Active Users:277 Time:21/05/2024 09:38:09 AM
Back to Messageboard Post New Thread Search Help Stats Rules
umm ok *NM* Aisha Send a noteboard - 15/07/2010 10:03:37 PM
On Tuesday 3 UK soldiers were killed by a rogue Afghan soldier.

On Thursday, the BBC is proud to announce it's exclusive interview with the man responsible (they think, since they can't actually confirm anything, that'd require actual proper journalism). Read how the BBC becomes the mouthpiece for the Taliban, and accusations of the slaughter of children and civilians, thereby justifying his very act.

Way to go BBC, truly you have plumbed the depths this time, bravo, you must be proud.
Aisha - formerly known as randschicka
Reply to message
BBC News Sells it's Soul - If it ever had one... Wibble - 15/07/2010 09:50:52 PM 1004 Views
umm ok *NM* Aisha - 15/07/2010 10:03:37 PM 257 Views
wow that's low... *NM* ironclad - 15/07/2010 10:18:28 PM 227 Views
That doesn't... seem that weird? nossy - 15/07/2010 10:40:58 PM 572 Views
Looks like they're trying their best to uphold journalistic integrity in the face of public opinion lord-of-shadow - 15/07/2010 10:54:00 PM 646 Views
In fact, having now read the link a bit better... I think this is good journalism. I applaud it. lord-of-shadow - 15/07/2010 10:57:35 PM 664 Views
thats what i took away form that article Aisha - 15/07/2010 11:13:02 PM 555 Views
I suspect it is the line of thought that says giving terrorists airtime is justifying their actions. *NM* Ghavrel - 15/07/2010 11:32:37 PM 216 Views
That's what I disliked about it, yes *NM* ironclad - 15/07/2010 11:42:53 PM 230 Views
i wonder if the same logic applies to giving air time to white supremacist Aisha - 16/07/2010 02:37:43 AM 503 Views
I don't like that line of thought. Nate - 16/07/2010 02:44:41 AM 680 Views
I was going to say this*: nossy - 16/07/2010 02:47:37 AM 543 Views
The amount of newsworthy information in that article was close to zero, though ironclad - 16/07/2010 10:16:56 AM 509 Views
Perhaps you read a different article then? snoopcester - 16/07/2010 11:19:04 AM 503 Views
I agree snoopcester - 16/07/2010 11:16:25 AM 472 Views
its, not it's. i thought you were talking about the site format, which now sucks. temeraire - 16/07/2010 06:36:23 AM 526 Views
Sorry I just don't see what is upsetting you with this article random thoughts - 16/07/2010 03:12:24 PM 562 Views
You just agreed with snoopcester about something. nossy - 16/07/2010 08:07:15 PM 484 Views
well hell really hasn't frozen over yet random thoughts - 16/07/2010 11:14:31 PM 656 Views
I'd rather have an unbiased source of information BlackAdder - 17/07/2010 12:19:39 AM 580 Views
Ditto snoopcester - 17/07/2010 12:28:39 AM 481 Views
that is funny coming from the guy who reads the Guardian random thoughts - 17/07/2010 03:12:05 PM 446 Views
I'd guess I actually spend more time reading the Daily Telegraph snoopcester - 17/07/2010 04:15:43 PM 447 Views
Whoa nossy - 17/07/2010 08:59:35 PM 592 Views
Not at me, surely. I'm adorable. *NM* Ghavrel - 17/07/2010 10:07:15 PM 227 Views
Pft, evil most often hides behind "adorable." *NM* nossy - 17/07/2010 10:34:22 PM 199 Views
you wouldn't know an unbiased source if it bit you random thoughts - 17/07/2010 03:09:46 PM 472 Views
"loony left"? BlackAdder - 17/07/2010 11:40:41 PM 518 Views
Sorry man. everynametaken - 16/07/2010 11:54:38 PM 461 Views
Back to Messageboard Post New Thread Search Help Stats Rules

Reply to Message

Formatting
Smiley Codes