|
|
Post by Red Rackham on Sept 9, 2024 10:16:17 GMT
Yes and do you really think an Israeli lawyer is the best person to shape the BBC's output to be in the service of the ones who pay for it? I understand we don't get funding for the BBC from the Israeli licence payer, so my advice to him is to fuck off. Trevor Asserson is a very highly regarded lawyer, and the research for this report was compiled by a team of 20 lawyers and 20 data scientists and is being taken seriously by everyone (Apart from Ofcom obviously) including the BBC. |
|
|
|
Post by Baron von Lotsov on Sept 9, 2024 10:38:07 GMT
Yes and do you really think an Israeli lawyer is the best person to shape the BBC's output to be in the service of the ones who pay for it? I understand we don't get funding for the BBC from the Israeli licence payer, so my advice to him is to fuck off. Trevor Asserson is a very highly regarded lawyer, and the research for this report was compiled by a team of 20 lawyers and 20 data scientists and is being taken seriously by everyone (Apart from Ofcom obviously) including the BBC. Yes of course it is. That's what I have come to expect from the Jewish federation.
To paraphrase The Prisoner I expect it to be "pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed or numbered or tabulated"
Sly bastards are often highly regarded by other sly bastards, so reputation is a relative thing.
And after deconstructing that, what are we left with. It's just a small matter of who pays for 20 lawyers and 20 'data scientists' (sic) and why.
Over on youtube I express an opinion that basically goes, we should ignore this conflict and it is harming us by crowding out our airwaves. This is my opinion which I am permitted to express under my Article 10 human rights, but another sly bastard deleted it within half an hour. It was not the channel owner either. They have teams of these cretins censoring our free speech so this is why they can fuck right off. They are engineering our thoughts. You are being played. The BBC should only be accountable to the license payer. But hey, guess what. The average licence payer gets fobbed off if they contact the BBC.
|
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Sept 9, 2024 15:33:38 GMT
How can he impose Israeli will on the British people? He has no authority over the BBC and the report is independent of the BBC as far as I can see. The British people expect the BBC to report without bias and as such the reporting from Gaza should be balanced. It is strange you wish me to ignore a Jewish output because it is Jewish but wish me to base my reconsideration on an Arab channel output.. Many countries throughout the world try to impose their will onto the British people I would think Arab nations and Israel are no exception to that. The BBC should not be part of that game which is not an easy path to follow but so far they seem to be making a right pig's ear of it and seemingly reporting with a degree of bias unbecoming of them and their supposed adherence to editorial impartiality. The documentary on Labour could probably not legally be made in this country. It is hot material. It is not propaganda because it is largely interviews with those who are inside Labour. It's just what happened and is it totally fucking shoddy. Watching that could have told you what Starmer was going to be like. There are no other documentaries with is information. You either watch it or remain stupid. This is why it is in no way strange when you know what I'm talking about. Aslo chack this guy's wiki page. There is more background on him. He's not a normal lawyer. He's a political lawyer. Shooting the messenger does not change the message. So we have to consider the accuracy of the message and it seems to have been a fairly easy comparison study. The BBC could of course say no you are wrong but they appear not to have done that. What ails the Labour party is nothing new there has been some pretty dirty political infighting to my recollection ever since the Heath/Benn deputy leadership competition. Why you would think this is something new is beyond me. I have watched lies come out of some of the party heavyweights for years and just because in this instance it favours your point of view does not make it any less frequent. There are many political lawyers, I am not clear why that negates his work. He has an axe to grind if the BBC provide the grindstone that is their lookout and largely not a surprise. |
|
|
|
Post by Red Rackham on Sept 9, 2024 16:49:56 GMT
Just for interest, Trevor Asserson, the lawyer behind this excellent BBC bias report is being interviewed by Sir Jacob Rees-Mogg on GB News, 8pm to 9pm this evening.
