Its the same thing in the states. name a movie made since 9-11 where the terrorists are Muslim.

Posted by: Elric66 at August 20, 2007 11:00 AM

"...unless they also complain, in which case the bomb will no doubt be set off by fundamentalist Christians"

...who would be ignored if they complained anyway and are fair game.

Of course, fundamentalist Christians totally believable as terrorists, right?

Posted by: Anna Venger at August 20, 2007 11:04 AM

Bring back the big blonde Boers from South Africa.

Posted by: MP at August 20, 2007 11:05 AM

Have you noticed how we're going back in time to find "bad guys" and people to laugh at? Think of "300" (Zoroastrian Persians attack Greece); Vikings/barbarians rampage through Capital One commercials and in the fall, we'll all get to chuckle along with "Cavemen" (until its cancelled after four shows).

Posted by: 3812Michelle at August 20, 2007 11:09 AM

What would happen if they "offend" Muslims? Thats the real question and issue.

Posted by: Elric66 at August 20, 2007 11:14 AM

Not that I watch the programme myself, but I would think (or would like to think) that most viewers are sharp enough to see through this PC nonsense. I mean the animal rights crowd is a bit implausible, surely?

Posted by: grobari at August 20, 2007 11:14 AM

When was the last Bond film where Muslims were terrorists? Oppsss never.

Posted by: Elric66 at August 20, 2007 11:23 AM

Posted by: Elric66 at August 20, 2007 11:14 AM

Demonstrations? Riots? Actual terrorist attacks? Just guessing here.

Posted by: Anna Venger at August 20, 2007 11:23 AM

Of course, this is the result of well-paid PR people, advocates, etc.

But I wonder if it is also the result of our elitist governments and media not trusting the common folk to use reason and behave well?

How is this presented by the Islamic advocates? They must say they fear a backlash against Muslims if a TV show causes unreasonable fears of Islamic terrorism.

What does this assume about non-Muslims?

That we are too stupid to know the difference between TV and reality, terrorists and non-terrorists.

That we are all thugs, ready to riot and do harm to any Muslim that we encounter, as a result of watching a fictional TV show.

Hmmmm. All this despite ample evidence to the contrary since 9/11 and various other real-life successful and unsuccessful Islamic terrorist attacks.

The Islamic advocates are painting us with their own brush. They are pointing the finger, accusing us of acting like they act.

Typical bully tactics.

But why do our government and media accept their position as being an accurate portrayal of us?

Why aren't the Islamic advocates laughed at and told, "Oh, get real, there's no campaign against Islam here and non-Muslims aren't all thugs out to get you."

Instead, they are told, "Oh my goodness, you are so right, dear, we must protect you from the non-Muslim hordes".

It's too bizarre and yet it's really happening. Here we are in "Opposite World" again.

Posted by: Josephine at August 20, 2007 11:25 AM

Ah yes those darn animal rights activists...ALWAYS CAUSING TROUBLE!! The BBC is a totally bankrupt organisation that has lost everything that made the BBC what it used to be...fair balanced hard nosed reporting. IT has become one of these I luv muslim mouthpieces and it along with CNN only produces stories worthy of fetid puke.

By the way speaking about CNN have you seen the latest garbage that C Amanpour has come up with "Gods Warriors"...I think this is somehting we all need to watch...even if only for the laughs.

Later y'all

Posted by: Shunkleash at August 20, 2007 11:25 AM

right on Anna

Muslims are only offended by fictional terrorist attacks done by Muslims and threaten real ones if offended by the fictional ones.

Posted by: Elric66 at August 20, 2007 11:25 AM

Coincidently an article in the news today highlights the animal rights campaigners long 'battle' to get the grenadier guards to stop wearing those big black bearskin hats. None have so far resorted to car bombings or be-headings. If only the entertainment industry would realise that truth is infinitely more interesting than fiction.

