Around 50% of British mosques have been attacked since 9/11 - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Bichak;41243974]Is that why all videos including the beheader's Islamist talk are taken down? You can only find it on Liveleak now. And it is the media, it does censor a lot of things.[/QUOTE] It's in all my local news sources, so I don't know where you're looking. Unless, you'know, your government really loves censoring stuff. [editline]30th June 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=OutspokenGolf;41244018]the irony of youtube censoring this after leaving The Innocence of Muslims uncensored isn't lost on me. That film offended me and i ain't even a muslim[/QUOTE] There's a difference between a really dumb video and a disturbing real world event. Youtube is a private company, it can show what it wants. It's not a news outlet, and depending on it one is retarded.

[QUOTE=Sgt Doom;41244005]That's usually because when a family sits down to watch the news, they don't want their kids to see blood-stained murderous psychopaths. Blame the kind of people who think all TV should be sanitized for children.[/QUOTE] They had no reason to censor the beheader's Islamist speech. [url]http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=37e_1369335448[/url]

[QUOTE=Bichak;41244049]They had no reason to censor the beheader's Islamist speech. [url]http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=37e_1369335448[/url][/QUOTE] Oh nothing you'know apart from HIS BLOODSTAINED HANDS AND KNIVES.

[QUOTE=Bichak;41244049]They had no reason to censor the beheader's Islamist speech. [url]http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=37e_1369335448[/url][/QUOTE] Here's the thing about social customs. You don't seem to realize there is a difference between what is acceptable on UK tv, Turkey tv or other networks in other countries. In the US, you could show a graphic scene of someone's head being split open on cable and FCC won't even blink at it. But if you show even a partial nip slip, prepare to get fined and have that segment pulled from the air. I'm guessing because Europe is a bit more sexually liberated than the States are, the opposite is likely more true.

[QUOTE=MrEndangered;41244063]Oh nothing you'know apart from HIS BLOODSTAINED HANDS AND KNIVES.[/QUOTE] Yeah it's totally about the bloody hands, you totally can't blur the hands off and let the audio remain. It totally doesn't change the fact of how fucking stupid it is to cut off the Islamic parts of his speech and broadcast the non-Islamic words. Ok.

[QUOTE=Bichak;41244085]Yeah it's totally about the bloody hands, you totally can't blur the hands off and let the audio remain. It totally doesn't change the fact of how fucking stupid it is to cut off the Islamic parts of his speech and broadcast the non-Islamic words. Ok.[/QUOTE] The BBC did show part of it, so was it printed in my local national papers. It's there on the internet for all to see. The reasons specific news outlets do/don't show stuff is complicated as they have their own rules. Even in Turkey. It's not some kind of conspiracy.

[QUOTE=Evilan;41244082]Here's the thing about social customs. You don't seem to realize there is a difference between what is acceptable on UK tv, Turkey tv or other networks in other countries. In the US, you could show a graphic scene of someone's head being split open on cable and FCC won't even blink at it. But if you show even a partial nip slip, prepare to get fined and have that segment pulled from the air. I'm guessing because Europe is a bit more sexually liberated than the States are, the opposite is likely more true.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=MrEndangered;41244113]The BBC did show part of it, so was it printed in my local national papers. It's there on the internet for all to see. The reasons specific news outlets do/don't show stuff is complicated as they have their own rules. Even in Turkey. It's not some kind of conspiracy.[/QUOTE] The British media didn't mention the murderer's Islamist intentions. But they chimp out at the slightest anti-Islam behaviour by the Brits.

[QUOTE=Bichak;41244117]The British media didn't mention the murderer's Islamist intentions.[/QUOTE] Now you're just making shit up. It was well publicised.

[QUOTE=MrEndangered;41244128]Now you're just making shit up. It was well publicised.[/QUOTE] It wasn't.

[QUOTE=Bichak;41244136]It wasn't.[/QUOTE] Prove it.

[QUOTE=MrEndangered;41244143]Prove it.[/QUOTE] You can't prove something that doesn't exist. You prove it was.

[QUOTE=Bichak;41244165]You can't prove something that doesn't exist. You prove it was.[/QUOTE] If you need any help, you see that 'The SUN' caption in the corner of the video on LiveLeak? Thats not for fun, it's the stamp of A BRITISH NATIONAL NEWSPAPER THAT SHOWED THE WHOLE THING. Islamist talk and all.

