According to the BBC...

[DanS]

There's no way of telling, by reading or listening to the BBC, however. Their reporting is always hystrionic, so it's tough to tell how serious of a situation he really is in. If they're always shouting, nobody will know when they're really serious.

The FT has shown much better judgement in this regard.

[Solly]

Their online website also seems very immature.

Consider these articles;

For a political article about the vice Prime Minister, abysmally childish. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/2968074.stm

Count the one-sentence paragraphs. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3029253.stm

[Dauphin]

A full 54% of Americans don't care whether WMD are ever found.

I'm in this 54%, as I think it would be useful to clip the wings slightly of the neoconservatives in this administration

How does not caring clip their wings?

[Solly]

We shouldn't be wasting resources now merely to find these weapons to prove to the electorate that we were right. Typical liberals, wanting government wastage at every level.

Now, if there was a national security issue, that would be different.

[FrustratedPoet]

Originally posted by Boddington's
We shouldn't be wasting resources now merely to find these weapons to prove to the electorate that we were right.

Of course we should be trying to find them. If there is a load of nuclear or chemical weaponry out in the desert somewhere don't you think it would be a good idea to find it before the bad guys do? We don't want to leave that **** just lying around the place.

In fact, the best reason to support searching for the WOMD is if you believe they are really there.

[Kropotkin]

Yeah, that's the spirit bodds. Reality shouldn't be in the way of a sound foreign policy!

[Solly]

"Now, if there was a national security issue, that would be different."

[Kropotkin]

Damn it, I posted in the wrong thread!

[Cruddy]

Originally posted by Boddington's
We shouldn't be wasting resources now merely to find these weapons to prove to the electorate that we were right. Typical liberals, wanting government wastage at every level.

Now, if there was a national security issue, that would be different.

OH, I see. So these WMD that are so lethal they "MUST NOT FALL INTO THE HANDS OF TERRORISTS" can safely be left scattered over Iraq, can they.

Not a security issue? What are you talking about?

Of course it's embarrassing for the govt to be shown to be pawns of the US - why shouldn't they wriggle?

If they can't stand the heat, they should get out of the kitchen.

[Solly]

Is my second paragraph invisible to you all or something?

[Jaguar]

If they're gonna use the word "tabloid" so freely, they should use it to describe the Guardian.

[FrustratedPoet]

Originally posted by Boddington's
Is my second paragraph invisible to you all or something?

I saw it, and noticed that it contains the phrase "if there was", which suggests that you don't believe there is currently a national security issue.

[Cruddy]

Originally posted by Boddington's

Explain to me why they criticise the BNP, a party doing all it can for British people, a lot more than they criticise Galloway, a man doing all he can to give state secrets and support to Saddam Hussein?

Because the BNP is a racist orgranisation stuffed with Nazi boot boys who deserve shooting.

Doing all it can for British people? Well, WHITE British people obviously. It's amazing how few non-WHITE members they have... Or is it that amazing?

Shooting? Nah, waste of a bullet. Ropes are reusable. Or maybe we should just cut their tongues out to save them spreading their linguistic poison. Now there's a trick the Iraqis could teach us.

As you can tell, the BNP get treated very lightly by the BBC considering what a lot of British people want to do to them.

[Solly]

BNP? Racist? No.

Q: Where do you stand on racial attacks?

A: Racist attacks are wrong, plain and simple. The majority of racist attacks in this country are committed against white British people, contrary to the image that the anti-British mass media portray. If a race-attack takes place, and the victim is black or Asian, the result is an endless media circus, howls of condemnation against the perpetrators, and more calls for repressive crusades against supposed ‘racism’. If a race-attack takes place, and the victim is white, the result is usually total silence. No condemnation, no media fanfare, total silence. By contrast, the BNP condemns all racial attacks, including those on non-whites. It is not the fault of individuals that they are in our country, and the answer to the problems caused by mass immigration must be solved by democratic political change, not by violence.

-------

Q: The politicians and the media call the BNP "racist"? Is this true?

A: No. "Racism" is when you ‘hate’ another ethnic group. We don't 'hate' black people, we don't 'hate' Asians, we don't oppose any ethnic group for what God made them, they have a right to their own identity as much as we do, all we want to do is to preserve the ethnic and cultural identity of the British people. We want the same human rights as everyone else, a right to a homeland, security, identity, democracy and freedom. We are not against immigrants as individuals. We are against a system which imports cheap labour regardless of the wishes of the host population. The British people were never asked if they wanted a multi-cultural society, immigration was forced on us undemocratically and against the clear wishes of the majority.

My editing: small font is complete bollocks, I'll agree to that.

But there's no racism there.

I think this is the fifth time I've had to copy that to prove someone here wrong.

[Bugs ****ing Bunny]

Q: When you talk about being "British" what do you mean?


A: We mean the bonds of culture, race, identity and roots of the native British peoples of the British Isles. We have lived in these islands near on 40,000 years! We were made by these islands, and these islands are our home. When we in the BNP talk about being British, we talk about the native peoples who have lived in these islands since before the Stone Age, and the relatively small numbers of peoples of almost identical stock, such as the Saxons, Vikings and Normans, and the Irish, who have come here and assimilated.

Q: Why are you against mixed-raced relationships?


A: We are against mixed-raced relationships because we believe that all species and races of life on this planet are beautiful and must be preserved. When whites take partners from other ethnic groups, a white family line that stretches back into deep pre-history is destroyed. And, of course, the same is true of the non-white side. We want generations that spring from us to be the same as us, look like us, and be moved by the same things as us. We feel that to preserve the rich tapestry of mankind, we must preserve ethnic differences, not ‘mish-mash’ them together

Q: What about unemployment, jobs and free trade?


A: The BNP calls for the selective exclusion of foreign goods from British markets and the reduction of foreign imports. We will ensure that as many as possible of our manufactured goods are produced in British factories, employing British workers. If this were done, unemployment in this country would be brought to an end, and good, well-paid employment would flourish, at last getting our people back to work. We deplore the degree to which Britain's industry, commerce, land and other assets have been allowed to fall into the hands of foreign owners. We are pledged to ensure that all vital national assets are restored to British ownership. We also call for preference in the job market to be given to native Britons

Q: What is the BNP's policy in regard to homosexuality?


A: We believe that homosexuality is unhealthy for any community.

A few more from their website.

Then again, given Griffin's involvement with the NF and the fact that he was still giving an enthusiastic "Sieg Heil" a few years ago, I'm not inclined to take his new cuddly face seriously. My bull**** detector objects.