Posted by: BlowHammed at August 20, 2007 11:31 AM

"Now the bomb will be set off by animal rights campaigners instead."
-- from the article above

But one defender of animal rights, the Dutchman Van der Graaf, admitted during his trial that he had killed Pim Fortuyn because, he said, Pim Fortuyn had been attacking the "most vulernable" members of Dutch society, the Muslim immigrants, and so he deserved to be killed, for "protecting" one group of humans, that is Muslims was precisely the same thing, in Van der Graaf's view, as defending animals as the "most vulnerable" of species.

What if the "animal rights campaigners" who set off such a bomb were to have been, as Van der Graaf was, egged on by Muslims who saw a way to get others, non-Muslims, to perform certain tasks on their behalf?

Posted by: Hugh at August 20, 2007 11:33 AM

When one looks at commercials in the US these days, especially high-profile commercial venues like the Super Bowl, we can clearly see that animals are being depicted for comedic value. Budweiser almost exclusively uses animals for comedy in their commercials, that is, they will until the animal rights activists put the kibosh on it. I also recall a "snicker's" commercial with two guys standing over an engine, culminating in an uncomfortable meeting of the lips a la "Lady and the Tramp". Their reaction drew harsh criticism from gay and lesbian activists and the commercial was promptly pulled.

Like last season's "24", Islamic terrorist plots quickly degenerate into the Islamists being the unwilling dupes of the Russians or worse, the greedy British businessman. This is commonplace and only getting worse as the West continues to suffer from the malaise of PC.

Posted by: awake at August 20, 2007 11:48 AM

To afraid to pose a story line that is simply to close to the truth.

In the photo of the article we see the brave,and confident looking professionals willing to confront those evil animal rights terrorists, but those Muslim terrorists are just a bit to scary in the world of fantasy to deal with.

Maybe they should also demonstrate their sensitivities in their Hospital practices by incorporating Islamic Medical practices as well, so as to not offend Muslims.

Posted by: Mackie at August 20, 2007 11:51 AM

Terror victims are BBC licence-payers, too

Over the weekend, the BBC was forced to remove a highly offensive message about Jesus from its website.

All websites run the risk of being defaced by extremists, but why had this message been allowed to remain there for a week, despite complaints?

Anti-Muslim comments vanish instantly. Meanwhile, it emerged yesterday that the BBC has refused to allow Casualty to carry a storyline featuring a terrorist attack by a Muslim suicide bomber. The editorial guidelines department decreed that, instead, the terrorists should be animal rights extremists.

The BBC's coverage of Islamic affairs has been unsatisfactory for many years.

In its international and domestic news reporting, the corporation has consistently come across as naïve and partial, rather than sensitive and unbiased. Its reporting of Israel and Palestine, in particular, tends to underplay the hate-filled Islamist ideology that inspires Hamas and other factions, while never giving Israel the benefit of the doubt. (Disgracefully, the BBC is still refusing to publish the Balen Report, which it commissioned to investigate allegations of anti-Israel bias.)

In its coverage of British Muslims, the BBC has been inspired by two laudable aims: to treat their beliefs respectfully; and to avoid stereotyping ordinary Muslims as terrorist supporters. In the process, however, it has done two rather different things.

First, it has presented Islam on its own terms, as if only Muslims had the authority to describe their religion.

Mohammed remains an intensely controversial figure. Yet the BBC shies away from proper historical investigation of "the Prophet", as it insists on calling him.

Second, the BBC has only scratched the surface of one of the biggest news stories of the decade: the penetration of Muslim youth by Islamic supremacist groups.

Indeed, the corporation has even helped this to happen.

Again and again, it has wheeled on Islamic "moderates" who belong to hard-line sects that real moderate Muslims are desperate to stop their children joining.

It has been left to Channel 4 to conduct undercover investigations in radical mosques and to commission a 2007 GFK/NOP opinion poll revealing that almost a quarter of British Muslims believe that the Government helped stage the London bombings of July 7, 2005.

We live in a world in which, although the vast majority of Muslims are not terrorists, the vast majority of terrorists are Muslim.

