Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content
 Share
James.

Amusing News Stories

By James., in General Chat

Recommended Posts

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 3 weeks later...
Buce

Buce

Posted
Posted
34 minutes ago, Strokes said:

What do people think about BBC’s decision to air Enoch Powell’s rivers of blood for the first time, 50 years after it was made?

I get that it’s historical but I’m not sure it’s necessary.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-43745447

 

The BBC said: "This is a rigorous journalistic analysis of a historical political speech. It's not an endorsement of the controversial views and people should wait to hear the programme before they judge it."

 

I think that's how I feel.

 

(Not sure why it's in the Amusing News Stories thread though) :huh:

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Alf Bentley

Alf Bentley

Posted
Posted
10 minutes ago, Buce said:

 

The BBC said: "This is a rigorous journalistic analysis of a historical political speech. It's not an endorsement of the controversial views and people should wait to hear the programme before they judge it."

 

I think that's how I feel.

 

(Not sure why it's in the Amusing News Stories thread though) :huh:

 

 

Likewise. Presuming that it will be accompanied by some proper analysis and critical debate, I see no harm in it. It might even be a good thing. The development of a more racially-mixed Britain, integration v multiculturalism, racism, inequality & immigration certainly remain major issues anyway and shouldn't be swept under the carpet.

 

Some of Powell's rhetoric will probably seem OTT to anyone other than those who are already paranoid about immigrants - "the River Tiber foaming with blood", "the black man with the whip hand" etc. I cannot imagine many people tuning into R4, hearing the speech and debate and being converted to violent racism. Broadcasting the speech without comment or debate would have been more questionable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Innovindil

Innovindil

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Strokes said:

What do people think about BBC’s decision to air Enoch Powell’s rivers of blood for the first time, 50 years after it was made?

I get that it’s historical but I’m not sure it’s necessary.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-43745447

Never come across this speech before. Way before my time. Interesting, if uncomfortable read. 

 

Clearly, he went overboard with it, it's nowhere near the cataclysm that he makes it out to be, but the fact is, 50 years after he's said it, we still have problems with integration. It is uncomfortable, but it does need discussion imo. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Strokes

Strokes

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Buce said:

 

The BBC said: "This is a rigorous journalistic analysis of a historical political speech. It's not an endorsement of the controversial views and people should wait to hear the programme before they judge it."

 

I think that's how I feel.

 

(Not sure why it's in the Amusing News Stories thread though) :huh:

 

 

lol

I though it was interesting news story, I should pay more attention. In my defence ??

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Carl the Llama

Carl the Llama

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, Strokes said:

What do people think about BBC’s decision to air Enoch Powell’s rivers of blood for the first time, 50 years after it was made?

I get that it’s historical but I’m not sure it’s necessary.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-43745447

I think it's disgraceful, typical right wing BBC bias.

  • Haha 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites
urban.spaceman

urban.spaceman

Posted
Posted
On 13/04/2018 at 08:20, Strokes said:

What do people think about BBC’s decision to air Enoch Powell’s rivers of blood for the first time, 50 years after it was made?

I get that it’s historical but I’m not sure it’s necessary.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-43745447

 

On 13/04/2018 at 08:56, Buce said:

 

The BBC said: "This is a rigorous journalistic analysis of a historical political speech. It's not an endorsement of the controversial views and people should wait to hear the programme before they judge it."

 

I think that's how I feel.

 

(Not sure why it's in the Amusing News Stories thread though) :huh:

 

 

 

On 13/04/2018 at 09:18, Alf Bentley said:

 

Likewise. Presuming that it will be accompanied by some proper analysis and critical debate, I see no harm in it. It might even be a good thing. The development of a more racially-mixed Britain, integration v multiculturalism, racism, inequality & immigration certainly remain major issues anyway and shouldn't be swept under the carpet.

 

Some of Powell's rhetoric will probably seem OTT to anyone other than those who are already paranoid about immigrants - "the River Tiber foaming with blood", "the black man with the whip hand" etc. I cannot imagine many people tuning into R4, hearing the speech and debate and being converted to violent racism. Broadcasting the speech without comment or debate would have been more questionable.

 

On 13/04/2018 at 09:24, Innovindil said:

Never come across this speech before. Way before my time. Interesting, if uncomfortable read. 

 

Clearly, he went overboard with it, it's nowhere near the cataclysm that he makes it out to be, but the fact is, 50 years after he's said it, we still have problems with integration. It is uncomfortable, but it does need discussion imo. 

Listened to it earlier. Very interesting production. Obviously it's a vile, racist speech. But on the other hand, it's an important part of our history from the last 50 years and MUST be studied, critiqued and thoroughly understood. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Captain...

Captain...

Posted
Posted
On 4/15/2018 at 02:23, urban.spaceman said:

 

 

 

Listened to it earlier. Very interesting production. Obviously it's a vile, racist speech. But on the other hand, it's an important part of our history from the last 50 years and MUST be studied, critiqued and thoroughly understood. 

Meh, it was just an early form of click bait.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Wymsey

Wymsey

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, Carl the Llama said:

lol By who?

Just some crowd watcher getting distracted and taking their eye off the car in front.

Just seems the camera was intently placed there and the reporter's reaction was something happened but she knew what it was.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...