Why the Democrats don't take Radical Islam seriously.

A Colored Bloke Yet

BBC Cancels TV Movie On Iraq War Hero As 'Too Positive,' Would 'Alienate' War Opponents
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/graphics/2007/04/08/wiraq308.jpg

The UK’s Telegraph reported that the BBC cancelled a 90-minute drama about the youngest surviving winner of the UK’s highest award for valor because “it feared it would alienate members of the audience opposed to the war in Iraq.” The BBC blocked the project that would have honored the incredible bravery and resilience of Private Johnson Beharry, a man who didn’t hesitate to risk his own life two separate times for his fellow soldiers. His Victoria Cross citation reads like a blockbuster Hollywood action script, but instead, it’s the real deal. Sounds uplifting and encouraging, and it could even be a real morale booster, right? Well, for the Beeb, that’s the problem (emphasis mine throughout):


For the BBC, however, his story is "too positive" about the conflict.

The corporation has cancelled the commission for a 90-minute drama about Britain's youngest surviving Victoria Cross hero because it feared it would alienate members of the audience opposed to the war in Iraq.

The BBC's retreat from the project, which had the working title Victoria Cross, has sparked accusations of cowardice and will reignite the debate about the broadcaster's alleged lack of patriotism.


A project insider exposed what many people have suspected about the BBC, which notoriously refuses to use the term terrorist to avoid making “value judgments”:

"The BBC has behaved in a cowardly fashion by pulling the plug on the project altogether," said a source close to the project. "It began to have second thoughts last year as the war in Iraq deteriorated. It felt it couldn't show anything with a degree of positivity about the conflict.

"It needed to tell stories about Iraq which reflected the fact that some members of the audience didn't approve of what was going on. Obviously a story about Johnson Beharry could never do that. You couldn't have a scene where he suddenly turned around and denounced the war because he just wouldn't do that.

"The film is now on hold and it will only make it to the screen if another broadcaster picks it up."

The BBC wouldn’t even show a positive story about a soldier because it interfered with the political message they wanted to send. They are clearly defining what they value, and it shows they are willing to give up good entertainment simply because it goes against their world view. The article then touched on the growing belief that the BBC only cares about negative stories about Iraq:

The BBC's decision to pull out will only confirm the fears of critics that television drama is only interested in telling bad news stories about the war.

The Ministry of Defence recently expressed concern about Channel 4's The Mark of Cain which showed British troops brutalising Iraqi detainees. That programme was temporarily pulled from the schedules after Iran detained 15 British troops


So, positive stories about Iraq are out and negative stories are in. Sounds like the US. There is social power in the entertainment side of the TV business, and the industry and the activists know it. The power of imagination and good writing can subtly influence in ways that lectures and screaming cannot.

If there is any doubt that Beharry’s story should be told, read his citation in a BBC article that describes his amazing heroism (back when the BBC wasn’t worried about the “wrong” message that a positive story about Iraq could send), or read a less detailed summary in this Telegraph article
 
A 'great hero' who saved comrades

"His level-headed actions almost certainly saved the lives of his crew"
Private Johnson Beharry has been awarded the Victoria Cross. The full citation reads as follows:

Private Beharry carried out two individual acts of great heroism by which he saved the lives of his comrades.

Both were in direct face of the enemy, under intense fire, at great personal risk to himself (one leading to him sustaining very serious injuries).

His valour is worthy of the highest recognition.

In the early hours of the 1st May 2004 Beharry's company was ordered to replenish an isolated Coalition Forces' outpost located in the centre of the troubled city of Al Amarah.

He was the driver of a platoon commander's Warrior armoured fighting vehicle.

His platoon was the company's reserve force and was placed on immediate notice to move.

The vehicle was hit again by sustained rocket-propelled grenade attack from insurgent fighters in the alleyways and on rooftops around his vehicle


As the main elements of his company were moving into the city to carry out the replenishment, they were re-tasked to fight through a series of enemy ambushes in order to extract a foot patrol that had become pinned down under sustained small arms and heavy machine-gun fire and improvised explosive device and rocket-propelled grenade attack.

Beharry's platoon was tasked over the radio to come to the assistance of the remainder of the company, who were attempting to extract the isolated foot patrol.

Insurgent ambush

As his platoon passed a roundabout, en route to the pinned-down patrol, they became aware that the road to the front was empty of all civilians and traffic - an indicator of a potential ambush ahead.

