"If a member of the public sees anyone acting suspiciously in or around a military base it should be reported to the police as a matter of urgency." I mean, just because we're always seeing 'smirking' Russians 'skulking' around all the time doesn't mean we're paranoid. It would be hilarious were it not so bloody ridiculous. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-46420486 And trust the stupid Beeb to believe it?
Actually it seems that the BBC is talking about a Daily Mail report of Russian skulking and the subsequent response: If you want to get your knickers in a twist then why not get angry at the Daily Mail (who ran the story) or the MOD (if you think there was a gross overreaction) instead of the BBC's factual report of the events ?
Kindly don't lecture me on how to formulate my posts. Thank you! If you don't like 'em then don't effing read 'em??
I just find it interesting that the object of your criticism seemed to be the BBC when the initial report was from the Daily Mail and the MOD seems to have responded to the perceived threat by taking action. The BBC just seem to be reporting what happened and the MOD response. What should they have done, ignored it altogether ?
Look, you obviously haven't noticed that the BBC has become the mouthpiece of central government, and at the government's behest is busy infantilising the nation. The BBC's mission statement used to be 'to inform, educate, and entertain', when all it really does is 'dissemble/brainwash, dumb down, and entertain with mindless drivel like Strictly, BGT, Get me out of the jungle' ****, weekly red-carpet awards crap, and chewing-gum-for-the-brain wall-to-wall sport. In short, I loathe the BBC for what it's doing to my country.
All of the above is just your opinion and, of course you're quite wrong about: Britain's Got Talent - that's ITV I'm a Celebrity, get me out of here - that's ITV as well ITV does most of the awards ceremony coverage too ....and if you think that the BBC has wall-to-wall sports coverage - compare the level of coverage now to any "golden age" and I think you'll find it much diminished these days. I think you have commercial TV and the BBC confused in your mind. As for your repeated claims of infantilisation - they inevitably lead back to the tabloid press (as on this occasion where the initial report was from teh Daily Mail). What bits of the report are you critical of ? That the Daily Mail reported it - that's a matter of record That the MOD, for whatever reason, issued guidance - that's a matter of record too If you think the MOD overreacted then your beef is with them, not the BBC.
But the the BBC has become the tabloid press, can't you understand that? And the BBC reports what government orders it to report, hence why it's still obsessing about effing Skripal every bloody day.
I don't understand it because it simply is not true. The editorial standards at the BBC are far higher. Do you have any evidence to support this assertion ? ....except it isn't. There's very little on the BBC website about it, and reports are largely absent from the news - except when there is something new from the investigation. You, on the other hand, do seem obsessed by it.
<Rule 2> we're not referring to editorial standards (news broadcasting), it's more to do with entertainment schedules. <Rule 2> delete Britain's Got Talent, I'm a Celebrity, get me out of here, and insert Dr Who, The Great British Bake-off, and Eastenders. I'll have to take your word that ITV does more luvvies awards shows though, because I haven't watched ITV for quite a number of years - I have more self-respect than to subject myself to its mindless drivel. (which BBC1 tries desperately to match? lol) DUH! If you followed BBC news broadcasts, radio and tv, you wouldn't need to ask that question because you'd see the 'evidence' for yourself. And there's plenty of it! Except it is!!! It's raised every bloody time this appalling excuse for a government wants to have yet another poke at Russia/Putin, whether there's anything new or not. I can't believe I'm having to point all this out to an apparently intelligent individual.
The Great British Bake off is now on Channel 4 - please do keep up. The BBC also has a requirement to entertain as well as inform. Indeed there is a requirement for the BBC to have a Saturday night "variety" entertainment programme (which was the catalyst for Strictly Come Dancing all those years ago - though no-one thought it would be that successful). I'm not entirely sure what kind of programmes you want the BBC to be putting on prime-time. The various free to air channels provide all kinds of content and when you add in iPlayer I'm not sure what you think is missing. Argument by assertion is no kind of argument at all, you need to provide some kind of evidence to support your claim. No doubt you think that repeated government complaints about anti-government BBC bias is merely a cover up for the "truth". I'm not clear where your pro-Russian sentiments come from.
