Chit Chat
Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
13 Aug 14
15:22
Joined:
Date Joined:
02 Oct 03
This was in Witham on the 8th (Friday) morning.
The BBC television news pages reported it on Saturday morning, and that it may have been a case of mistaken identity. There was no description of the attacker.
On Monday morning, the BBC reported that an e-fit picture had been given by police to help trace the attacker. There was still no description, which you think would have helped find him faster.
I read all the BBC regional news every day and know how they work.
I now made it a long odds on shot that the attacker wasn't white, or the BBC would definitely have said so.
On Tuesday morning the BBC said there two attackers. There was still no description of them, but only one e-fit had been released.
Still no description on the BBC this morning. So I googled Essex Police news.
It looks like the one who threw the liquid, the subject of the e-fit, has been remanded in custody.
He is black.
His accomplice was white.
If they were both white it would have said so in the first instance.
Why do the BBC consistently do this?
The BBC television news pages reported it on Saturday morning, and that it may have been a case of mistaken identity. There was no description of the attacker.
On Monday morning, the BBC reported that an e-fit picture had been given by police to help trace the attacker. There was still no description, which you think would have helped find him faster.
I read all the BBC regional news every day and know how they work.
I now made it a long odds on shot that the attacker wasn't white, or the BBC would definitely have said so.
On Tuesday morning the BBC said there two attackers. There was still no description of them, but only one e-fit had been released.
Still no description on the BBC this morning. So I googled Essex Police news.
It looks like the one who threw the liquid, the subject of the e-fit, has been remanded in custody.
He is black.
His accomplice was white.
If they were both white it would have said so in the first instance.
Why do the BBC consistently do this?
Show More
My guess would one one of two reasons Taxi:
Either through a sense of fair play the BBC misguidedly see the deck as being stacked against young black men and don't want to play up to a stereotype in order to give them a fairer shake.
Or they know full well that young black men are disproportionately likely to be involved in violent attacks like this and they are so limp diccked and are riven with political correctness that they conspire to keep relevant facts from us when such crimes are committed.
They may think it is the first.
Either through a sense of fair play the BBC misguidedly see the deck as being stacked against young black men and don't want to play up to a stereotype in order to give them a fairer shake.
Or they know full well that young black men are disproportionately likely to be involved in violent attacks like this and they are so limp diccked and are riven with political correctness that they conspire to keep relevant facts from us when such crimes are committed.
They may think it is the first.
The BBC are a racist organisation and thats a fact.Time and again the race of the perpetrator is a closely guarded secret unless of course he is white.This is a truly disturbing occurrence ..of course the usual apologists will be on here saying it aint so.
Whatever it is, it's 'class 8 corrosive', and it burns.
@GRANTCKING -- what is caustic chemical? acid?
Assuming the copper who said caustic had a chemistry degree, then the opposite: alkaline -- say bleach or drain clearer.
Otherwise, any corrosive chemical whether acid or alkali.
Assuming the copper who said caustic had a chemistry degree, then the opposite: alkaline -- say bleach or drain clearer.
Otherwise, any corrosive chemical whether acid or alkali.
CMAT. Well, I can only assume that, when the E-fit was made public, it would have been fairly obvious what colour he was...unless it was a bloody bad E-fit. Prior to the E-fit being issued there would have been little point in releasing the news that he was black because you couldn't have recgnised him, anyway!! You wouldn't know what the f**k he looked like!"!
What is your problem with good old Aunty Beeb? Or is it just that you like complaining?
What is your problem with good old Aunty Beeb? Or is it just that you like complaining?
naydam,
I think the op is struggling to come to terms with the fact that, in this country at least, a person's race is becoming less of an issue.
I think the op is struggling to come to terms with the fact that, in this country at least, a person's race is becoming less of an issue.
I think he's struggling to come to terms with facts in general!
I apologise to the OP. My last remark was a snide, vindictive comment. I did not intend to rile him and once again, I apologise.
We should be able to differ or disagree without personal comments.
We should be able to differ or disagree without personal comments.
The point here is that the BBC have an agenda and that agenda is to under report black on white crime.The post at 15.41 is absolutely spot on.
Sums up Wesdag
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gTx4q3BYdyU
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gTx4q3BYdyU
Is there any evidence this was a racist attack?
There is no monopoly on crime for either white or black people
But if you issuing a description of an attacker
I would have thought the person's colour was quite important myself
As for the BBC, they are painfully PC
We are constantly beaten over the head with the fact that we are both a racist and sexist society
like a large wooden club whether it is true or not???????????????
I do not approve of this, as we departing from reality, let us just stick to facts please.
Some of old uns are becoming increasingly confused??????????????
There is no monopoly on crime for either white or black people
But if you issuing a description of an attacker
I would have thought the person's colour was quite important myself
As for the BBC, they are painfully PC
We are constantly beaten over the head with the fact that we are both a racist and sexist society
like a large wooden club whether it is true or not???????????????
I do not approve of this, as we departing from reality, let us just stick to facts please.
Some of old uns are becoming increasingly confused??????????????
Looking at the News and its an endless stream of negative things Muslims and blacks have been doing, mass murder, Ebola ,racist attacks. etc,etc.
Europe would be a better place if it was a Muslim free zone.
Europe would be a better place if it was a Muslim free zone.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-essex-28731050
From the same article, written on 10th August it clearly states:
"The two suspects are described as a white man and a black man and if anyone saw them either in the area prior to this attack or afterwards we would urgently like to speak to them."
From the same article, written on 10th August it clearly states:
"The two suspects are described as a white man and a black man and if anyone saw them either in the area prior to this attack or afterwards we would urgently like to speak to them."
oh
...the OP is wrong......not much else I can say then
...the OP is wrong......not much else I can say then
It appears that the op puts having a good seethe ahead of getting his facts correct.
Another negative happening ,you just know its going to be a black man who did it. Would be a shock if it wasn't.
Not a fact though.
Not a fact though.
I am convinced that some posters have THEIR own agenda and refuse to accept that the the BBC are not there to report events in a manner which suits those posters.
Let's examine this particular case. Firstly, though, I must add that I know nothing of any of these events and the only information I have is from the original post.
So, there is an occurrence on Friday morning. The BBC don't report this because they are unaware of it.
Saturday morning. The BBC receives a report from a source that the attack may be the result of mistaken identity. No mention is made of the source of this information or why mistaken identity is being considered. There is no description issued because no description has been issued.
