Lewes Forum thread

Go on, tell 'em what you think

Lewes Forum New message

BBC Bias on Left Wing Violence

On 26 Mar 2011 at 7:46pm Newmania wrote:
Just when you think the BBC could get no worse you hear their astonishing coverage of the Keep Spending (on us )protest .
Against a backdrop of terrifying destruction all they could say was that lots of people didn`t break anything .
Well of course !! Do they want an armed insurrection before they tut a little. How would they would have treated these scenes at an EDL march ? ..." Many of these Fascists spent a peaceful day discussing issues of race and culture lets not forget .." I wonder why the BBC are sympathetic to the infantile anti cut case ? Ooo thats hard. Christ alive the corruption and mendacity boils my noggin ! Boils it I tell you !
On 26 Mar 2011 at 9:04pm MC wrote:
Newmania. If you do not see the BBC as a uniquely important cultural institution to be treasured and protected there is no hope for you.

You appear to have formed, and be driven by, a politcal agenda governed entirely by an emotional state (often referred to as a chip on the shoulder) .
On 26 Mar 2011 at 9:53pm wallander wrote:
It is possible to value the BBC and also be highly critical of it. There is a left of centre ideology in the journalists it employs. They no doubt think of themselves as impartial but to anyone who is (like Newmania) leaning right they appear almost absurd in their credulity.
We are in an era of world rioting and change so compared to what is happening elsewhere todays events in London may appear "small beer". It doesn't make it forgivable or excusable. If you were genuinly concerned about "cuts" how would damaging property help. Then again I always did well out of IRA bomb attacks so someone may prosper!
On 26 Mar 2011 at 10:04pm OldManiac wrote:
Many people are commenting from the opposite perspective that they are concentrating on about 150 naughty people out of a demonstration of 250,000+ (i.e. 0.06%). You see what you want to see and you will probably always perceive a left-wing bias. Of course the real bias Newmania is you own "hostile media" cognitive bias.
On 26 Mar 2011 at 10:23pm wallander wrote:
What percentage of the population of Libya or Yemen or Syria are fighting on the streets? Very small but the effect may be world changing!
On 26 Mar 2011 at 10:52pm Twinky wrote:
Compare the tory ranting in the original post with the below
"Labour complains to BBC in 'cuts or savings' row
The Labour party has lodged a formal complaint to the BBC amid a growing political row over how the corporation covers the Coalition's deficit reduction policies." Daily Telegraph 9th March
Seems to me if the tories and labour are both whingeing about the BBC then the BBC is getting it about right in terms of coverage...even they may be a bunch of up-their-own-arse luvvies who piss our money away at the slightest excuse...
On 27 Mar 2011 at 12:03am Mr Forks wrote:
Newmania you are fascist scum! You Thatcher loving piece of sh*t!
On 27 Mar 2011 at 12:21am Williamdyer wrote:
...and CUT! Mr Forks has won the race to the bottom this time. Next round will start shortly, after a word from our sponsors.
On 27 Mar 2011 at 12:36am Newmania wrote:
Well I do admire Margaret Thatcher ?
Twinky - The BBC has a well documented corporate culture which is hardly worth debating. There is nothing sinister about that especially and its not exactly a Party bias . For example the BBC was pro Common Market ( and surveys can show this ) when Labour was the main opposition.
Noggin boiling - was intended as comic hyperbole btw. A day in the sun a couple of Margaritas and I am happy as ratty in his boat. Tra la la .
On 27 Mar 2011 at 12:35pm Clifford wrote:
wallander wrote: 'It is possible to value the BBC and also be highly critical of it. There is a left of centre ideology in the journalists it employs.'