|
|
|
|
Post by patman post on Sept 9, 2024 17:43:29 GMT
Just for interest, Trevor Asserson, the lawyer behind this excellent BBC bias report is being interviewed by Sir Jacob Rees-Mogg on GB News, 8pm to 9pm this evening. You must be salivating already at the prospect of having your tummy tickled for an hour… |
|
|
|
Post by Baron von Lotsov on Sept 9, 2024 18:27:50 GMT
The documentary on Labour could probably not legally be made in this country. It is hot material. It is not propaganda because it is largely interviews with those who are inside Labour. It's just what happened and is it totally fucking shoddy. Watching that could have told you what Starmer was going to be like. There are no other documentaries with is information. You either watch it or remain stupid. This is why it is in no way strange when you know what I'm talking about. Aslo chack this guy's wiki page. There is more background on him. He's not a normal lawyer. He's a political lawyer. Shooting the messenger does not change the message. So we have to consider the accuracy of the message and it seems to have been a fairly easy comparison study. The BBC could of course say no you are wrong but they appear not to have done that. What ails the Labour party is nothing new there has been some pretty dirty political infighting to my recollection ever since the Heath/Benn deputy leadership competition. Why you would think this is something new is beyond me. I have watched lies come out of some of the party heavyweights for years and just because in this instance it favours your point of view does not make it any less frequent. There are many political lawyers, I am not clear why that negates his work. He has an axe to grind if the BBC provide the grindstone that is their lookout and largely not a surprise. What they did was illegal. Nothing has been done about it though. We're onto the 2 tier malarkey yet again. |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Sept 9, 2024 19:20:21 GMT
Shooting the messenger does not change the message. So we have to consider the accuracy of the message and it seems to have been a fairly easy comparison study. The BBC could of course say no you are wrong but they appear not to have done that. What ails the Labour party is nothing new there has been some pretty dirty political infighting to my recollection ever since the Heath/Benn deputy leadership competition. Why you would think this is something new is beyond me. I have watched lies come out of some of the party heavyweights for years and just because in this instance it favours your point of view does not make it any less frequent. There are many political lawyers, I am not clear why that negates his work. He has an axe to grind if the BBC provide the grindstone that is their lookout and largely not a surprise. What they did was illegal. Nothing has been done about it though. We're onto the 2 tier malarkey yet again. Legality is for a court to decide, if Labour members are concerned about their Constitution being ignored and UK political rules broken then the court is the place to make the legal decision. If not it is legal. |
|
|
|
Post by Red Rackham on Sept 9, 2024 19:56:56 GMT
Did anyone watch the Trevor Asserson interview? It was very interesting (Assuming you're blessed with an IQ in double figures)
Who'd of thought BBC Arabic gets their information from Iran? And UK licence fee payers are paying for it. The BBC should be closed down, now.
|
|
|
|
Post by Baron von Lotsov on Sept 9, 2024 20:08:00 GMT
What they did was illegal. Nothing has been done about it though. We're onto the 2 tier malarkey yet again. Legality is for a court to decide, if Labour members are concerned about their Constitution being ignored and UK political rules broken then the court is the place to make the legal decision. If not it is legal. Indeed, it is a matter for the courts. I mean there are many regulators that could have taken an interest, and one is called the Parliamentary Standards Committee. I felt sorry for the Labour activists, because anyone trying to blow the whistle on this Mafia-like operation was hung out to dry. Corbyn did take legal action, but it is damn expensive and their favourite trick is to pad the case out for so long that the prosecuting side runs out of money, like if you are playing the money markets, it is called a margin call, which basically means the two teams of lawyers have run up a bill of more than you can afford, and you have to pay the money into the court.
