Today at the Biased BBC commentsÂ - the BBC is slated for referring to the Palestinean president as “Mr Abbas” while referring to Israel’s vegetative ex-leader as “Sharon”. Lots of concurring, while nobody points out that “Mr Abbas” is mentioned in the article while “Sharon” is mentioned in a direct quote. Learn to read and get yourself a style guide, you ignorant fuckwits.
What else? Someone who’s angry that the phrase “Muslim terrorism” isn’t used when referring to an explosion in Algeria… because obviously without that qualification we’d assume it was the Scottish Presbyterians. Although if you’re applying the fashionable right-wing terminology that all terrorist attacks should be prefixed by the religion of their protagonists, Algeria has suffered significantly in the past from Catholic terrorism.
Bizarre non-sequitur of the section:
heresÂ [sic] how the world looks when you dont [sic] live in a socialist prison.
There are various possible interpretations of this comment. It’s trivially true that if you are in a socialist prison (presumably a prison run byÂ a socialist government; as far as I’m aware there are no prisons themselves run under social-democratic principles) you’re unlikely to be driving about in a Â£150,000 car. Perhaps the commentator meant “everywhere except the US is a miserable socialist prison where super-rich people can’t buy silly cars”Â - also a perplexing point of view, given the number of super-rich people driving silly cars in London, Paris, and indeed everywhere else except North Korea. Weird.
Anybody else notice that Al Beeb seems to have an Anti India Bias.. Could it be the Muslims employed by Al Beeb in which to post it anti western message are Pakistani??
…wins on the bizarre conspiracy theory stakes, not least because the links it posts to ‘positively’ covered Pakistani news are more negative than the Indian news pieces…
This needs no comment:
As a teenager I discovered that those wedded to a certain ideology remain inflexible, intolerant and dismissive of alternative arguments. My school lessons in biology and religious instruction usually degenerated into heated arguments between myself and the teachers concerned who were died in the wool communists. They turned the lessons into indoctrination sessions.
Further still into the madness,
I wonder if [the BBC paying better pensions than the private sector because core salaries are lower] is a myth in the same way that other public sector workers claim, incorrectly, to be lower paid.
Incorrectly? As someone who works in the private sector because public sector pay is too low, er, no.
Then there’sÂ a link to the respected geopolitical analysts and investigative journalists at Investors’ Business Daily, who’ve reprinted, err, some of the usual trumped-up bullshit about Saddam and September 11. Of course, the BBC are “failing to cover this storyÂ properly” rather than “ignoring it because it’s pointless arse and Republican spin”. Followed by someone whining that the BBC is ignoring a story about Spanish town-hallÂ corruption – presumably the fact that they care reflects the overlap between BBBC-ing right-wing fantasists andÂ red-faced gin-drinking expats in the Costas…
I’m going to stop now, before my head explodes. But I’ll leave you with one of the most incisive comments ever made about World War I:
The Germans intended to invade France and then England. That is the TRUTH. The Germans were not that stupid and neither were we or the French.