Alex Salmond show on Russia Today

[Ad Lib]

4 minutes ago, Henderson to deliver ..... said:

Exactly, the British state would never lock up or kill people it disagrees with.

The British state does not imprison or kill journalists for dissent.

Edit to add: and even if it did, the BBC wouldn't take orders to cover it up.

Edited November 11, 2017 by Ad Lib

[Colkitto]

5 hours ago, Ad Lib said:

1. The UK is a one party state apart from the 8 plus parties that have been part of or had influence over a government in at least part of it in the last 5 years. This is like saying “but apart from the squad of over 30 players, Celtic has no football team”.

2. “Clever” is not the adjective I would use to describe the UK Government. Nor for that matter is “subtle”. I don’t think you’ve thought this through at all.

3. Even if the BBC were a “propaganda tool of the British state” the British state doesn’t jail and murder journalists and the BBC doesn’t help them cover it up. The issue is not bias here. Lots of news outlets are biased. The issue is enabling state brutality and giving credibility to propaganda outlets that specifically support and facilitate the regimes that do it.

1. 8 Unionist parties? 

2. I think it's clever and subtle that they have a State propaganda organisation like the BBC and make it look like they have no direct involvement   in it's pro-British narrative. In fact clever and subtle enough to fool even you...

3. The British State have murdered in many places around the world. BBC World Service quite quiet on that one..  

[Ad Lib]

Just now, Colkitto said:

1. 8 Unionist parties? 

2. I think it's clever and subtle that they have a State propaganda organisation like the BBC and make it look like they have no direct involvement   in it's pro-British narrative. In fact clever and subtle enough to fool even you...

3. The British State have murdered in many places around the world. BBC World Service quite quiet on that one..  

1. This will be news to the SNP, Sinn Fein, Scottish Greens and Plaid Cymru, all of which have either been in government in the United Kingdom or have been the decisive swing vote in a Parliament.

2. You are vastly over-estimating the intelligence and capacities of the British state. Still, at least there's no danger of anyone overestimating your intellectual capacities.

3. Yeah, that will be why every military conflict the UK has been involved in in living memory has had BBC war and political reporters scrutinising and criticising actions of British military, diplomatic and political actors live on television.

[capybara]

http://derekbateman.scot/

 

Bateman nails it..as usaual 

[RedRob72]

Not so sure about Unionist seethe!? Just perhaps a further indication of how much his stock has fallen and his diminishing relevance and credibility. It's quite sad really for such a talented politician to be reduced to this.

[NotThePars]

I'd rather he was acting at the bam up outside the political arena than dictating policy tbf.

[Antiochas III]

7 minutes ago, RedRob72 said:

Not so sure about Unionist seethe!? Just perhaps a further indication of how much his stock has fallen and his diminishing relevance and credibility. It's quite sad really for such a talented politician to be reduced to this.

If that was the case it would not have caused the outcry it has.  Especially from MPs and MSPs that actually appeared on RT's news output.

[Colkitto]

20 minutes ago, Ad Lib said:

1. This will be news to the SNP, Sinn Fein, Scottish Greens and Plaid Cymru, all of which have either been in government in the United Kingdom or have been the decisive swing vote in a Parliament.

2. You are vastly over-estimating the intelligence and capacities of the British state. Still, at least there's no danger of anyone overestimating your intellectual capacities.

3. Yeah, that will be why every military conflict the UK has been involved in in living memory has had BBC war and political reporters scrutinising and criticising actions of British military, diplomatic and political actors live on television.

1. Okay you got me on a typo well done. My point was Westminster governments 4 Unionist parties only have been in power (sharing)

2. As I say, they have fooled you.

3. Okay off the top of my head, did the BBC report the British murders in N.Ireland, Iraq, Afganistan at the time?  

[RedRob72]

If that was the case it would not have caused the outcry it has.  Especially from MPs and MSPs that actually appeared on RT's news output.

Including Nicola Sturgeon apparently, rare criticism indeed.
His lifelong ambition in tatters, the guy is becoming an increasingly desperate troll.
Almost appeared that he had turned a corner a couple of weeks back on QT, but alas no.
Seems determined to 'do and say whatever I want' according to an interview with Kirsty Wark. His flouncing sense of self importance is just tiresome.

