a pretentious, affected, or effete man. Quite reasonable description I’d say. I have little time for Jew-hating filth and less for supposedly educated people cheering for them. In 50 years you’ll be long gone and if I’m lucky I’ll be nearing the end and they’ll still be dedicating their lives to wiping out Jews because it’s all they know.
Oooh another menshy ... kudos sport ... but you're still irrelevant ... except in your bathroom mirror
Personally, I don't hate anyone; let alone a particular race creed or colour ... will leave that to you and other bigots ... but I do despise intolerance and ignorance ...and you labelling me pretentious has an almost delicious irony ...
Pieguts? Yeah, he’s still around, pops up on the Saints board from time to time, and the horror show that is GC
You both deserve a special round of applause for ignoring the bit where I clearly say: "So in principle I have zero problem with the BBC using my license fee to pay audio forensics experts to count bullets fired in an exchange that killed just over a dozen people." Nice and slow, mind.
Doesn't that discrepancy bother you in the slightest though? The fact that they are willing to spend the time and money to fecking count the number of bullets fired in a 20-min exchange, but apparently couldn't be arsed to find out whether or not the star and narrator of a documentary was the son of a Hamas minister and trained as an actor by the Hamas Ministry of Communications (propaganda)? I'll say it again, really really slowly and clearly for you and Solid: I don't have a problem whatsoever with the levels of exactitude being applied to Israel's actions. On the contrary, I welcome it. But at least have the decency and moral fibre to apply those standards consistently. We cannot have a status quo where Israel is investigated by Sherlock Holmes and every other belligerent in the world, including Hamas, is given Frank Drebin.
Ha go **** yourself ya patronising **** Shall we just take that one sentence out of context and ignore the rest of what you were saying.. about accusing the BBC of trying to act as Moral voice and ethical barometer ? You also claimed that it was a 'discrepancy' for the BBC to analyse the murders and how many rounds were fired at the medics. Dismissing it as 'Ethical commentary' And it is at that point where, due to this discrepancy, reporting of facts degenerates into an ethical commentary. As was said to you, you are trying to denigrate the work of the BBC, because they have exposed the lies of the IDF over this. It's a pattern with you, you do the same with any UN agency that does the same.
The pulled it as soon as they found out. What else do you expect them to do ? Now piss off, I'm watching the footie.
how often do they find a phone which carried on recording during such an "incident" ffs and if the IDF hadn't tried such a blatant cover up they wouldn't have needed to so to you on ignoring this obvious point
Suppose it depends what you want to see, and with you I'm not surprised you want to ignore the war in Sudan, funded by whole list of countries in military armour, this isn't just a civil war as you would prefer to dismiss it, it's a war like all wars being funded by some of the biggest actors in the trade of death.
Nonsense. They pulled it after 10 days of intense public pressure including multiple MPs and the Minister of Culture weighing in. It was an absolute disgrace and wouldn't have happened if only they'd applied the same standard of exactitude to Hamas as they do to Israel in the first place. But they don't. And you won't see it.
