Answer to Reith over at Biased BBC

For some reason my comment won't post again. It appears the hyper links are the cause and so I'll post it here. Hopefully someone at Biased BBC can post it.

LOL

"John Reith:
marc | Homepage | 29.08.07 - 12:42 pm


You did not link, link Reith….

Apologies for any breach of netiquette. I sort of assumed you’d know how to find your own website."

The link isn't for me Reith, it's for the readers you're trying to fool - but you already knew that. LOL

Reith: "Notice how Reith says he just followed my link? Shouldn't you have done that in the first place Reith?

Obviously I did. Otherwise I wouldn’t have been able to cut, paste and quote your line about ‘coming from al-Jazeera’ in my initial comment, would I?"

Obviously you did the second time or why would you say "you just followed my link"?

You're not making much sense Reith. LOL but thats to be expected.

Reith: "Nothing to say then about how you didn't even know who we were talking about? You didn't even know he was the editor in chief of al Jazeera.

Rubbish. I knew exactly whom we were talking about. Unlike you, I have displayed a pretty thorough knowledge of what he was hired to do by the BBC WS Trust."

Really? Then why did you refer to him as "someone" and what was the other one, "a person". The only thing you display is your ignorance.

Reith: "Now, trivia aside –now you have the facts and context, when will you amend/withdraw the misleading stories on your site?"

You haven't pointed one out yet.

On Fayad Abu Shamala's comments Reith says "He didn’t. It’s a lie."

Where's your proof Reith?

Reith: "BBC presenter says Israelis should be shot.

Tom Paulin wasn't a BBC presenter. He was a poet and Oxford don who sometimes appeared as a guest on a BBC arts show."

From the link Reith:

"...and regular panel member on the BBC2 arts programme Late Review"

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2002/04/16/npaul16.xml

Here's the definition of a presenter Reith:

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/presenter

Seems pretty clear Paulin could be called a "presenter" but a regular panelist on the BBC is about the same, isn't it?

Interesting that's all you object to about Paulin, his being called a presneter. You ok then with a regular (insert word) on the BBC calling for Jews to be shot then? One would assume so since you didn't address the substance of the report.

Folks, notice how Reith quibbles about small details but not about the substance of the reports? Also notice how he ignores the tremendous amount of other evidence, a great deal of it by the BBC themsleves.

Reith: ".....actually nearly all your stories are a bit dodgy. Best double check them all."

Thanks for the plug. Shame you didn't link. Please everyone check them all.

http://ussneverdock.blogspot.com/2005/01/bbc-is-turn-off-its-official.html

Taken together, it's impossible for anyone to claim that the BBC is not biased, lies, creates fabrications, is anti American anti Israeli and pro Islamist - they admit it themselves.