The platoon commander ordered the vehicle to halt, so that he could assess the situation.

The vehicle was then immediately hit by multiple rocket-propelled grenades.

Eyewitnesses report that the vehicle was engulfed in a number of violent explosions, which physically rocked the 30-tonne Warrior.

He did not know if his commander or crewmen were still alive, or how serious their injuries may be


As a result of this ferocious initial volley of fire, both the platoon commander and the vehicle's gunner were incapacitated by concussion and other wounds, and a number of the soldiers in the rear of the vehicle were also wounded.

Due to damage sustained in the blast to the vehicle's radio systems, Beharry had no means of communication with either his turret crew or any of the other Warrior vehicles deployed around him.

He did not know if his commander or crewmen were still alive, or how serious their injuries may be.

Own initiative

In this confusing and dangerous situation, on his own initiative, he closed his driver's hatch and moved forward through the ambush position to try to establish some form of communications, halting just short of a barricade placed across the road.

The vehicle was hit again by sustained rocket-propelled grenade attack from insurgent fighters in the alleyways and on rooftops around his vehicle.

Further damage to the Warrior from these explosions caused it to catch fire and fill rapidly with thick, noxious smoke. Beharry opened up his armoured hatch cover to clear his view and orientate himself to the situation.

He still had no radio communications and was now acting on his own initiative, as the lead vehicle of a six Warrior convoy in an enemy-controlled area of the city at night.

As the smoke in his driver's tunnel cleared, he was just able to make out the shape of another rocket-propelled grenade in flight heading directly towards him


He assessed that his best course of action to save the lives of his crew was to push through, out of the ambush.

He drove his Warrior directly through the barricade, not knowing if there were mines or improvised explosive devices placed there to destroy his vehicle.

By doing this he was able to lead the remaining five Warriors behind him towards safety.

As the smoke in his driver's tunnel cleared, he was just able to make out the shape of another rocket-propelled grenade in flight heading directly towards him.

He pulled the heavy armoured hatch down with one hand, whilst still controlling his vehicle with the other.

Head exposed

However, the overpressure from the explosion of the rocket wrenched the hatch out of his grip, and the flames and force of the blast passed directly over him, down the driver's tunnel, further wounding the semi-conscious gunner in the turret.

The impact of this rocket destroyed Beharry's armoured periscope, so he was forced to drive the vehicle through the remainder of the ambushed route, some 1,500 metres long, with his hatch opened up and his head exposed to enemy fire, all the time with no communications with any other vehicle.

During this long surge through the ambushes the vehicle was again struck by rocket-propelled grenades and small arms fire.

While his head remained out of the hatch, to enable him to see the route ahead, he was directly exposed to much of this fire, and was himself hit by a 7.62mm bullet, which penetrated his helmet and remained lodged on its inner surface.

Despite this harrowing weight of incoming fire Beharry continued to push through the extended ambush, still leading his platoon until he broke clean.

Exposing himself yet again to enemy fire he returned to the rear of the burning vehicle to lead the disorientated and shocked dismounts and casualties to safety


He then visually identified another Warrior from his company and followed it through the streets of Al Amarah to the outside of the Cimic House outpost, which was receiving small arms fire from the surrounding area.

Once he had brought his vehicle to a halt outside, without thought for his own personal safety, he climbed onto the turret of the still-burning vehicle and, seemingly oblivious to the incoming enemy small arms fire, manhandled his wounded platoon commander out of the turret, off the vehicle and to the safety of a nearby Warrior.

Led to safety

He then returned once again to his vehicle and again mounted the exposed turret to lift out the vehicle's gunner and move him to a position of safety.

Exposing himself yet again to enemy fire he returned to the rear of the burning vehicle to lead the disorientated and shocked dismounts and casualties to safety.

Remounting his burning vehicle for the third time, he drove it through a complex chicane and into the security of the defended perimeter of the outpost, thus denying it to the enemy.

Once inside Beharry collapsed from the sheer physical and mental exhaustion of his efforts and was subsequently himself evacuated


Only at this stage did Beharry pull the fire extinguisher handles, immobilising the engine of the vehicle, dismounted and then moved himself into the relative safety of the back of another Warrior.

Once inside Beharry collapsed from the sheer physical and mental exhaustion of his efforts and was subsequently himself evacuated.

