And slowly the tide of world opinion turns...

Wow those are Sadam like numbers.

Unfortunately its not World opinion...

It's just those with common sense and open eyes...

p.s.

My company has international lines.....not saying that I made a phone call of support....not saying I didnt either :)))

Morning Charles....

Ha! The mighty masses have turned against thee, BBC! Repent, or be blacklisted by people who pay for thy channel!

Saddam sorry

Huzzah for the Brits. Common Sense at last !

Sounds like Canadian Journalism. Same thing happens here, except no one shows support for the broadcaster....

At least they are addressing the problem in Britian.

Opps! I've said too much already, the CRTC is coming for me with the RCMP!

Although I am all for pillorying the shameful BBC here, and making a last stand against Mordor and for the rights of men on this issue...

...read Kilroy-Silk's comments at the end, in which he refers to himself as an institution and gives himself credit for all the improvements in race relations in the UK. Bismillah, what a windbag!

#9 Mike G

...read Kilroy-Silk's comments at the end, in which he refers to himself as an institution and gives himself credit for all the improvements in race relations in the UK. Bismillah, what a windbag!

Sounds like the UK's version of Michael Savage.

Like sands from the hourglass...so are the days of our lives...

I am not sure of what i meant there....but it sounded good...

I say F*** em

I'm glad that they're showing some common sense and that many are protesting against this patent infringement of his rights. Even more interesting, check out the BBC's re-opened comments about Kilroy, where support for him outpaces condemnation of him by at least 10:1. But also note which comments the BBC chooses to highlight in its little grey boxes - almost all of them are critical of Kilroy. Interesting little bit of bias there.

I would like to see an apology from the BBC...which I highly doubt will happen...

Andrew B.

Excellent news! Go Brits!

Now the next step: Each realizing he's not alone in his thinking and values, and taking action to confront the forces of PC and LLLism. Contact your MPs and bolster them with the knowledge they have the backing of the folks back home. Insist that the BBC be privatized and earn its own keep. Failing that, that it seek equivalent funding from the people and governments in other nations if it's going to be a "disinterested international corporation" instead of a British one. And don't be afraid to tell the ignorant purple-haired hate-spewing Guardian reader with the pierced forehead that he's full of it.

Congratulations though, I'm very proud!

I think Kilroy-Silk sucks, especially that part of the video where he goes "Domo Arigato, Mr. Roboto."

Oh, wait, I was thinking of "Kilroy Was Here - Styx". Never Mind.

So where's Mr. "The people have spoken - the bastards!" to tell the British public that they don't have the right to hold politically-incorrect views?

How this must GALL the BBC. I'm sure they thought the plan of forced apology and "voluntary" donations by Mr. Kilroy-Silk would get the point across to the British public that Muslims must be appeased at all costs. Glad to see that the Biased Broadcasting Corporation miscalculated so badly on this one.

I think Kilroy-Silk should be castrated, then beheaded, or beheaded, and then castrated, for daring to shatter the peaceful inter-community relations, tolerance, and love we all foster in our day-to day lives, even if it is the jews who made him do it.

OT -- Tears Run as Israeli Barrier Rises Near Jerusalem

Good thing there's no bias in the media...

Unfortunately, it's the 3% of the ninnies and the twits that decide such matters. All the leftist traitors along with the self hating, guilt ridden psuedo intellectual fools are the ones who count in Merry Old England.

#19 Let's Roll,

LOL. How about the Arafat quote:

"This is the biggest Nakba (Catastrophe) of all Nakbas."

It's like an iowahawk parody...

#13 Ariel, the 're-opened comments' page only shows the comments the BBC editors deemed suitable for the general public. That most of them support Kilroy-Silk is surprising enough, but I'm sure the selection is not representative of the real anger at the BBC many feel.

OT - some unintentional humourFourth one down

I have no sympathy for the Brits complaining about "freedom of speech" when they WILLFULLY allowed their government to take over all broadcast television in the first place.

Years of the Brits telling us how "materialistic" and "un-cultured" Americans and our TV tastes are has made me feel NO sympathy for stories such as these. The UK brought it upon themselves.

Sorry about your luck, Kilroy-Silk. Maybe next time you won't be so quick to accept work under a governmental thumb.

The BBC's Royal Charter and funding are presently under British governmental review.

Support the cancellation or non-renewal of the charter by writing to UK Culture Secretary Tessa Jowell:

tessa.jowell@culture.gsi.gov.uk

Peter Verkooijen #22,

Absolutely true. That's why, as you said, it's all the more surprising that there's around 10:1 support for Kilroy. They can't even find enough anti-Kilroy folks and the few who they do find are highlighted in order to make them more prominent. I sent in my comment:

NO! Kilroy's statements were factually accurate: If we look at Arab countries, we can say with confidence that the preponderance of all suicide bombers, limb amputators, and repression of women comes from them. The BBC is trying to punish someone for stating facts.

Meanwhile, in a more egregious case, the case of Tom Paulin, who called settlers "Nazis" who should be killed - i.e. actively advocating for death of certain people - there was no BBC reaction whatsoever. The best case scenario is that the BBC believes that calling for the death of Jews is less bad then making factually accurate statements about Arabs.

Finally, in a last bit of hypocrisy, we, as Jews, are constantly told that criticism of Israel is not Jew-hatred. So why is criticism of Arabs and their cultural "achievements" considered hatred of Muslims?

#26 Ariel: We regret to inform you that your submission to our forum has not been selected for publishing. Nice try though, Yahoodi.

Cheers,
Nigel

/Model4

Is this really a freedom of speech issue? Or, more directly, is it a government-sponsored medium issue?

I don't pretend to know anything about UK laws, etc. so let's consider such a situation in the US.