Monday morning. The police have constructed an E-fit picture of the assailant. This E-fit is probably for the benefit of police officers. It would not necessarily be constructed for public display. Was this E-fit shown in any newspapers? Was it shown on any other national news channels? Why do you assume that it was given to the BBC? Just because the BBC has received notification of an E-fit does not necessarily mean that a description has been issued. Was the description available on other media sources?
Tuesday morning. It now transpires that there are TWO attackers. There is just ONE E-fit. You then state that this E-fit has been 'released'. What do you mean by 'released'? Made available for public scrutiny? Was the E-fit then displayed in the public domain? Who displayed it? Who DIDN'T display it? Was there a description of them ANYWHERE apart from Essex police news?
Why do you say that if they had both been white, the BBC would have said so. They probably gave out all the reliable information that they had. How would they know he was black or white or brown if they didn't receive the information from a reliable source. Let's face it, their information was far from complete when they needed to add a second assailant!
If you say that the BBC have an agenda on matters of colour-related crime, and that they were withholding information...where else was all this missing info displayed? Who showed it?
Let's examine this particular case. Firstly, though, I must add that I know nothing of any of these events and the only information I have is from the original post.
So, there is an occurrence on Friday morning. The BBC don't report this because they are unaware of it.
Saturday morning. The BBC receives a report from a source that the attack may be the result of mistaken identity. No mention is made of the source of this information or why mistaken identity is being considered. There is no description issued because no description has been issued.
Monday morning. The police have constructed an E-fit picture of the assailant. This E-fit is probably for the benefit of police officers. It would not necessarily be constructed for public display. Was this E-fit shown in any newspapers? Was it shown on any other national news channels? Why do you assume that it was given to the BBC? Just because the BBC has received notification of an E-fit does not necessarily mean that a description has been issued. Was the description available on other media sources?
Tuesday morning. It now transpires that there are TWO attackers. There is just ONE E-fit. You then state that this E-fit has been 'released'. What do you mean by 'released'? Made available for public scrutiny? Was the E-fit then displayed in the public domain? Who displayed it? Who DIDN'T display it? Was there a description of them ANYWHERE apart from Essex police news?
Why do you say that if they had both been white, the BBC would have said so. They probably gave out all the reliable information that they had. How would they know he was black or white or brown if they didn't receive the information from a reliable source. Let's face it, their information was far from complete when they needed to add a second assailant!
If you say that the BBC have an agenda on matters of colour-related crime, and that they were withholding information...where else was all this missing info displayed? Who showed it?
The op's point is correct.I read the report and indeed as he states the ethnicity of the attacker is NOT mentioned in the first instance..the fact a black and a white man were being sought was towards the **** end of the piece.If two white men were being hunted the BBC would have that information in the first paragraph.
Higher than normal number of ethnic minority people work for the BBC and lower than normal for the Police. Sure to create bias and possible friction between both.
years ago my local paper stopped reporting the descriptions of muggers
You are making it all up in your head. You would like to think that the headline WOULD have been "Two Whites assault Black" but the truth is that it wouldn't, It'd just that you would want it to be to fall in line with your opinion of the Beeb. Your opinion is biased.
You would like to think that the headline WOULD have been "Two Whites assault Black"
err no! never seen a headline of "two blacks assault white" either.
what you may expect to see is something like ....
Man assaulted near London Bridge at 11.40pm, by three men. He was robbed at knifepoint. His attackers made off with his i-phone and wallet. His attackers are described as being white/black males in their late teens
err no! never seen a headline of "two blacks assault white" either.
what you may expect to see is something like ....
Man assaulted near London Bridge at 11.40pm, by three men. He was robbed at knifepoint. His attackers made off with his i-phone and wallet. His attackers are described as being white/black males in their late teens
My opinion of the Liberal slanted bbc is not biased.Their discrimination against the indigenous population of this country is there for all to see right down to the abundance of ethnics they employ.
in the interests of fact rickiBobby
The Ebola virus is not a Muslim or African plot to destroy us all
it is a virus..as far as I am aware virus's not have political allegiances
The Ebola virus is not a Muslim or African plot to destroy us all
it is a virus..as far as I am aware virus's not have political allegiances
Looking at the News and its an endless stream of negative things Muslims and blacks have been doing, mass murder, Ebola ,racist attacks. etc,etc.
in answer to that post
in answer to that post
Wesdag 13 Aug 14 21:45
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-essex-28731050
From the same article, written on 10th August it clearly states
"The two suspects are described as a white man and a black man and if anyone saw them either in the area prior to this attack or afterwards we would urgently like to speak to them."
I absolutely love it when people try to prove me wrong, or that I was lying, and thinking they have found the holy grail, they post it, and fail miserably.
What you have posted is a website address.
What I was quoting, if you can read properly, was BBC television regional news pages.
Do you understand the difference?
And if you want to try the 'they only have room for two pages' ploy, so 'couldn't fit in the descriptions', that has also been tried before with items like this, and they also failed.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-essex-28731050
From the same article, written on 10th August it clearly states
"The two suspects are described as a white man and a black man and if anyone saw them either in the area prior to this attack or afterwards we would urgently like to speak to them."
I absolutely love it when people try to prove me wrong, or that I was lying, and thinking they have found the holy grail, they post it, and fail miserably.
What you have posted is a website address.
What I was quoting, if you can read properly, was BBC television regional news pages.
Do you understand the difference?
And if you want to try the 'they only have room for two pages' ploy, so 'couldn't fit in the descriptions', that has also been tried before with items like this, and they also failed.
Wesdag 13 Aug 14 21:47
It appears that the op puts having a good seethe ahead of getting his facts correct.
It appears that you can't read, and that your family tree is a cactus.
It appears that the op puts having a good seethe ahead of getting his facts correct.
It appears that you can't read, and that your family tree is a cactus.
Let us examine the chit chat formulaic evidence: if you read any one of the following newspapers you have what is laughably known as a left or right wing stance.
The Sun
The Express
The Mail
The Guardian
The Independent
The Telegraph
The Times
Excluding The Racing Post, if there are any other large selling daily rags they will no doubt also be labelled left or right wing by chit chat.
So no matter what newspaper you read, to everybody on either side of the political spectrum, at some time, you will be a tw@t for reading them.
I can't remember the last time I purchased a newspaper, it's certainly not this century.
Now you can imagine how many BBC TELEVISION news pages I have read over the years. And before it closed down, I used to read BBC CEEFAX every day.
