This is not just an "independent journalist". Mr collier dedicates his life to investigative reporting, and to exposing antisemitism, wherever it may be. Which is in no way to denigrate the job he does. I believe I actually used to know Mr Collier before his career change-both my career and my upbringing has caused me to come into contact with a lot of Jewish people. I liked the man-pretty sure, I still would.
People need to stop with the Black & White portrayal of Palestine and Israel. There are lots of good people on both sides. As well as people I regard as Terrorists-on both sides.
The father of the man in the documentary is an elected Agriculture Minister in the elected Hamas Govt. There has been no reports of any terrorist activities. The Uncle campaigns for the release of Palestinians currently imprisoned by the Israeli authorities-in a role that is not entirely dissimilar to Mr Collier himself.
Should the BBC have made any possible involvement clear here? Of course it should.
But has there actually been any suggestion that anything in the documentary about the suffering of Gazans was untrue? No. And that was the point of the documentary.
The BBC, like all Western Media, provides detail and context to all released Israeli prisoners. To give back stories. To humanise them. As they should. But does not afford the same coverage to any Palestinians released.
Of course, it could be that every single Israeli released has had no part in the conflict. Including all the ones that were in the Armed Forces at the time.
And it could be that every single released Palestinian is, or has been, a terrorist. And none have a back story worth reporting. Which rather begs the question why a country as brilliantly run (from a military perspective) as Israel has let hundreds (if not thousands) go?
While I am on the subject, 1 thing that intrigues me.
1. We say that Ukraine was perfectly entitled to delay elections due to the invasion. And that he remains a Democratically elected leader 2. We also say that the democratic Mandate for Hamas has expired. That there should have been elections. Disregarding the invasion
This is not just an "independent journalist". Mr collier dedicates his life to investigative reporting, and to exposing antisemitism, wherever it may be. Which is in no way to denigrate the job he does. I believe I actually used to know Mr Collier before his career change-both my career and my upbringing has caused me to come into contact with a lot of Jewish people. I liked the man-pretty sure, I still would.
People need to stop with the Black & White portrayal of Palestine and Israel. There are lots of good people on both sides. As well as people I regard as Terrorists-on both sides.
The father of the man in the documentary is an elected Agriculture Minister in the elected Hamas Govt. There has been no reports of any terrorist activities. The Uncle campaigns for the release of Palestinians currently imprisoned by the Israeli authorities-in a role that is not entirely dissimilar to Mr Collier himself.
Should the BBC have made any possible involvement clear here? Of course it should.
But has there actually been any suggestion that anything in the documentary about the suffering of Gazans was untrue? No. And that was the point of the documentary.
The BBC, like all Western Media, provides detail and context to all released Israeli prisoners. To give back stories. To humanise them. As they should. But does not afford the same coverage to any Palestinians released.
Of course, it could be that every single Israeli released has had no part in the conflict. Including all the ones that were in the Armed Forces at the time.
And it could be that every single released Palestinian is, or has been, a terrorist. And none have a back story worth reporting. Which rather begs the question why a country as brilliantly run (from a military perspective) as Israel has let hundreds (if not thousands) go?
An East African paper. In 2004. Trying to make a story of interest to its readers by shoe-horning a claim that he was Kenyan-born. As opposed to had some Kenyan roots.
Couldn't even spell his name right.
Seriously-how desperate are some people? The USA is in the grip of the Far Right. Attacking the poor. Marginalising Minorities. To boost the already bulging wallets of the Billionaire Musk club.
The Democrat Party is temporarily rudderless. It contains people who are either semi-retired/retired, or not yet ready to lead.
And the Rabid Right continue to fight pathetic historic battles. Pretending (for example) that a Billionaire trying to give all his money away is still interested in money. While the World's richest man feeds off the poor and the marginalised.
Waiting for the "if you've got nothing to hide, why worry" brigade to turn up.....
Our Govt wants to be able to view these messages. Merely to stop terrorists and paedophiles using this as a way to go about their "business". It is going to be MI5/MI6/GCHQ. Not the Dept of Stealth and Social Obscurity.
I wish to support a honest and fair Government ( do you know where we can find one )
I would settle for 1 that seeks to protect people from harming children. This is not a Party political matter-the 2023 Act was an all-party one. Introduced by the Tories and continued by Labour.
This is a fair-minded piece below. Not least because Wiki actually opposes the Act
This is all about money. Various duties are imposed upon Big Tech. In relation to various child-related things, such as sharing photos of children being abused, people encouraging kids to kill themselves, that sort of thing.