Younger BBC programme-makers are aware of this awkward fact; the problem lies with an older generation of executives stuck in a PC timewarp. Casualty is fiction, but that is no excuse for constructing a politically acceptable parallel universe.

To ban a storyline featuring Islamic terrorists not only misrepresents reality; it is also an insult to licence-payers whose family, friends or colleagues were blown to pieces on July 7 - and not by animal rights activists.

Posted by: Jerusalem Posts at August 20, 2007 11:55 AM

I hate to say it but Britian is the new France

Posted by: Elric66 at August 20, 2007 11:55 AM

Oh brother. Next they'll abolish television altogether, for fear of offending the Taliban strain of peaceful ones.

Posted by: ISLAMSFORLOSERS at August 20, 2007 12:41 PM

It might be a good thing in the UK to ban TV with all the Musim propaganda coming from the British airwaves.

Posted by: Elric66 at August 20, 2007 12:47 PM

Information on the Immigration act of 1965 that started this flood of islam to the US. Thank you politicians, you have ruined the dream of America.
Ted Kennedy...you are a large part of this fiasco.
http://www.ednews.org/articles/3512/1/Immigration-Milestones-1965-Family-Reunification-Replaces-National-Quotas-Part-1/Page1.html

Posted by: interestinconundrum at August 20, 2007 12:54 PM

The Immigration Act was all about getting elected.
http://www.npg.org/forum_series/socialexp.html
We can't count on political leaders, it is all about them.

Posted by: interestinconundrum at August 20, 2007 1:00 PM

Bravo

http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=26731_The_Lights_Go_Out_in_Gaza&only

On Monday, it said the payments would not resume because it had received word that Hamas was “diverting” electricity revenues.

But I was told Hamas wasnt corrupt. Im "shocked"

Posted by: Elric66 at August 20, 2007 1:19 PM

Fiction attack? Just show the real news over and over so everyone recalls what these people do when ever the mood strikes them.

Posted by: CLL1709 at August 20, 2007 1:27 PM

Fictional attack? Just show the real news over and over so everyone recalls what these people do when ever the mood strikes them. Or perhaps that is to bigoted.

Posted by: CLL1709 at August 20, 2007 1:29 PM

How soon before they bitch about the real attacks around the world done by Muslims?

Posted by: Elric66 at August 20, 2007 1:32 PM

"The first show of the hospital drama's new series was to have featured a storyline about an explosion caused by Islamic extremists"

...ohh, like that doesn't happen....

Posted by: exsgtbrown at August 20, 2007 1:45 PM

"300 hatepreachers can't be deported from the UK!"

http://sheikyermami.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/08/pc-crusaders.gif

http://sheikyermami.com/2007/08/19/muslim-terror-suspect-allowed-to-stay-in-uk/

Posted by: sheik yer'mami at August 20, 2007 1:56 PM

The BBC is racist against Animal-rights activists. They should be sued for hate-speech.

Posted by: Jimmy the Dhimmi at August 20, 2007 2:30 PM

Josephine -- no, the stated motivation would probably be not (or only in part) fear of the backlash against muslims, but also fear of setting off these extremist hotheads, or youths or whatever the euphemism would be, who of course are fine and quiet until they are "angered" by such uppity dhimmies, I mean bigoted media. And no, I doubt very much that the parties responsible for this BBC decision are doing it out of ignorance -- merely self interest, like the Syrian and Alexandrian patriarchs who opened their doors to the submission cult back in 8th century. The patriarchs got more power over their community and less interference from the Bysantine or Roman center. Good deal for them, for a while.
Animal activist terrorists not believable? Don't underestimate the power of displacement as a defence mechanism.
It is Bat Ye'Or, I think, in "Islam and Dhimmitude", who cites depictions by christian dhimmies of "jewish hordes" attacking the West, complete with kadis riding alongside the troops and egging them on.
So give it a little time, you'll see jewish terrorists blowing up Big Ben on Casualty.