I can't quite recall what happened in Corbyn's case, but I seems to recall they played dirty. Now if that were the way Labour's freinds of Israel treat their so-called friends, it really makes me wonder who this guy we speak of has connections to. I don't know him from Adam so can't say what he is, except to me he looks like a certain type of lawyer who applies undue influence on institutions which are supposed to be democratic. The BBC is supposed to be for all those who fund it. Lawyers in general take the piss anyway. The often-used logo of the profession is the balanced scales, but balanced in the Orwellian sense in practice. I've employed lawyers on many occasions and know my way around the scene somewhat. Statistically I believe only about one in ten is a decent honest lawyer. They do exist, but there are many more sharks. Law is often abused in courts. |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Sept 10, 2024 8:25:28 GMT
Legality is for a court to decide, if Labour members are concerned about their Constitution being ignored and UK political rules broken then the court is the place to make the legal decision. If not it is legal. Indeed, it is a matter for the courts. I mean there are many regulators that could have taken an interest, and one is called the Parliamentary Standards Committee. I felt sorry for the Labour activists, because anyone trying to blow the whistle on this Mafia-like operation was hung out to dry. Corbyn did take legal action, but it is damn expensive and their favourite trick is to pad the case out for so long that the prosecuting side runs out of money, like if you are playing the money markets, it is called a margin call, which basically means the two teams of lawyers have run up a bill of more than you can afford, and you have to pay the money into the court.
I can't quite recall what happened in Corbyn's case, but I seems to recall they played dirty. Now if that were the way Labour's freinds of Israel treat their so-called friends, it really makes me wonder who this guy we speak of has connections to. I don't know him from Adam so can't say what he is, except to me he looks like a certain type of lawyer who applies undue influence on institutions which are supposed to be democratic. The BBC is supposed to be for all those who fund it. Lawyers in general take the piss anyway. The often-used logo of the profession is the balanced scales, but balanced in the Orwellian sense in practice. I've employed lawyers on many occasions and know my way around the scene somewhat. Statistically I believe only about one in ten is a decent honest lawyer. They do exist, but there are many more sharks. Law is often abused in courts. In general terms I agree however that is the system we are stuck with and as for lawyers my own experience with them is pretty unpleasant. I have little sympathy for Corbyn as he was quite happy to use similar tactics in his many interests as regards antifa and antiracism by smearing those he disliked and allowing lies and innuendo to rule the debate as well as low level violence. He agreed those he stood against were illegitimate in the political sphere and as such open to all sorts of effective action. When you ride in the rodeo occasionally you will get trampled |
|
|
|
Post by Baron von Lotsov on Sept 10, 2024 9:17:05 GMT
Indeed, it is a matter for the courts. I mean there are many regulators that could have taken an interest, and one is called the Parliamentary Standards Committee. I felt sorry for the Labour activists, because anyone trying to blow the whistle on this Mafia-like operation was hung out to dry. Corbyn did take legal action, but it is damn expensive and their favourite trick is to pad the case out for so long that the prosecuting side runs out of money, like if you are playing the money markets, it is called a margin call, which basically means the two teams of lawyers have run up a bill of more than you can afford, and you have to pay the money into the court.
I can't quite recall what happened in Corbyn's case, but I seems to recall they played dirty. Now if that were the way Labour's freinds of Israel treat their so-called friends, it really makes me wonder who this guy we speak of has connections to. I don't know him from Adam so can't say what he is, except to me he looks like a certain type of lawyer who applies undue influence on institutions which are supposed to be democratic. The BBC is supposed to be for all those who fund it. Lawyers in general take the piss anyway. The often-used logo of the profession is the balanced scales, but balanced in the Orwellian sense in practice. I've employed lawyers on many occasions and know my way around the scene somewhat. Statistically I believe only about one in ten is a decent honest lawyer. They do exist, but there are many more sharks. Law is often abused in courts. In general terms I agree however that is the system we are stuck with and as for lawyers my own experience with them is pretty unpleasant. I have little sympathy for Corbyn as he was quite happy to use similar tactics in his many interests as regards antifa and antiracism by smearing those he disliked and allowing lies and innuendo to rule the debate as well as low level violence. He agreed those he stood against were illegitimate in the political sphere and as such open to all sorts of effective action. When you ride in the rodeo occasionally you will get trampled Sure there were warning signs with Corbyn, but if you support democracy, I think the