We want to share an important update with our Betfair Community users.
Over the coming months, the Betfair Community platform will be winding down. The final active day for the platform will be December 21st. From December 22nd, users will no longer be able to access the platform.
Your discussions, insights, engagement, and, most importantly, feedback have helped shape the platform and guided innovation. Your feedback continues to be important to us, and we will continue to listen via our dedicated feedback channels, as well as through product testing and innovations.
To share your feedback and experience, visit: https://support.betfair.com/app/home
Chit Chat
Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
20 Feb 17
11:36
Joined:
Date Joined:
05 Apr 06
...
Show More
Saying Trump and his goons committed a Terrorist act by making up the terrorist story about Sweden.
He has terrorised people.
He has terrorised people.
No wonder the luvvies are constantly hysterical with O'Brien as their spokesman.
If a terrorist act was not publicised, then it would not be a terrorist act...... as it would not have terrified a significant number of people.
Logically all terrorist acts should not be publicised, then there will be little incentive to commit the terrorist acts.
COFFEE HOUSE
James O’Brien spreading ‘FAKE NEWS’ via the BBC is a must-watch
Douglas Murray
Douglas Murray
17 February 2017
12:36 PM
Twitter
Facebook
LinkedIn
Email
The row about ‘fake news’ and the ‘crooked media’ appears to be ongoing. And every time the BBC and other mainstream media mention it they present themselves solely as the victims of such phenomena. So let us turn to just one edition of the BBC’s Newsnight.
On Wednesday of this week the programme was presented by James O’Brien. Now in the first place Mr O’Brien is a strange choice to present this programme. Not just because his awkward, cut-out, Lego man gait makes it obvious why he has made his career in radio, but because he is the sort of hyper-partisan figure who, if they came from the opposite political side, would never be hired by the BBC.
But back to Wednesday’s Newsnight. Just after a ‘Viewsnight’ slot given to Tariq Ramadan – dauphin of the Muslim Brotherhood – it was back to the studio for a discussion about President Trump with two guests down the line from Washington.
Here is how O’Brien introduced them: ‘Anne Gearan from the Washington Post and Asra Nomani who has written for outlets such as Breitbart and The Hill.’ To say that the way in which O’Brien introduced the latter was acidic is to understate matters. Even on the Cathy Newman scale of ‘ostentatiously introducing someone as though they are a bad smell’ O’Brien excelled. ‘Here’ – he was clearly saying – ‘is a really reputable woman. And here, by comparison is a lowly, nuts-oid blogger lady who we can all interrupt and laugh at.’
Unfortunately for O’Brien the technology failed and we lost Anne Gearan. Then, even more unfortunately for O’Brien, Nomani used her opening moments to politely correct the BBC’s introduction of her. An introduction that had indeed been fake and crooked. For as Nomani informed O’Brien, she is not just some broad who has ‘written for outlets such as Breitbart [lemony face] and The Hill [expectorate]’. On the contrary, as she had to waste her opening moments explaining, not only has she never ‘written for Breitbart’, the more pertinent fact about her life is that she spent fifteen years at the Wall Street Journal.
So why did Newsnight’s James O’Brien – in a discussion about ‘fake news’ – spread false information about Nomani before he had even begun his first question? Why did it not concern him that any fair-minded viewer might easily come away with the impression that O’Brien knew nothing about his guest and that he or someone else from the Newsnight team had simply spent the period before transmission lazily searching Google for the most hostile intro they could put together? Might precisely this type of media ‘bias’ be one of the things that fuels the perception that the mainstream media are intent on bringing down everyone and everything associated not just with Trump but with any of the arguments he makes?
For her part, Nomani went on to calmly explain her concerns about ‘The vilification of both the Trump administration and anybody who might say that there’s any rational discourse to be had about the administration and its policies. That’s what really concerns me as a journalist.’