If the network in question was CNN rather than BBC, there would be no free speech issue at all. CNN is free to have any editorial policy it wants and to enforce said policy by means of hiring/firing among others. The wisdom and importance of said policy would be reflected in its viewship and so, ultimately, its bottom line. So, if CNN fired Kilroy and, say, Fox picked him up, then, judging by his popular support, Fox would greatly benefit and CNN would be hurt in its wallet. A consistent record of such editorial misjudgement would eventually result in a new set of editors and different policy.

But what if it was PBS instead of CNN. In that case, the same considerations still apply because PBS is partially supported by "Viewers Like You", a semi-smart provision by Congress in legistlating the PBS charter. But the effect would be attenuated considerably by the non-consumer support sources. This attenuation would mean that reaction to correct the policy would range from much slower to never.

My understanding of BBC is that there is absolutely zero consumer input into its bottom line, indeed, there is no bottom line. So, the only way to "correct" BBC editorial policy is governmental dictation; a cure much worse than the disease.

In summary, government sponsored "news" media will always range between mostly and always being editorial wastelands. One possibility is to legislate PBS and NPR out of the news and opinion business, that is, limit to strictly cultural, entertainment and educational presentations.

Ariel, I also send the BBC a comment referring to Tom Paulin and their disgusting statement about him:

"His polemical, knockabout style has ruffled feathers in the US, where the Jewish question is notoriously sensitive."

None of the comments on the website mentions Tom Paulin. This issue is clearly out of bounds for the BBC editors.

So I don't expect any of our comments to appear on the site. We'll see...

World opinion is changing

Not in so many words. More like the media's ability to create an artificial reality and call it "world opinion" is fading away.

Hey folks, I just came across this - off-topic but ofi nterest nevertheless - written by Jackie Mason & Raoul Felder!

The Sorry Tale of George Soros

I wouldn't declare victory yet. Yes, the BBC and government involvement in this is the worst sort of totalitarianism, but they make an easy target. If no prominent British figure is willing to confirm the self-evident truth of Kilroy-Silk's remarks, the message of PC self-censorship remains.

Dear Brits,

Refuse to pay the tax that supports the Beeb and dump your tellies in the Thames in protest, dressing in politically incorrect Red Indian costumes while doing so.

Worked in Boston once upon a time.

So Silk is getting supported and the Beeb is getting told to shut up and leave the man in peace. Think such a thing might happen if this were in, say, France? Nah, we'd never hear anything about it. And if we did, it would be painted as a bunch of upstarts upsetting the balance. Certainly why I have more respect for the Brits than I ever will for the French (barring the anti-idiotarian French, of course.)

The "silent majority" are beginning to see the clear pattern of bias running through BBC decisions.

Think :
1 weeks of support for Gilligan's attack on Blair
2 Kilroy's popular daytime show axed for PC reasons
3 Tom Paulin's clear incitement regarded almost with humour

Ordinary people are starting to join the dots. And starting to question the princip-le of paying a compulsory licence fee to a politically biased organisation. Which also happens to be ludicrously inefficient and expensive.

A couple of the comments did refer briefly to Tom Paulin.

Subscribers to Honest Reporting will see that they've covered the issue--and are clearly reading LGF!

Oh, I dunno. I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if the BBC stands its ground. Nothing pisses off the elite quite like facing peasants waving pitchforks in their faces.

"They must be taught a lesson" will triumph over "WTF??!!"

Well, I don't pay the license fee for the specific reason that the BBC is not unbiased like it should be.
Instead, I gave the money to PizzaIDF when I was drunk. Stick that in your pipes and smoke it, loony liberal elites at the Beeb!

Better yet, Boston MA is named for a port in England, which presumably has a harbor...

Uh, oh, first 26K people call in on a BBC and want the right to defend themselves, now 50K +++ support free speech. All w/in 10 days.

The serfs are starting to fight back.

#32 someone: I don't know about "the worst sort of totalitarianism," though it is quite dangerous. But then I haven't read your link yet to get the full context.

You're right though that it's going to hinge upon Brits actually doing something about this. Things aren't going to get any worse without the Beeb having an open policy of giving employees paid time off to scout out sniping positions near the local synagogue. I truly hope it isn't an "enemy of my enemy is my friend" situation, where all the leftist, arabist, jihadist propaganda is worth it, so long as they keep sticking it to the Chosen.

Let's see, we've had wall-to-wall weeping coverage of a massacre that never took place. Terrorists described as "militants," "fighters" and "gunmen." Fawning portrayals of Islam that whitewash all that is wrong with it today. Illegal economic and jihadi migrants described as "asylum seekers." Gilligan lying in Baghdad. Gilligan lying to take down Blair, with the full and unconditional backing of the BBC board, even after it resulted in Kelley's death. The stalwart crew of the Ark Royal pissed enough to give them the boot. Mandates that the former Iraqi dictator not be describes as a dictator. Now a man banished not for provocative statements, but because they commented on the annointed, while vipers like Paulin are given a free pass in the name of "open and challenging dialogue."

If the time isn't ripe to take the BBC apart, I shudder to think of what will be going on in the world when the time is.

BBC hits back over Kilroy claims

See if you can work out what the beeb is trying to say:

In a statement, the corporation said ... "In view of some newspaper coverage, we would like to make it clear that the BBC defends and supports freedom of speech. This has never been about freedom of speech.

"It is about how the job of a BBC presenter carries with it responsibilities about what is written and said publicly and how this may impact on their on-air role." /blockquote>

It's not about freedom of speech but it is about what presenters say?

Here are some ways to ensure you obey

the will of the MCB:

1. You MUST spell words the way we tell you:

Several of our Muslim correspondents were unhappy with the Daily Mail and the Daily Express continued use of the antiquated spelling “Moslem” in their stories. We wrote to the editors of both newspapers in July and urged them not to unnecessarily antagonise their many thousands of Muslim readers in this way.