Yes, but anyone who is genuinely 'left of centre' (that is, who considers that the present capitalist system should be replaced by a socialist system) would see the BBC line as decidedly pro-capitalist and pro-market. Which is only to be expected in a capitalist society. I imagine the staff of Pravda and Izvestia in the old Soviet Union had a tendency to be party supporters.
On 27 Mar 2011 at 12:39pm Clifford wrote:
Mr Forks wrote: 'Newmania you are fascist scum! You Thatcher loving piece of sh*t!'

Mr Forks, your political education was sadly lacking. However you damn Thatcher (and I damned her constantly) she was never a fascist. I think 19th century liberal comes nearer. By extension, therefore, I hardly think Newmania merits the insult that he is a fascist. Right-wing looney perhaps, but not a fascist.
On 27 Mar 2011 at 9:16pm MC wrote:
Just looney in my book. But wouldn't have him anywhere else.
On 27 Mar 2011 at 10:19pm Mungo wrote:
I was interested to read this evening of the TUC distancing themselves from the trouble in central London.
How then do they explain the use of Union bibs , banners and flags being hung all around Trafalgar Square.
I think we all know who the scum are.
On 27 Mar 2011 at 10:51pm Midge wrote:
I hope that Ed Miliband is hanging his head in shame
On 27 Mar 2011 at 11:11pm wallander wrote:
If I was a conspiracy theorist I might claim the "anarchists" were paid stooges who's mission it was to discredit the left. Sadly it might just be young men who haven't played enough rugby.
On 27 Mar 2011 at 11:11pm wallander wrote:
If I was a conspiracy theorist I might claim the "anarchists" were paid stooges who's mission it was to discredit the left. Sadly it might just be young men who haven't played enough rugby.
On 28 Mar 2011 at 4:28am Zebedee wrote:
Or people who know that their vote counts for nothing and that no peaceful demonstration ever changed anything.
On 28 Mar 2011 at 7:08am drone wrote:
Brilliant day & fantastic protest. Great to see such a large Lewes contingent going up. The fight against the cuts goes on. A luta continua!
On 28 Mar 2011 at 8:24am Clifford wrote:
Wallander - I played rugby AND I am an Anarchist. What do you make of that? Zebedee sums up the situation precisely.
On 28 Mar 2011 at 10:33am Hoist wrote:
Newmania - I see what you do now - you lose the argument on one thread - resort to asking people to read bottom-numbingly long and boring documents and refuse to summarise or answer any of the valid points that your opponents make - and then you start a new thread with the same load of old guff.
On 28 Mar 2011 at 12:01pm not from around here wrote:
Even one of the TUC's representatives said that 'NO' cuts at all was not realistic so why do protesters persist with this childish notion that we can keep things the way they are. Sure somebody from here will claim they are only arguing for 'slower' cuts but many thousands of the placards and banners do in fact say 'no cuts'.
Is UK uncut who were involved with the violent protests (accoording to TV news) affiliated to Lewes Uncut does anybody know?
On 28 Mar 2011 at 12:08pm Hoist wrote:
We don't all have to agree with everything that everyone in the TUC says.
Tax the rich - not the poor.
What are you going to do if they are affiliated - duff them up?
UK uncut are anti violence actually.
On 28 Mar 2011 at 12:15pm not from around here wrote:
Hello Hoist, I'm not about to 'duff anybody up', not my style - maybe it's yours?
I'm just curious as there is a huge difference between a group being officially anit-violence and then quietly accepting (not condemning) violence conveniently carried-out by a 'break-away' group.
If Lewes Uncut is nothing to do with violence at all they have far more legitimacy than if they are connected, however loosely with violent protest.
If you support a group which has resulted in violent protest then you are partly responsible for that violence and all it entails.
On 28 Mar 2011 at 12:18pm not from around here wrote:
Hoist - both the rich and the poor are taxed, except that the rich are taxed at a higher rate than the poor already. Maybe we could save money by not wasting resources on pointless protests?
On 28 Mar 2011 at 12:20pm not from around here wrote:
So Hoist are you one of those who thinks we should not cut anything at all - especially your benefits?
On 28 Mar 2011 at 1:02pm not from around here wrote:
Make up your own minds about these 'eccentrics'.

