If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Arutz Sheva)   BBC admits that they are falsifying Lebanese casualties; considers terrorists using private homes as civilians   (arutzsheva.com) divider line 435
    More: Asinine  
•       •       •

12844 clicks; posted to Main » on 23 Jul 2006 at 11:46 AM (8 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



435 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | » | Last | Show all
 
2006-07-23 09:02:15 AM
The BBC, organization that refused to address the 7/7 bombers or Hamas members as "terrorists", biaised against Israel?

Tell me it isn't so. Wankers.
 
2006-07-23 09:12:14 AM
Yet the only source for this information is IsraelOnlineNews.com.

Because we know there's no bias there.
 
2006-07-23 09:16:31 AM
You'd think that an admission by the BBC would warrant a link to said admission.
 
2006-07-23 09:17:34 AM
Kyosuke: Because we know there's no bias there.

yeah, the damn joooooos.

Like, in 2002 when they denied they were killing thousands and committing genocide in Jenin and it turned out to be true.
 
2006-07-23 09:19:36 AM
Tatsuma: The BBC, organization that refused to address the 7/7 bombers or Hamas members as "terrorists", biaised against Israel?

They also don't refer to Ahmadinejad as a poopy-head, even though he, quite clearly, is one.
 
2006-07-23 09:21:08 AM
Enough with the headlines, Tatsuma. It's too early for a flame war.
 
2006-07-23 09:24:45 AM
Last One Left: They also don't refer to Ahmadinejad as a poopy-head, even though he, quite clearly, is one.

And they don't liken his facial features to a gorilla either. Ever watched "Every Which Way but Loose"?

The eyes, man, the eyes

www.smh.com.au

msnbcmedia.msn.com

They are biaised, biaised I tell you!
 
2006-07-23 09:25:51 AM
Tatsuma:
yeah, the damn joooooos.
You're the one trying to turn this into a religious discussion, not me.

Tatsuma:
Like, in 2002 when they denied they were killing thousands and committing genocide in Jenin and it turned out to be true.


The BBC killed thousands in Jenin? Or the "jooooos" killed thousands in Jenin?

What?
 
2006-07-23 09:27:27 AM
Seems to me that one of the tactics the terrorists are using (and one which I might add seems to be quite effective) is to place children's toys, clothes and other belongings at recent bombing sites.

I was watching some raw footage on CNN the other day and as the cameraman walked through the scene, he focused on a small gray stuffed animal lying on top of the rubble. It seemed so out of place. Not burned, not soiled, not covered in dust nor even any debris. It was simply sitting ON the rubble.

Today on CNN international I heard a reporter say that the site he was at was "obviously a civilian home." His reasoning was that there were children's clothes and toys laying in the rubble.
 
2006-07-23 09:27:57 AM
Tatsuma: The eyes, man, the eyes

That is kinda creepy, but you know what I meant. It is best if journalists stayed true to reporting the facts and left the punditry to know-it-alls.
 
2006-07-23 09:31:12 AM
Last One Left: That is kinda creepy, but you know what I meant. It is best if journalists stayed true to reporting the facts and left the punditry to know-it-alls.

Definitely... but I don't think it is "punditry" to refer to the 7/7 bombers as terrorists, don't you think?
 
2006-07-23 09:39:22 AM
Tatsuma: Definitely... but I don't think it is "punditry" to refer to the 7/7 bombers as terrorists, don't you think?

Terrorist is a loaded word. People use the word to describe anything from hijackers to Zidane's mom. The BBC could also use the word mujhahadeen (sp?) or fedayeen (sp?) too, but they don't. By referring to them in something less assuming, the journalists neither shirk their responsibility to present the facts, nor do they glorify their actions. It's prudent, in my estimation.

I'm quite sure we've had this conversation before.
 
2006-07-23 09:40:37 AM
MorrisBird: Enough with the headlines, Tatsuma. It's too early for a flame war.


and you're talking rubbish too.
 