As it happens, I am fairly sure that the reason why Nomani came across the BBC and James O’Brien’s radar would have been for a piece she wrote in the Washington Post after the election titled ‘I’m a Muslim, a woman and an immigrant. I voted for Trump.’ The piece got a justifiable amount of attention and a disgusting amount of vitriol. But there is something I would like to add about her.
Nearly two years ago Nomani and I shared a platform in Brooklyn in a debate against a number of Islamists including the vile (apparently now leading feminist icon) Linda Sarsour. I already admired Nomani and her work, but nothing prepared me for the woman herself. I trust readers know I’m not given to overpraise. But as I related in a column at the time, Nomani and I appeared that evening under somewhat strained circumstances. Our event took place just days after two jihadists had attacked an event in Garland, Texas, and as a result the third member of our team – Ayaan Hirsi Ali – had been advised that it wasn’t safe to join us. With considerably heightened amounts of security Nomani and I appeared as normal. But one detail sang out.
In the days before the event Nomani had received a highly specific threat to her life. And the person who had promised to punish her for her alleged ‘heresy’ turned out to have RSVP-ed as an attendee at our event. Despite being warned off, Nomani insisted that she would still be there. Near the start of the event, in the face of mocking opponents and a deeply hostile crowd (and with her young son in the audience) Nomani called out this would-be assassin. She insisted that she would continue to say what she did, whatever they tried to do to her. She did all this calmly, and without any ostentation. It was one of the bravest things I have ever seen.
As I say – James O’Brien doesn’t know any of this, or doesn’t care about any of this. He saw a woman he felt he could belittle and diminish as though she were calling in to one of his daytime phone-in shows. O’Brien and Newsnight don’t need to ask why people are losing trust in mainstream media. Programmes like theirs on Wednesday night – and their treatment of one guest in particular – are the reason.
James O’Brien spreading ‘FAKE NEWS’ via the BBC is a must-watch
Douglas Murray
Douglas Murray
17 February 2017
12:36 PM
The row about ‘fake news’ and the ‘crooked media’ appears to be ongoing. And every time the BBC and other mainstream media mention it they present themselves solely as the victims of such phenomena. So let us turn to just one edition of the BBC’s Newsnight.
On Wednesday of this week the programme was presented by James O’Brien. Now in the first place Mr O’Brien is a strange choice to present this programme. Not just because his awkward, cut-out, Lego man gait makes it obvious why he has made his career in radio, but because he is the sort of hyper-partisan figure who, if they came from the opposite political side, would never be hired by the BBC.
But back to Wednesday’s Newsnight. Just after a ‘Viewsnight’ slot given to Tariq Ramadan – dauphin of the Muslim Brotherhood – it was back to the studio for a discussion about President Trump with two guests down the line from Washington.
Here is how O’Brien introduced them: ‘Anne Gearan from the Washington Post and Asra Nomani who has written for outlets such as Breitbart and The Hill.’ To say that the way in which O’Brien introduced the latter was acidic is to understate matters. Even on the Cathy Newman scale of ‘ostentatiously introducing someone as though they are a bad smell’ O’Brien excelled. ‘Here’ – he was clearly saying – ‘is a really reputable woman. And here, by comparison is a lowly, nuts-oid blogger lady who we can all interrupt and laugh at.’
Unfortunately for O’Brien the technology failed and we lost Anne Gearan. Then, even more unfortunately for O’Brien, Nomani used her opening moments to politely correct the BBC’s introduction of her. An introduction that had indeed been fake and crooked. For as Nomani informed O’Brien, she is not just some broad who has ‘written for outlets such as Breitbart [lemony face] and The Hill [expectorate]’. On the contrary, as she had to waste her opening moments explaining, not only has she never ‘written for Breitbart’, the more pertinent fact about her life is that she spent fifteen years at the Wall Street Journal.
