Archive for Our Scotland - www.our-scotland.org Scottish Politics Discussion Forum / Messageboard - Dedicated to online discussion about Scottish Politics and an Independent Scotland, as well as Scottish Society today. We also have a section dedicated to Banter, Sport and Recommended Sites.
 



       Our Scotland - www.our-scotland.org Forum Index -> Scottish News, Life and Society
Red Justice

Pro-Palestinian groups occupy BBC Scotland

Just received a text message on my mobile phone:

"Over 100 supporters of Stop The War and Palestinian groups (including Solidarity members) are currently occupying BBC Scotland HQ at Pacific Quay in Glasgow. They will not end the action until the BBC reverses it's decision not to broadcast an emergency aid appeal for Gaza. There is also a demo in front of the building in support for those inside."

Will be updates on Solidarity website.
http://www.solidarityscotland.org/
Rinty

The protest just ended with BBC Scotland agreeing to a metting with campaigners this week.  The campaign goes on until the BBC change their view on the charity ad being anti-Israel.

Just spoke to Solidarity members outside who have just left the building, it was filmed by many news agencies from around the world
Red Justice

The BBC is clearly not impartial I resent having to pay them a license fee

Gaza decision up to BBC - Burnham
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7849943.stm

Thanks for the update Rinty
mairead

Aye Red Justice. I totally agree with you. Humanitarian aid iadvertising s what is being asked for and the BBC is taking a one sided stance.
Alasdair

The BBC is supposed to be free of advertising.  

Nobody believes that they are impartial, yet they can hardly remain impartial when the have MP's attempting to dictate policy in this area (or any other), my understanding is that this advert is being run in numerous places why should it be run on the BBC as well.
Dave Coull

Alasdair wrote:
The BBC is supposed to be free of advertising.

Not quite.

The BBC is supposed to be free of commercial advertising.

It is a fact that the BBC does advertise its own programmes, and also BBC products which are a spin-off from its own programmes.

In addition, the BBC does carry charitable appeals for emergency aid in disaster situations.

You might think it shouldn't, but, statement of fact, it does.

The charitable appeals which the BBC carries are not just for natural disasters, but also for disasters caused by war.

Again, you might think it shouldn't, but, statement of fact, it does.

As I understand it, this particular appeal was from a well established disaster appeals charity charity which the BBC has had no problems with in the past. The BBC has carried previous appeals from this very same charity on behalf of aid in other disasters caused by war, for instance in Darfur and other places.  

Again, you might think that the BBC should not carry appeals from this particular charity, for aid in disasters caused by war, but, statement of fact, it does.

So the BBC has no objection in principle to carrying disaster appeals, the BBC has no objection in principle to carrying disaster appeals for disastrous situations caused by war, and the BBC has no objection in principle to carrying appeals from this particular aid organisation, as it has done so several times before.

If you support the BBC's stance on a refusal in this particular case, then you have got to give your reasons for supporting a POLITICAL decision by the BBC. The non-political thing to do would have been to follow their previous practice, and carry an appeal for disaster aid made by this well-established charitable organisation, as they have done several times in the past.
mairead

Well said DC.
Alasdair

mairead wrote:
Well said DC.


I disagree!

Stating that the BBC advertises it's own programmes and products is hardly shocking or surprising news to me, yet it's the only thing they do advertise.  They don't carry adverts for third party organisations (excluding those they are required to do so ... e.g. party political broadcasts).

I am aware that they have carried other appeals in the past, however, in those cases there has been little chance of them taking one side or the other, assuming sides have even been involved ... fact.

It doesn't matter which way the BBC jumped on this one, they would be accused of a poltiical decision, if they reverse it now it will be a political decision ... fact.

dave coull wrote:
If you support the BBC's stance on a refusal in this particular case, then you have got to give your reasons for supporting a POLITICAL decision by the BBC.


I'm not sure if your saying that I need to give reasons for supporting a political decision made by the BBC, or if you're insinuating something about where I stand on the matter, either way I don't.

However, I don't believe that this was necessarily a political decision, the reasons that the BBC has given for their refusal sound reasonable enough to me, indeed, as far as I'm aware (lacking a television) the only stations airing the appeal are UK broadcasters with no interests outside the UK.  The BBC is a worldwide organisation and best serves it's masters by maintaining a level of impartiality in what is clearly a hyper-sensitive subject for many people.
Red Justice

How can anyone say the BBC is impartial. It is a humanitarian issue that a charitable organisation wants to broadcast.