2. You MUST propogate our political bias at all times:

We contacted the BBC again in July to insist that the BBC describe the Jewish settlements in the West Bank and Gazah as “illegal”.

3. You MAY NOT refer to the acts of our glorious infant murdering jihadi brothers in ways of your own choosing:

At the end of May, the media committee wrote to the BBC to protest about their use of the phrase “Islamic terrorists” to describe Kashmiri freedom fighters in their news reports.

4. Finally, NO making fun of your dhimmitude, kufr:

The media committee received a very large number of complaints from British Muslims about a story which appeared in an article entitled “Britain’s Boom Town” in the Sunday Times magazine on July 28. The author of the article said that there was an area of Birmingham which was described by the locals as “Allah’s arse”.

This is awesome, I didn't dare hope it would be this good :-)

Did any Brits see the interview with Trevor MacDonald last night? I completely forget it was on.

3% of the ninnies and the twits

We're through being cool!

#43 Emo

The author of the article said that there was an area of Birmingham which was described by the locals as “Allah’s arse”.

Ah colloquial British humor!

How does "papijoe, Pain in Allah's arse" sound?

At last, the great lumbering beast called "the silent majority" is finding its voice. I had sent a comment early this morning to BBC and checked but it wasn't among those in the three pages I scanned. I sent another one (and also sent an email to The Express). It's possible they are swamped and haven't posted some of them or, as someone above said, maybe they're being selective in those they post.

Colt

In the interview last night Kilroy came across as cool and balanced - compared with the BBC stooge interviewer. And stressed "What facts did I get wrong ?"

#48 JohninLondon

Excellent, I figured he'd be good.

Elizabeth

The BBC selective in what it says or prints on its website ? Never !!!!

/sacasm off

Look! Richard Perle wants to include Saudi Arabia in the axis!

Top US official blasted for anti-Saudi remarks

Now all GW needs to do is to stop sleeping with Saudi ambassador and reverse his policy on illegal immigration and he's got the election in the bag!

Refuse to pay the tax that supports the Beeb and dump your tellies in the Thames in protest, dressing in politically incorrect Red Indian costumes while doing so.

Or throw them out the windo ala SCTV.

#47 Elizabeth: Hard to say. But I usually don't have any problem getting posted on whatever mainstream forum I like, with a little tailoring of the message to the venue (and can't see where most of us would have any problem doing so either). Certainly doesn't pan out all the time, but at least one in four tries.

I've never once had my comments selected by the folks at the BBC's "Have Your Say" after dozens of entries. I'm not a great writer, but I've seen worse accepted. I've posted right from the beginning of some threads. I've watered down my comments to just slouch quizzingly toward a main point. I've posted in threads where the dynamic was over 10-1 against my position, which ought to add a little boost to a dissenting post. Not one nibble. Your mileage may vary though.

I did actually write to another section of the Beeb once to criticize an article run during or near the war, and was delighted and suprised to get a polite and personal attempted defense of the piece by the author himself.

#48 JohninLondon: Do you happen to have a video/audio/transcript link handy? Wasn't this on ITV? I will try to look it up this evening. Would it be itv.com?

Model 4: Have Your Say is completely biased. It should change its name to "Have Your Say (as long as it agrees with the BBC.)"

Go over to the Biased BBC website and enter your rejected comments in their comments section, with the notation that it didn't get published.

At least Biased BBC's readers will get to see what you had to say.

I have a few times submitted perfectly decent and publishable comments to the beeb site. Needless to say not one made it past the KGB.

Mmm...I'm not too sure about this. I distinctly remember old Saskie Morlock berating me about the fact that the Brits his parents came across were of the Bush is an idiot type and would in no way support Kilroy-Silk.

As such this is a clear case of Mrs Kilroy Silk hitting the redial 50,000 times. Has to be.

The "Have Your Say" site is run by three 19 year old members of the Young Socialist's Party who sit about making up emails and picking names out of the phonebook to attach to them.

I've long since giving up on that particular "Forum"

Via Rantburg:

THE BBC has agreed to reinstate Robert Kilroy-Silk after suspending him for describing Arabs as “suicide bombers, limb amputators and women repressors”.
But he has had to agree to new producer guidelines designed to prevent him causing offence to anyone. This column sat in on his comeback show.

KILROY: Good morning, everybody. Welcome to the show. Today we’re talking about freedom of speech. My first guest this morning has had a tragic life.

He lost an eye and both hands while on missionary work in Afghanistan and has had to subsist on benefits ever since. Please welcome, from the Finsbury Park mosque, Captain Hook.

(Loud applause).

KILROY: I know this is difficult for you, so take your time. What would you like to say to us?

HOOK: Death to the infidel! Death to the Jews! Death to America! Death to the West!

(Even louder applause.)

KILROY: You’re clearly very upset and that’s understandable. I know what you must be going through. Did I mention I’m part Irish?

(AUDIENCE: Death to the infidel! Death to the Jews! Death to America! Death to the West!)

KILROY: I feel your pain, I really do. I’ll come back to you later in the show. My next guest is from al-Muhajiroun. What would you like to say to the viewers, sir?

AL-MUH: September 11 2001 was a towering day in history — a mighty blow against the Great Satan. It is the duty of the faithful to rise up and join the jihad.

(Riotous cheering).

KILROY: I can tell emotions are running very high on this issue.

AL-MUH: The oppressor must be destroyed. The Jews must be driven into the sea!

(Audience goes berserk).

KILROY: Well, you’re certainly entitled to your point of view. I’m sure many, many of the people watching will be able to relate to what you are saying.

AL-MUH: Can I just mention that we’re holding a recruiting drive in Tipton on Tuesday?

KILROY: Of course you can. I’m from Birmingham, by the way. (Turns to camera). And don’t forget, if you’re watching at home, if you’d like to make a donation to Hezbollah In Need just ring the number at the bottom of your screen. Our operators are standing by.