2006-07-23 09:40:47 AM
Last One Left: Zidane's mom

Have you ever tasted her food? If that's not a chemo weapon, I don't know what it is.

By referring to them in something less assuming, the journalists neither shirk their responsibility to present the facts, nor do they glorify their actions. It's prudent, in my estimation.

That's not at all why the BBC does it, according to the Beeb itself. They don't call terrorists "terrorists" since that would prevent them from having inside sources and being able to get interviews.
 
2006-07-23 09:42:27 AM
Glasgowsfinest:
Enough with the headlines, Tatsuma. It's too early for a flame war. and you're talking rubbish too.

Am I, really? 7 submissions, 3 approved, it seems like someone appreciates my rubbish, today.

You know, disagreeing with someone /= talking rubbish
 
2006-07-23 09:42:39 AM
It's way too farking early for this kinda crap.
 
2006-07-23 09:43:35 AM
Tatsuma:
They don't call terrorists "terrorists" since that would prevent them from having inside sources and being able to get interviews.
And that's a bad thing?

Maybe the intelligence community could learn a thing or two here.
 
2006-07-23 09:44:46 AM
Tatsuma:
7 submissions, 3 approved, it seems like someone appreciates my rubbish, today.
3 out of 7 isn't a passing grade. Please return to the back of the class.
 
2006-07-23 09:46:33 AM
Tatsuma: Have you ever tasted her food? If that's not a chemo weapon, I don't know what it is.

They're very soft. Her toes are especially succulent. Oh, oh! Her food! I was thinking of something else.

That's not at all why the BBC does it, according to the Beeb itself. They don't call terrorists "terrorists" since that would prevent them from having inside sources and being able to get interviews.

Which is fine by me too. A corporation shouldn't have a conscience or a sense of social responsibilty. They're institutions of economic activity.
 
2006-07-23 09:46:35 AM
Kyosuke: 3 out of 7 isn't a passing grade. Please return to the back of the class.

Fark is more like a baseball game, and a .428 average is pretty good.

And that's a bad thing?

Hmm, yes and no. It's like calling Mussolini a "contested politican" in order to gain exclusive interviews.
 
2006-07-23 09:47:10 AM
Last One Left: Which is fine by me too. A corporation shouldn't have a conscience or a sense of social responsibilty. They're institutions of economic activity.

What about public corporations, though?
 
2006-07-23 09:47:53 AM
Tatsuma: Fark is more like a baseball game

Well, I, for one, am not catching.

/all political threads should devolve into sexual-innuendo-filled galas
 
2006-07-23 09:49:23 AM
Tatsuma: What about public corporations, though?

Not in my opinion. They should still have to earn a profit.
 
2006-07-23 09:51:38 AM
Last One Left: Well, I, for one, am not catching.

I will be, I don't mind, I love catching your balls

/all political threads should devolve into sexual-innuendo-filled galas

Not in my opinion. They should still have to earn a profit.


Well, yeah, I guess you are right. I mean, I understand why they do it and I can still respect it, but even if I respect it, that doesn't mean I can't be angry about it.
 
2006-07-23 09:51:49 AM
Last One Left: Not in my opinion. They should still have to earn a profit.


I disagree, in the case of the BBC at least. We fund it directly. I don't like the idea of them making profits from my investments.
 
2006-07-23 09:53:04 AM
Tatsuma: Am I, really? 7 submissions, 3 approved, it seems like someone appreciates my rubbish, today.


Well yes, doesn't mean it's not rubbish though.
 
2006-07-23 10:00:39 AM
Glasgowsfinest: I disagree, in the case of the BBC at least. We fund it directly. I don't like the idea of them making profits from my investments.

What if the profits were used to continue funding the BBC, eventually resulting in them becoming a self-sufficient private corporation?

Tatsuma: that doesn't mean I can't be angry about it.

Agreed. Everyone is entitled to an opinion.