Take it from me, I know how the BBC work, and I don't tell lies.
For those who disbelieve me, I challenge you to read all the regional news every day for one or two weeks.
These are examples of what you will definitely find:
A crime committed by white man or men, if the police have given a description, the BBC WILL put it on the screen.
A crime committed by black or asian man or men, if the police have given a description, the BBC MAY put it on the screen, but it's highly unlikely.
If a UKIP member has been nicked for fiddling expenses, creating a disturbance or made a crass remark, that will NOT sit in regional news on its own. That will be in the MAIN headlines, repeated in UK NEWS, and even if the UKIP man is from Cornwall, it will also appear under London news, as well as south west news, and if nothing has happened of any interest in any other county, it will be put on there as well.
Have you ever heard of David Ruffley? A pathetic excuse for a man, but more importantly, a Tory MP in Suffolk. He assaulted his common law wife. It was on Suffolk regional news for one day, then vanished. I don't recall it being on the London News page at all, even though he's an MP. It didn't slide over the borders to Norfolk or Essex news either.
Mark my words, if Ruffley was a UKIP man that would have been in London, Suffolk, Norfolk, Essex, Bedfordshire, Berkshire, Buckinghamshire, Kent, Sussex and Surrey news, and probably Clackmannanshire for good measure.
Try this report from 2012 - some of you may recall it as a football fans punch up in a north London pub that got out of hand with two fatal stabbings, when it was clearly nothing of the kind.
The truth apparently appeared in the Daily Mail, so now half of you can say that it was all lies.
.
http://durotrigan.blogspot.co.uk/2012/05/bbc-hides-anti-white-race-murder.html
The Sun
The Express
The Mail
The Guardian
The Independent
The Telegraph
The Times
Excluding The Racing Post, if there are any other large selling daily rags they will no doubt also be labelled left or right wing by chit chat.
So no matter what newspaper you read, to everybody on either side of the political spectrum, at some time, you will be a tw@t for reading them.
I can't remember the last time I purchased a newspaper, it's certainly not this century.
Now you can imagine how many BBC TELEVISION news pages I have read over the years. And before it closed down, I used to read BBC CEEFAX every day.
Take it from me, I know how the BBC work, and I don't tell lies.
For those who disbelieve me, I challenge you to read all the regional news every day for one or two weeks.
These are examples of what you will definitely find:
A crime committed by white man or men, if the police have given a description, the BBC WILL put it on the screen.
A crime committed by black or asian man or men, if the police have given a description, the BBC MAY put it on the screen, but it's highly unlikely.
If a UKIP member has been nicked for fiddling expenses, creating a disturbance or made a crass remark, that will NOT sit in regional news on its own. That will be in the MAIN headlines, repeated in UK NEWS, and even if the UKIP man is from Cornwall, it will also appear under London news, as well as south west news, and if nothing has happened of any interest in any other county, it will be put on there as well.
Have you ever heard of David Ruffley? A pathetic excuse for a man, but more importantly, a Tory MP in Suffolk. He assaulted his common law wife. It was on Suffolk regional news for one day, then vanished. I don't recall it being on the London News page at all, even though he's an MP. It didn't slide over the borders to Norfolk or Essex news either.
Mark my words, if Ruffley was a UKIP man that would have been in London, Suffolk, Norfolk, Essex, Bedfordshire, Berkshire, Buckinghamshire, Kent, Sussex and Surrey news, and probably Clackmannanshire for good measure.
Try this report from 2012 - some of you may recall it as a football fans punch up in a north London pub that got out of hand with two fatal stabbings, when it was clearly nothing of the kind.
The truth apparently appeared in the Daily Mail, so now half of you can say that it was all lies.
.
http://durotrigan.blogspot.co.uk/2012/05/bbc-hides-anti-white-race-murder.html
I have no idea what news pages you are on about. If I go online to see the BBC news, I would go to the website indicated in the link supplied earlier.
This, it seems is different to the one the 'regional news pages'. I don't know what they are or where they are located.
This, it seems is different to the one the 'regional news pages'. I don't know what they are or where they are located.
I have a Freeview box, I don't want or need Sky.
Channel 80 is a 24 hour BBC news channel.
Press the red button on your remote control and the news pages index will come on screen.
I would assume you get the same pages on BBC1, 2, 3 or 4 when you press the red button, but I always use channel 80.
Channel 80 is a 24 hour BBC news channel.
Press the red button on your remote control and the news pages index will come on screen.
I would assume you get the same pages on BBC1, 2, 3 or 4 when you press the red button, but I always use channel 80.
Is that the Luke Fitzgerald affair? If it is, then yes, the earliest news reports DID indicate a football related incident. But that was because of witness statements from people who genuinely believed that! At that time NOBODY had pieced together that it originated with some entirely unrelated scuffle between two youths earlier in the day. The proper story came to light much later on.
NOBODY (except the black gang) knew anything about the actual cause of events. They were NOT misreporting it!
This is just paranoia.
NOBODY (except the black gang) knew anything about the actual cause of events. They were NOT misreporting it!
This is just paranoia.
55 year old man attacked in his home in south west London by burglars.
It happened on Monday, but is still on BBC news pages today (Thursday) It must be a slow week for news.
It seems that the burglars were probably Polish.
Under BBC rules, 'foreign' isn't white, even when it is.
The BBC gave no description.
It happened on Monday, but is still on BBC news pages today (Thursday) It must be a slow week for news.
It seems that the burglars were probably Polish.
Under BBC rules, 'foreign' isn't white, even when it is.
The BBC gave no description.
If you view the BBC video report for the Luke Fitzgerald case on that page, there is no mention at all of a 20 strong black gang attacking the pub with weapons.
They probably interviewed a dozen who said it was committed by blacks, but only show whites who said it 'got a bit rowdy' and didn't mention the ethnicity of the gang at all.
They probably interviewed a dozen who said it was committed by blacks, but only show whites who said it 'got a bit rowdy' and didn't mention the ethnicity of the gang at all.
I can only suggest that you ring Essex police...that seems to work.
The BBC have described them as 'probably Polish'. What do you want them to say?! I have no doubt that they will issue a more accurate description IF and WHEN it becomes available. This will be issued by the police if and when they decide that they have enough detail to make it worthwhile. In the meantime, it's four fellas...probably Polish.
I am totally at a loss to understand what you mean by 'foreign isn't white, even when it is'.
