C4 'distorted' mosque programme

[rory_20_uk]

Link (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/west_midlands/6936681.stm)

So, Channel 4 made a documentary that showed several preachers making extreme comments. The police managed to find that these were taken out of context, and that airing them on TV was incitement. Apparently letting people know about extremist views is a crime whereas having them isn't really as bad.

this came up on Channel 4 news and was very amusing. One of the Clerics was interviewed. His comments were all "out of context". Apparently such phrases as "even with a PhD women are deficient" and "Bin laden is worth 1,000 of Tony Blair as Bin laden is Muslim" have a context that makes them OK... No, he wasn't able to recall what the context was, but was quick to (repeatedly) refer us to the investigation the police had done.

When this undercover dispatches was done to the BNP the police didn't go after the show. They were simply white racists, end of story.

Is even recognising that all is not well in the integrated society of the UK now not allowed? Or am I having a blinkered diatribe against the police who are being completely fair?

~:smoking:

[Crazed Rabbit]

Bad channel 4! Get your head back in the sand and stop talking about approaching danger!

If we can just get everyone to force themselves to think the right way, perhaps we can change reality!

Crazed Rabbit

[Ser Clegane]

Well ... they could simply release the full transcript/tape to show the context for everybody to judge.

[Boyar Son]

the UK needs to toughen up on these instigators.. they'll lead the people into suicide bombings...

[Slyspy]

Or they could be more honest in their editing.

[Spetulhu]

What's so bad about letting extremists blunder on TV? Context or not, I'd want nothing to do with people who thinks the "right" religion makes you worth more than others.

[Tribesman]

So there was some heavy editing and splicing of different speeches into one to make a good story .
Nah they wouldn't do that would they .


So lets see .....there was this hour long program of nasty comments , less advert time , less commentary time , less title sequence .
So lets be generous and give it a healthy1/2 an hour of nasty comments .

People said oooooo looky there at the nasty comments , the police said 'allo 'allo whats going on 'ere then with these nasty comments , their lawyers looked at 56 hours of nasty comments and decided that it wasn't actually nasty and that the editing down of the comments and presenting them as nasty was the nasty thing .



When this undercover dispatches was done to the BNP the police didn't go after the show.
Perhaps they should have .
They went with what the show had depicted and said oooooooo thats nasty comments that is....the courts looked at the actual comments and said case not proven .
It appears the police have learnt from their mistake , but the journalists havn't .

[Duke of Gloucester]

It is difficult though. What is the difference between editting to mislead and editting to make the programme more interesting?

There is a precedent for the police investigating programme editting and it did not end well for the police:

BBC (in this case they are not impartial) link (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/tv_and_radio/2308767.stm)

The two situations are not the same, but be ready for the police to be apologising again.

[Fragony]

Radical imams foaming and the status quo downplaying it? Tell me it isn't so!

They are all big teddybears after all.

[Tribesman]

Radical imams foaming and the status quo downplaying it? Tell me it isn't so!

Errrr...it isn't so Frag , sorry to shatter your illusions but Britain does this thing , when it gets foaming at the mouth radical imans it sends them to jail for breaking the law if they break the law or if they is foriegn it deports them too .
Just like it does with foaming at the mouth white supremacist scum when they break the law .
Strange that isn't it :dizzy2: what a funny system , must be something to do with the rule of law or some such nonsense:shrug:

[Fragony]

Ehhhhh, what button did I step on this time :dizzy2:

BWahahaha out of context indeed, pretty straightforward no? So, time to get that system to work Tribes.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=peFQWuk4nuo&eurl

out of context uh-huh

[Tribesman]

BWahahaha out of context indeed, pretty straightforward no? So, time to get that system to work Tribes.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=peFQWuk4nuo&eurl

out of context uh-huh


:laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4:
Hey Frag all that was posted before , if you note from the first clip of the documentary that you just linked that 3rd "preacher" got banned from the country didn't he , he broke the laws with comments he made .
Pretty straightforward yes .
It does help if you keep up to date with topics you want to get upset about . It would make it harder for me to make your posts look silly:oops:
Soooooo...try again :2thumbsup:

[Fragony]

Poor tribesy, just wants to be loved, is that too much to ask? Why don't they?

ps, ser makes a good point, gimme everything. We can make up a context later, works for them, always a listening ear somewhere. Loves everything that isn't theirselve.

Awwwwww found exactly what you want to hear Tribes.

http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=5621979422472502457

Yes, this is entirely believable.

very.

[caravel]

Apparently such phrases as "even with a PhD women are deficient" and "Bin laden is worth 1,000 of Tony Blair as Bin laden is Muslim" have a context that makes them OK... No, he wasn't able to recall what the context was, but was quick to (repeatedly) refer us to the investigation the police had done.
Shocking lies, he's only worth about about 100 of Tony Blair. :no:

[Tribesman]

Shocking lies, he's only worth about about 100 of Tony Blair.
I didn't know Tony Blair had a price on his head .