Same thing, different gravy! Yes, to entertain adults not low-IQ retards? Yes, to inform with the truth, not parrot government spin I can't think why. Maybe they thought it was so ridiculous that not even the Great Gormless British tv viewers would go for it. But how wrong they were?? Anything aimed at an audience with at least an average IQ. And how about thought-provoking? To stimulate the brain rather than turn it into mush. Try and get around to watching Harrison Bergeron and you'll see where I'm coming from. I'll answer that with a question - do you believe the Skripal story, yes or no?? They aren't so much pro-Russian as anti-West, and that's because of the provocative sabre-rattling of the West towards a country which is offering no global threat whatsoever - and furthermore whose support we'll need when global Islam get its ass into second gear.
Thanks very much, TD - I guess it's subjective, and as I've got a thick skin I tend to think everyone has. Actually I like discussing with you.
I just think that if you want to criticise the BBC for their content, you should pick programmes they show. I mean there's plenty of "filler" in the schedule to pick from IMO. You seem to think that things you like are, by definition, high quality and worth watching and those that you don't are mindless twaddle. You might not be shocked that other people don't share your views. You also seem to want to replace what you consider government indoctrination with cerberus indoctrination You seem to have a specific, fixed, world view. Anything that challenges that world view is simply dismissed. If I thought for one moment that you were interested, I'd tell you but as you clearly aren't I shan't waste my time. There's plenty of thought provoking stuff on the BBC. You just dismiss it because it doesn't fit your specific and very narrow definition of worthy. False dichotomy to which I will respond with my own - do you believe the Russian version of the Skirpal story ? I see you've swallowed the US's "Islam is the biggest threat to the world" story hook, line and sinker.... I suppose it's one way to ensure permanent war, to select a religion where 15% of the world's population are adherents as your enemy. It's a really good enemy as well because while it's easy to point out how ramshackle the Russian military is (though they do seem able to punch well above their weight in terms of international influence), fear of an entire religion is far more abstract and difficult to pin down. Just because your Muslim neighbours appear to be happy members of the community, it doesn't mean they're not planning to suddenly implement Sharia law
No problem. Until you drew my attention to it, I had no idea that some content had been snipped for Rule 2.
Yes I do believe the Russian version; unfortunately I believe the Russian government more than I believe any western one, where outright and shameless lying to their electorates seems to be the order of the day. I'm surprised that you haven't noticed that? I'm a very intelligent man and don't swallow anything I read unless I concur with it, which in this case, radical Islam is indubitably the biggest threat to the world. I actually became convinced when I analyzed it 2 decades ago. And finally, ordinary Muslims will be as obedient as the rest of us when Sharia is implemented; the difference is that they'll be ready for it, and embrace it just the same as we'll have to - except for those who won't mind being decapitated for declining the 'invitation'. I know I haven't addressed all your points but I'm still handicapped by having to wear this bloody finger stall, so don't have my usual typing ability.
I'm not surprised at your healthy scepticism of the official government line but I do find your willingness to accept the Russian version bewildering. ...the kind of statement that Dunning-Kruger was developed for The idea that Sharia law would be implemented in Western democracies is ridiculous. The fact that a self-proclaimed very intelligent man believes this to be the case IMO demonstrates how effective the anti-Islam Western (and in particular US) propaganda has been. "They" want to keep us afraid - Islam is an excellent bogeyman to keep us fearing "others" so we don't question our leaders too much. It used to be "reds under the beds" I guess now it's "Jihadis who are the baddies"
I love the Russian culture. I don't know who he is and care even less. That's an extremely naive point of view; when you've finished watching Harrison Bergeron, watch Bitter Lake, and learn about Wahhabism, then come back and tell me you're not scared. I assure you that those 'reds' under the beds are pussycats compared to militant Islam.
I'm not sure about the mouthpiece of central government especially when Laura and gang deliver their views on life in Westminster....which I think is my issue with the BBC in that they can shove their analysis where the sun doesn't shine and stick to reporting the facts, rather than listening to them delivering their interpretation of their own analysis. Take Euronews, admittedly not exactly the most mind stretching of chanels', but at least they stick to a factual narrative of what has happened without trying to spin or re-interpret events into a pre-defined editorial bias. ...yeah...I think the issue is the audience...it must be aimed at a broad spectrum of viewers who like easily digestible soundbites without actually having to work through the issues. The radio 4 is the better(ish) outlet for news. I'm of the opinion that the BBC has commercial TV confused in its mind...its trying to be all things to everyone and thus missing on most fronts... Anyway you guys carry on...
