The bbc, again.

Wisbech Eagle said:
So what!

You need to look at the whole picture, of his attitude and words in the days and weeks prior, of what he said in total during the speech, but also what he didn’t say! Then look at what he did as the mob broke into the Capitol and threatened the people there, forcing them to take refuge and fear for their lives. He just watched. It wasn’t until late in the day he, under pressure from Ivanka, he told them it was enough and they should go home.

Was that really “cheering our brave senators and congressmen and women” or were those words just thrown in to prepare some plausible deniability?

Did he try to calm the mob and reassure them that democracy must always be respected?

So did the editing portray the reality of his actions, or not?

The answer will depend on how you view Trump. It’s not absolute.
Click to expand...

So it's all about subjective feelings and a hysterical, selfish reaction to not getting one's own way.

This is how women behave. This is a woman's attitude toward things.
 
Teddy Eagle said:
And with great success. He's really on the ropes after 9 years of posting to people who can't vote for him.
Click to expand...
I have become increasingly aware that it’s less him alone, dangerously disturbed though he is. It’s those behind him, manipulating and driving him. The people behind Project 2025 and Stephen Miller, who is as obsessed with anti immigration sentiment as anyone posting here, and Peter Theil, the tech multi billionaire who is against the whole principle of democracy.

They have terrorised Congress, threatened critics with huge defamation suits which their targets don’t have the resources to defend, and are also seeking retribution on all who did their jobs in trying to resist this.

Yet many here continue to be in denial of this and think it’s just me. People need to wake up!
 
McAhuna said:
That is clearly indefensible by the BBC, and far more serious then just editing out the waffle.
Click to expand...
I’m afraid the BBC aren’t the only broadcaster that likes to bend the truth. My facts are sketchy on this but I seem to recall that the US stations were quick to quote Trump saying to one of the coloured women politicians that she should go to Africa to sort out their problems. They omitted the last part of his sentence which continued with: and then come back and tell us how it’s done. All the news channels reported was that Trump had told a coloured woman to go to Africa. I have a sketchy memory of this tho.
 
McAhuna said:
That is clearly indefensible by the BBC, and far more serious then just editing out the waffle.
Click to expand...
Yes, it is. And raises questions about how many other news stories have been edited to convey a message other than the truth?
In expectation of the response that newspapers have a political position - no one has to pay the Daily Mail so they can read the Guardian.
 
McAhuna said:
My comment that mods should edit the posts was tongue in cheek given the thread topic.

But I agree with what you say. I haven't blocked anyone.
But I find it amusing that Wisbech liked the above post, after announcing he was blocking me for hurty words. 🤣
Click to expand...
I shall wear his liked comment with pride. Kinda made my day. Lol
 
Nicholas91 said:
So it's all about subjective feelings and a hysterical, selfish reaction to not getting one's own way.

This is how women behave. This is a woman's attitude toward things.
Click to expand...
Not in any way.

I don’t speak for the programme makers or can see inside their heads but what I see is an attempt to tell the real story. Not the one that Trump wanted you to believe.
 
Wisbech Eagle said:
I have become increasingly aware that it’s less him alone, dangerously disturbed though he is. It’s those behind him, manipulating and driving him. The people behind Project 2025 and Stephen Miller, who is as obsessed with anti immigration sentiment as anyone posting here, and Peter Theil, the tech multi billionaire who is against the whole principle of democracy.

They have terrorised Congress, threatened critics with huge defamation suits which their targets don’t have the resources to defend, and are also seeking retribution on all who did their jobs in trying to resist this.

Yet many here continue to be in denial of this and think it’s just me. People need to wake up!
Click to expand...
who is against the whole principle of democracy.
I think you’ll find that the current Labour government is the same…
 
Teddy Eagle said:
Yes, it is. And raises questions about how many other news stories have been edited to convey a message other than the truth?
In expectation of the response that newspapers have a political position - no one has to pay the Daily Mail so they can read the Guardian.
Click to expand...
No one has to watch Panorama either.

They can come and read the HoL if they choose to.
 
Wisbech Eagle said:
I have become increasingly aware that it’s less him alone, dangerously disturbed though he is. It’s those behind him, manipulating and driving him. The people behind Project 2025 and Stephen Miller, who is as obsessed with anti immigration sentiment as anyone posting here, and Peter Theil, the tech multi billionaire who is against the whole principle of democracy.

They have terrorised Congress, threatened critics with huge defamation suits which their targets don’t have the resources to defend, and are also seeking retribution on all who did their jobs in trying to resist this.

Yet many here continue to be in denial of this and think it’s just me. People need to wake up!
Click to expand...
And when everyone has woken up what do you want them to do? Remembering we live in a different country.
 
Nicholas91 said:
Which is exactly the opposite of what happened. An edited portrayal of the event to support your subjective feelings.
Click to expand...
Depends what you mean by “event”!

If you mean the verbatim words in strict sequence considered entirely on their own without any context whatsoever, then you will reach such a conclusion.

If you mean a much wider context stretching from the moment the election result became obvious until the moment it was confirmed in the Senate, then you won’t.
 
Wisbech Eagle said:
Depends what you mean by “event”!

If you mean the verbatim words in strict sequence considered entirely on their own without any context whatsoever, then you will reach such a conclusion.

If you mean a much wider context stretching from the moment the election result became obvious until the moment it was confirmed in the Senate, then you won’t.
Click to expand...

Dictionary definition of 'Event': a thing that happens or takes place, especially one of importance.

It's not for the BBC nor any other news outlet to provide the public with their interpretation of 'context'. It is to report factucally upon an 'event' (see above description). The moment they do not, this is not news, it is propaganda.

If said propaganda is representative of your subjective feelings, you will of course support it, as you do.
 
Teddy Eagle said:
But they do have to pay the BBC in order to watch a different channel.
Click to expand...

And justify why they don't need a licence.

Imagine if that applied to other fields.
Car Insurance companies knocking on your door demanding to know why you weren't insured with them, insisting you prove you don't need car insurance or they will take you to court.
It's bonkers, but somehow Britons have been brainwashed to think it is acceptable.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Holmesdale Online Shop

Back
Top