Having returned to duty following medical treatment, on 11 June 2004 Beharry's Warrior was part of a quick reaction force tasked to attempt to cut off a mortar team that had attacked a Coalition Force base in Al Amarah.

As the lead vehicle of the platoon he was moving rapidly through the dark city streets towards the suspected firing point, when his vehicle was ambushed by the enemy from a series of rooftop positions.

During this initial heavy weight of enemy fire, a rocket-propelled grenade detonated on the vehicle's frontal armour, just six inches from Beharry's head, resulting in a serious head injury.

Beharry then lost consciousness as a result of his wounds


Other rockets struck the turret and sides of the vehicle, incapacitating his commander and injuring several of the crew.

With the blood from his head injury obscuring his vision, Beharry managed to continue to control his vehicle, and forcefully reversed the Warrior out of the ambush area.

The vehicle continued to move until it struck the wall of a nearby building and came to rest.

Beharry then lost consciousness as a result of his wounds.

By moving the vehicle out of the enemy's chosen killing area he enabled other Warrior crews to be able to extract his crew from his vehicle, with a greatly reduced risk from incoming fire.

Despite receiving a serious head injury, which later saw him being listed as very seriously injured and in a coma for some time, his level-headed actions in the face of heavy and accurate enemy fire at short range again almost certainly saved the lives of his crew and provided the conditions for their safe evacuation to medical treatment.

Beharry displayed repeated extreme gallantry and unquestioned valour, despite intense direct attacks, personal injury and damage to his vehicle in the face of relentless enemy action.
 
anti semitism is the canary in the coal mine

England is the worst


England is dead

Long live the MOOSESHITS that will kill you all


Hope it doesnt come to the US

it will if the DIMZ are in charge
 
I must have imagined the film about him that was on BBC3 last month then.
 
busybody said:
how could you have PRETENDED npt to have known?
I didn't know, because the only place it was reported was in the insane blogs you read. The film was shown last month on the BBC. I didn't watch it, but I know that it was on.
 
That story is all over the blogosphere all right.

But there's nothing on the Telegraph site, or the BBC site.
 
Cap’n AMatrixca said:
I'm saying the action against Saddam was a seperate issue under the larger unbrella of the fallout of the collapse of the Soviet Union. The fact that Radical Islam then chose that as the battleground was merely one of convinience, had we had gone to Dafur as Joe Biden now suggests, they would have made Darfur the main battle ground, they had to get our military to where they could kill some of them because we have taught them withour actions that as soon as the troops die, we run. It was outrageous to watch the Democrats sieze power in such a manner.
But, had we went to Darfur, we would have a noble purpose: stopping a ongoing genocide. I think Democrats would totally support that for the limited time frame we'd be needed. Instead of our open-ended commitment to Iraq, a purposeless mission in the first place.

So how about you tell us which pols are strong on Radical Islam and what they plan to do about it. You can even mention your Libertarian guys here.
 
MechaBlade said:
But, had we went to Darfur, we would have a noble purpose: stopping a ongoing genocide. I think Democrats would totally support that for the limited time frame we'd be needed. Instead of our open-ended commitment to Iraq, a purposeless mission in the first place.

So how about you tell us which pols are strong on Radical Islam and what they plan to do about it. You can even mention your Libertarian guys here.

Come on Mecha, grow up. Noble purpose, short term my ass. Like Somalia maybe? First bit of blood and we'd pack up and haul ass under a Democratic admin. just as we did back then. The Dems want to look noble but they don't want it to cost anything.

Who are the instigators in Darfur and where is the money and weapons coming from that is supporting their effort? In a nutshell, the instigators are Islamic militants and they're getting their money and arms from the middle east. Not being able to convert the indigenous peoples with convincing argument, they kill them. Such is that way of militant Islam. It's in the Holy Qu'ran ya know?

Whatever you think of Iraq, and I know it's not much, we shut off that tap of petro dollars flowing into the militants hands and diluted the numbers of jihadists pouring into Darfur. And we do have operators in there as well. Maybe not as photo-oppy as the Marines wading ashore at Somalia, but the sum of the efforts are making a difference. Further, there are currently 7 seperate operations taking place in Africa. But they aren't getting any press. They're probably happy about that.

But the over-riding point is that you, and the Democrats, always want to do something somewhere else. If the subject of Iran comes up, you start yapping about N. Korea. If the subject of Iraq comes up, let's yap about Darfur. No matter what's done where, you guys want to do it somewhere else. It's a wonder you can ever make up your mind where to get laid. You want to talk about doing things everywhere all the time. But that's it, just talk.