Posted by: kuchuklambat at August 20, 2007 2:44 PM

Latest Message to United States citizen jihad watchers:

We are in the middle of the seventh day of posting this request at Jihad Watch, and we are up to 44 volunteers. Florida is now in the lead with 6. Volunteers from 24 states have signed on.

I'm looking for at least two people in every state of the Union who would be willing to purchase a copy of Robert Spencer's Religion of Peace? Why Christianity Is and Islam Isn't and mail it to one of the senators in your state. I'm organizing an effort to get the book simultaneously to all 100 senators, in order to send a strong message.
If we get more than two people per state, books can also be sent to the House of Representatives.

If you’d like to be involved, please write to me at traehnam@yahoo.com under the subject heading “Senate,” and tell me the state your senator represents, an email address where I can reach you, and a nickname. No need for your real name. And I will never share your email address with anyone, not even with other volunteers for this project.

And visit www.jihadawareness.blogspot.com to get more info on this project and to leave comments other volunteers can read. You can also see there the growing list of participants in this project, and the states their senators represent. I’ll try to update the list at least once a day. I've also designed a graphic that might amuse. Scroll down when you get to the site.

Once we have at least two people from every state, we can agree on a mailing date and then each of us can mail a copy of the book on that date.

Right before each of us mails the book, we can issue a press release to various media outlets in every state, and in that way announce and explain the mailing. And perhaps we can come up with some other ways of maximizing the effectiveness of this project and gaining as much positive attention as possible.

One of the project's volunteers suggested contacting Rep. Sue Myrick, who started the anti-Jihad caucus in Congress. I'll try to coordinate this project with Rep. Myrick to maximize its effectiveness. I've also been calling various congressional offices to get advice on how best to go about this. And I'll soon contact Regnery, Robert Spencer's publisher, to ask their advice and to see if we can coordinate with them in some way.

Posted by: traeh at August 20, 2007 2:49 PM

In a way, there is no story here, as this is exactly what we now expect of the BBC.
The BBC's glory used to be the integrity and balance of her news reporting and documentaries, and those same qualities were often to be found in her drama output as well.
Things have changed, and affection for what was once a great and respected institution is increasingly being replaced by hostility, see:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/08/20/ntv120.xml

The comments on that report are almost entirely critical of the BBC, and I would guess that they are fairly representative of mainstream British opinion.
so move along folks, there is nothing to watch on this channel....

Posted by: M Al-Content at August 20, 2007 3:28 PM

kuchuklambat -- Interesting points. Thanks.

Posted by: Josephine at August 20, 2007 3:41 PM

Muslims are only offended by fictional terrorist attacks done by Muslims and threaten real ones if offended by the fictional ones.
Posted by: Elric66

LOL And entirely ON POINT... LOL funny but sad at the same time...

Posted by: Allahfanculo at August 20, 2007 4:05 PM

A "fictional terrorist attack"? What about the real ones? Do they offend Muslims? Can the BBC cancel those?

Posted by: tanstaafl at August 20, 2007 4:08 PM

@ Allahfanculo

You cant make this stuff up.

Posted by: Elric66 at August 20, 2007 4:18 PM

If we ever see another 'Navy Seals' or Chuck Norris's 'Delta Force' who will the bad guys be?

They don't want to insult CAIR or muslims.

I guess they will have to portray a white male Republican American from the Christian Bible belt that is fanatically Patriotic and has turned against the country.

Oh sorry, that already is Hollywoods new villan.

I remember the good old days of movies not being afraid to show muslims as villans. That was before 9/11, now look at how Hollywood has stooped.

I still wonder if Hollywoods new portrayal of villans was changed by the U.S. State Department. I don't know if anyone remembers but for about 12 months after 9/11 the U.S. State Department said they wanted to meet with writers, directors of Hollywood because they wanted to get involved in the movie making industry regarding muslims.

After several years later we see ZERO movies that are publically associated with the State Department, so what have they been involved in? Since the State Department is anti-U.S. it would only make logic that the State Department is behind this 'don't offend muslims' policy in movies.

Anyone know anything about this?

