Chit Chat
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?
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 90
|
By:
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.  |
|
By:
I don't.
 |
|
By:
Carlsberg?
|
|
By:
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.
|
|
By:
what is caustic chemical? acid?
|
|
By:
Whatever it is, it's 'class 8 corrosive', and it burns.
|
|
By:
@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. |
|
By:
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? |
|
By:
1.01 landed ^
|
|
By:
As was your comment.
|
|
By:
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. |
|
By:
I think he's struggling to come to terms with facts in general!
|
|
By:
agreed
|
|
By:
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.  |
|
By:
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.
|
|
By:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QqvUz0HrNKY
|
|
By:
^ A good tune to have a good seethe to
 |
|
By:
Sums up Wesdag
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gTx4q3BYdyU |
|
By:
About your level.
|
|
By:
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?????????????? |
|
By:
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. |
|
By:
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." |
|
By:
oh
 ...the OP is wrong......not much else I can say then |
|
By:
It appears that the op puts having a good seethe ahead of getting his facts correct.
|
|
By:
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. |
|
By:
^ YAWN
|
|
By:
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? |
|
By:
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.
|
|
By:
NO.
|
|
By:
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.
|
|
By:
years ago my local paper stopped reporting the descriptions of muggers
|
|
By:
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.
|
|
By:
It'd should be It's.
|
|
By:
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 |
|
By:
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.
|
|
By:
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 |
|
By:
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 |
|
By:
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. |
|
By:
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. |