(AUDIENCE: Death to Israel!)

KILROY: Let’s welcome our next guest. It’s a pleasure and a privilege to have on Kilroy, a leading QC, a champion of human rights, wife of the Prime Minister, the Wicked Witch herself, Cherie Booth QC.

(Polite hissing from audience)

KILROY: Cherie, thanks for coming in. I used to be an MP, too, you know.

Like me, you’ve got a bit of a reputation for being outspoken on the subject of human rights, haven’t you?

WW: Yes, Robert, I have.

KILROY: And I think, also like me, you got yourself in a bit of hot water over something you said to the Saudi ambassador.

WW: All I said, Robert, was that Saudi Arabia had a pretty appalling image in the eyes of the world because of the disgraceful way they treat women.

KILROY: What, exactly, did you mean by that?

WW: Well, for instance, they won’t let women drive, deny them the vote, deny them property rights. Women in the Arab world are second-class citizens.

KILROY: Steady on, Cherie. That’s a bit harsh. I can fully understand why our audience might easily take exception. I’m surprised an intelligent women like you would rush to judgment without knowing all the facts.

(AUDIENCE: Death to the Wicked Witch!)

WW: What I actually meant to say . . .

KILROY: That’s enough. I won’t have such vile, offensive language on this show.

HOOK: I object to appearing alongside infidels and half-

naked harlots.

This is a deliberate insult to Islam.

KILROY: No offence, Captain. But we do live in a tolerant, multi-

racial, multicultural society.

HOOK: Not where I come from, we don’t.

KILROY: What, Finsbury Park?

HOOK: Infidel dog! (spits on studio floor).

KILROY: My next guest is a young man, Ali, from Salford. He’s just volunteered to go to work in Jerusalem as a suicide bomber. That’s an interesting career choice.

ALI: I’ve always wanted to travel and kill Jews.

(AUDIENCE: Death to Israel! Death to The West!)

KILROY: Good for you, Ali. So many young people are prepared to sit around on their backsides these days. Not like when I was a young, working class lad in the West Midlands, before I became a famous TV personality and newspaper columnist.

AL-MUH: We have thousands of martyrs like Ali waiting to bring death to the unbelievers.

(AUDIENCE: Kill, Kill, Kill!)

KILROY: And they say modern youngsters are only interested in sex, drugs and mobile phones. That’s about all we’ve got time for. I’d like to thank all my guests, Captain Hook — good luck with the deportation appeal; al-Muhajiroun — hope the jihad goes well; Ali — come back and see us when you, er, perhaps not.

(Sound of sirens. Enter boys in blue.)

PLOD: You thought you’d got away with it, chummy, didn’t you? Robert Kilroy-Silk, I am arresting you for possession of an offensive suntan. Now stand still while the sergeant chops your arm off.

KILROY: See you in the morning.

OT: "Trouble With Islam" Author on FNC now.

OT: Dutch Teacher Shot in the Head by Student (via Drudge). I thought this was impossible, considering their gun-control laws.

The school apparently has a history of violence. Students said police make daily visits.

"Fights are normal here, but not like this," said student Mohammed Ouledle.

Tragic violence that could happen anywhere. But it sounds like a RoP-heavy school, and something tells me the shooter's name wasn't "Peter." Especially since it wasn't released. Will try to keep an eye on this, although I suspect the press will do their job and try to keep facts out of the hands of the public. Damn shame, as warm, fun and kind as the Dutch were when I lived there.

Ok, some perspective here.

Kilroy Silk is the presenter of a TV show of great inanity (think Jerry Springer type content without the humour). He is not the standard bearer for right-minded British people, he is a twat.

Now, while the comments in his newspaper column are sensible and factual, they are undermined by his subsequent mealy mouthed defence, and his interview on ITV yesterday was pathetic.

Please don't invest your hopes in this guy, he's not worth it.

And #24 Unmutual

I have no sympathy for the Brits complaining about "freedom of speech" when they WILLFULLY allowed their government to take over all broadcast television in the first place.

I don't know what you mean by this. There are 5 free-to-view terrestrial television channels in the UK, two of which are provided by the BBC (which is NOT the government, although funded by iniquitous taxation), and three commercial independent companies. Additionally, there are hundreds of satellite and cable channels (I recently counted that I have 137 of them!), of which about 6 are BBC.

The BBC has always been a propaganda arm of the government in times of war. What'd you expect?

#59 Seymour Paine

Please don't post full stories. It wastes Charles's bandwidth and can get him in big trouble over copyrights. Besides, that's the third time somebody posted that here.

From BBC comments, linked #13 by Ariel:

Perhaps I should be glad that BBC has decided to suspend Kilroy's show, otherwise I wouldn't have heard of this wonderful article. This is just one example to how trying to shut people up doesn't work.

Eli, New York, USA

There is something incredibly annoying with the BBC selecting this comment from a New Yorker with a Jewish name. It's like they are trying to say: look Jews in New York agree with Kilroy-Silk. Do you want to be with us, or do you want to be with the NYC Jews?

By coincidence I sent an entry to the BBC comments page on this subject, also comparing the BBC's treatment of Kilroy-Silk with that of Tar Paulin. I, too got no post.

That's three would-be commentators in one small space. My guess is that they have received hundreds of comments along these lines, and have seen fit to post none of them.

And yet they say that they post a representative selection of all the comments they receive. . . Smell untruth here?

I read, though, that Lord Janner wants to take up on Tar Paulin's 'kill the Jews but I'm not an anti-semite' speech.

I'm sorry to say. but the sooner we have a terrorist attack in the UK, the sooner we can start sorting out the mess we're in.

The longer we go on not being attacked, the longer the enemy has to prepare.

