Inconvenient truths and lunatic 2083 fallacies

Posted on Posted in government, law, politic, society

INCONVENIENT TRUTHS AND LUNATIC 2083 FALLACIES

By Stanley Collymore

¬†On Saturday 23 July 2011 the day after the terrorist outrage in Norway the British tabloid newspaper the Sun carried as its banner headline: “Norway’s 9/11” then without a shred of evidence to support its grotesque allegations went on to categorically assert that this act of terrorism was Muslim-related, tied to al-Qaida and linked to Colonel Gaddafi’s loathsome regime in Libya. The biggest selling daily in the UK because regrettably its feeds off smut and mindless propaganda, the sort of thing that unfortunately many Brits insatiably lap up, the agenda of the Sun newspaper, which is part of Rupert Murdoch’s News International that’s currently deeply embroiled in the phone hacking scandal in the UK, hasn’t, it seems, learnt anything from the universally condemned, reprehensible conduct of its now defunct sister newspaper the News of the World, its own unanswered similar, vile behaviour in the same contemptible imbroglio or that of its parent companies News International and News Corp.

But don’t for a minute run away with the mistaken notion that the Sun alone was at fault in deliberately, dishonestly, xenophobically, Islamophobically and in racially-motivated terms mischievously pointing the finger of blame at Muslims for what had taken place in Norway.. By no means was this the case. In fact, all the western media, print as well as the electronic, instantaneously jumped on board the same expedient bandwagon and in the most demonized, completely vicious and comprehensively racist terms imaginable denounced the murderous events in Norway as undeniably the barbaric acts of terrorists and the perpetrators of them as none other than Muslims. And while it’s perfectly allowable and even marginally legitimate, although somewhat misguided, to candidly offer up one’s speculation as a likely possibility for something that has happened even in cases like this one, it’s neither moral nor lawful to do so using one’s unsubstantiated suppositions as cast iron facts to mask one’s prejudices or wilfully create mischief.

This however is precisely what the BBC did; and I’m singling it out and taking it to task here because it’s a public broadcasting corporation which every citizen and resident in the United Kingdom who owns a TV set or recording equipment, whether that person watches or listens to the BBC or not and increasingly because of the entrenched Zionist stance and exceedingly biased propagandistic drivel that the BBC increasingly and perniciously pumps out aren’t any longer doing so, must obligatorily fund through the statutorily enshrined by parliament, BBC licence fee with the unpleasant alternative for those who dissent of a very hefty court fine and immediate imprisonment if they don’t follow suit and do what the majority of the populace is coerced into coughing up for the BBC’s gross mismanagement. In actual fact the BBC is the only broadcaster in the entire United Kingdom which is legally accorded this privilege and as such one would logically have expected that it would endeavour to reflect the diverse views in a balanced, objective …