Friday, 20 November 2015

Andrew Neil's tirade against "Islamist scumbags" on the BBC last night was MAGNIFIQUE

I have no idea how these things are handled these days, but I find it hard to believe that this particular script was sent upstairs for approval...

...because, surely, some well-meaning multiculti appeasement monkey would have spiked it: I very much doubt that the phrase "Islamist scumbags" has ever been broadcast by the BBC (unless used by some EDL thug in a documentary highlighting the dangers of - pause for a theatrical shudder - Islamophobia).  To hear it uttered by a BBC presenter was extraordinary: it was as if the world had shifted on its axis. If any unsuspecting editorial policy wallahs were watching at home, they probably fainted at that point. 

But, maybe I'm wrong, and the script was shown to editorial policy beforehand - and they gave it their blessing. In which case, thank you for showing some guts. Whatever led up to Neil's splendid defence of western civilisation, the BBC appears to have got right behind it: This Week tweeted the video, which has already garnered 10,000 retweets. Sacré bleu! 

Bravo, Brillo Pad! I've been rude about you in the past, but I take it all back: that glorious 1'46" was worth the licence fee (I expect you've heard that once or twice in the past, give or take a few seconds).


  1. I wonder if transmitting Neil's rant is a signal that a small "anti-party" clique (whose eyes have been opened by the Paris atrocity) has formed deep in the BBC . It would be like the good old days when a concealed ideological split in the Soviet praesidium would be telegraphed by the publication in Pravda or Izvestia of a story hinting at the true disastrous state of Soviet agriculture. Maybe a revisionist wing is establishing itself at our own Pravda.

    1. A gloriously exuberant statement of genuine opinion. Old Brillo Pad is an easily lampooned broadcaster but this is a tour de force. Bravo.
      Incidentally, I find the second half of Umbogo's comments bewildering, prob because I just don't have a clue about Russian politics...sorry.
      I am pleased, however, to report the top of the LP hit parade is Elvis Presley one more. HURRAH.

    2. I suspect, Umbongo, that the clique only has one member - i.e. Andrew Neil - but that he's sufficiently pig-headed and angry enough to blast his way through all the bullshit, and that he's too old and too wealthy to worry about losing his job. Besides, he recently got married for the first time, and may want to spend more time with his family.

    3. Believe me, Umbongo is spot on, Riley.

      As for Elvis, I'm delighted to hear that he's back at No. 1, where he belongs - and I'm really looking forward to his comeback tour.

  2. Actually SG I had a bit of a reassessment concerning Neil's "bravery" and the likelihood of an anti-party group at W1A. Forgive me quoting myself here but below is what I posted yesterday at craig's magnificent is the BBC biased? website.

    "In all the congratulatory complacency about Neil's rant no-one appears to have noticed that Neil has taken the easy route by reserving his strictures to Islamist scumbags. Blimey, I don't think anyone speaking/writing from W1A actually praises ISIL. Rather, the Narrative - which by implication Neil buys into - insists on a distinction between the beliefs of "Islamists" and "real" Moslems (apparently there must be 2 different Korans in print). So what's the big deal?

    Neil could have spread his net wider to condemn the passive and not-so-passive fifth columns of believers (both religious and political) in France and here? Granted this would have taken real courage and might (although unlikely) have sparked some genuine soul-searching by his employer. As it is (Godwin acknowledged), Neil's rant is as brave as going on air in 1942 to give Hitler (who wouldn't have been listening) an earful to buoy up the French resistance and depress the Germans while ignoring the goings-on in Vichy - and just as effective."

    craig's reply also puts Neil's putative anti-party line into perspective.

    1. I can't answer for SDG, Umbongo - but my own understanding is that the word "Islamist" means Muslims who want to create full-blown Islamic theocracies, i.e. no separation between church and state, and with every aspect of its citizens lives ruled by religious laws. Not all Muslims are Islamists, so I think Neil used the right term. If he had used the term "Muslim", I think it would have been a mistake, and he would no longer be working for the BBC - or any other British broadcaster - and his programme editor would also be toast. Personally, I believe there is such a thing as a moderate Muslim, because I've enjoyed boozy evenings with quite a few of them. That doesn't stop me believing that moderate Muslims should speak out a lot, LOT more, that multiculturalism stinks, and that the West's current determination to swamp our countries with even more Muslims is a suicidally stupid policy.

      Neil delivered his defence of Western civilisation (which is what it boiled down to) as one of the BBC's main political journalists, rather than as a guest on a politics programme. He was being brave, believe me.

    2. I'll take your point about Neil's bravery - after all you've been in the belly of the beast.

      However, the distinction between "Islamists" and the "moderate" followers of the Koran is a distinction without much of a difference. ISIL is vile - and its followers and overt supporters elsewhere are vile - but the necessity for the "fish in water" for ISIL's success still applies.

      I think - or I certainly hope - that my Moslem neighbour is not actually planning a terrorist attack or sewing together an explosive waistcoat as I write. OTOH I have a passing knowledge of the tenets of his religion and they're not nice, particularly towards kuffars. Moreover, your boozy Moslem friends are conspicuously not "good" Moslems or even moderate ones: they are breaking one of the basic codes of their religion.

  3. Mohammed Ghoffuq Youssef23 December 2015 at 10:18

    The President of Turkey settled the question of Islamic/Islamist, at least to his own satisfaction : "There is no Radical Islam - just Islam.