Rapid Response Media Alert: Targeting Iran – The BBC Propaganda Begins

[bigfish]

If you had the faintest idea what you were blah blah blah blah blah

Fucking experts! Don't you just love 'em!

 

[editor]

So, on the basis of a demonstrable sequence of lies and crude associations, you arrive at the assertion that I always source my threads from "anti-Semitic conspiranoid sites," like medialens - which you have now rather conveniently labeled anti-Semitic!

You arrived at the conclusion that you'd been censored here.

So exactly when have you been prevented from freely expressing your opinion here or had words "censored" from your posts?

 

[laptop]

Fucking experts! Don't you just love 'em!

So in Bigfish's world, the information someone offers is to be discounted simply because they know what they're talking about?

Bigfish, you're painting yourself into a conspiracock corner. That's "logic" worthy of Viallis himself.

So when did you last go over a text with the lawyers to check for libel?

And what can you tell us about legal moves to decide whether or not the hosting company, as well as the editor and the author, is punishable for any libels here? (Question: if your corner newsagent sells a Private Eye containing a libel, are they liable?) Can you tell us what "Rome II" is about?

 

[Pickman's model]

is rome ii connected in any way with vatican ii?

 

[bigfish]

You arrived at the conclusion that you'd been censored here.

So exactly when have you been prevented from freely expressing your opinion here or had words "censored" from your posts?

Principally, when I and others, who have serious concerns about the official orthodoxy, have wanted to continue posting on particular threads only to return and find them locked down in the bin. Also, it is very difficult to engage in meaningful debate when a mob of trolls descend with the sole intention of disrupting the discussion with insulting ad hominen "conspiraloon" type attacks.

This is how you closed down the recent Jet fuels can't melt steel thread:

All future 9/11 conspiraloon threads repeating the same cult-like drivel about (non-existent) invisible missile-firing pretend planes and (non-existent) invisible explosives will be binned on sight

There is nothing cultish about believing that jet fuel can't melt steel, nor did anyone mention anything about "invisible missile-firing pretend planes", apart from you that is.

 

[laptop]

is rome ii connected in any way with vatican ii?

Not that I'm aware

I'll have to check the negotiating text to see whether there's an exclusion for religious services, though...

 

[pk]

Explain this bollocks Bigfish:

"Rapid Response Media Alert: Targeting Iran – The BBC Propaganda Begins!!!"

And answer the question, do you actually belong to a union?

 

[editor]

Principally, when I and others, who have serious concerns about the official orthodoxy, have wanted to continue posting on particular threads only to return and find them locked down in the bin.

Actually, I think you'll find that the particular topic had been discussed in full, at length, in circles for a very long time.

So no 'censorship there at all then.
Just tedious repetition from seriously obsessed minds.

Not one of your 1,516 posts has been altered in any way.
Not one of your 1,516 posts has had any words removed or 'censored'.
You have been at absolute liberty to post up whatever fantastic nonsense you find on the web, but when the conspiracy-tastic debate goes around in an ever decreasing circles for about the ten zillioneth time, it is rightly sent to the bin.

 

[bigfish]

And answer the question, do you actually belong to a union?

Before I answer your ignorant question, please either support your repeated charge that medialens is anti-Semitic by reproducing the offending material and naming its author, or else retract your slanderous accusation and apologize for misleading this forum.

Explain this ... Bigfish:

"Rapid Response Media Alert: Targeting Iran – The BBC Propaganda Begins!!!"

Here's the section that was deleted by the editor from my opening post on the thread. It's the important bit which relates directly to the title.

Ian Traynor reported in the Guardian this week that Western concern over Iran's suspected nuclear programme has been growing since 2003 when it was revealed that Tehran had been conducting secret nuclear activities for 18 years in violation of treaty obligations. Traynor wrote:

"The International Atomic Energy Agency in Vienna has had inspectors in the country (Iran) throughout the period. While finding much that is suspect, the inspectors have not found any proof of a clandestine nuclear bomb programme." ('Special forces "on the ground" in Iran,' Ian Traynor, The Guardian, January 17, 2005)

Remarkably, in an almost exact repeat of events in 2002 and 2003, the BBC is now reflexively boosting the US claim that Iran presents a threat to the West.

On yesterday's BBC1 lunchtime news, diplomatic correspondent James Robbins (yet another Oxbridge elite bf) declared that US relations with Iran were "looking very murky because of the nuclear threat". (BBC1, 13:00 News, January 20, 2005)

Robbins meant, of course, the +alleged+ nuclear threat from Iran.

On the BBC's 18:00 news, Robbins again spoke of Iran "where the President is confronting the nuclear threat". (BBC1, 18:00 News, January 25, 2005)

Is this balanced, objective reporting by the BBC?