If you have doubts and unlike Palestinians in Gaza you are not out in the bitter cold beside the rubble of your homes at least watch this:
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=IJQUZcXESBU

Disasters Emergency Committee
http://www.dec.org.uk/
Reluctant Hero

Dave Coull wrote:
It is a fact that the BBC does advertise its own programmes, and also BBC products which are a spin-off from its own programmes.


I find this aspect of the BBC increasingly disturbing.

The fact that they use the 10.25 Scottish News to advertise Newsnight Scotland is totally wrong.  They only have about 4 minutes to give a summary of the Scottish News, yet use about one minute of that as advertising.  That is just one example.

Regarding the issue in hand, I think the BBC have scored a spectacular own goal.  If they had broadcast the appeal, no-one would have given it a second thought.  The fact that they never, then dedicated so much air-time to discussing the fact that they never, gave the appeal more publicity than was ever imaginable.
agentmancuso

Reluctant Hero wrote:
I think the BBC have scored a spectacular own goal.  If they had broadcast the appeal, no-one would have given it a second thought.  The fact that they never, then dedicated so much air-time to discussing the fact that they never, gave the appeal more publicity than was ever imaginable.


That's a good point.
jamesieboy

Once again the naive Marxist/Islamist coalition (and what a bloody coalition!) are trying to impose their twisted and contradictory logic, this time on the BBC.
As far as I'm concerned the BBC should show the charity broadcast, but the publicity probably, in a perverse way, will help the appeal. However, I wonder why the 'socialists' are so obsessed with Palestine when they ignore totally the plight of the Tibetans, the wretched populations of Darfur and Congo (is because they are only Africans?) and the long-suffering Tamil population of Sri Lanka where there is also a war being waged with a lot more deaths than in Glasgow?
jamesieboy

Sorry about the last word on the last posting. It should read Gaza.
Dave Coull

jamesieboy wrote:
Once again the naive Marxist/Islamist coalition (and what a bloody coalition!) are trying to impose their twisted and contradictory logic
Well, Jamesieboy, so you are a conspiracy theorist. In your case, the conspiracy which you believe in is "the Marxist/Islamist coalition". As somebody who has played an active part in demonstrations of solidarity with the Palestinians, and as somebody who has supported other demonstrations where participation just wasn't possible for me, I can assure you, I am neither a Marxist nor an Islamist.
jamesieboy wrote:
I wonder why the 'socialists' are so obsessed with Palestine when they ignore totally the plight of the Tibetans, the wretched populations of Darfur and Congo (is because they are only Africans?) and the long-suffering Tamil population of Sri Lanka
While it may be true that there are some socialists who "ignore" all, or even just some, of these conflicts, that is probably true, to at least as great an extent, if not more, of the population as a whole, including non-socialists. So , the accusation that "socialists" are the folk who "ignore" these  problems just doesn't make sense. What is probably true is that many socialists do pay more attention to the problems of the Palestinians. So, let's leave aside the false accusation about "ignoring" these other problems, and answer the question, why does it look like greater priority is being given to the Palestinians?

Because no human being can do everything. Because both time and money are in limited supply. Because, whether we like it or not, we do have to make decisions about priorities. Because we are citizens of one of the countries which created the problem of the Palestinians in the first place. Because we bear no collective responsibility for the sufferings of the Tibetans. The Chinese Communist Party bears a responsibility for that, and so do the Lamaist Buddhists as an organised religious and political grouping, but, as mere citizens of the UK, we don't. But we do have a responsibility for what has been done, and continues to be done, to the Palestinians, because of the major role the UK played in setting up, and continuing to support, the state of Israel. So far as Darfur and the Congo are concerned, because, so far as I am aware, we are not arming those who are attacking the suffering populations of these regions, but we DO arm those who attack Gaza. So far as the BBC is concerned, because sometimes their claimed "neutrality" is exposed as a pretence; because they are in fact an arm of the British state, which is allied with that aggressive state, Israel.
agentmancuso

Dave Coull wrote:
But we do have a responsibility for what has been done, and continues to be done, to the Palestinians, because of the major role the UK played in setting up, and continuing to support, the state of Israel.