The BBC have described them as 'probably Polish'. What do you want them to say?! I have no doubt that they will issue a more accurate description IF and WHEN it becomes available. This will be issued by the police if and when they decide that they have enough detail to make it worthwhile. In the meantime, it's four fellas...probably Polish.
I am totally at a loss to understand what you mean by 'foreign isn't white, even when it is'.
The BBC have described them as 'probably Polish'.
Not on the BBC television news pages they haven't, it's on my screen at the moment, there is no description at all.
Not on the BBC television news pages they haven't, it's on my screen at the moment, there is no description at all.
Cmat...the likes of naydam and wesbag wont have it will they..no matter how many examples you present them with both have their heads firmly stuck up their own rectums.At least we know the truth.
Well, I looked at that link you put up. It seems to be a very biased assessment of the events. It states things like 'the BBC said it was football-related' and then points out that the 'correct' story was in the Daily Mail'. But it doesn't give a timeline as to WHEN the Daily Mail story was published. This could only have been much later, when the facts had been determined. I have no doubt that the BBC were also reporting exactly the same story at that later time.
The witnesses are the ones who suggested it was a football thing...what else would they think? A gang of black youths comes into your pub and starts causing mayhem...how were they supposed to know that it was actually connected to some scuffle between two fellas (that they probably didn't know), several hours earlier??
Why do you say that they didn't show any statements from blacks? If it happened in any pub that I went in, there would be no statements from blacks...because they don't seem go in my type of pub!
Even if there were statements from some black customers, you would assume that they said the same thing.
Perhaps the police specifically requested that they did not indicate ethnicity in order to avoid vigilant 'retaliation' from people who might wish to call this a racial crime...which it obviously wasn't.
I'd be interested to know which of the news programmes, (Ch3, Ch4, Sky etc.) reported this any differently AT THE TIME. Not several days later.
You do my head in. You just ignore all of the facts and proclaim to all "BBC bias" and "Racist murder". It simply ain't so.
The witnesses are the ones who suggested it was a football thing...what else would they think? A gang of black youths comes into your pub and starts causing mayhem...how were they supposed to know that it was actually connected to some scuffle between two fellas (that they probably didn't know), several hours earlier??
Why do you say that they didn't show any statements from blacks? If it happened in any pub that I went in, there would be no statements from blacks...because they don't seem go in my type of pub!
Even if there were statements from some black customers, you would assume that they said the same thing.
Perhaps the police specifically requested that they did not indicate ethnicity in order to avoid vigilant 'retaliation' from people who might wish to call this a racial crime...which it obviously wasn't.
I'd be interested to know which of the news programmes, (Ch3, Ch4, Sky etc.) reported this any differently AT THE TIME. Not several days later.
You do my head in. You just ignore all of the facts and proclaim to all "BBC bias" and "Racist murder". It simply ain't so.
BBC hides anti-white Race Murder
We have come to expect the BBC to systematically distort the news to fit its narrative of an essentially anti-black, anti-Muslim ‘racist’ British, particularly English, society, and no effort is seemingly spared to highlight examples of white ‘racism’ whenever it occurs and often when it doesn’t. The BBC is eager to construe more or less any innocuous remark as ‘racist’ if it deems such a remark to be anything less than celebratory of multiethnic multicultural ‘diversity’. However, over the past three days its reporting has hit a new low in its coverage of the brutal stabbing and subsequent death of a young man named Luke Fitzpatrick in a Dollis Hill pub – the Ox and Gate – last Saturday.
Reading the BBC reports on its website and listening to its accompanying video, you could be forgiven for thinking that this fatality was the consequence of things turning “nasty” and “rowdy” amongst a group of drunken football fans – white football fans – in a London pub. The only interviewees chosen for the video were white, and the reporter stated:
“Police have arrested three people so far. Two teenage boys and a man in his thirties.” He continued: “A night of celebration, turned to tragedy.”
There was no mention of the ethnicity of those arrested or what form the violence took. All three reports from Sunday, Monday and today were tailored in such a way as to make this tragic death look like a ‘typical’ consequence of the innate violence associated with a certain type of English football fan. As can be seen from the following extract, this bias in its report is undeniable:
The victims were found close to The Ox and Gate pub, where several people had gathered to watch the Champions League final on TV.
An eyewitness who was inside the pub told BBC London that as fans celebrated Chelsea's win things turned "rowdy and nasty", resulting in some damage both inside and outside the pub.
It is believed the victims were father and son and the stabbing took place after trouble started in the pub.
We turn to The Daily Mail on the other hand and discover what really happened. This was no brawl between tanked up football hooligans, this was a mass anti-white race attack perpetrated by a gang of 20 hooded blacks who burst into the pub, killed Luke Fitzpatrick and stabbed his father. The Mail writes:
The pair were attacked when a gang armed with bats and knives stormed the north London pub after father and son had watched Chelsea win the cup together at on Saturday.
'I was there on Saturday and it was like something out of a horror film.
'There were about 20 young black guys all with their hoods up armed with sticks and bats and knives. They just ran in the pub and started trying to attack people.
'It was really frightening. But it should not have happened to Luke, it shouldn’t have happened to anyone, but he was a complete innocent.'
Why did the BBC omit all of this terrifying and highly salient detail? For what reason could it have ignored the identity of the attackers and the fact that they stormed the pub en masse armed with lethal weapons? This was no brawl between drunken football fans; this was an organised anti-white race attack. The BBC has some explaining to do, for its treatment of this crime, as in its willingness to claim that organised Pakistani Muslim paedophilia has nothing to do with the cultural background of the perpetrators, illustrates its intrinsic anti-white anti-indigenous bias. The BBC is institutionally racist: it is anti-white, but more specifically, anti-English. Have you had enough of this? A video of the biased BBC report is shown below, in which a completely distorted politically correct vision of this brutal murder is presented for public consumption. The BBC should be held to account for such wilful misrepresentation.
We have come to expect the BBC to systematically distort the news to fit its narrative of an essentially anti-black, anti-Muslim ‘racist’ British, particularly English, society, and no effort is seemingly spared to highlight examples of white ‘racism’ whenever it occurs and often when it doesn’t. The BBC is eager to construe more or less any innocuous remark as ‘racist’ if it deems such a remark to be anything less than celebratory of multiethnic multicultural ‘diversity’. However, over the past three days its reporting has hit a new low in its coverage of the brutal stabbing and subsequent death of a young man named Luke Fitzpatrick in a Dollis Hill pub – the Ox and Gate – last Saturday.