Watch the video »
On 28 Mar 2011 at 1:31pm Hoist wrote:
Point 1 -I'm sure you're against the TUC on this basis too.
Point 2 - the rich need to be taxed more because they have more money.
Point 3 - I'm your worst nightmare NF - I'm a higher rate tax payer with a concience and my husband is director in a multinational.
Will watch the video when I can do so - no approp where I am right now but if it shows the lads on the demo being violent - well they were just football hooligans who obviously didn't have a match to go to. Probably vote the same way as you.
On 28 Mar 2011 at 2:09pm Newmania wrote:
Why so snarky hoist ? I do not recall losing any argument with you . Au bleeding contraire actually
UK Uncut profess to be anti violence but as Laurie Penny reports in the New Statesman today it would be naive to suppose everyone under their banner intended no more than a walk and sandwiches. It is also quite absurd to say that extreme sections of a constituency have nothing to do with the constituency itself. they would not have been at the Countryside alliance gig would they
FYI Had they been football hooligans the Club in question would have been legally liable for the damage and if 500 ran amok in that manner god knows what action would be taken
I thought the sight of Red Ed acting as a hired sectional tribune to the Public Sector Unions was delicious.
Btw Hoist if you feel you and your husband do not deserve to keep the money you have ( and who am I to disagree) why not give me some ? I fancy a culinary tour of France , come on ...its so little ...
On 28 Mar 2011 at 2:18pm hoist wrote:
Hello again
Sorry if tone seems snarky but not sorry enough to fund you feeding your face. I prefer my causes to be deserving.
You still haven't answered my question about how we are in this mess if the bankers are doing such a good job or given me the precis I asked for.
I'm no fan of red ed either.
I was at the march - violence was from a group of young lads dressed in black. They were quite distinct from the uncut people. I'm sure that the organisations affected find the bit of criminal damage a small price to pay for all the tax avoiding.
On 28 Mar 2011 at 2:33pm Clifford wrote:
I see 'not from around here' is around here again with the counsel of despair of the chronically apathetic - never protest over anything ever.