In the first year of WW2 Churchil had many problems persuading Brits that there really was a war on and that they needed to act. The Phony War ended and we got to work.

When will the Phony War with militant Islam end?

I find myself somewhat dissapointed when I hear of yet another terrorist plot foiled. I don't want people to die, but I'd rather a few people died now, than thousands, or tens of thousands later on.

Someone to watch over us

An interesting insight into some immigrants' view of our democracy.

Arab Media watch, [Link: www.al-awda.org.uk...] n Islamic organization keeping watch on the fairness of our media, in an interview today called for the BBC to sack Kilroy over his remarks. When asked if that darling of the Left should be sacked for calling Jewish settlers 'Nazis who should be shot' the only response came as 'That's for the BBC to decide'. its nice to know there are people watching over us who understand what democracy and fair reporting is all about.

Or perhaps they prefer the particular style of media enjoyed by these activists in their home countries.

Who can tell..

#62 ade

.

Please don't invest your hopes in this guy, he's not worth it

The Kilroy affair has nothing to do with his personality and abilities, or quality of his programme, but everything to do with the BBC bias and double standards, and attempt to limit free speech following Muslim's represantative bodies pressure to limit criticism of their rotten society.

I hope Kilroy can sue BBC for the breech of contract, tho' they backed off probably too soon for that.

I met Kilroy once, my girlfriend was on his show, he is actually a really nice down to earth genuine guy.
Lets hope his show gets syndicated on another network,
but dont hold your breath since the religion of peace ©™ control the media here.

Just to underscore the BBC position, we have a whole month comming up on the hajj to mecca on BBC and BskyB to look oh so forward to.

Oy vay it's enough to make anyone vote BNP.

Shalom aleichem....

David

#64 Engineer

Thanks for the advice. I generally don't and don't know why I did this time but your advice is good. Thanks.

#70

Oy vay it's enough to make anyone vote BNP.

Know you were joking, but it shows up the apparent contradictions in UK (and world) politics...

When the Islamists aren't joining forces with the Trots, they're sitting down with Nick Griffin discussing how they can make the UK judenrein.

Why the loony left loves - to paraphrase Kilroy - limb amputating, women oppressing suicide bombing Islamists is as hard to understand as why the other socialist extreme, given the misnomer 'far right', loves them just as much.

The only link I can see that both Nazis and Trots like to transpose their own unconcious disgust for their depraved, evil lives into hatred of Jews.

#61 Model4

If it was an urban school, which it sounds like it is, then statistically it was an Arab and that's discounting all possible jihadi tendencies.

#67 Terry

I'm sorry to say. but the sooner we have a terrorist attack in the UK, the sooner we can start sorting out the mess we're in.

We had plenty of terrorist attacks by the IRA - I don't remember an instant 'sorting out' of anything then.

I find myself somewhat dissapointed when I hear of yet another terrorist plot foiled.

Well, I'm delighted. Our security people evidently know what they are doing.

I don't want people to die, but I'd rather a few people died now, than thousands, or tens of thousands later on.

I don't think you should assume it's inevitable that huge numbers of people are going to die in the future, nor that it is necessary for a 'few people' to be killed in order for some hypothetical 'sorting out' to occur. If one terrorist attack occurs, it is more likely that we will settle into the horrible and dreary repetition of attacks we had to suffer from the IRA for many years, and that the Israelis are suffering now.

Please don't wish death on a 'few people' - they might include you or those dear to you.

#67 Terry

Don't worry, you'll get your wish sooner or later. As the rest of us grieve for the dead and injured, you can rub your hands together and wait for the 'sorting out' to begin. Won't that be a treat?

There are also a few letters on BBC Ceefax on the Kilroy affair. All of the are anodyne with Volatire being quoted twice. In other words, I disagree with you but will fight etc ..

The Ceefax page is 145.

67 Terry

You make an interesting point. This Kilroy affair is the wrong fight to pick. It is giving lots of propaganda mileage to the Islamists and nought for us. I suspect that soon, the Islamists will start to act all liberal and tolerant and thus make everyone else look nasty.

(Think before you write this, this is LGF remember).
The corollary of that is, that if Kilroy wanted to do real damage, ie real anger, real smouldering cool sixpack real ale anger in Britain, he should have apologised as humbly as possible.

I'm of to have a coffee before I read the replies.

#76 DP

It is giving lots of propaganda mileage to the Islamists and nought for us.

1. Islamists make up their own propaganda, so it really makes no odds. People who want to feel guilty will do so whether or not Kilroy-Silk speaks the truth about Arab regimes.

2. The BBC has effectively censored a man for opinions that are increasingly widely held. The Commission for Racial Equality is furious. The Met. Police are looking to investigate. This is symptomatic of what's wrong with modern Britain, and goes hand-in-hand with this: Why Britain is no longer a land fit for heroes - The politics of the pitiful have driven colonel Tim Collins out of the Army

If these two things, and the Hutton report, don't shake people awake, I dread to think what does.

54 Model4

Sorry - the ITV interview last night with Kilroy is not available on the web.

Apropos comments submitted to the BBC website, it appears that at least 4 of us sent in comment - and none were published. Selective - or what ?

The Express today had articles about the 3 women executives at the BBC who are likely to be deciding the fate of the Kilroy programme over the next few days. What some readers will have noticed is that these 3 mostly seemed to have minimal credentials for their senior positions. As the Express pointed out, it is highly unlikely they would get any sort of executive post on an Arab network.

I hope people also noticed they are drawing down HUGE salaries (paid by the compulsory licence fee, of course). This is all part of the BLOATED BBC - some 24,000 staff as well as all the people who free-lance. Their news operation is massive and has loads of duplication - they sent over a dozen reporters to the start of the inquest on Lady Di last week, for example.