point of the Labour Files was to say the leader the party and its supporters wanted was thrown out by criminal force. This is what stinks about Starmer's appointment. I hear his wife is a Jew as well. Actually I have not watched the whole series the company produced on this, just the first one so I can't say how Starmer connects to it, but it is obvious to me he was the one Labour Friend's of Israel were trying to install. They should be in prison. We now have an unelected tyrant. The Labour Party should tell the bastard that he either rules according to what the party wants or to get out. If they don't sling or reform him they will all lose their seats next time around and chances are Reform will pick up over 100 seats if Reform and thei 5 MPs perform well for the next 5 years. That should be enough to scare them. If you don't compromise on immigration the country will swing solidly agaisnt it with a vengeance. |
|
|
|
Post by Rebirth on Sept 10, 2024 12:55:46 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Sept 11, 2024 8:10:09 GMT
In general terms I agree however that is the system we are stuck with and as for lawyers my own experience with them is pretty unpleasant. I have little sympathy for Corbyn as he was quite happy to use similar tactics in his many interests as regards antifa and antiracism by smearing those he disliked and allowing lies and innuendo to rule the debate as well as low level violence. He agreed those he stood against were illegitimate in the political sphere and as such open to all sorts of effective action. When you ride in the rodeo occasionally you will get trampled Sure there were warning signs with Corbyn, but if you support democracy, I think the point of the Labour Files was to say the leader the party and its supporters wanted was thrown out by criminal force. This is what stinks about Starmer's appointment. I hear his wife is a Jew as well. Actually I have not watched the whole series the company produced on this, just the first one so I can't say how Starmer connects to it, but it is obvious to me he was the one Labour Friend's of Israel were trying to install. They should be in prison. We now have an unelected tyrant. The Labour Party should tell the bastard that he either rules according to what the party wants or to get out. If they don't sling or reform him they will all lose their seats next time around and chances are Reform will pick up over 100 seats if Reform and thei 5 MPs perform well for the next 5 years. That should be enough to scare them. If you don't compromise on immigration the country will swing solidly agaisnt it with a vengeance. The EHRC found Labour guilty of unlawful activity as regards anti-semitism. Now the EHRC is not the Labour party and is an independent watchdog as regards the equality act. Are you saying the supporters want anti-semitism and if they do that is what they should get. Personally I have no faith in the EHRC due to biased, skewed and inaccurate reports but at least they were not the Labour party |
|
|
|
Post by Baron von Lotsov on Sept 11, 2024 8:25:07 GMT
Sure there were warning signs with Corbyn, but if you support democracy, I think the point of the Labour Files was to say the leader the party and its supporters wanted was thrown out by criminal force. This is what stinks about Starmer's appointment. I hear his wife is a Jew as well. Actually I have not watched the whole series the company produced on this, just the first one so I can't say how Starmer connects to it, but it is obvious to me he was the one Labour Friend's of Israel were trying to install. They should be in prison. We now have an unelected tyrant. The Labour Party should tell the bastard that he either rules according to what the party wants or to get out. If they don't sling or reform him they will all lose their seats next time around and chances are Reform will pick up over 100 seats if Reform and thei 5 MPs perform well for the next 5 years. That should be enough to scare them. If you don't compromise on immigration the country will swing solidly agaisnt it with a vengeance. The EHRC found Labour guilty of unlawful activity as regards anti-semitism. Now the EHRC is not the Labour party and is an independent watchdog as regards the equality act. Are you saying the supporters want anti-semitism and if they do that is what they should get. Personally I have no faith in the EHRC due to biased, skewed and inaccurate reports but at least they were not the Labour party Yes but there were also a load of other party activists who were set up for things they did not do. This is what happens when you get caught up with political lawyer Jews. They are talented lawyers, but use their brains to fuck people. They have the morals of a pig and this was clearly shown in their actions. If there is anti Semitism it is justified. Simply what has happened is these were all working for Israeli Jews so they cast themselves as Semites, they totally fucked over good decent and honest people, like those just helping promote Labour on the door steps and these people rightly were furious with them, hence the bastards set them up as anti-semites. It's bollox, since there is no equivalent charge of anti Brits. Why the fuck do Semites feel they should be above the law? If the scales are not balanced the law means shit, and it does in this case. I know how it is to get stitched up by lawyers. I've been in the hot seat. They lied to do it. They perverted the course of justice. This is why it is criminal. |
|
