Remember the 'Undercover Mosque' programme?

retired_ks reddy · 08-09-2007, 10:32 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by pandaLUFC:
With overkill like that, it's no wonder people get paranoid. Also, in the Britain Under Attack programme, the narrator mused on the BNP's idea that racism is demonised by the media.

**** off Channel 4.

Three. The others refer to wars abroad, and to terrorists here. Surely you're not calling terrorists muslim are you? Careful now, don't want to be demonised.

retired_ks reddy · 08-09-2007, 10:33 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Fat Bhoy Tim:
<BLOCKQUOTE>Fighting The Taliban
Broadcast: Monday 08 January 2007 08:00 PM

Meeting The Taliban
Broadcast: Thursday 11 January 2007 11:05 PM

Is it just me, or is that hilarious?

You'd think they'd at least leave the fighting till after they've met them. </BLOCKQUOTE>

That was probably their intention but they didn't know much about the Taleban. Must've come as a shock to the crew

retired_selvinel · 08-09-2007, 10:34 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Sir Bert Preast:
<BLOCKQUOTE>Originally posted by spotg:
See, if the programme makers weren't trying to incite racial hatred here, then what exactly was the point of making the show?

To tell us the oh so shocking news that there are muslims in the country who aren't keen on gays and kaffir armies in "their lands"?

We have that **** rammed down our throats at every possible opportunity.

To show the hatred being incitied in what the press calls a moderate mosque.

Bit like when the BNP tried a re-brand and the BBC sent someone in to see if it was for real. Think the BBC should've been prosecuted? </BLOCKQUOTE>

Bert, the suggestion is their comments have been edited and taken wildly out of context. You can spin just about anything when you do that.

Given how often they seem to focus on this issue, and the on going stance they take, it wouldn't be surprising if someone was indulging in a bit of creativity.

If the accusation is true, they've been been inciting anything. On the other than Channel 4 would be guilty of it.

So let's wait and see what the investigation says, other than twist facts according to our pre-disposed opinions?

retired_therob · 08-09-2007, 10:35 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Sir Bert Preast:
<BLOCKQUOTE>Originally posted by msteuk:
Bert missing the point by a few miles there

Go on? </BLOCKQUOTE>

You say that even without the unfair editing the subjects in question were still saying offensive things.

Does this mean that C4 shouldn't be in hot water when all the evidence suggests that they manipulated the footage? Such as this example:

Quote:

Mr Usamah said he had been featured as saying homosexuals should be thrown from a mountain when in fact he was explaining it was an opinion featured in some books, which was not one he believed.

Of course it shouldn't. Whether offensive things were said or not, and whether C4 did an unfair cut-and-paste job, are two independent issues.

retired_sajnesh · 08-09-2007, 10:37 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Sir Bert Preast:
<BLOCKQUOTE>Originally posted by spotg:
See, if the programme makers weren't trying to incite racial hatred here, then what exactly was the point of making the show?

To tell us the oh so shocking news that there are muslims in the country who aren't keen on gays and kaffir armies in "their lands"?

We have that **** rammed down our throats at every possible opportunity.

To show the hatred being incitied in what the press calls a moderate mosque.

Bit like when the BNP tried a re-brand and the BBC sent someone in to see if it was for real. Think the BBC should've been prosecuted? </BLOCKQUOTE>

And they show that by asking leading questions about interpretations of islam, and turn a sentences which goes something like

"Some of the more extreme texts advocate throwing homosexuals off the highest mountain, and that is the sort of teaching that we are trying to eradicate"

into

"advocate throwing homosexuals off the highest mountain"

Make a programme finding some real extremists preaching real hate, by all means, then the police can go in there and make arrests, but a show like this which gives a distorted impression of the people featured helps nothing.

retired_kkaigle · 08-09-2007, 10:37 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Sir Bert Preast:
<BLOCKQUOTE>Originally posted by pandaLUFC:
With overkill like that, it's no wonder people get paranoid. Also, in the Britain Under Attack programme, the narrator mused on the BNP's idea that racism is demonised by the media.

**** off Channel 4.

Three. The others refer to wars abroad, and to terrorists here. Surely you're not calling terrorists muslim are you? Careful now, don't want to be demonised. </BLOCKQUOTE>

Hell, I'd probably agree with you if it wasn't for the fact that "Islam" or "Musilm" wasn't mentioned in the show. Regardless of where it is and what they are doing, if they of that religion and either living in a shithole bombed to the stoneage or are taking about blowing up the West, the people who watch shows like Dispatches are gradually going to become Islamophobic due to the overkill.

Pavlov would be proud.

retired_ks reddy · 08-09-2007, 10:37 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Fat Bhoy Tim:

Bert, the suggestion is their comments have been edited and taken wildly out of context. You can spin just about anything when you do that.

Given how often they seem to focus on this issue, and the on going stance they take, it wouldn't be surprising if someone was indulging in a bit of creativity.

If the accusation is true, they've been been inciting anything. On the other than Channel 4 would be guilty of it.

So let's wait and see what the investigation says, other than twist facts according to our pre-disposed opinions?

Wait for what investigation? The police asked the CPS to prosecute, the CPS said '**** off you silly boys'. That'll be because they decided there was nothing to prosecute. That's why I said the police 'did' something rather than 'are doing' something.

The imams in the video are Salafis. You know about Salafis, don't you? So do you think the programme misinterpreted what they preach?

retired_kkaigle · 08-09-2007, 10:38 AM

Was mentioned that should say

retired_ks reddy · 08-09-2007, 10:39 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by msteuk:

You say that even without the unfair editing the subjects in question were still saying offensive things.

Does this mean that C4 shouldn't be in hot water when all the evidence suggests that they manipulated the footage? Such as this example:

<BLOCKQUOTE>Mr Usamah said he had been featured as saying homosexuals should be thrown from a mountain when in fact he was explaining it was an opinion featured in some books, which was not one he believed.

Of course it shouldn't. Whether offensive things were said or not, and whether C4 did an unfair cut-and-paste job, are two independent issues. </BLOCKQUOTE>

Go watch the clip of Mr. Usamah explaining what he said, then come back to me if you're still insane enough to believe him.

retired_ks reddy · 08-09-2007, 10:41 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by spotg:

And they show that by asking leading questions about interpretations of islam, and turn a sentences which goes something like

"Some of the more extreme texts advocate throwing homosexuals off the highest mountain, and that is the sort of teaching that we are trying to eradicate"

into

"advocate throwing homosexuals off the highest mountain"

Make a programme finding some real extremists preaching real hate, by all means, then the police can go in there and make arrests, but a show like this which gives a distorted impression of the people featured helps nothing.

Abu Usamah is a Salafi. SAL-AF-I. They take all the sacred texts literally, however extreme. Salafis are the ones saying throw the poof down the well, they are NOT the ones preaching moderation.

Do you understand?

Remember the 'Undercover Mosque' programme?

Grab a beer, sit back and relax.

Remember the 'Undercover Mosque' programme?