Reading the BBC reports on its website and listening to its accompanying video, you could be forgiven for thinking that this fatality was the consequence of things turning “nasty” and “rowdy” amongst a group of drunken football fans – white football fans – in a London pub. The only interviewees chosen for the video were white, and the reporter stated:
“Police have arrested three people so far. Two teenage boys and a man in his thirties.” He continued: “A night of celebration, turned to tragedy.”
There was no mention of the ethnicity of those arrested or what form the violence took. All three reports from Sunday, Monday and today were tailored in such a way as to make this tragic death look like a ‘typical’ consequence of the innate violence associated with a certain type of English football fan. As can be seen from the following extract, this bias in its report is undeniable:
The victims were found close to The Ox and Gate pub, where several people had gathered to watch the Champions League final on TV.
An eyewitness who was inside the pub told BBC London that as fans celebrated Chelsea's win things turned "rowdy and nasty", resulting in some damage both inside and outside the pub.
It is believed the victims were father and son and the stabbing took place after trouble started in the pub.
We turn to The Daily Mail on the other hand and discover what really happened. This was no brawl between tanked up football hooligans, this was a mass anti-white race attack perpetrated by a gang of 20 hooded blacks who burst into the pub, killed Luke Fitzpatrick and stabbed his father. The Mail writes:
The pair were attacked when a gang armed with bats and knives stormed the north London pub after father and son had watched Chelsea win the cup together at on Saturday.
'I was there on Saturday and it was like something out of a horror film.
'There were about 20 young black guys all with their hoods up armed with sticks and bats and knives. They just ran in the pub and started trying to attack people.
'It was really frightening. But it should not have happened to Luke, it shouldn’t have happened to anyone, but he was a complete innocent.'
Why did the BBC omit all of this terrifying and highly salient detail? For what reason could it have ignored the identity of the attackers and the fact that they stormed the pub en masse armed with lethal weapons? This was no brawl between drunken football fans; this was an organised anti-white race attack. The BBC has some explaining to do, for its treatment of this crime, as in its willingness to claim that organised Pakistani Muslim paedophilia has nothing to do with the cultural background of the perpetrators, illustrates its intrinsic anti-white anti-indigenous bias. The BBC is institutionally racist: it is anti-white, but more specifically, anti-English. Have you had enough of this? A video of the biased BBC report is shown below, in which a completely distorted politically correct vision of this brutal murder is presented for public consumption. The BBC should be held to account for such wilful misrepresentation.
Will you please stop posting OTHER people's comments, and ex[press some of your own. It is impossible to have a discussion with some body who simply replies with somebody else's opinion, plucked from God knows where.
Stop beating about the bush, both of you, and tell me EXACTLY what you think occurred that day. From start to finish. IN YOUR OWN WORDS!
Stop beating about the bush, both of you, and tell me EXACTLY what you think occurred that day. From start to finish. IN YOUR OWN WORDS!
Reverse the scenario and the media would be continually bringing up the subject and saying why have these racist white thugs not been arrested.
What on earth is "The media would be" supposed go mean?! Some of them might be. Some of them might not. Stick to facts of 'what is' and not fanciful ideas of how YOU think it would be IF.....
The riots a few years ago was clearly a race riot inspired by a perceived injustice to a gang leader.
The media lied to the whole world and gave the impression it was young people of all ethnicity were rebelling.
The Afro Carribean population of this country is about 5% mainly in our large cities and where the riots were centred.
Large cities like Southampton, Portsmouth ,Leeds ,Newcastle etc with a minimal number of this group the trouble was almost nil.
This blatant misrepresentation damaged the reputation of this country especially the young.
The media lied to the whole world and gave the impression it was young people of all ethnicity were rebelling.
The Afro Carribean population of this country is about 5% mainly in our large cities and where the riots were centred.
Large cities like Southampton, Portsmouth ,Leeds ,Newcastle etc with a minimal number of this group the trouble was almost nil.
This blatant misrepresentation damaged the reputation of this country especially the young.
It's natural for people to overreact to perceived injustice.
The typical black moaning bastard goes on about slavery, and wanting reparations, and the legal system being against them etc. etc. OK, some of it may be true, but things are clearly much better for you now, so stop complaining and get on with it ffs.
The typical white moaning bastard goes on about black crime, and how certain sections of the media are pro-minority, and etc. etc. OK, some of it may be true, but it's probably still better to be white, so stop complaining and get on with it ffs.
I mean, if we're only talking about BBC television, and the BBC website mentions black and white suspects without bias, is it seriously anything to get so wound up about anyway?
The typical black moaning bastard goes on about slavery, and wanting reparations, and the legal system being against them etc. etc. OK, some of it may be true, but things are clearly much better for you now, so stop complaining and get on with it ffs.
The typical white moaning bastard goes on about black crime, and how certain sections of the media are pro-minority, and etc. etc. OK, some of it may be true, but it's probably still better to be white, so stop complaining and get on with it ffs.
I mean, if we're only talking about BBC television, and the BBC website mentions black and white suspects without bias, is it seriously anything to get so wound up about anyway?
Always amusing to see the usual suspects having a good Alf Garnet style seethe.
Always interesting to see that you didn't reply to my 23:49 post.
What article made the most front page news:
A 20 strong gang of hooded blacks with weapons who attacked a pub full of white football fans, which resulted in death.
(Have it your way Naydam, it wasn't racist)
or
(neither was this then)
The murder of Stephen Lawrence.
A 20 strong gang of hooded blacks with weapons who attacked a pub full of white football fans, which resulted in death.
(Have it your way Naydam, it wasn't racist)
or
(neither was this then)
The murder of Stephen Lawrence.
I think it is very important that journalists report in an honest
and unbiased way. If this is suspect, and for me the BBC is a
in almost everything it does, suspect, then we have no protection
from our politicians, police service, councils , or any form of safety.
and unbiased way. If this is suspect, and for me the BBC is a
in almost everything it does, suspect, then we have no protection
from our politicians, police service, councils , or any form of safety.
It is not just a minor thing how these things are reported. It
is essential to our freedoms.
is essential to our freedoms.
Cmat. I don't know if you are being serious in acknowledging that Luke Fitzgerald's death was not a racist crime. My guess is that you probably aren't.
As for which story made the most front page news...that would obviously be the Stephen Lawrence case (although I would like to point out that this was front page news throughout the media...not just the BBC).