Even as the staggering catastrophe that has befallen Iraq continues to be played out, the BBC and other media are yet again preparing the public mind for war. If the public can be convinced that this latest 'threat' is real, then politicians can again unleash their bombers with impunity.

How many more innocent people have to die before journalists wake up to their moral responsibility to protect human life, to treat Third World nations as something more than Western playthings, to challenge warmongering propaganda, and to develop their powers of independent, rational thought?

http://www.medialens.org/alerts/2005/050121_BBC_Iran_Propaganda.HTM

In addition, David Miller of Strathclyde University recently wrote that:

"BBC managers have fallen over themselves to grovel to the government in the aftermath of the Hutton whitewash. When will any of the BBC journalists who reported the 'Scud' attacks apologise? When will their bosses apologise for conspiring to keep the anti-war movement off the screens? Not any time soon."

 

[Wess]

who believes that 19 Arabs "fanatics" conspired with a "mastermind" in an Afghan cave and turned over a state of the art fucking super power, not once but four times in less than a day!

A bit more likely than a holographic remote controlled plane.
...and what is so extraordinary about terrorists hijacking planes ?...

This is how you closed down the recent Jet fuels can't melt steel thread:

Considering the fact that jet fuels can indeed melt steel and there wasn't a bit of evidence provided by the CTer's to prove otherwise it all ends up in a shit fight which deservedly gets binned..

Let's face it, you guy's just want to be able to post up bullshit without having to answer to your claims, and it's not like you haven't been given ample opportunity to do so.

also...most the posters here know that media is used for political purpose and gain and personal agenda's, we know most of the crap printed in relation to a political party of any persuasion is usually full of crap and/or rhetoric ....and yes, we already know that the US Gov. will probably do to another sovereign nation what they did to Iraq (and the others it has invaded over the years)

Do you think you are the only person who understands all this?...or that because we (posters who won't accept the conspiracy theory re; 911) don't believe in holographic remote controlled aircraft that we believe everything that is revealed in the mainstream media?...There is nothing new or surprising in the article you posted up.

btw, I do agree and wish to fuck the authors of this war propaganda crap would stand up for themselves but, it ain't gunna happen....the Editors, owners and the Politicians are all in it for the money and power and walk past the truth on the way to the bank....nothing new there.

btw...what's wrong with providing a link to a long C&P?.....

 

[bigfish]

Actually, I think you'll find that the particular topic had been discussed in full, at length, in circles for a very long time.

So no 'censorship there at all then.
Just tedious repetition from seriously obsessed minds.

Speaking of obsessed minds, leaving aside some of the usual suspects, I note that it was you in fact who topped the post count on that particular thread, ratcheting up a grand total of 86 posts. The thread starter, sparticus, managed just 24 comments, while I posted only 2.

And this was your opening shot across the thread starters bow: "FFS, this has been discussed to death, you conspiraloon muppet. And it's becoming really fucking boring now."

You went on to close the thread down just when serious questions were being asked about the BBC's online report purporting to explain 'How the World Trade Center fell'. A report littered with factual errors and an inacurate and misleading diagram. A report cited by yourself.

Not one of your 1,516 posts has been altered in any way.
Not one of your 1,516 posts has had any words removed or 'censored'.

I suppose the fact that it was you who removed the paragraphs from my opening post referring to the BBC (as indicated in the title), must have somehow slipped your mind for the moment.

 

[pk]

Go fuck yourself Bigfish.

You can't even answer a simple question...

And you really need to know just how shit your beloved decietful Medialens is...?

Fucking Google it mate. Key search words:

Medialens. Racist.

Your accusation that I am misleading the board is a fucking joke coming from you, Bigfish, you're as ignorant as you are stupid.

Of course - I would say that - I'm part of the mind-controlling Bildeburg establishment.

 

[editor]

I suppose the fact that it was you who removed the paragraphs from my opening post referring to the BBC (as indicated in the title), must have somehow slipped your mind for the moment.

Right. I had enough of your bullshit.

Your words weren't censored because of some evil editorial policy. They were removed because - for the last fucking time - posters are not allowed to shove up great swathes of cut and paste.

I've warned you enough times about this and I'm fucking fed up dealing with an arrogant cunt who thinks the rules don't apply to him.

So I'll make it simple for you to understand and put it in nice big letters for the very last time:

Replying to posts. Do not post up huge reams of cut and paste text, but make things easier for others by summarising the article and including a link to the unabridged version. Users who make a stream of posts with no meaningful content and/or continually post up off topic material in inappropriate threads/forums will be banned.

Post up another of your arrogant cut and paste-a-thons and you'll be looking for new boards to repeat your conspiraloon theories on.

 

[Lock&Light]

Post up another of your arrogant cut and paste-a-thons and you'll be looking for new boards to repeat your conspiraloon theories on.