Ishmael
 
Ishmael said:
Come on Mecha, grow up. Noble purpose, short term my ass. Like Somalia maybe? First bit of blood and we'd pack up and haul ass under a Democratic admin. just as we did back then. The Dems want to look noble but they don't want it to cost anything.

Who are the instigators in Darfur and where is the money and weapons coming from that is supporting their effort? In a nutshell, the instigators are Islamic militants and they're getting their money and arms from the middle east. Not being able to convert the indigenous peoples with convincing argument, they kill them. Such is that way of militant Islam. It's in the Holy Qu'ran ya know?

Whatever you think of Iraq, and I know it's not much, we shut off that tap of petro dollars flowing into the militants hands and diluted the numbers of jihadists pouring into Darfur. And we do have operators in there as well. Maybe not as photo-oppy as the Marines wading ashore at Somalia, but the sum of the efforts are making a difference. Further, there are currently 7 seperate operations taking place in Africa. But they aren't getting any press. They're probably happy about that.

But the over-riding point is that you, and the Democrats, always want to do something somewhere else. If the subject of Iran comes up, you start yapping about N. Korea. If the subject of Iraq comes up, let's yap about Darfur. No matter what's done where, you guys want to do it somewhere else. It's a wonder you can ever make up your mind where to get laid. You want to talk about doing things everywhere all the time. But that's it, just talk.

Ishmael


Yup

The Dimz always wanna fight the NEXT war

When it happens, its not the NEXT war, its now the WAR and must be stopped

Meca has no clue!
 
Ishmael said:
Come on Mecha, grow up. Noble purpose, short term my ass. Like Somalia maybe? First bit of blood and we'd pack up and haul ass under a Democratic admin. just as we did back then. The Dems want to look noble but they don't want it to cost anything.

Who are the instigators in Darfur and where is the money and weapons coming from that is supporting their effort? In a nutshell, the instigators are Islamic militants and they're getting their money and arms from the middle east. Not being able to convert the indigenous peoples with convincing argument, they kill them. Such is that way of militant Islam. It's in the Holy Qu'ran ya know?

Whatever you think of Iraq, and I know it's not much, we shut off that tap of petro dollars flowing into the militants hands and diluted the numbers of jihadists pouring into Darfur. And we do have operators in there as well. Maybe not as photo-oppy as the Marines wading ashore at Somalia, but the sum of the efforts are making a difference. Further, there are currently 7 seperate operations taking place in Africa. But they aren't getting any press. They're probably happy about that.

But the over-riding point is that you, and the Democrats, always want to do something somewhere else. If the subject of Iran comes up, you start yapping about N. Korea. If the subject of Iraq comes up, let's yap about Darfur. No matter what's done where, you guys want to do it somewhere else. It's a wonder you can ever make up your mind where to get laid. You want to talk about doing things everywhere all the time. But that's it, just talk.

Ishmael

You neglect to mention that the republicans were some of the strongest advocators of "cutting and running" in Somalia.

In fact, Didn't Clinton increase troop levels for several months after the "blackhawk down" incident?
 
Ishmael said:
But the over-riding point is that you, and the Democrats, always want to do something somewhere else. If the subject of Iran comes up, you start yapping about N. Korea. If the subject of Iraq comes up, let's yap about Darfur. No matter what's done where, you guys want to do it somewhere else. It's a wonder you can ever make up your mind where to get laid. You want to talk about doing things everywhere all the time. But that's it, just talk.

Ishmael
The point we make is that you, and the Republicans, always want to start war with a random country for political/monetary gain and not for any good reasons for actually going to war. Iran is no scarier than North Korea and Iraq was helpless in terms of attacking the US.

I would be okay with either taking an isolationist policy or ending genocides where we can (in addition to using the military for any actual defense that may be needed). All I can do is talk until people start implementing my ideas. Just like all you can do is talk about what the Dems would do, but have no actual idea what would happen in that hypothetical situation.
 
zipman said:
In fact, Didn't Clinton increase troop levels for several months after the "blackhawk down" incident?
in your dreams, JEW KILLER

in fact, when asked for TANKS and heavy firepower

Les Aspin, said NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Typical Dim response

How many JEWS did you kill today, ZippHole?
 
Back
Top