7
   

The Prudes over at the BBC

 
 
Reply Fri 7 Feb, 2014 01:42 am
Headline:
Ukraine crisis: Leaked phone call embarrasses US
Quote:
The alleged conversation between Ms Nuland and the US ambassador to Ukraine, Geoffrey Pyatt, appeared on YouTube on Thursday.

The 4min 10sec video was entitled "Maidan's puppets" in Russian - a reference to the square in the Ukrainian capital, Kiev, where pro-EU protests have been held for months. A transcription of the whole conversation was also posted in Russian.

At one point, the female speaker mentions the UN and its possible role in trying to find a solution to the Ukraine stand-off.

She says: "So that would be great, I think, to help glue this thing and have the UN help glue it and you know..." she then uses the graphic swear word about the EU.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-26072281

for the record the unmentionable words are "**** the E.U.".

These words are almost the entire story, yet the BBC can not report them?? WTF is going on over on this island? On this side of the pond I often hear this word used dozens of times a day, are we to believe that fancy pants brits cant be confronted with the word on the news even when it is intrical to the story? THis sounds like the works of the same fanatical nanny state that has aims of outlawing pointy kitchen knives and regulate knife blade lengths.
 
Lordyaswas
 
  8  
Reply Fri 7 Feb, 2014 03:09 am
Did you firget to buy some prunes when you were out shopping, hawk?

Dear me, it comes across as if you are really genuinely angry about this, rather than just write something to try and upset a limey.

Pretty good effort, old boy.
Setanta
 
  3  
Reply Fri 7 Feb, 2014 04:34 am
"Intrical?"

That Wackeye, he's special . . . you know, like Special Olympics . . .
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Feb, 2014 06:08 am
@Setanta,
R u threatening to wack him in the eye ??
Setanta
 
  2  
Reply Fri 7 Feb, 2014 06:30 am
@OmSigDAVID,
Lookin' to stir up some trouble, huh?
0 Replies
 
ehBeth
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Feb, 2014 07:33 am
@hawkeye10,
hawkeye10 wrote:
On this side of the pond I often hear this word used dozens of times a day


on the news?

I'm glad you're on the far far far side of the pond.
0 Replies
 
Lordyaswas
 
  3  
Reply Fri 7 Feb, 2014 07:53 am
Good Evening. Here is the news from the BBC.....

0 Replies
 
Lordyaswas
 
  3  
Reply Fri 7 Feb, 2014 07:57 am
Followed of course by the Sport.....


0 Replies
 
tsarstepan
 
  2  
Reply Fri 7 Feb, 2014 08:29 am
@hawkeye10,
I don't know anything about this story but the one thing BBC isn't is prudish.

Have you heard the language they allow in their shows? Pretty darn racy by US standards. F bomb this and F bomb that!
Ticomaya
 
  2  
Reply Fri 7 Feb, 2014 09:03 am
@hawkeye10,
hawkeye10 wrote:
These words are almost the entire story, yet the BBC can not report them?? WTF is going on over on this island? On this side of the pond I often hear this word used dozens of times a day, are we to believe that fancy pants brits cant be confronted with the word on the news even when it is intrical to the story? THis sounds like the works of the same fanatical nanny state that has aims of outlawing pointy kitchen knives and regulate knife blade lengths.

The intrical words as told by the much less-prudish CNN ...

Quote:
Top U.S. diplomat launches f-bomb on EU in leaked recorded conversation
February 6th, 2014
05:21 PM ET
By Elise Labott

A leaked audio recording of a phone call allegedly catches the top U.S. diplomat to Europe working on a behind-the-scenes deal to end the Ukrainian political turmoil, and using profanity to express strong frustrations with inaction and indecision by the European Union in resolving the crisis.

In the conversation, voices closely resembling those of Assistant Secretary for European Affairs Victoria Nuland and U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Geoffrey Pyatt discuss a plan to broker a deal between the Ukrainian government and the opposition.

At one point the woman, who sounds like Nuland, can be heard saying "f**k the EU."


http://i.imgur.com/qLJDJ5I.png
hawkeye10
 
  -1  
Reply Fri 7 Feb, 2014 10:51 am
@Ticomaya,
The cnn story informs us of what the offending word was, the BBC story on the other had only asserts that something offensive was said with telling us what was said. Not the same.
hawkeye10
 
  -2  
Reply Fri 7 Feb, 2014 01:07 pm
@Lordyaswas,
Lordyaswas wrote:

Did you firget to buy some prunes when you were out shopping, hawk?

Dear me, it comes across as if you are really genuinely angry about this, rather than just write something to try and upset a limey.

Pretty good effort, old boy.