[mjw]

Not so sure about Unionist seethe!? Just perhaps a further indication of how much his stock has fallen and his diminishing relevance and credibility. It's quite sad really for such a talented politician to be reduced to this.

Its brought you out from under your rock so there might be something in it.

[D Angelo Barksdale]

21 minutes ago, Ad Lib said:

The British state does not imprison or kill journalists for dissent.

Edit to add: and even if it did, the BBC wouldn't take orders to cover it up.

Ah, that's alright then, as long as we treat the journalists ok.

There are of course isolated incidents, such as the detention of David Miranda at Heathrow, Sami al Haj an Al Jazeera journalist who was arrested in Pakistan, interrogated by MI5 and packed off to Guantanamo for 6 years, and Martin O'Hagen who was murdered by Loyalist paramilitaries, who of course, were in collusion with British security services.

You are right though, Britain generally does not kill or imprison journalists, we are after all, the good guys right ?

Of course, we're quite happy to hand over journalists and dissenters to other regimes known for their less than liberal treatment of opposition voices.

https://www.theguardian.com/news/2017/nov/09/how-britain-did-gaddafis-dirty-work-libya 

Your second sentence is naïve in the extreme given the cover up of child sex abuse at both Westminster and the BBC. If push came to shove, the BBC would do what the f**k they were told by the government.

 

[Ad Lib]

34 minutes ago, Colkitto said:

1. Okay you got me on a typo well done. My point was Westminster governments 4 Unionist parties only have been in power (sharing)

2. As I say, they have fooled you.

3. Okay off the top of my head, did the BBC report the British murders in N.Ireland, Iraq, Afganistan at the time?  

1. It wasn't a typo, it was literally the core of your point. "Westminster" is not the same as "the British State". The British state has four governments each of which functions autonomously within its areas of responsibility, and which reflect a different sets of political cultures through different party political structures and governing arrangements. That it has four governments should, to any sane person, be evidence that it manifestly isn't a one party state.

Next you'll be telling me that Germany is a one party state because no government has ever consisted of Bavarian secessionists, that Spain is a one party state because Catalan and Basque secessionists have never formed the Spanish Government, and that Australia is a one party state because the Aboriginal populations with desire for greater autonomy have never had enough political representation to form part of the government there. Your definition of a one party state is a violence to the English language, and right up there with the hysteria of Ruth Davidson and her cronies calling Scotland a one party state because the SNP had a majority once.

2. Or we could go with the more obvious conclusion, which is that you're talking out your arse?

3. When their reporters became aware of them, yes. They reported them often and in detail on prime-time television. Did you literally not own a television during the Troubles or the Iraq or Afghan wars?

[RedRob72]

Its brought you out from under your rock so there might be something in it.

Aye, I don't post as much these days but still enjoy a wee look in now and then.
Gotta be honest though it's hard to resist when Big Eck just keeps on giving.
I realise that you may never understand the feeling of euphoria in not only seeing him destroyed on the night of the 18th Sept 2014, but the ignominy bestowed by the good people of his former Gordon constituency giving him a pat on the fanny and telling him to f**k off in June.
This latest stunt is what he has sadly been reduced to.

[Ad Lib]

4 minutes ago, Henderson to deliver ..... said:

Ah, that's alright then, as long as we treat the journalists ok.

There are of course isolated incidents, such as the detention of David Miranda at Heathrow, Sami al Haj an Al Jazeera journalist who was arrested in Pakistan, interrogated by MI5 and packed off to Guantanamo for 6 years, and Martin O'Hagen who was murdered by Loyalist paramilitaries, who of course, were in collusion with British security services.

You are right though, Britain generally does not kill or imprison journalists, we are after all, the good guys right ?

Of course, we're quite happy to hand over journalists and dissenters to other regimes known for their less than liberal treatment of opposition voices.

https://www.theguardian.com/news/2017/nov/09/how-britain-did-gaddafis-dirty-work-libya 

Your second sentence is naïve in the extreme given the cover up of child sex abuse at both Westminster and the BBC. If push came to shove, the BBC would do what the f**k they were told by the government.

 

So to be clear:

David Miranda, not a journalist, was detained at an airport for transporting classified documents on behalf of a journalist, that posed a threat to national security. The documents were confiscated, he was interrogated in connection with manifestly criminal activity, and was then released. That is not even remotely comparable to Russia killing and jailing journalists for expressing political dissent.