That's a good point.

But additionally, we ought to be concerned about the brutal injustice afflicted on Palestinians, because of the enormous significance the Middle East has for world politics. However unappetising it may be to repeat it, most of the conflicts in Africa have little effect on anyone other than the immediate civilian population. But the nature of the US involvement in the Middle East, and the potential powder keg of militant Islam, mean that the violence in Gaza carries echoes far beyond the perimeter fences.
jamesieboy

I suppose the naive liberals/socialists/human rights protesters don't realise that they're being used as stooges by the islamists.
The latest news coming from Gaza is that Hamas activists are now stopping aid convoys at gunpoint and looting them like the common thieves in the night and gangsters that they are.
Many in the west, sadly, don't realise this...yet!
The dispute is, at the end of the day, down to cause and effect. Hamas fires rockets into Israel, who in turn eventually invade and kill hundreds of Hamas terrorists. The point really is quite simple - don't fire rockets, don't indulge in suicide attacks and you will eventually benefit from a lasting period of peace.
Most people in Israel supported the military incursion into Gaza. Why was that? They can't all be fascists and murderers. Look at their point of view. If you were living in a community within striking distance of a Hamas rocket, you would be scared. You would want the government to do something about it. You wouldn't be very pleased if they just sat about and dithered.
Remember one thing above all: You wont beat the Jews, not now, not in 5 years, not in 20 years. They are too strong, too powerful, too smart, too rich. These are the people who have made the single biggest contribution to Western civilisation. They are not idiots and will always be one step ahead. Negotiation is the only way to peace, not rockets.
Rinty

If there is to be any peace then the next cease fire MUST be imposed.  the West cant allow Israel to continue to squeeze and blockade gaze and call this a ceasefire.

Israels actions have led to the rise of Hamas and militant islaam but most of those who voted Hamas dont fall into that category, they just want someone to fight back and see Hamas as the best option.

Let's not pretend that the palestinian rockets came first or that they came in isolation of siege conditions imposed by the Israeli Government.
Dave Coull

jamesieboy wrote:
The latest news coming from Gaza
Where do you get your so-called "news" from, Jamesie? Is it from the Voice of Israel, or something like that?
jamesieboy wrote:
is that Hamas activists are now stopping aid convoys at gunpoint and looting them like the common thieves in the night and gangsters that they are.
Look, Jamesie, you can't have it both ways. They can't be BOTH "Islamic fanatics" AND "common thieves". Islamic fanatics cut the hands off common thieves. When I was with the British forces in Aden colony, many, many, years ago, beggars who'd had their hands cut off were a fairly common sight on the streets of Steamer Point, Maalla, and Kormakshar. They had come either from the Kingdom of Yemen, or from Saudi Arabia, or from one of the other very reactionary monarchical regimes of the Arabian peninsula, and made their way to the (then) relatively prosperous colony to beg, as that was practically the only way of making a living open to them.
jamesieboy

That's right. Israel has a big responsibility now to implement the ceasefire and open the borders for humanitarian aid and development to start taking place.
It should also start to demolish the illegal settlements on Palestinian land.
If the settlers don't like it - tough!
A bit of give and take from both sides will lead to an eventual two-states solution.
The only thing that Gaza doesnt need is the vainglorious George galloway arriving on their doorstep in a couple of days time.
jamesieboy

They stole the aid from the convoys at gunpoint. That make them thieves in my book as that was supposed to go to the poor, suffering people of Gaza. I am well aware of the Islamic dictat that says thieves should have their hands amputated. I am against this. Jail and hard labour would be a better solution.
I am also aware of the practice in some Muslim communities to cut off the young girls' clitoris (to stop them enjoying sex when they reach the age of 'consent' - usually around 13). It is shocking and barbaric and a crime against humanity. But then again, not a mention from the indignant left in this country.
Rinty

I am absultekly sure that the gazans disagree, they wil welcome the vehicles on the convoy, including George Galloway.

There is no chance of Israel relaxing the grip on Gaza.