Years ago I had dealings with the BBC on their original planning for satellite services - they simply didn't have a clue, either on the technology or the programming. Little wonder that Rupert Murdoch has scooped the pool on money-making satellite channels. His news operation is lean and mean - but just as effective as much of the BBC coverage.

So - the BBC is not only blatantly biassed - it is monstrously inefficient.

I don't like Kilroy. But he is an effective performer, and appears to work hard, churning out several programmes a week. And draws a sizeable audience. But at the BBC the "talent" often has to kow-tow to nonentities. (They are currently losing some of their best comedy writers who find themselves on the "wrong wavelength".)

There seems to be little doubt that the Hutton report will fire a bradside at BBC management - just a short while after the mess they have made over Kilroy.

This debacle will run and run. I still think the BBC deserved the Idiotarian of the Year award, because their pernicious effect is on-going and far-reaching.

This article by Stephen Pollard appeared in yesterday's Evening Standard, the London paper for home-going commuters :

[Link: www.stephenpollard.net...]

77 colt
Patience.
---------------------
What actually Kilroy said was quite mild. The reality of Islam is far worse. Far far worse.

I dont really care if they mutilate their women, chop the hands of muslims, stone their adulterers, god only knows what to homosexuals, athiests etc. What I do mind is that they come to the West and accept us to be grateful for it. Yup, the social welfare bugdet is too large and we need these people.

But patience. We have moved a million miles from where we were just 2 years ago. I have watched this cancer of Islam with apprehension for over 30 years. I'm beginning to have hope at last.
9/11 was a major blunder on their part or it could be the reverse. Its difficult to see at the moment.

HonestReporting refers to the Campaign to Abolish the Television Licence site, and the info the site provides shows BBC to be a big fat parazite, that should be disconnected from the infusions of taxpayers money ASAP.

#82 Rayra

only 5 years for 5 Attempted Murder charges. Europe is Doomed.

A policeman was shot and nearly killed in the UK recently. The shooter walked in with a sawn-off and shot the cop in the stomach.

10 years with parole.

...walked in to a police station with a sawn-off...

Colt:

WTF?! Why didn't the cops blow him away long before he fired?!

Ah, never mind. It was in the UK. I remember now: guns are bad, cops with guns are bad, householders with guns are bad, householders who kill burglars are bad, barbed wire to protect your house is bad.

Ah, Britain please come to your senses. Remember the Empire?! Remember that you were once Englishmen?! Hail Brittania?! Pretty please, wake up.

#86 Atomic Redneck, Rumsfeld's groupie

Insane, isn't it?

We had some trouble around our neighbourhood, gangs of 50+ 'youths' kicking down garden walls. One time, my dad and I went out the front while a few of them were in our front garden trying to knock our wall down from within the garden.

That would never have happened in a state where the citizenry are armed.

Oh, by the way, if we do recover our Imperial stripes, we owe the USA an ass-kicking :-)

Colt:

I think it was Robert Heinlein who once said, "An armed society is a polite society." This redneck agrees with him.

He's right.

What's worse is that we had to put up with that happening for months. The police were (and remain) a joke. The 'youths' moved on to smashing wing-mirrors on cars once they realised nothing would happen to them. Bastards.

{Sigh}

Check out THIS story about Dutch law enforcement:

[Link: www.expatica.com...]

71-year-old cancer victim in a wheelchair blows away Turkish illegal immigrant with huge violent crime rap sheet who was burglaring the cancer victim's premises. Cancer victim charged with "manslaughter" and could be sentenced to 12 years in prison. (The same sentence given to the man who killed Pim Fortuyn in cold blood.)

And these are the kind of "progressive" laws the tranzis want to import into the US!

#81 DP

I have watched this cancer of Islam with apprehension for over 30 years. I'm beginning to have hope at last.

DP, you are right on the money. Our best ally is actually their arrogance and stupidity. They overplay their hand, and act before they are ready. Of course, they expect angels and the heavenly legions to help them aganist the infidels, so I guess it's logical to them....

You seem like a sensible guy, by the way. Take a look at the forum in [Link: www.faithfreedom.org...] as well, if you don't already know it. It's not quite like LGF, but for those who can avoid advocating violence against muslims in general it can be very interesting. Plenty of ex-muslims.

I have read with interest the comments about the BBC online 'Have your say' and the comments which state that it is biased puzzle me. I have just read through the comments about Kilroy and it seems to me that there was a fair balance between those who supported his removal from BBC and those against...or am I too objective???

DP

Thanks for the various posts you have made on this blog and elsewhere about the true roots of mathematics. Very enlightening - plenty of good ammo against the trite stuff the Chairman of the CRE in Britain has been coming out with in defence of his referral of Kilroy to the police for alleged racial incitement.

mags

The BBC posts do not reflect the OVERWHELMING majority view in the UK that the BBC was wrong to axe Kilroy. Yes, they have selected a fair few pro-Kilroy posts - but this is not the usual balance they show, and maybe they realise what a hornets-nest they have disturbed by their actions on Kilroy.

The acid test will be - will they keep the Kilroy show off-air, but still let Tom Paulin appear every week on Newsnight ?

#95 JohninLondon

AFAIC, no acid test is needed. Paulin was not taken off the air, not investigated and not reported to the police by the CRE. He actually gave specific instructions about what should happen to Jews, the very definition of incitement. But, no.

This is what we pay our BBC licence for ?

'No viewers' for BBC

By SUN ONLINE REPORTER

SOME of the BBC's digital channels have so few viewers that last year 55 days' worth of programmes were watched by NO ONE, new figures have shown.

More than 1,300 hours of television scored zero on an official viewing figures ratings scale - meaning there were not enough people watching to be officially measured.

The Beeb's rolling News 24 channel got the least viewers, with 472 hours of "unwatched" programming - although much of that was in the early hours of the morning.

Kids channel CBBC was the next with 314 hours.