The Xs/Facebooks of this World are given 2 options-
(1) To allow our Govt to view stuff; or (2) To do it themselves
In short, there are occasions where, if Big Tech wilfully turns a blind eye to users seeking to further their causes of raping or killing children, they can be prosecuted for aiding and abetting the abusers. They don't become liable just because it happens-it is allowing it to continue after they know that is the problem
The USA has previously brought many cases to seek to get this sort of info from Big Tech. Unsuccessfully.
The people who oppose it? Mainly, Big Tech. And Human Rights Lawyers-sorry to disappoint people who think this is a Right or Left thing. And paedophiles.
I can understand why people might object to the way things are done. I cannot understand why any person with a shred of decency objects in principle to the idea of seeking to prevent the sheltering of paedophiles.
Mind you. There's no end-to-end encryption of me being urinated on by Russian prostitutes
Comments
This is not just an "independent journalist". Mr collier dedicates his life to investigative reporting, and to exposing antisemitism, wherever it may be. Which is in no way to denigrate the job he does. I believe I actually used to know Mr Collier before his career change-both my career and my upbringing has caused me to come into contact with a lot of Jewish people. I liked the man-pretty sure, I still would.
People need to stop with the Black & White portrayal of Palestine and Israel. There are lots of good people on both sides. As well as people I regard as Terrorists-on both sides.
The father of the man in the documentary is an elected Agriculture Minister in the elected Hamas Govt. There has been no reports of any terrorist activities. The Uncle campaigns for the release of Palestinians currently imprisoned by the Israeli authorities-in a role that is not entirely dissimilar to Mr Collier himself.
Should the BBC have made any possible involvement clear here? Of course it should.
But has there actually been any suggestion that anything in the documentary about the suffering of Gazans was untrue? No. And that was the point of the documentary.
The BBC, like all Western Media, provides detail and context to all released Israeli prisoners. To give back stories. To humanise them. As they should. But does not afford the same coverage to any Palestinians released.
Of course, it could be that every single Israeli released has had no part in the conflict. Including all the ones that were in the Armed Forces at the time.
And it could be that every single released Palestinian is, or has been, a terrorist. And none have a back story worth reporting. Which rather begs the question why a country as brilliantly run (from a military perspective) as Israel has let hundreds (if not thousands) go?
1. We say that Ukraine was perfectly entitled to delay elections due to the invasion. And that he remains a Democratically elected leader
2. We also say that the democratic Mandate for Hamas has expired. That there should have been elections. Disregarding the invasion
Anyone else find that a bit two-faced?
Couldn't even spell his name right.
Seriously-how desperate are some people? The USA is in the grip of the Far Right. Attacking the poor. Marginalising Minorities. To boost the already bulging wallets of the Billionaire Musk club.
The Democrat Party is temporarily rudderless. It contains people who are either semi-retired/retired, or not yet ready to lead.
And the Rabid Right continue to fight pathetic historic battles. Pretending (for example) that a Billionaire trying to give all his money away is still interested in money. While the World's richest man feeds off the poor and the marginalised.
Not just poor losers. Poor winners.
Which do you wish to support?
This is a fair-minded piece below. Not least because Wiki actually opposes the Act
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Online_Safety_Act_2023
This is all about money. Various duties are imposed upon Big Tech. In relation to various child-related things, such as sharing photos of children being abused, people encouraging kids to kill themselves, that sort of thing.
The Xs/Facebooks of this World are given 2 options-
(1) To allow our Govt to view stuff; or
(2) To do it themselves
In short, there are occasions where, if Big Tech wilfully turns a blind eye to users seeking to further their causes of raping or killing children, they can be prosecuted for aiding and abetting the abusers. They don't become liable just because it happens-it is allowing it to continue after they know that is the problem
The USA has previously brought many cases to seek to get this sort of info from Big Tech. Unsuccessfully.
The people who oppose it? Mainly, Big Tech. And Human Rights Lawyers-sorry to disappoint people who think this is a Right or Left thing. And paedophiles.
I can understand why people might object to the way things are done. I cannot understand why any person with a shred of decency objects in principle to the idea of seeking to prevent the sheltering of paedophiles.
Mind you. There's no end-to-end encryption of me being urinated on by Russian prostitutes
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14426753/Fury-Thought-Police-targeting-grandmother-criticised-Labour-Starmer-abuse-power.html