Its not about opening borders to allow aid in, its about whether they have right to close them in the first place.  Israel prevent Gazans from travelling by sea, not just through israel.
jamesieboy

Of course they will welcome the convoy - if it gets through, and I sincerely hope it does.
However, Israel controls the borders, not Egypt.
Galloway has jumped on the bandwagon for purely opportunistic reasons. To massage his ego, to give the impression that he really cares. He's a chancer of the first degree.
Most people that have contributed to the aid convoy have done so, not to get their names in the papers and their face on TV but to help those who need it.
I know a whole veriety of people on the Left and they all agree - Galloway is only interested in his own self-publicity.
Dave Coull

jamesieboy wrote:
I am well aware of the Islamic dictat that says thieves should have their hands amputated.
So, how come you can't see any contradiction in you calling these folk BOTH "Islamic fanatics"  AND "common thieves"?
jamesieboy wrote:
The latest news coming from Gaza
I wrote:
Where do you get your so-called "news" from, Jamesie?
jamesieboy wrote:
They stole the aid from the convoys at gunpoint.
You haven't answered my question, Jamesieboy. Maybe this did happen, and maybe it didn't, and maybe whatever it was that happened could be open to more than one interpretation. So   -   where did you get this news from? A source which I can actually check out would be good.
jamesieboy

I think it was The Independent newspaper. I can't remember as I read a whole lot of newspapers and watch loads of news channels.

Believe me, Hamas, Hizbollah, Taliban, Al Qaeda, Chechens, Al Shabab (somalia) take your pick. Women Repressors - the lot of them. Dedicated to murder, mayhem, favour using suicide bombs in public places, martyrdom is their big thing. Extreme right wing, far worse than the Israelis, they are pure scum.
Dave Coull

jamesieboy wrote:
Believe me
I don't even believe my own wife when she tells me something she read in some paper, not until I have actually checked it out for myself. Of course I believe she is telling me the truth as she sees it, but often she has just taken a cursory glance at the paper, and when I carefully read the very same story it turns out to say something slightly different. As for YOU saying "believe me", I have no particular reason to do so. I don't know you, I don't know anything about you, and you are unable to provide any source for the story you claim.
jamesieboy

I'm a teacher so I'm used to people believing me.

I agree you don't always believe what you read in the papers, but it does depend on which paper. The tabloids are generally awful and specialise in twisting stories and sometimes telling downright lies. The broadsheets usually provide more credible stories with more serious, professional journalists.

You don't know me. Well ditto. I don't know me either. But I think you slightly get the feeling that I like winding people up on some occasions.

I live near the A82, going out to Loch Lomond, near the Israeli consulate in Old Kilpatrick where I sometimes enjoy a pint with some guys from some Mossad organisation or something. I think it's a cleaning company.
azzuri

jamesieboy wrote:

You don't know me. Well ditto. I don't know me either. But I think you slightly get the feeling that I like winding people up on some occasions.


No; don't take it personally, this is just Dave's style of argument. As anyone should; he likes his facts, no ambiguity and sources, lots of them.

It seems that some people like him, some don't. As far as I'm aware, Dave doesn't really seem to care either way; and will treat each individual post on its merits and decipher it, sometimes in a way which changes the discussion for the better, and sometimes it becomes an argument of semantics which can lead us to a dead end. Whether you like him or not, this is Dave's way and I think he adds to the debate here.

I'm sure he'll have something to say on my post,  but this is my honest assessment of him from his many posts here.

btw, sorry I never said it before jamesieboy, I'm azzuri, welcome to the Our Scotland forums.  Embarassed  Smile
Dave Coull

azzuri wrote:
sorry I never said it before jamesieboy, I'm azzuri, welcome to the Our Scotland forums
Yes, welcome to the forums, Jamesieboy. I think it was Azzurri that started Our Scotland, and he is one of the moderators. I'm not.
jamesieboy

Mucho gusto. Encantado de conocerle, Azzuri.

Pleased to meet you, and you too Dave the Independentista.