#89 Atomic Redneck, Rumsfeld's groupie:

Yep, you and Heinlein are absolutely right. Somebody can sit through an entire red light here, and nobody will even blow the horn at them.

OT - but relevant to PC issues. A leader in the Telegraph for Wednesday : :

Women should not be scared to walk alone

A grotesque picture of life on the streets of London emerges from our report today which reveals that, on average, a woman is gang-raped in the capital every day. These rapes are not committed by "sick" loners who might ultimately be treated for their psychological illness, but by predatory gangs of feral youngsters. Some victims are randomly selected, while others are known to some of the gang and singled out for their ordeal. Two thirds of the rapists have previous convictions for street crime, suggesting that a hard-core of young men now regard rape as just another experience in a life-long criminal career.

Scotland Yard has done nothing to publicise these statistics, which were uncovered by our reporter scrutinising the Metropolitan Police Authority website. Officers might fear they will be labelled racist for highlighting a crime wave disproportionately carried out by black and Asian youths. But the racial aspect to this story is a red herring: all residents of London, and the country as a whole, should be loudly indignant.

More police may be needed in London, but we also need more intelligent deployment of the manpower to hand. The Metropolitan Police this week began a lengthy investigation into the incoherent writings of a second-rate daytime talk show host to see if he should be prosecuted for inflaming feelings towards Arabs. How decadent we have become to see this as a priority when young women are liable to random attack while walking the streets of London.

#79 JohninLondon: Yep, I voted for the Kofi/UN just a hair above the BBC. I don't think most people realize just how far the Beeb goes to stoking and "legitimizing" grievances against the West around the globe. Thanks for the news on the interview too.

#87 Colt:

We had some trouble around our neighbourhood, gangs of 50+ 'youths' kicking down garden walls. One time, my dad and I went out the front while a few of them were in our front garden trying to knock our wall down from within the garden.

Sheesh, you're so PC-whipped you have to call guys over the age of 50 "youths"?! (shakes head) OK, we'll spar again whenever you like, but preferably after we've drained the rest of the swamps together. But this time we get to start out on your turf!

Y'know... crafty Brits... I'm beginning to suspect this wimpy facade is all a ruse, just to get the rest of the world to beg them to fire up the Empire again. Then all criticism could be deflected with "Well, you did ask for it."
/marks down one more country to keep an eye on

#93 Mags: "Is my 'problem' that I'm too perceptive, or too objective?" Was that supposed to be clever?

#99, John In London,

From your leader in the Torygraph, I notice that "Asian" youth gangs are included among those doing the gang rapes in London.

I know from experience that "Asian" is really a UK code word for Muslims from the Indian Subcontinent, as UK Hindus and Sikhs rarely commit these type of anti-social crimes.

As in France, Norway, Australia and now the UK, gang rapes against "infidel" women by Muslims seem to be common occurrences.

For some British Muslims Kilroy's Express column provides clear reason to confront UK politics with superior Islamic reasoning. An apology is not the end of this.

His comments are absolutely not about Islam, and far from calling for attacks on Muslims, criticises Arab states for repressing... Muslims! There is no comparison with the gravity of Paulin's remarks, and if the BBC did equate the two it would still be generous to Paulin and unfair to Kilroy. The problem isn't about who each has offended, rather what each has said.

Model4 If you quote someone make sure you get it right.

You never know how much action is needed to get a solid majority to become fully awake.

#24:

I have no sympathy for the Brits complaining about "freedom of speech"...

"We must all hang together, or we'll surely hang separately."

- Benjamin Franklin (allegedly)

Mags,

Just seems they don't reflect the numbers. Like I say, as do many others here, my views which are not rabid or very right-wing have never made it past the censors. The BBC has an interest here, so presenting a flood of support for Kilroy as an even debate is only natural to them. It is a shame that they even considered it an issue, but by misrepresenting public opinion they demonstrate a seditious perseverance that betrays it's fee-paying audience. Maybe I am wrong about the figures, but the evidence plus the substance of what he says, suggests the BBC is really pushing it, again, and again.

British Columnist Stephen Pollard wrote the following on the BBC's lunatic hypocracy:

Talk about double standards (Evening Standard)

It’s difficult thinking of Robert Kilroy-Silk as a victim. Perma-tanned, rich and as smooth as they come, he is about as far from defenceless as it is possible to imagine.

But he has moved beyond mere victimhood. The reaction to his now infamous newspaper column, in which he attacked “loathsome” Arabs for being “suicide bombers, limb-amputators, (and) women repressors”, has turned Mr Kilroy-Silk into something far more significant than a newspaper columnist who used some ill-judged phraseology and incurred the wrath of the BBC in the process.

His treatment has instead become a symbol of the hypocrisy which infects our liberal establishment, and of the double standards which govern the way it operates.

There are some countries and people one can condemn with impunity. But lay into others and you should prepare to be visited by the vengeance of polite society.

Attack America as a genocidal empire bent on world domination and you will be lauded for your sagacity. Argue that Americans as a nation are ignorant and brutal and you will merely be demonstrating your civilised values.

And if you have a truly rounded understanding of the way the world works, you will know that terrorists only resort to terror because they have no alternative. They have no alternative because they are oppressed. And they are oppressed by… aha! The true villain. Not the terrorist, who is merely a product of his environment, but those who cause him to act as he does. And we know who that is. It is, as ninety nine times out of a hundred it always has been, the Jews. It’s the Jews’ fault.

Don’t, of course, say it’s ‘the Jews’. That would be anti-Semitic, and that’s deplorable. Play, instead, the get out of jail free card: it’s the Israelis’ fault. Put it like that and you’ve free rein to rant away. Heh presto! You’re not a raving anti-Semitic bigot but a caring, compassionate liberal, speaking up for victims of Jewish – oops, I meant Israeli – oppression. It’s not the terrorists’ fault they murdered 20 Israelis. They had no choice. And anyway, some of your best friends are Jews.

