BBC Blog Network

User Profile

The Notting Hill Hammer

Listed below are comments made by The Notting Hill Hammer between Wednesday, 7th January 2009 and Tuesday, 5th May 2009.

«Newer
Older»

'A bit of a week' 08:39am on 05 May 2009 285. At 4:47pm on 01 May 2009, Susan-Croft wrote:
The Notting Hill Hammer 269

Sorry to say I do not think you rattled anyones cage, actually I was wondering what the point of you post was to be honest.

There are rightwing and leftwing websites out there some of which can be deemed as unsavoury.

All I got from your post is that you feel superior to us, you come from the USA and that you dislike white, male, straight, rightwing people. So I presume you are not one of these. As I dislike prejudice of any kind your post did not interest me Im afraid.

................

Ah, I see, miscomprehension is one of your many skills. I come from the UK and the only fact you got right was that I am not rightwing. You did give me a good laugh when you stated you disliked prejudice though, I like someone who can parody themself so well.

As I said before, I did rattle cages. The only point I was trying to make was that the continual accusations of bias against the BBC and Nick in particular are absurd. That stands and is supported by the little flurry of responses to my original comment.
'A bit of a week' 4:24pm on 01 May 2009 275. At 4:11pm on 01 May 2009, johnharris66 wrote:
#269 nottinghillhammer wrote:
Oh dear, I do seem to have rattled a few cages.

But the point is, you haven't. Sorry. Provide a killer fact or persuasive argument and only then will the readership of this site respect your point of view.

I've watched FOX News and I don't like it. But it's not funded by the State. The BBC has to meet a higher standard of impartiality. Generally I think it does, but when it does occasionally err it seems to be in a left-supporting direction.

......

I'm absolutely not interested in the respect of the majority of contributors to this site. I don't respect them. If I haven't rattled cages, why the plethora of responses? As I said before most of the people on this site merely want their prejudices confirmed and agreed with.

Check out Speak You're Branes to find out how some people out there feel about contributors to these pages.
'A bit of a week' 3:52pm on 01 May 2009 Oh dear, I do seem to have rattled a few cages. I know it's so much nicer to read only those comments which agree with your own, but in a democracy we have to take the cut and thrust of debate.

I'm not going to bother quoting any of the predictable responses but will respond to a few of the points.

I know there are a lot of rightwing websites out there, most of them are full of vile invective about anyone who is not white, male, straight and rightwing.

I don't particularly like this government. The point of my post was the endless tedious screaming about BBC bias, the rightwing tactic pioneered in the USA and slavishly followed by UK imitators.

Fox news is heavily rightwing, it is designed to be, it mirrors its viewers. Like it or not, I don't think Fox would ever claim to be impartial.

I lived in the USA for many years, there are many far right talk show hosts there, why don't you know this?

Spelling is fairly important wen komicatin kos it helpus wiv unerstanin

I'd still rather a Labour government than a tory one.

Libertarianism gets bandied about a lot on the web. Many use it as an excuse for far right rubbish.
'A bit of a week' 11:15am on 01 May 2009 At 1:15pm on 30 Apr 2009, Triffid100 wrote:
Nick,

Reading the comments on the blog I think you need to start repairing your relationship with the public. Basically, you don't seem to be trusted to give impartial reporting.

Time to come clean ?

..............

It always amuses me that the heavily biased mostly rightwing contributors to these blogs and HYS believe that they constitute the public. You don't, you are pilloried in the wider world for your knee-jerk reactionary ranting, there are websites dedicated to mocking you.

The BBC is admired around the world for its balanced reporting and Nick has posted comments critical of the government for years. What the rightwingers want is a news outlet that exactly mirrors their own prejudices. It already exists folks, it's called the Daily Mail. Why don't you post there instead?
Modernising tradition 09:53am on 30 Mar 2009 26. At 6:32pm on 27 Mar 2009, RFC- more-trophies-than-anyone wrote:
Why are the media repeatedly reporting the myth that only Roman Catholics are forbidden from being Monarch ? As a Presbyterian Protestant I would also be barred and no-one says anything about that.

As for "discrimination", the RC Church is openly discriminatory against women and homosexuals in its own flock by forbidding them from entering the priesthood. The RC Church also bans Protestant teachers and other faiths from reaching senior employment positions in their schools, which would be illegal in any other job. These schools aren't built and paid for by solely Roman Catholics either so why should I financially contribute to this Roman Catholic bigotry and discrimination ?

A devout Roman Catholic's first allegiance will always be to the Pope in Rome,look at certain Labour MP's resignations on abortion isuesas examples, and any Roman Catholic Monarch would be no different in putting his obedience to Rome before his British subjects. That is why a Roman Catholic Monarch is rightfully and totally unacceptable.

..............

Are presbyterians particularly accomodating to homosexuals then? Not if reports from Northern Ireland are anything to go by. The clue to your views is in your username and other posts. You are a sectarian Rangers supporter perpetuating centuries old bigotry.

I agree with some other posters, the real issue is ending the institution of the Monarchy which discriminates against every Briton who is not a member of that family
Obama's intriguing CIA pick 11:21am on 09 Jan 2009 NoRashDecisions wrote:

seanspa #129: Here here -- especially on that last paragraph!!!

Why can't everyone hold this view?

................

Sorry NRD, you should have written "Hear, Hear". Please try harder.
Obama's intriguing CIA pick 3:45pm on 08 Jan 2009 NoRashDecisions

I'm sorry that you feel "picked on", I actually agree with a lot of what you write. However, very poor spelling and grammar do make for very difficult reading, which spoils the communication of your ideas.
Obama's intriguing CIA pick 5:06pm on 07 Jan 2009 NoRashDecisions.

Please, please: USE A SPELLCHECKER
Obama's intriguing CIA pick 5:04pm on 07 Jan 2009 Mr Panetta is a Roman Catholic with an Italian name who was educated by Jesuits. Why does that make me feel uncomfortable, I wonder.

..............

Probably because you are a small-minded bigot.
Obama's intriguing CIA pick 2:14pm on 07 Jan 2009 37 MagicKirin wrote:

Ref #33

MSNBC has a comentator who has a thrill coming up his leg as Obama speaks.

Nuff said

.......

And Fox News is a whole channel dedicated to right wing lies, US radio is infested by racist homophobic fascists who make the KKK seem like the WI, so what precisely is your tiny-minded point?

Like most on the unintelligent right you scream bias against anyone that does not share your pathology.

«Newer
Older»

^ Back to top

BBC MMVI

The BBC is not responsible for the content of external internet sites

BBC.co.uk

BBC Blog Network

Find and talk to the BBC's bloggers.

User Profile

The Notting Hill Hammer