So why did Newsnight’s James O’Brien – in a discussion about ‘fake news’ – spread false information about Nomani before he had even begun his first question? Why did it not concern him that any fair-minded viewer might easily come away with the impression that O’Brien knew nothing about his guest and that he or someone else from the Newsnight team had simply spent the period before transmission lazily searching Google for the most hostile intro they could put together? Might precisely this type of media ‘bias’ be one of the things that fuels the perception that the mainstream media are intent on bringing down everyone and everything associated not just with Trump but with any of the arguments he makes?
For her part, Nomani went on to calmly explain her concerns about ‘The vilification of both the Trump administration and anybody who might say that there’s any rational discourse to be had about the administration and its policies. That’s what really concerns me as a journalist.’
As it happens, I am fairly sure that the reason why Nomani came across the BBC and James O’Brien’s radar would have been for a piece she wrote in the Washington Post after the election titled ‘I’m a Muslim, a woman and an immigrant. I voted for Trump.’ The piece got a justifiable amount of attention and a disgusting amount of vitriol. But there is something I would like to add about her.
Nearly two years ago Nomani and I shared a platform in Brooklyn in a debate against a number of Islamists including the vile (apparently now leading feminist icon) Linda Sarsour. I already admired Nomani and her work, but nothing prepared me for the woman herself. I trust readers know I’m not given to overpraise. But as I related in a column at the time, Nomani and I appeared that evening under somewhat strained circumstances. Our event took place just days after two jihadists had attacked an event in Garland, Texas, and as a result the third member of our team – Ayaan Hirsi Ali – had been advised that it wasn’t safe to join us. With considerably heightened amounts of security Nomani and I appeared as normal. But one detail sang out.
In the days before the event Nomani had received a highly specific threat to her life. And the person who had promised to punish her for her alleged ‘heresy’ turned out to have RSVP-ed as an attendee at our event. Despite being warned off, Nomani insisted that she would still be there. Near the start of the event, in the face of mocking opponents and a deeply hostile crowd (and with her young son in the audience) Nomani called out this would-be assassin. She insisted that she would continue to say what she did, whatever they tried to do to her. She did all this calmly, and without any ostentation. It was one of the bravest things I have ever seen.
As I say – James O’Brien doesn’t know any of this, or doesn’t care about any of this. He saw a woman he felt he could belittle and diminish as though she were calling in to one of his daytime phone-in shows. O’Brien and Newsnight don’t need to ask why people are losing trust in mainstream media. Programmes like theirs on Wednesday night – and their treatment of one guest in particular – are the reason.
Thanks Broadsword. A great read and what most sane people who watched that encounter would concur with.
i havnt been instructed to spam the forum by saying i enjoyed it either
Douglas Murray very good debater doesn't rant and rave or name call worth listening to.
Wiki :
Murray is an atheist, having previously been an Anglican,
but has described himself variously as a cultural Christian,[41] a Christian atheist.[42]
He is openly gay.[43]
Murray is an atheist, having previously been an Anglican,
but has described himself variously as a cultural Christian,[41] a Christian atheist.[42]
He is openly gay.[43]
The Leopard 20 Feb 17 13:19
Logically all terrorist acts should not be publicised, then there will be little incentive to commit the terrorist acts.
Wonderful, keep the population away from the harsh truth and all will be well in the world.
Logically all terrorist acts should not be publicised, then there will be little incentive to commit the terrorist acts.
Wonderful, keep the population away from the harsh truth and all will be well in the world.
Good stuff from Douglas Murray. I've always got time to listen to him.
As regards James O’Brien, he's a self confessed champagne socialist.
I don't believe he's sincere in anything he says. I think he's purely motivated by cash.
And toeing the BBC line is where the cash is for him.
I think that's all that needs to be said about O'Brien.
If the BBC dropped him and the Daily Mail offered him enough money, I'm sure he'd change his politics overnight.
As regards James O’Brien, he's a self confessed champagne socialist.
I don't believe he's sincere in anything he says. I think he's purely motivated by cash.
And toeing the BBC line is where the cash is for him.
I think that's all that needs to be said about O'Brien.
If the BBC dropped him and the Daily Mail offered him enough money, I'm sure he'd change his politics overnight.
