doom
22:52 Douglas De Bono
22:49 Douglas De Bono
22:44 Deacon Blues