My obvious question to you "Why was it such 'front-page news'? No doubt your answer would be biased reporting. But that is not the truth, is it?
So, have a little think about it and might see things more clearly.
I would also recommend that you consider what constitutes a 'racist crime'.
As for your friend Wesdaq, it seems that he only wishes to 'wind people up'. Not much more I can say to that. In future, I will try to remember that his posts are not for the purpose of discussion. They are simply for his amusement.
Then again, If I have spread a little happiness during our brief association, I will take solace from that.
As for which story made the most front page news...that would obviously be the Stephen Lawrence case (although I would like to point out that this was front page news throughout the media...not just the BBC).
My obvious question to you "Why was it such 'front-page news'? No doubt your answer would be biased reporting. But that is not the truth, is it?
So, have a little think about it and might see things more clearly.
I would also recommend that you consider what constitutes a 'racist crime'.
As for your friend Wesdaq, it seems that he only wishes to 'wind people up'. Not much more I can say to that. In future, I will try to remember that his posts are not for the purpose of discussion. They are simply for his amusement.
Then again, If I have spread a little happiness during our brief association, I will take solace from that.
I would also recommend that you consider what constitutes a 'racist crime'.
Easy, when a black or asian is attacked by a white person.
Easy, when a black or asian is attacked by a white person.
naydam,
I simply find it amusing that this kind of Alf Garnet style ranting as displayed above still exists.
Such types seem to have a massive chip on their shoulder which you can't help but laugh at.
They are relics of the past who can't or won't accept that the world has moved on.
If that constitutes "winding people up", then so be it.
I simply find it amusing that this kind of Alf Garnet style ranting as displayed above still exists.
Such types seem to have a massive chip on their shoulder which you can't help but laugh at.
They are relics of the past who can't or won't accept that the world has moved on.
If that constitutes "winding people up", then so be it.
Pretty arrogant, and delusional to think that just because the world has "moved on"
things are necessarily any better..or even different.
things are necessarily any better..or even different.
Wesdaq, are you black?
If not, do you live in an area with a large black or asian population?
Tell us where you live.
I lived in one such area, and when I joined Betfair, there were no less than 28 on this forum alone, who either lived there, worked there, or travelled through there on the way to and from work.
Now there are none.
The world has moved on, and what was a sh1thole of a borough has changed.
It's now a dangerous sh1thole that resembles the third world.
If not, do you live in an area with a large black or asian population?
Tell us where you live.
I lived in one such area, and when I joined Betfair, there were no less than 28 on this forum alone, who either lived there, worked there, or travelled through there on the way to and from work.
Now there are none.
The world has moved on, and what was a sh1thole of a borough has changed.
It's now a dangerous sh1thole that resembles the third world.
I noted that you didn't answer the questions.
FYI there was another 'liquid attack' in Lowestoft yesterday.
Despite lots of witnesses seeing and hearing the woman screaming, there was no description of the attacker on the BBC.
I know where I'd put my money.
FYI there was another 'liquid attack' in Lowestoft yesterday.
Despite lots of witnesses seeing and hearing the woman screaming, there was no description of the attacker on the BBC.
I know where I'd put my money.
SHOP ROBBERY - TADWORTH - SURREY
SURREY POLICE PAGE
Two of the suspects are described as being of Asian appearance and the third man is described as being black
BBC TELEVISION NEWS PAGES REPORT
no description
=================================================================
BOGUS WINDOW CLEANERS ROB ELDERLY WOMAN - BANSTEAD - SURREY
POLICE PAGE
The first suspect is described as being white, in his early 20's, around 5ft 9” tall and being very thin with straight, collar length dark hair. It is believed that he was wearing black trousers, a thin black jacket or black long sleeved shirt and was carrying a black satchel type bag.
The second suspect is described as being a black man with light skin and a small round shaped face, in his early 20's, around 5ft 3” tall, with a medium build and having short black hair. It is believed that he was wearing an orange or red coloured jumper.
BBC TELEVISION NEWS PAGES NEWS REPORT
no decription
===================================================================
Meanwhile... here in sunny Norfolk...
THE HEINOUS CRIME OF SCARPERING WITH £160k WORTH OF VALUABLE COINS - NOBODY THREATENED OR INJURED...
Yes, you guessed it..
BBC TELEVISION NEWS PAGES NEWS REPORT
The suspect is white.
SURREY POLICE PAGE
Two of the suspects are described as being of Asian appearance and the third man is described as being black
BBC TELEVISION NEWS PAGES REPORT
no description
=================================================================
BOGUS WINDOW CLEANERS ROB ELDERLY WOMAN - BANSTEAD - SURREY
POLICE PAGE
The first suspect is described as being white, in his early 20's, around 5ft 9” tall and being very thin with straight, collar length dark hair. It is believed that he was wearing black trousers, a thin black jacket or black long sleeved shirt and was carrying a black satchel type bag.
The second suspect is described as being a black man with light skin and a small round shaped face, in his early 20's, around 5ft 3” tall, with a medium build and having short black hair. It is believed that he was wearing an orange or red coloured jumper.
BBC TELEVISION NEWS PAGES NEWS REPORT
no decription
===================================================================
Meanwhile... here in sunny Norfolk...
THE HEINOUS CRIME OF SCARPERING WITH £160k WORTH OF VALUABLE COINS - NOBODY THREATENED OR INJURED...
Yes, you guessed it..
BBC TELEVISION NEWS PAGES NEWS REPORT
The suspect is white.
and when i first moved out this way
it made the front page if a bike got stolen
it made the front page if a bike got stolen
call me a taxi
FYI there was another 'liquid attack' in Lowestoft yesterday.
Despite lots of witnesses seeing and hearing the woman screaming, there was no description of the attacker on the BBC.
I know where I'd put my money.
38 year old man arrested.
FYI there was another 'liquid attack' in Lowestoft yesterday.
Despite lots of witnesses seeing and hearing the woman screaming, there was no description of the attacker on the BBC.
I know where I'd put my money.
38 year old man arrested.
Bearing in mind my previous remarks on here when a UKIP member does something wrong, compared with a Tory sleazebag.
My post concerning David Ruffley, TORY MP who assaulted his wife, which got on to Suffolk news for just one day, before being taken down.