Feb 20, 2017 -- 11:13AM, saddo wrote:
The Leopard 20 Feb 17 13:19 Logically all terrorist acts should not be publicised, then there will be little incentive to commit the terrorist acts.Wonderful, keep the population away from the harsh truth and all will be well in the world.
You are not very good with logic.....are you ? 
Feb 20, 2017 -- 11:15AM, Dr Crippen wrote:
Good stuff from Douglas Murray. I've always got time to listen to him.As regards James O’Brien, he's a self confessed champagne socialist. I don't believe he's sincere in anything he says. I think he's purely motivated by cash.And toeing the BBC line is where the cash is for him.I think that's all that needs to be said about O'Brien. If the BBC dropped him and the Daily Mail offered him enough money, I'm sure he'd change his politics overnight.
James O'Brien's main income comes from his 3 hour prog on LBC (10 AM to 1 PM ), he does not get much remuneration from Newsnight.
He's not a self-confessed champagne socialist, link?
You've obviously never listened to the LBC show.
he does not get much remuneration from Newsnight.
I don't how much he gets from the BBC, I'm not his accountant.
I've heard about the huge incomes presenters get on the BBC, so I can't see why he shouldn't be coining it in from them as well.
Look on Wiki.
I have listened to LBC.
When I do I usually switch the radio off when O'Brien comes on, because I don't like the way he constantly interrupts callers trying to throw them off their stride.
He's a bully.
I don't how much he gets from the BBC, I'm not his accountant.
I've heard about the huge incomes presenters get on the BBC, so I can't see why he shouldn't be coining it in from them as well.
Look on Wiki.
I have listened to LBC.
When I do I usually switch the radio off when O'Brien comes on, because I don't like the way he constantly interrupts callers trying to throw them off their stride.
He's a bully.
Politically, O'Brien has been described as "coming from the left"[2] and sometimes describes himself as a "champagne socialist" in jest.[3]
There you go - you can't miss it.
There you go - you can't miss it.
....in jest .......means it is a joke and he does not believe it.
LBC presenters are paid to have an opinion, it is not the BBC and they are allowed to be forceful.
He interrupts them to stop them getting away with nonsense.
He Is very good at debating would have a good chance at becoming leader of the Labour Party.
Possible future prime minister.
He interrupts them to stop them getting away with nonsense.
He Is very good at debating would have a good chance at becoming leader of the Labour Party.
Possible future prime minister.
O'Brien is not just good at debating he's brilliant.
He never gives his callers a chance to state their case.
He said on the One Show, ''As I tell my wife, you don't have to be in the right to win an argument.''
It's a funny call in show when he won't let anybody else speak.
He never gives his callers a chance to state their case.
He said on the One Show, ''As I tell my wife, you don't have to be in the right to win an argument.''
It's a funny call in show when he won't let anybody else speak.
By the way.
I thought champagne socialist meant someone who gets rich from the capitalist system, yet believes in left wing politics.
That makes them a hypocrite as well. No wonder he jests about it.
Same as his buddy on Newsnight Evan Davis. Another wealthy capitalist who promotes left-wing politics.
I thought champagne socialist meant someone who gets rich from the capitalist system, yet believes in left wing politics.
That makes them a hypocrite as well. No wonder he jests about it.
Same as his buddy on Newsnight Evan Davis. Another wealthy capitalist who promotes left-wing politics.
He'd be alright debating with Jeremy Kyle.
A contest between the one who could shout the loudest.
A contest between the one who could shout the loudest.
Well, a contest to see which one could shout the loudest.
They are not getting rich they are just making a good living (does not buy you much of a property in London)..... I'm not sure they call themselves socialists...... maybe more like social Democrats.
The routine for O'Brien when he gets a call, is to let them get a couple of sentences in. So he can see which way they're leaning.
Then if it's not in line with his rant, he picks them up on a trivial point and harps on about that until all their time has gone.