I am glad that the Nazi's did not have a big brother like the State Department protecting them or we would have never seen 'Hogans Hero's'.

Posted by: alaskan1000 at August 20, 2007 4:44 PM

Even in the good ol days of hollywood, Muslims were rarely the bad guys. James Bond, in 27 films never faced off against jihadists.

Posted by: Elric66 at August 20, 2007 5:30 PM

Elric66:
I hate to say it but Britian is the new France

Total crap. I dont see one single Western country that is not beholden to political correctness or has liberal ideology running its institutions. Granted individual Western countries have their hangups, but no Western country (and I mean none) is a free country where they do not care about who they offend.
Not Britain, not the USA, not France.
Australia is probably the most ballsiest country because of the national attitude for calling a spade a spade.

All Western countries show flashes of anti-dhimmitude and dhimmitude in turn. None are consistent. The unguarded "man on the street" is probably the best source of "gut feeling" in a country. Not the institutions and certainly not the Governments.

Posted by: UK Infidel Lover at August 20, 2007 5:32 PM

Jerusalem Posts:
Mohammed remains an intensely controversial figure. Yet the BBC shies away from proper historical investigation of "the Prophet", as it insists on calling him

That is hardly surprising. The Muslims are like nitrogycerin. You just never know when they will explode.

And the BBC know this. If they put anything that called "the Prophet" a charlatan, a paedophile, a figure like Hitler, Stalin etc, a man without control of his sexual lusts etc, a depraved man - Muslims will riot. And you can be sure that BBC offices in many countries will be torched, journalists kidnapped and beheaded, diplomats from Islamic countries will be demanding the UK government sack the Board of Governers, Chairman and CEO.

So do you want to start this?
Sooner or later, this has to be risked.

Posted by: UK Infidel Lover at August 20, 2007 5:40 PM

The bbc has a long history of biased dislike and hatred for christians. The folks at the bbc know that they could get away with offending christians because christians will not threaten them with death. Unlike muslims, who issue death fatwas and who acutally carry out their threats. The cowardly bbc folks have now spine in dealing with the real islamofascists and therefore, are not believable in their presentations.

Posted by: callmeinfidel at August 20, 2007 6:28 PM

The BBC is run by "minority groups" for "minority groups". They insult all "minority groups" with their bias. Most non-whites in this country are NOT racist, the BBC is now a mouthpiece for islamic supremacism. This makes me disturbed, there are an awfull lot of gay people in the BBC. We all know that this is the group that will pay the heaviest price for an Islamic/Sharia UK. We have become so caught up in political correctness that the people who have the most to lose are promotiong the very group who will take the most from them; their lives.

Posted by: DaveMate at August 20, 2007 6:48 PM

UK Infidel Lover WROTE:

Jerusalem Posts:
Mohammed remains an intensely controversial

figure. Yet the BBC shies away from proper historical investigation of "the Prophet", as it insists on calling him

That is hardly surprising. The Muslims are like nitrogycerin. You just never know when they will explode.

And the BBC know this. If they put anything that called "the Prophet" a charlatan, a paedophile, a figure like Hitler, Stalin etc, a man without control of his sexual lusts etc, a depraved man - Muslims will riot. And you can be sure that BBC offices in many countries will be torched, journalists kidnapped and beheaded, diplomats from Islamic countries will be demanding the UK government sack the Board of Governers, Chairman and CEO.

So do you want to start this?
Sooner or later, this has to be risked.

AGREED. YOU HIT THE NAIL ON THE HEAD.

Posted by: DaveMate at August 20, 2007 6:54 PM

MP wrote:

Bring back the big blonde Boers from South Africa.

Exactly ... Movies like Lethal Weapon (featuring easily dispatched Boer racists), Behind Enemy Lines (oh so boring), even today's Bourne Ultimatum ... ALL of them them have totally unrealistic/ho-hum villains in today's world.

That's the shame -- who cares about those guys? All we get is contrived villians (including fundamentalist Christians) and ridiculous plot lines with ever more impressive CG (as if that's any solace).