Today, on your trusty BBC television news pages is the news of a female UKIP member who made an 'outrageous' remark about a stall holder in Ramsgate. He and his wife, iirc, were from Taiwan, and the UKIP bird referred to him as a 'ting tong from somewhere' 
Now, I know that Mad Maggie moved a few boundaries for tactical reasons, but being pretty good at geography, I'm 99.99% sure that Ramsgate is still in Kent.
If I was in the SLIGHTEST bit unsure, I could always Google it.
Unlike the prize twunt who puts the news on the BBC television pages.
He/she is obviously above using Google, or wanted to spread nasty news about UKIP, you can make up your own minds on that one....
He/she put in on Kent news, Sussex news, Surrey news, Hampshire and Isle Of Wight news, and just to play safe, Berkshire news and Oxfordshire news.
I didn't check Scotland news.
TORY MP assaults his wife - one day in one local news region
UKIP bird makes 'outrageous' remark - it's on 6 different regional news pages, and you can have odd against they are removed after just one day.
My post concerning David Ruffley, TORY MP who assaulted his wife, which got on to Suffolk news for just one day, before being taken down.
Today, on your trusty BBC television news pages
is the news of a female UKIP member who made an 'outrageous' remark about a stall holder in Ramsgate. He and his wife, iirc, were from Taiwan, and the UKIP bird referred to him as a 'ting tong from somewhere' Now, I know that Mad Maggie moved a few boundaries for tactical reasons, but being pretty good at geography, I'm 99.99% sure that Ramsgate is still in Kent.
If I was in the SLIGHTEST bit unsure, I could always Google it.
Unlike the prize twunt who puts the news on the BBC television pages.
He/she is obviously above using Google, or wanted to spread nasty news about UKIP, you can make up your own minds on that one....
He/she put in on Kent news, Sussex news, Surrey news, Hampshire and Isle Of Wight news, and just to play safe, Berkshire news and Oxfordshire news.
I didn't check Scotland news.
TORY MP assaults his wife - one day in one local news region
UKIP bird makes 'outrageous' remark - it's on 6 different regional news pages, and you can have odd against they are removed after just one day.
This has got to be The best one yet by the BBC
Christopher Adeji
from Ramsgate, did a runner from Canterbury Crown Court, Kent, just before he was due to appear on an attempted rape charge.
Members of the public who see Adjei are not advised to approach him, but to contact Kent Police.
Okay then, sounds like a dangerous facker. Tell us what he looks like?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
The BBC 'forgot' to include this:
'Adjei is described as a stocky black man, with dark hair.'
You couldn't make it up
Christopher Adeji
from Ramsgate, did a runner from Canterbury Crown Court, Kent, just before he was due to appear on an attempted rape charge.
Members of the public who see Adjei are not advised to approach him, but to contact Kent Police.
Okay then, sounds like a dangerous facker. Tell us what he looks like?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
The BBC 'forgot' to include this:
'Adjei is described as a stocky black man, with dark hair.'
You couldn't make it up
Been on the beta forum, loads more views, but no more responses.
Is this too sensitive for some of you who were posting earlier?
Is this too sensitive for some of you who were posting earlier?
The BBC have seen the light.
A woman on a train from London to Birmingham, she woke at Leighton Buzzard to find a man sexually assaulting her. She challenged him, but he ignored her.
She then demanded that he let her out of her seat, which he did.
The woman left the train at Milton Keynes and alerted police.
Officers met the train at Rugby station but could not find anyone matching the description of the man.
The man is described as Asian and in his forties.
Sgt Summerfield said: “We are keen to speak to anyone on the train who witnessed this incident or believes they have any information which could help our investigation. I am particularly interested in talking to two women who sat opposite the victim prior to the assault. One of the women had a laptop,the other was reading a book. Both got off the train at Leighton Buzzard."
Sitting opposite and never said a word????!?!?!?!?!
Perhaps they were afraid of being labelled 'racist'?
A woman on a train from London to Birmingham, she woke at Leighton Buzzard to find a man sexually assaulting her. She challenged him, but he ignored her.
She then demanded that he let her out of her seat, which he did.
The woman left the train at Milton Keynes and alerted police.
Officers met the train at Rugby station but could not find anyone matching the description of the man.
The man is described as Asian and in his forties.
Sgt Summerfield said: “We are keen to speak to anyone on the train who witnessed this incident or believes they have any information which could help our investigation. I am particularly interested in talking to two women who sat opposite the victim prior to the assault. One of the women had a laptop,the other was reading a book. Both got off the train at Leighton Buzzard."
Sitting opposite and never said a word????!?!?!?!?!
Perhaps they were afraid of being labelled 'racist'?
call me a taxi 20 Aug 14 13:24
This has got to be the best one yet by the BBC
Christopher Adeji
from Ramsgate, did a runner from Canterbury Crown Court, Kent, just before he was due to appear on an attempted rape charge.
Members of the public who see Adjei are not advised to approach him, but to contact Kent Police.
Okay then, sounds like a dangerous facker.
Tell us what he looks like?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
The BBC 'forgot' to include this:
'Adjei is described as a stocky black man, with dark hair.'
You couldn't make it up
====================================
BBC NEWS HAS BEEN UPDATED THIS MORNING
He is now believed to be in the Thanet area of Kent.
Have the BBC described him, so that the good people of Thanet can avoid him, as he's considered dangerous.
Have they fack
This has got to be the best one yet by the BBC
Christopher Adeji
from Ramsgate, did a runner from Canterbury Crown Court, Kent, just before he was due to appear on an attempted rape charge.
Members of the public who see Adjei are not advised to approach him, but to contact Kent Police.
Okay then, sounds like a dangerous facker.
Tell us what he looks like?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
The BBC 'forgot' to include this:
'Adjei is described as a stocky black man, with dark hair.'
You couldn't make it up
====================================
BBC NEWS HAS BEEN UPDATED THIS MORNING
He is now believed to be in the Thanet area of Kent.
Have the BBC described him, so that the good people of Thanet can avoid him, as he's considered dangerous.
Have they fack
CMAT. Have you ever considered that this lack of description might be to prevent some excitable people from forming vigilante mobs. You never seem to form a calm, balanced view of the situation.
There was no description possibly because they don't want every Tom, D1ck and Harry pointing the mob towards anybody who they might think could be the suspect.
It might also help to bear in mind that the case has not yet been heard in court, so he must be presumed innocent.
Furthermore, from the reports that you have given (and I have no other source of info on this) the description of 'dangerous' seems to have been created by you!