So that they never get their points across, or get a chance to challenge the great man.
It's most annoying when you might be interested with what they've got to say.
Because we've already heard what O'Brien's got to say before they started calling in.
As they say on his mate's programme Dragons Den. ''And for that reason I'm out.''
Then if it's not in line with his rant, he picks them up on a trivial point and harps on about that until all their time has gone.
So that they never get their points across, or get a chance to challenge the great man.
It's most annoying when you might be interested with what they've got to say.
Because we've already heard what O'Brien's got to say before they started calling in.
As they say on his mate's programme Dragons Den. ''And for that reason I'm out.''
It's always difficult arguing with someone who has a dump button.
That Evan Davis off Dragons Den.
I'm sure he played Mr Barlow in Salem's Lot.
I'm sure he played Mr Barlow in Salem's Lot.
Evan Davis is great...... being gay may put some people off him with his very short hair .......but he has a razor sharp mind
Farage is much more courteous when taking in a call on LBC
O'Brien is the kid with the ball, the one who takes it home.
O'Brien is the kid with the ball, the one who takes it home.
Yes Zen...Nigel shows how it should be done...listens politely and ACTUALLY converses with the caller..What Dr Crippen describes on his post at 18.38 is precisely what occurs and like the good DR i now switch off at 10.
Yes always very polite is forum hero Nigel Farage
To Herman van Rompuy
"You have the charisma of a damp rag and the appearance of a low-grade bank clark."
Very personal.
To Herman van Rompuy
"You have the charisma of a damp rag and the appearance of a low-grade bank clark."
Very personal.
Likewise, i find O'Brien nauseating.
He and loose women get me reaching for my remote.
He and loose women get me reaching for my remote.
Scandy
What has that got to do with LBC and taking call from the public?
What has that got to do with LBC and taking call from the public?
Are you a total imbecile haven?..the point is about how he conducts himself on his radio PHONE IN show compared to the obnoxious O'Brien..do try to keep up
You only find him dull spotty because you are on the opposite side...yeah yeah..we all know you voted for Brexit
Farage s*cking up to Trump shows he is only after the money.
Farage s*cking up to Trump shows he is only after the money.
Turned his back on the gravy train that was the EU to chase the American dollar. Yes that makers sense.
Turned his back on the gravy train that was the EU to chase the American dollar. Yes that makers sense.
James OBrien is an anti democratic snob,a product of his Ampleforth education.
He hates UKIP because they speak for the working man using plain English.
He hates Paul Nuttall for his plain talking and working class origins.
He hates Trump for his plain talking and his speaking for the ordinary American.
He wants to overturn the Brexit vote.
He wants Trump impeached.
He didnt like those results so wants them changed.
He hates UKIP because they speak for the working man using plain English.
He hates Paul Nuttall for his plain talking and working class origins.
He hates Trump for his plain talking and his speaking for the ordinary American.
He wants to overturn the Brexit vote.
He wants Trump impeached.
He didnt like those results so wants them changed.
Farage s*cking up to Trump shows he is only after the money.
Don't Remainers want to make a success of Leaving the EU? A good relationship with the US is beneficial to our economy.
Remainers are quick to point out any economic negatives since the vote, yet are happy to throw a spanner into the works to hinder progress.
Farage wants the UK to make a success of Leaving the EU, who wouldn't>?
Oh yeah, the same people who want to ban Trump from his state visit. Those that are still bitter about the referendum vote.
Talk about bad losers.
Don't Remainers want to make a success of Leaving the EU? A good relationship with the US is beneficial to our economy.
Remainers are quick to point out any economic negatives since the vote, yet are happy to throw a spanner into the works to hinder progress.
Farage wants the UK to make a success of Leaving the EU, who wouldn't>?
Oh yeah, the same people who want to ban Trump from his state visit. Those that are still bitter about the referendum vote.
Talk about bad losers.
Post Your Reply
Please login to post a reply.
Wonder
Instance ID: 13539