/Uwe seriously like catching my Bolls?
//The above was a Pavolvian attempt to wean you off my peen
 
2006-07-23 10:03:45 AM
Oh, thank God. I was worried there for a moment that there were actually civilians being killed in Lebanon. Now I can rest easy knowing that that dead 5 year old boy was actually a Hamas militant.
 
2006-07-23 10:06:46 AM
"It is difficult to quantify who is a terrorist and who is a civilian."

/=

BBC admits that they are falsifying Lebanese casualties; considers terrorists using private homes as civilians

Not yours!
 
2006-07-23 10:08:40 AM
Last One Left: /Uwe seriously like catching my Bolls?

Damnation! May you and your next seven generations be cursed!
 
2006-07-23 10:09:31 AM
Tatsuma

That's not at all why the BBC does it, according to the Beeb itself. They don't call terrorists "terrorists" since that would prevent them from having inside sources and being able to get interviews.

So, it would prevent them from doing their jobs?
 
2006-07-23 10:12:41 AM
Tatsuma: Damnation! May you and your next seven generations be cursed!

As long as they don't have to watch Alone in the Dark or BloodRayne, I think we, as a dynasty, can handle it.
 
2006-07-23 10:21:49 AM
Fark It: So, it would prevent them from doing their jobs?

Tatsuma: I understand why they do it and I can still respect it, but even if I respect it, that doesn't mean I can't be angry about it.
 
2006-07-23 10:22:51 AM
Tatsuma: "yeah, the damn joooooos."

What's that got to do with it? You're accusing the BBC of bias, how is it unreasonable to question the neutrality of an Israeli website?
 
2006-07-23 10:23:05 AM
Last One Left: They should still have to earn a profit.

"Should" isn't the proper term. "Legally obligated" is.
 
2006-07-23 10:30:16 AM
Submitter is a cretin. Where does it say in TFA that the BBC admitted falsifying anything? All it has is a quote from a BBC reporter saying that It is difficult to quantify who is a terrorist and who is a civilian.
 
2006-07-23 10:31:36 AM
Purple_Jack: Submitter is a cretin. Where does it say in TFA that the BBC admitted falsifying anything? All it has is a quote from a BBC reporter saying that It is difficult to quantify who is a terrorist and who is a civilian.

They don't give a name or any other references other than the anonymous BBC reporter (is "he" quoted anywhere else online?).. I smell bullshiat..
 
2006-07-23 10:33:54 AM
Purple_Jack

The British Broadcasting Corp. (BBC) has admitted that many of the victims of Israeli retaliation in Lebanon are terrorists and not innocent civilians.

So, if this is to be believed, their civilian casualty reports may not have been accurate. I'm still waiting for a statement by the BBC itself, or a report from somewhere else.

/I'm still not catching in Tatsuma's twisted Fark baseball game
 
2006-07-23 10:37:09 AM
ArbitraryConstant: What's that got to do with it? You're accusing the BBC of bias, how is it unreasonable to question the neutrality of an Israeli website?

that was an off-hand, sarcastic comment about how Israeli sources are judged too biaised to report actual news. nothing more to it. I wasn't implying he doesn't trust jews.
 
2006-07-23 10:40:08 AM
Purple_Jack:

Here's a hint:

"May or may not be a civilian, it's hard to quantify", that won't be a greenlight.
 
2006-07-23 10:40:39 AM
submitter: BBC admits that they are falsifying Lebanese casualties; considers terrorists using private homes as civilians

Hmm. I think submitter is reading a lot into the article that isn't actually there.

From the article:

The British Broadcasting Corp. (BBC) has admitted that many of the victims of Israeli retaliation in Lebanon are terrorists and not innocent civilians. A BBC reporter said he saw Hizbullah terrorists using a private home and added, "It is difficult to quantify who is a terrorist and who is a civilian."

What they are saying is that it is difficult to tell whether they are terrorists or not. It does not say that they are deliberately falsifying the figures.

Therefore, please take your flamebait and go away.
 
2006-07-23 10:43:17 AM
Tatsuma: "May or may not be a civilian, it's hard to quantify", that won't be a greenlight.