There was no description possibly because they don't want every Tom, D1ck and Harry pointing the mob towards anybody who they might think could be the suspect.
It might also help to bear in mind that the case has not yet been heard in court, so he must be presumed innocent.
Furthermore, from the reports that you have given (and I have no other source of info on this) the description of 'dangerous' seems to have been created by you!
naydam
CMAT. Have you ever considered that this lack of description might be to prevent some excitable people from forming vigilante mobs. You never seem to form a calm, balanced view of the situation.
There WAS a description. I got it from a different site, not the BBC, they didn't publish it. Which is the whole point of the posts about the BBC.
Members of the public who see Adjei are not advised to approach him, but to contact Kent Police.
That line ^^^ was from the first BBC television news page report.
I didn't make it up. Kent Police said 'not to approach him.'
Now, in your infinite wisdom of the luvvie world, try and work out why the police don't want you to approach him.
Could it be because:
a) He'll tell you an unfunny joke?
b) He likes to kiss men?
c) He's got terrible body odour?
d) He's considered dangerous?
or
e) Who gives a fack? If the police say stay away from him, I will.
Believe me, the reason is not a) b) or c) I'd make d) an odds on shot.
So why not describe him?
And the 2nd report is repeated here, as in my previous post.
BBC NEWS HAS BEEN UPDATED THIS MORNING
He is now believed to be in the Thanet area of Kent.
Have the BBC described him, so that the good people of Thanet can avoid him, as he's considered dangerous.
Have they fack
If you want to avoid him, as the Police suggest you should, or report his whereabouts if you see him, like a good citizen, wouldn't it be handy to have a description of him?
Or do you consider that racist, simply because he's black?
CMAT. Have you ever considered that this lack of description might be to prevent some excitable people from forming vigilante mobs. You never seem to form a calm, balanced view of the situation.
There WAS a description. I got it from a different site, not the BBC, they didn't publish it. Which is the whole point of the posts about the BBC.
Members of the public who see Adjei are not advised to approach him, but to contact Kent Police.
That line ^^^ was from the first BBC television news page report.
I didn't make it up. Kent Police said 'not to approach him.'
Now, in your infinite wisdom of the luvvie world, try and work out why the police don't want you to approach him.
Could it be because:
a) He'll tell you an unfunny joke?
b) He likes to kiss men?
c) He's got terrible body odour?
d) He's considered dangerous?
or
e) Who gives a fack? If the police say stay away from him, I will.
Believe me, the reason is not a) b) or c) I'd make d) an odds on shot.
So why not describe him?
And the 2nd report is repeated here, as in my previous post.
BBC NEWS HAS BEEN UPDATED THIS MORNING
He is now believed to be in the Thanet area of Kent.
Have the BBC described him, so that the good people of Thanet can avoid him, as he's considered dangerous.
Have they fack
If you want to avoid him, as the Police suggest you should, or report his whereabouts if you see him, like a good citizen, wouldn't it be handy to have a description of him?
Or do you consider that racist, simply because he's black?
If you go back a few posts, you'll see that the BBC had no problem describing a coin thief in Norfolk who scarpered with a fortune in coins.
He didn't abscond from a courtroom when facing a rape charge
He never threatened anybody at all.
He never caused any damage.
There was no warning from Norfolk Police not to approach him.
I'd say he wasn't dangerous.
But of course, he was white, so the BBC gave the description.
He didn't abscond from a courtroom when facing a rape charge
He never threatened anybody at all.
He never caused any damage.
There was no warning from Norfolk Police not to approach him.
I'd say he wasn't dangerous.
But of course, he was white, so the BBC gave the description.
The police probably suggested that he should not be approached because THEY want to deal with the matter. There is far too much chance of mistaken identity by the general public with a very loose, and often contradictory, description.
You know, like "We don't want none o' them 'pedotricians' living round 'ere".
You know, like "We don't want none o' them 'pedotricians' living round 'ere".
The police probably suggested that he should not be approached because THEY want to deal with the matter.
My I tentatively suggest that the police could 'deal with the matter' faster if he was spotted, and his location reported.
He can't be spotted though, because there was no description.
You know, like "We don't want none o' them 'pedotricians' living round 'ere".
I have no idea what that means, and most probably, neither do you.
My I tentatively suggest that the police could 'deal with the matter' faster if he was spotted, and his location reported.
He can't be spotted though, because there was no description.
You know, like "We don't want none o' them 'pedotricians' living round 'ere".
I have no idea what that means, and most probably, neither do you.
The police know his name. They have probably got pictures of him. They know where he lives. They can soon learn his associates (they probably know them already) and areas here he is likely to frequent.
The police don't want you and other strangers to help. The original message would probably be directed toward the people who already know him.
My 'pedo' reference was in respect of a vigilante gang who attacked (I think) a member of hospital staff thinking they were some sort of sex pervert because somebody heard they were a 'pedo'.
This, of course, would not be unusual...as the person was a paediatrician!
And that, of course, is what happens when ill-informed people decide to 'help' the police.
When they want your help they will show you his photograph and announce their request on television. Maybe even the BBC!
The police don't want you and other strangers to help. The original message would probably be directed toward the people who already know him.
My 'pedo' reference was in respect of a vigilante gang who attacked (I think) a member of hospital staff thinking they were some sort of sex pervert because somebody heard they were a 'pedo'.
This, of course, would not be unusual...as the person was a paediatrician!
And that, of course, is what happens when ill-informed people decide to 'help' the police.
When they want your help they will show you his photograph and announce their request on television. Maybe even the BBC!
They won't want my help yet. I only hunt down convicted criminals.
Mr Farage is going to run for MP in Thanet.
The absconder from Canterbury Crown Court, who is considered dangerous, is apparently in the Thanet area.
I don't think he will like Mr Farage.
£250 a day (on expenses, naturally) for a bodyguard.
Cheap imo.
The absconder from Canterbury Crown Court, who is considered dangerous, is apparently in the Thanet area.
I don't think he will like Mr Farage.
£250 a day (on expenses, naturally) for a bodyguard.
Cheap imo.
Have the police actually stated the the absconder is considered dangerous? The last info that I recall from my trusty source (you) requested that people should contact the police if they see him, rather than approach him. I didn't get the impression that they thought he would be dangerous. Perhaps they don't want to give him the chance to run away again. Apparently, he's done that before! 
Post Your Reply
Please login to post a reply.
Wonder
Instance ID: 13539