When the poet Tom Paulin remarked in an interview with an Egyptian newspaper that Jewish settlers in the occupied territories "should be shot dead. I think they are Nazis, racists, I feel nothing but hatred for them”, the reaction – or, rather, lack if it – illustrated perfectly the double standards at work. (He has since claimed that his views have been taken out of context and thus distorted, but he does not deny using those words.) Mr Paulin remains a favoured guest of the BBC and a panellist on the Newsnight Review, just has he did after the publication of his poem, Killed in Crossfire, in which he suggested that the Israeli army deliberately gunned down "little Palestinian boys" and likened it to a "Zionist SS"... (more)

Why is it that "our side" can't put 200,000 people on the street to protest abridgement of free speech, support Israel, condemn terrorism, support the war, demand enforcement of immigration laws, etc.?

ah the guardian. nothing wrong with that paper. no bias at all...except whats up with this story about paul o'neill?

i noticed this particularily obnoxious begining to an article in todays Guardian:

"George Bush's former treasury secretary Paul O'Neill, who is being investigated after publicly criticising the president, denied yesterday that he had taken secret documents. "

[Link: www.guardian.co.uk...]

ahhh, i see. he was attacked for "publicly criticising the President"! ah that george - planning war from the day he became the leader of the free world. i suppose we ought to ignore the cnn story that quotes o'neil saying"

"People are trying to make a case that I said the president was planning war in Iraq early in the administration," O'Neill said.

"Actually, there was a continuation of work that had been going on in the Clinton administration with the notion that there needed to be regime change in Iraq."

[Link: www.cnn.com...]

Why should the BBC (or PBS or NPR for that matter) care what the public thinks? Did the politburo care what people thought? These phone calls are nice, but the only way to make those organizations accountable is to make them accountable to the market, rather than a handful of government bureaucrats and the Marxist professors they studied under in the University.

#109 aesmlue,

Thanks for pointing it out. That particular contortion really sums up the Qu'ardian.

(Perhaps they were thinking of Turkey.)

All day the BBC TV and radio channels have been running as second-lead item the death of the British ISM activist. Running it ahead of important items such as - for example - the House of Commons vote on university fees which could lose Blair his job, and the follow-up to the suicide of the UK doctor who killed over 200 patients. The news of several Israeli soldiers being killed today - the first suicide bombing since Christmas and therefore directly relevant to any moves towards peace - is treated almost as an afterthought.

This is a measure of how steadily and remorselessly the BBC drives its own agenda. Frankly, as a UK citizen, I couldn't care a fig about Tom Hirndall. He took foolish risks, placed himself in harm's way. But I do have a close interest in whether Blair will stand or fall on the education vote, and I am concerned to know how a mass-murderer was able to commit suicide when (maybe) he should have been under closer watch in prison.

Kilroy is under attack for alleged incitement to racial hatred - when his diatribe was about Arab states, not Arabs per se, and had obviously had nil effect since it was originally published last April. But surely the BBC is far more guilty of incitement to racial hatred - it constantly gives implicit support to people and organisations who want to see the end of Israel.

JohninLondon

Thanks John. I also appreciate your comments on the BBC. The BBC has been the most pernicious broadcaster in the last 15 years. For over 10 years I have stopped giving any credence to the BBC, whenever it came to any matter involving Islam. Israel is just a sub-set of this.

I wondered then why the BBC had to come to such a pass. What struck me then, some 10 years ago, is that this virtual Damascene conversion of the BBC occurred at the time of the Lebanese civil war and the Israeli invasion of Lebanon.
It was then that it became clear to the BBC, that its reporters were not safe from the thugs of the PLO, Amal or the multitude of Islamic Jihad groups if it ever gave a fair shot to the Christians in Lebanon or the Israelis. After all its reporters were safe if they criticised the Christians or the Israelis but kidnap or death, if they angered the Islamic thugs. Once such a editorial decision had been made to protect its journalists, it was then difficult to reverse the pro-islamic stance without appearing inconsistent. And so it continues.

I wonder what you think.

DP

I don't know that local conditions for journalists during the Lebanon troubles would convert the entire world-view of the BBC at top level. But yes, maybe pragmatism/cowardice in the Midde East end of the BBC news reporting spread upwards at that time ?

I tend to think it is all part of the LLL nexus running between academia, the Guardianistas (and now the Independent) and BBC recruitment - much of which used to be from Oxford and Cambridge and tainted with the same Arabism as has afflicted the UK Foreign Office for decades.

But even the BBC has now been putting today's homicide bombing at the Gaza border post ahead of the report on the death of the Brit ISM activist. But the latter still got equal time, approximately.

JohninLondon

Maybe a mixture of both.
-----------------------
Now at home, Barnabus fund highlights the increasing frequency of intimidation of vicars in Northern England. Bradford, Oldham etc vicars are finding it difficult to go about their duties due to intimidation from Muslim youths. It is occasionally picked by the local press but the thugs are termed as 'Asian' youths. This is causing anger among Hindus and Sikhs, as their kids are not involved but getting the blame.

There is also the tragic case of a family in N.England that converted from Islam to Christianity, that is receiving regular death threats and has had a couple of arson attacks. When the firecrew arrived, the muslim youths taunted the firemen and the family with "Where is your Jesus now?" and "Bin laden will win". The poilce dont want to take action so as not to hurt muslim feelings and sensitivities.

WHAT HAVE WE COME TO.

Take care in London.

DP

You will no doubt know that there has been serious trouble in the areas you mention - Oldham and Bradford. Those areas look like pressure-cookers - at some point the whole thing could explode. But meanwhile, as you say, the media tend to pussy-foot about describing some of the trouble-makers as Asian Muslims.