It's true, distorting an article's statements to make its claims seem more outrageous will often help get a greenlight.

Congratulations.
 
2006-07-23 10:45:30 AM
Tatsuma: "Am I, really? 7 submissions, 3 approved, it seems like someone appreciates my rubbish, today."

Yes. Fark has a financial incentive to get more pageviews, and your flamebait does a pretty good job of this.

"yeah, the damn joooooos."

Is it your contention, then, that people critical of Israeli policy are critical because they hate the "joooooos", and that there aren't any other motivations in play?
 
2006-07-23 10:53:57 AM
Just check their wallets for the Terrorist Club card.
 
2006-07-23 10:56:17 AM
ArbitraryConstant: Is it your contention, then, that people critical of Israeli policy are critical because they hate the "joooooos", and that there aren't any other motivations in play?

already answered

Tatsuma: that was an off-hand, sarcastic comment about how Israeli sources are judged too biaised to report actual news. nothing more to it. I wasn't implying he doesn't trust jews.

ArbitraryConstant: Yes. Fark has a financial incentive to get more pageviews, and your flamebait does a pretty good job of this.

Yes indeed! I, and others, keep Drew floating in Heineken, and he keeps us floating in boobies link and non-sensical flamewars.

that's the Circle of Fark
 
2006-07-23 10:58:14 AM
Tatsuma: Here's a hint:

"May or may not be a civilian, it's hard to quantify", that won't be a greenlight.


I've no idea what you're trying to say here. How does saying that it's difficult to tell who is civilian and who is a terrorist become an admission of falsifying figures? If you check their website, they say:

More than 350 Lebanese have been killed in the 11 days of violence, many of them civilians

You can hardly accuse them of falsifying figures when they don't differentiate, but just give the estimated total killed. Given their admission of how difficult it is to tell them apart, this is the responsible thing to do.
 
2006-07-23 11:01:18 AM
Tatsuma: Yes indeed! I, and others, keep Drew floating in Heineken, and he keeps us floating in boobies link and non-sensical flamewars.

that's the Circle of Fark


In that case, you're going a bit overboard even by Fark standards in how much (and for how long) you're abusing an international tragedy as your ticket to personal internet celebrity.
 
2006-07-23 11:03:49 AM
Vin Diesel: In that case, you're going a bit overboard even by Fark standards in how much (and for how long) you're abusing an international tragedy as your ticket to personal internet celebrity.

a "ticket to personal internet celebrity"?

What the fark. I read an article about something that I thought needed to get out there, as many people touts Israel killed 350+ civilians, yet can't seem to realize and understand that many of the "civilians" killed (more than half, according to the Israeli government) are terrorists.

I made a spin on the headline as to make sure it was greenlit. It has been greenlit.
 
2006-07-23 11:08:06 AM
Tatsuma: "I thought needed to get out there, as many people touts Israel killed 350+ civilians"

If people are doing it, correct the people. If the BBC is doing it, provide attribution because it's not clear they did.

You haven't done this, and neither did the website you linked.
 
2006-07-23 11:09:04 AM
Tatsuma: What the fark. I read an article about something that I thought needed to get out there, as many people touts Israel killed 350+ civilians, yet can't seem to realize and understand that many of the "civilians" killed (more than half, according to the Israeli government) are terrorists.

The boobies, heineken and senseless flamewars with misinformation (like your headline) are entertainment that's mixed in along with the handful of serious discussions. If you want to make sure people are informed, submit accurate headlines and don't turn so many of them into Tatsuma-branded threads. Get friends who agree with you to post, hell, just argue under a different nick from time to time. (If you're already doing this, then the support for Israel's recent actions must be even weaker than I thought, since so few people here are trying to justify it anymore.)

If you're just going for shiats and giggles like so many submissions, aiming for as many greenlights as you can get, and/or trying to get more attention for your Tatsumafest regardless of how much misinformation you have to put out, you go right on doing what you've been doing.
 
Displayed 50 of 435 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report