And I love 'If you support a group which has resulted in violent protest then you are partly responsible for that violence and all it entails.' That presumably makes all the pro-police posters partly responsible for Ian Tomlinson's death.
On 28 Mar 2011 at 2:41pm Hoist wrote:
Ha ha - quite
On 28 Mar 2011 at 4:02pm bastian wrote:
has anyone read the letters page of the local rag this week...there is a reply to a letter last week(which I didn't read)is it a coincidence,or has this poster become discontent with cyberspace and branched out into newsprint.
On 28 Mar 2011 at 5:04pm Newmania wrote:
Got nothing to do with "Responsible for " its " associated with" and quite reasonably so,who do you expect to be the violent one, the moderates , the majority ?
Aint never so
On 28 Mar 2011 at 9:02pm not from around here wrote:
Hoist - why should I be 'against the TUC'? I don't agree with their views on the cuts but I'm not 'against' them in principle if that's what you mean?
Football hooligans voting the same way as me - I presume that's meant to be an insult and a pretty clumsy one at that.
I consider myself a moderate and a pretty centred one as well. I have stronger views on some subjects some of which take me to the right of the middle ground and some to the left. I vote Tory as they generally make less of a mess of the countries finances than Labour do. They usually have to clear up the mess left behind by Labours profligate spending - and this time is no exception.
Personally I would like them to cut harder and faster than they currently are so that the pain is out of the way quickly and we can all get on towards a more prosperous future.
This whole cuts issue isn't about politics (at least it shouldn't be), it's about economic realities.
Hoist you said "I'm sure that the organisations affected find the bit of criminal damage a small price to pay for all the tax avoiding." That certainly sounds like you condone the violence and that is exactly what I'm talking about - people with attitudes like yours who justify the violence are partly responsible for the outcome. You should feel ashamed and yet you feel proud. Would somebody be justified in smashing up some of your property on the basis that
A: they don't agree with your politics and think you might be avoiding some income tax
B: that you can afford it anyway?
No, didn't think so.
On 29 Mar 2011 at 10:57am Hoist wrote:
Lewes uncut aren't violent protesters either - any more than the TUC and you seem to be against them just because they were on the same march.
The mess wasn't from Labours 'profligate spending' - aren't you aware of this? There was a crisis in the banking sector - didn't you read about it? And the torys were the people who started dereglating that industry. They would not have done any different to labour - not a bit - they would have - if anything - been worse. Come on - give it up - rubbish argument.
Violence and criminal damage aren't the same thing - again - rubbish argument. Also - if I behaved the way these people do I would deserve what I got.
Harder and faster cuts only sounds reasonable in theory - don't forget that there are real people who will suffer.
On 29 Mar 2011 at 1:47pm Mouse wrote:
Thatcher was awesome. I especially enjoyed the Belgrano bit.
On 29 Mar 2011 at 10:52pm Brixtonbelle wrote:
Hoist has hit the nail on the head. It's real people who suffer with the cuts, not the bankers or MP's who we somehow 'trust' to run this country and capitalism for us.
I vote that all MP's and bankers are put on an average UK salary for the next five yeasr so that cuts can be harder and faster, and the resultant savings donated to the public purse. After all, as Gideon and co say, we are all in this together - let's all feel the pain together !
On 30 Mar 2011 at 11:19am Hoist wrote:
Now there's a plan!
On 30 Mar 2011 at 12:31pm not from around here wrote:
Lewes Uncut are really wasting ordinary peoples time by taking over the bank in Lewes and turning it into a 'drama area' - I mean how childish are you people?
UK Uncut spokesperson Lucy Annhurst steadfastly refused to condemn the violence and made a complete fool of herself on Newsnight a couple of days ago to the complete exasperation of the presenter. Have a look at the link - her hilarious and maddening interview begins about 6 mins into the clip. The violence has been described as a massive own goal for the anti cuts movement and I agree. There may be serious points to be made but the average man or woman is going to completely turned-off by the violence.

Watch the video »
On 30 Mar 2011 at 12:52pm Lewes Trousers wrote:
The economic crisis was not made by Labour and not truly by 'the Banks', but by a finance system that no one wanted to regulate (except funnily enough Gordon Brown - in one of his early fininacial speeches) because the sector gave so much tax revenue, once the sector went into decline this effected tax revenue and made a hole in the public purse.
The sector was saved with state intervention, funny how when we were two steps from empty shelves at tescos, no one spoke out against the nanny state then, wasn't it?
Since that time the financial and banking sector has turned itself around, in the USA they have already sold off many of the governments shares in banks and mortgage companies, here the governemnt are holding around £850 billion of banking assets.
The likelihood is we will have a full recovery by 2014 and all revenues and more will be returned, assets be sold off and the Governemnt sitting in Clover, with tax give aways etc. Whilst we will be sitting with no public services because the Tory Lib-dems don't like them and have made todays difficulties an excuse to attack all public services, when they know in effect in a few years time we will be able to pay for them twice over.
This is why the left of centre parties wanted to invest heavily in public service to cushion the blow of the recession, save jobs and livelihoods, because they too new it could be paid for in 2014. So see you in 2014 no dout with income tax down to 15% with not a bobby in site, no hospital, no library, and no job. Did I mention that the south east has a large proportion of its poulation employed in public service.
I read somehwere that every generation has to learn what the Tories are really like.

This thread has reached its limit now
Why not start another one


Lewes Station View 82:132
Lewes Station View

Just noticed. TP started "Quote of the Moment", although it's hard to understand what it's for. more
If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear.
George Orwell