Roll on the day.

 

[pk]

What this prick knows about the BBC I could write on a microbe.

 

[fela fan]

Good posting bigfish. Good to see some sense and a questioning mind amongst the rest of this [insert word of choice]. Keep up the good work mate.

I think it very sad that our national broadcaster can yet again be preparing the grounds for war through its choice of rhetoric.

Of course, in a democracy (sic), the only way the politicians can enter a war is to have the people on board. And that can only occur through dissemination of propaganda: enter the media.

Oh dear. Poor iranians if they are indeed to be next. But wait... they're only pesky third worlders, so who gives a hoot eh...

 

[editor]

But wait... they're only pesky third worlders, so who gives a hoot eh...

I give a fucking hoot you arrogant, pompous, supercilious, smug, deluded conspiraloon.

The notion that conspiraloons are any help at all to anyone in the third world is fucking laughable.

 

[bigfish]

And you really need to know just how shit your beloved decietful Medialens is...?

Fucking Google it mate. Key search words:

Medialens. Racist.

Your accusation that I am misleading the board is a fucking joke...

Please stop lying about medialens and stop misleading the forum. When I accused you earlier of vulgar anti-Semitism, I was able to produce an appalling post you had made demonstrating the veracity of the charge straightaway. On the other hand, now that you accuse medialens of exactly the same crime, all that you can muster is a feeble reccommendation to search the internet with Google! Really, does anybody need anymore proof than this of your inbuilt double standard and of what an odious creepy right wing charlatan you really are?

Searching with Google, using the terms you recommend, turns up no documents that support your malicious allegation against medialens. No surprise there then. However it did turn up this rather interesting message to the medialens editors from George Monbiot

Dear David and David,


I know we've had disagreements in the past, but I wanted to send you a note of appreciation for your work. Your persistence seems to be paying off: it's clear that many of the country's most prominent journalists are aware of Medialens, read your bulletins and, perhaps, are beginning to feel the pressure. If, as I think you have, you have begun to force people working for newspapers and broadcasters to look over their left shoulders as well as their right, and worry about being held to account for the untruths they disseminate, then you have already performed a major service to democracy. I feel you have begun to open up a public debate on media bias, which has been a closed book in the United Kingdom for a long time. As you would be the first to point out, this does not solve the problem of the corporate control of the media, but it does sow embarrasment in the ranks of the enemy, while reminding your readers of the need to seek alternative sources of information.

George Monbiot thinks that medialens may "have performed a major service to democracy", while pk incists that the very same site is a hot bed of anti-Semitism and recommends Google as his proof!

Hands up all those silent readers out there who believe Monbiot is right and that pk is wrong...

 

[Barking_Mad]

ZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

 

[pk]

I think it very sad that our national broadcaster can yet again be preparing the grounds for war through its choice of rhetoric.

Preparing the grounds for war? Oh do me a favour Fela Fan.
What the fuck are you talking about here?
It's a TV station. Are they all "preparing the grounds" too?
Are we all controlled by "puppet masters"?
Get a life. You read too many comics.

Please stop lying about medialens and stop misleading the forum.

Stop misleading the forum? Are you fucking joking me or what????

You're the one declaring the BBC to be some kind of propaganda weapon used at will by the dark overlords of war!

Which is clearly a load of Bigtush bollocks, am I right?

When I accused you earlier of vulgar anti-Semitism, I was able to produce an appalling post you had made demonstrating the veracity of the charge straightaway.

Blatant bollocks Big-nish, you big bucket of buffalo blaps!!

I was able to produce an appalling post you had made demonstrating the veracity of the charge straightaway.

LOL! You sound like that crotchety Tory-boy student character Harry Enfield used to do!

So in that case, you'll have no problem producing this post of mine, the veracity of which now seems to have you salivating in your pants.

Seeing as I don't remember you ever producing anything original, except of course loads of boring cut and paste conspiranoid bullshit.

Oh, when you're finally ready to answer my questions...what do you really know about - the BBC news, newrooms in general, unions in relation to mass media, or just about anything that isn't from one of your fruitloop websites?
Do you actually use Google, or are you sent these links by other members of your odd planet?

You were proved utterly wrong by any sane person's rationale, on every single aspect of 9/11 conspiracies you have been spouting these last 12 months or so, yet never provide anything but cut and paste crap.

What do you really know about propaganda, Bigtwat?

 

[pk]

Oh and Bigfish - are you really trying to tell me that Monbiot cannot spell ""embarrassment"?

LMFAO!

I think Merde-in-a-lens is a piece of dubious one sided shit compared to the BBC, whom you have yet to prove are involved in a propaganda exercise.

Sure, nothing wrong with looking at two sides of a story, it's why I come here after all, but at Medialens, they're far from the honest men of journalistic integrity you believe them to be.