Your name obviously means 'the blues' in Italian. Do you have Italian ancestry? You know what they say about Italian males. High on libido, low on sexual mores, hence the high demand in Italy for the puttana type of women (only joking)
agentmancuso

Dave Coull wrote:
don't even believe my own wife when she tells me something she read in some paper,


That must make for a fraught breakfast table on occasion. Once again, the good lady has my deepest sympathy.
Dave Coull

agentmancuso wrote:
must make for a fraught breakfast table on occasion
Sadly, there are no lively discussions over breakfast at present. Keri's dad, who was only just getting over throat cancer, has now had an operation to remove a brain tumour. Keri's mom is unable to look after him, due to herself having had a triple heart bypass operation last year, as well as having only one lung. She'd had lung cancer, and the surgeons completely removed the cancerous lung to prevent it spreading to her good one. I don't think they do lung removal on the NHS, but they do it in California, provided you or your insurance company have the money to pay for the operation. Anyway, Keri had to go to help look after her parents for a few weeks.  She did phone me this morning at twenty minutes to eight, and she sang to me, the Nat King Cole song "Unforgettable, that's what you are".  I joined her in singing the last two lines. Of course it was twenty minutes to midnight in California.
agentmancuso wrote:
Once again, the good lady has my deepest sympathy.
I will tell her you said so, when she phones tonight. She's been asking me to tell her funny things to cheer her up, and she will have a good laugh at you sympathising with her for being married to me.
Holebender

You can pass on sympathies from Sheila and I (about her parents, not her marriage) the next time you talk to Keri.
azzuri

Dave Coull wrote:
azzuri wrote:
sorry I never said it before jamesieboy, I'm azzuri, welcome to the Our Scotland forums
Yes, welcome to the forums, Jamesieboy. I think it was Azzurri that started Our Scotland, and he is one of the moderators. I'm not.


I started it; yes, but I'm afraid I can't take any of the credit for the development since. That's been purely down to the committed mods we have/have had and the motivated users who use it. Without the users, this place would just be like an empty pub with no music.
azzuri

jamesieboy wrote:
Mucho gusto. Encantado de conocerle, Azzuri.

Pleased to meet you, and you too Dave the Independentista.

Your name obviously means 'the blues' in Italian. Do you have Italian ancestry? You know what they say about Italian males. High on libido, low on sexual mores, hence the high demand in Italy for the puttana type of women (only joking)


Nothing that exotic I'm afraid. All of my ancestry is from around Ayrshire apart from one great-grandparent from Ireland. I was fascinated with Italy and Italian history as a young guy, my first girlfriend was an Italian immigrant, I am a huge Killie fan and just loved the look of the word 'Azzurri' (the blues). Unfortunately someone else had registered 'azzurri' on the first forum I registered on, so I dropped an 'r' and the rest is history...
agentmancuso

azzuri wrote:
so I dropped an 'r' and the rest is history...


You ought to be careful, dropping your 'r's all over the place like that...
Dave Coull

azzuri wrote:
Without the users, this place would just be like an empty pub with no music.
My father used to play the piano in pubs. He never learned to read a single note of music, but he had perfect pitch, and he could listen to a song just once and then sit down at a piano and play it, chords and all, just like that. Speaking of pubs with no music, do we have any musical facility on Our Scotland? I would be delighted to contribute my unique rendering of "Danny Boy".
azzuri

Dave Coull wrote:
azzuri wrote:
Without the users, this place would just be like an empty pub with no music.
My father used to play the piano in pubs. He never learned to read a single note of music, but he had perfect pitch, and he could listen to a song just once and then sit down at a piano and play it, chords and all, just like that. Speaking of pubs with no music, do we have any musical facility on Our Scotland? I would be delighted to contribute my unique rendering of "Danny Boy".


...we did have plans for one, but after your comment Dave those have been hastily shelved!  Laughing
jamesieboy

Azzuri your picture looks a bit like Frankie Boyle who is a great comedian.

His best line was - Gordon Brown looks like a scrotum with a sad face painted on it.

Brilliant.
azzuri

...it is indeed FB, who I'm a huge fan of. The funniest I've seen him was attacking a heckler live in Kilmarnock Grand Hall - tore the poor drunken guy to shreds.  Laughing
Lord Pitsligo

Frankie at his finest:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GX8IvbE1hoE

I love the way the other guy tries to follow up his comment, but the presenter just shuts him up   Very Happy

       Our Scotland - www.our-scotland.org Forum Index -> Scottish News, Life and Society
Page 1 of 1
Create your own free forum | Buy a domain to use with your forum
Our Scotland Hit Counter Scottish Top Site - Topsites Our Scotland Forums Critical Acclaim ~ Politically Progressive Top Sites View Site Stats Scottish Politics