Bad journalism offends me

Un asked for paternal protection if my alleged fragile state offends me

Censorship offends me.

Yes, this piece offends me, had I known how poorly it was done I would have not taken the time to read it, I would gave read a better account first, which I needed to do because I wanted to know what the alleged offensive word was. I get equally worked up with accounts of alleged rape or alleged child porn, which journalists now refuse to specify, when I know that since the definition of rape and child porn is now so expansive the labels are of very little use. Tell me what
allegedly happenee without hiding behind euphemisms. I can take it, and journalists and governments owe me the truth rather than their characterizations of the truth, which all too often is all they offer.

See the accounts of the operations of the NSA and the CIA for illustration of where this gets us, not to mention the invasion of Iraq.
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Feb, 2014 01:16 pm
@hawkeye10,

Lordyaswas wrote:
Did you firget to buy some prunes when you were out shopping, hawk?

Dear me, it comes across as if you are really genuinely angry about this,
rather than just write something to try and upset a limey.

Pretty good effort, old boy.
hawkeye10 wrote:
Bad journalism offends me

Un asked for paternal protection if my alleged fragile state offends me

Censorship offends me.

Yes, this piece offends me, had I known how poorly it was done I would have not taken the time to read it, I would gave read a better account first, which I needed to do because I wanted to know what the alleged offensive word was. I get equally worked up with accounts of alleged rape or alleged child porn, which journalists now refuse to specify, when I know that since the definition of rape and child porn is now so expansive the labels are of very little use. Tell me what
allegedly happenee without hiding behind euphemisms. I can take it, and journalists and governments owe me the truth rather than their characterizations of the truth, which all too often is all they offer.

See the accounts of the operations of the NSA and the CIA for illustration of where this gets us, not to mention the invasion of Iraq.
WELL SAID, Hawkeye.

I join in that point of vu.





David
0 Replies
 
Ticomaya
 
  2  
Reply Fri 7 Feb, 2014 01:31 pm
@hawkeye10,
hawkeye10 wrote:

The cnn story informs us of what the offending word was, the BBC story on the other had only asserts that something offensive was said with telling us what was said. Not the same.


**** = prude
f**k = not prude

Gotcha.
hawkeye10
 
  -1  
Reply Fri 7 Feb, 2014 04:40 pm
@Ticomaya,
Quote:
**** = prude
f**k = not prude

despite the title that I chose prudishness is not all that I care about, as was explained. Basic journalistic competence, to include the willingness to to report facts rather that editorial estimation of the facts, is as well.

I am beginning to think that BBC is the new CNN, a once OK journalism outfit that now does no more than shovel the BS.
Lordyaswas
 
  4  
Reply Fri 7 Feb, 2014 04:57 pm
@hawkeye10,
Still seems important enough for someone thousands of miles away to first of all bother to use it for news, and secondly, to get his knickers all tangled about it.

I couldn't give a f*** what your news people are saying or doing, and it's definitely not worth my effort actually commenting on what they say or don't say.

Do us Brits fascinate you that much?

Get a life, mate.
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Feb, 2014 05:04 pm
@Lordyaswas,
Lordy wrote:
Get a life, mate.


He wouldn't know what to do with it.
0 Replies
 
hawkeye10
 
  -1  
Reply Fri 7 Feb, 2014 05:05 pm
@Lordyaswas,
Quote:
Do us Brits fascinate you that much?


bad journalism and bad government annoy be that much, I have started many threads on these topics.
Lordyaswas
 
  3  
Reply Fri 7 Feb, 2014 05:09 pm
@hawkeye10,
Do you spend all day checking out various news articles from around the world?

Can you direct me to any critical reports you've made regarding, let's say...... Fox?

Or is it just the beeb that you read? Quite understandable for an American, but I doubt you'd admit as such.


hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Feb, 2014 05:28 pm
@Lordyaswas,
Quote:
Do you spend all day checking out various news articles from around the world?
I spend a small amount of time gathering news from many different sources, most in USA and EU

Quote:
Can you direct me to any critical reports you've made regarding, let's say...... Fox?
I dont watch tv news hardly at all, and dont have enough respect for fox news to use their website most of the time, so no.

Quote:
Or is it just the beeb that you read?
my order roughly is:

WP headlines only since I dont pay
NYT headlines only since I dont pay
Slate
Yahoo
DW Germany
BBC
NBCnews (but I hate their new homepage mostly pictures format and will prob be dropping them)
Economist headlines only since I dont pay
Seattle PI
My local paper headlines only since I dont pay
Der Speigel


I am beginning to think that BBC needs to drop down on my list.
 

Related Topics

 
  1. Forums
  2. » The Prudes over at the BBC
Copyright © 2022 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 01/24/2022 at 01:52:55