Similarly, the fact that the UK was sometimes complicit in extraordinary rendition was not something that the BBC attempted to deny or cover-up, or which it declined to report. Extraordinary rendition was a massive story in the British media and the BBC covered it in as excruciating detail as anyone else. They did not help the UK Government to cover it up and they did not peddle deliberately false narratives to cover their tracks.

Compare and contrast this with the coverage of Russia Today's Ukraine material, and you will see that these two organisations are almost on the opposite ends of the spectrum when it comes to press credibility, impartiality and effective reporting.

And of course the British (including their military) have done some unpleasant things during the Troubles. But the UK Government manifestly was not complicit in the murder of literally the only journalist to have been assassinated at that time. Indeed, the organisation that killed him is literally a proscribed terrorist organisation in UK law! And, importantly in the context of this thread, the BBC did not attempt to cover it up.

You are full of shit.

[Benjamin_Nevis]

Aye, I don't post as much these days but still enjoy a wee look in now and then.
Gotta be honest though it's hard to resist when Big Eck just keeps on giving.
I realise that you may never understand the feeling of euphoria in not only seeing him destroyed on the night of the 18th Sept 2014, but the ignominy bestowed by the good people of his former Gordon constituency giving him a pat on the fanny and telling him to f**k off in June.
This latest stunt is what he has sadly been reduced to.

Is this the first time a P&B poster has actually bit to a politician? Absolutely delicious [emoji38]

[welshbairn]

Can't wait for the seethe when he takes over the Scotsman. Onwards with the Salmond media empire!

Edited November 11, 2017 by welshbairn

[mjw]

Aye, I don't post as much these days

Its still too much though.

[RedRob72]

Its still too much though.

Just can't catch a break! (sigh)

[D Angelo Barksdale]

44 minutes ago, Ad Lib said:

So to be clear:

David Miranda, not a journalist, was detained at an airport for transporting classified documents on behalf of a journalist, that posed a threat to national security. The documents were confiscated, he was interrogated in connection with manifestly criminal activity, and was then released. That is not even remotely comparable to Russia killing and jailing journalists for expressing political dissent.

Similarly, the fact that the UK was sometimes complicit in extraordinary rendition was not something that the BBC attempted to deny or cover-up, or which it declined to report. Extraordinary rendition was a massive story in the British media and the BBC covered it in as excruciating detail as anyone else. They did not help the UK Government to cover it up and they did not peddle deliberately false narratives to cover their tracks.

Compare and contrast this with the coverage of Russia Today's Ukraine material, and you will see that these two organisations are almost on the opposite ends of the spectrum when it comes to press credibility, impartiality and effective reporting.

And of course the British (including their military) have done some unpleasant things during the Troubles. But the UK Government manifestly was not complicit in the murder of literally the only journalist to have been assassinated at that time. Indeed, the organisation that killed him is literally a proscribed terrorist organisation in UK law! And, importantly in the context of this thread, the BBC did not attempt to cover it up.

So to be clear:

The Russian state detaining and killing journalists bad, the British state aiding the killing and detaining of journalists via rendition not so bad, and not even remotely comparable.

The collusion between British security forces and paramilitary forces would definitely not stretch to the murder of a journalist or civilians because they were 'literally a proscribed terrorist group !!'

You clearly see the BBC as a bastion of integrity and speaking truth to power. Top of 'the spectrum when it comes to press credibility, impartiality and effective reporting' Others don't however. I would imagine the liberal response would be to respect the differing views and not throw around childish insults and belittle othe....

1 hour ago, Ad Lib said:

You are full of shit.

 

2 hours ago, Ad Lib said:

Still, at least there's no danger of anyone overestimating your intellectual capacities.

 

1 hour ago, Ad Lib said:

you're talking out your arse

 

15 hours ago, Ad Lib said:

"BUT THE BBC IS A STATE BROADCASTER"

Is fucking mouth frothing simpleton territory.

[Zetterlund]

Hopefully our kids and grandkids can grow up in Ad Lib's vision of a liberal Utopia, where people who go against the establishment position lose the right to vote and the opinions of entire races are dismissed as inferior and illegitimate.