The point is: Bring back the bumbling Muslim Terrorists of True Lies, or even Back to the Future ... that's more in line w/ an Al Zarqarwi fumbling with his AK47 on Youtube.

I'm sure this Fall we'll see the Geico-inspired Cavemen commiting atrocities and mayhem, thereby taking the heat off the Ummah...

Posted by: blues4allah at August 20, 2007 6:57 PM

They'd better watch out, an "animal right activist" shot popular Dutch political candidate Pim Fortuyn in the back in 2002, assassinating perhaps Holland's last hope for national survival.

I suggest that they have invisible aliens set the bombs.

Or Nazi time travellers from Hitler's last, never-before-revealed science breakthrough.

Or suspiciously white demons from another dimension.

(Okay, let's just make it talking animated alphabet letters, and everyone will be happy. Except kids from the spelling-bee...)

Posted by: profitsbeard at August 20, 2007 7:27 PM

BLUES4ALLAH has a point, we now see the major media players so cowed that they will not portray islamic terrorists as terrorists. They are so scared of their employees being attacked that they appease these people. Violence is a tool of islam, the threat of violence is the tool of islam. If islam wants to be peaceful then they NEED TO BE PEACEFUL. We (that is everyone on this forum)know that islam will use ANY trick or disingenuous statement to promote the islamification of the UK/world. That's what the koran tells them to do. We need to wake up to this. I live in a town (East London, UK) that has become almost totally muslim. I live very close to Anjem Choudary, a totally nutty islamist. Not far from him is a man who was arrested for the plot to bring down planes from Heathrow Airport. This is not a statement I make lightly. These people live VERY near to me. What do I do? I don't physically attack them EVEN THOUGH I SEE THEMM EVERY DAY. But they want me dead for NOT being muslim. Go figure. They are guided by hatred.

Posted by: DaveMate at August 20, 2007 7:30 PM

Bird Brain Corporation does it again-mustn't offend Muslims! Am sure when first Truck bomb explodes on BBC turf there will be further howling & beating of breasts by these
craven journos [frantic to enjoy life on rich pickings of bonuses & high wages forcibly taken from British population in guise of 'Television License.}
By burying their heads in proverbial sand-BBC hopes to appease Muslims. A forlorn hope,chaps as
Jihadists have old U.K in their sights,correctly intepreting Dhimmitude in all areas of New Labour
Government as signs of weakness.
Only this morning Fat Boy Al Sadr has declared 'Brits to be on the run' in Basra where doubtless he & his grateful henchmen are planning
to hasten the rout with sniper bullets,bombs,RPGs & beheadings.
Please note that Muslim who died of burns in Glasgow attack made a last E Mail saying 'he was
doing all this for Allah...'

Posted by: Morgane at August 20, 2007 7:42 PM

Western society does not believe in truth anymore. Postmodernism is little more than turning our feelings into the test of truth. Politics is about who gets the most angry. Perhaps it is time to get angry about what is happening to the UK. Non-violently angry, but angry none the less.

Posted by: James Martel at August 20, 2007 9:34 PM

"Now the bomb will be set off by animal rights campaigners instead."

And who will der viewers think of? Ok with me.

Posted by: FreeSpeech at August 21, 2007 6:22 AM

"
Even in the good ol days of hollywood, Muslims were rarely the bad guys. James Bond, in 27 films never faced off against jihadists.

Posted by: Elric66 "

"Some events in "Casino Royale" seem ripped from the newswires. There's an attempted attack on a passenger airliner, a chase scene through African misery and a torture episode. One couldn't help thinking of the recent plot by British Muslims to wreak mid-air mayhem, the relentless catastrophe of Darfur or the mutilated bodies piling up daily in Baghdad. In short, "Casino Royale" plunges the audience head-first into 2006. "

Posted by: exsgtbrown at August 21, 2007 7:11 AM

I'm surprised they didn't change the muslim terrorists to anti-abortion activists.

Posted by: ImNoDhimmi at August 21, 2007 9:37 AM