[QUOTE=MrEndangered;41244172]If you need any help, you see that 'The SUN' caption in the corner of the video on LiveLeak? Thats not for fun, it's the stamp of A BRITISH NATIONAL NEWSPAPER THAT SHOWED THE WHOLE THING. Islamist talk and all.[/QUOTE] Where in the British TV the Islamist intentions were published?

[QUOTE=Bichak;41244202]Where in the British TV the Islamist intentions were published?[/QUOTE] I'm sorry, but you said 'the media'. National newspapers and websites are the media. You lose.

Not even BBC's newspaper mentions the Islamist intention of the attack.

[QUOTE=Bichak;41244214]Not even BBC's newspaper mentions the Islamist intention of the attack.[/QUOTE] The BBC doesn't have a newspaper.

[QUOTE=Bichak;41244049]They had no reason to censor the beheader's Islamist speech. [url]http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=37e_1369335448[/url][/QUOTE]Except for the fact he was covered in blood. Ofcom threw a shitfit for that exact reason. [url]http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-22938744[/url]

[QUOTE=MrEndangered;41244212]I'm sorry, but you said 'the media'. National newspapers and websites are the media. You lose.[/QUOTE] It's not national. Not even BBC's newspaper mentions the Islamist intention of the attack. [editline]29th June 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=Sgt Doom;41244219]Except for the fact he was covered in blood. Ofcom threw a shitfit for that exact reason. [url]http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-22938744[/url][/QUOTE] Tell me why BBC didn't publish the Islamic intention.

[QUOTE=Bichak;41244220]It's not national. Not even BBC's newspaper mentions the Islamist intention of the attack.[/QUOTE] The Sun is national. I'm British, are you telling me I have no idea what I'm saying? Oh, and by the way: "The case for this being a jihadist attack, following the ideology of al-Qaeda, is compelling - even if the police won't yet say so officially." - [URL]http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-22630303[/URL] You're making up shit to stir up shit. Admit it.

bbc newspapers are actually only visible to reptillians who in turn cannot touch real, human paper as they have no good in their souls

[QUOTE=MrEndangered;41244232]The Sun is national. I'm British, are you telling me I have no idea what I'm saying? Oh, and by the way: "The case for this being a jihadist attack, following the ideology of al-Qaeda, is compelling - even if the police won't yet say so officially." "According to senior Whitehall sources the people carrying out the attack were heard to say: "Allahu Akbar [God is Great]", BBC political editor Nick Robinson reported."- [URL]http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-22630303[/URL][/QUOTE] Pushed down to the bottom of the article, lol. Admit that the majority of British families don't know the attack was Islamist.

[QUOTE=Bichak;41244253]Pushed down to the bottom of the article, lol.[/QUOTE] What? People can't read whole articles now? It's in two national sources. Fucking accept it.

[QUOTE=Bobie;41244245]bbc newspapers are actually only visible to reptillians who in turn cannot touch real, human paper as they have no good in their souls[/QUOTE] Aw, now that's just not nice.

[QUOTE=Bichak;41244253]Pushed down to the bottom of the article, lol. Admit that the majority of British families don't know the attack was Islamist.[/QUOTE] Confirmed for troll as he cannot read. Good play, good play.

[QUOTE=MrEndangered;41244260]What? People can't read whole articles now? It's in two national sources. Fucking accept it.[/QUOTE] Majority of the British families don't even know the attack was Islamist, because not even the TV mentions it. Get over it. [highlight](User was banned for this post ("Shitposting" - Megafan))[/highlight]

[QUOTE=Bichak;41244285]Majority of the British families don't even know the attack was Islamist, because not even the TV mentions it. Get over it.[/QUOTE] I've shown you a British article from British national television, that references a report from a second national news channel, and from the biggest national newspaper that both reference islam, terrorism, terrorist groups, and a video of the entire thing. If you can't get past some sense of muslimphobia to actually read, then you're a very good troll or incredibly terrible at understanding context. I've made my point successfully, so I shall vacate.

[QUOTE=MrEndangered;41244343]I've shown you a British article from British national television, that references a report from a second national news channel, and from the biggest national newspaper that both reference islam, terrorism, terrorist groups, and a video of the entire thing. If you can't get past some sense of muslimphobia to actually read, then you're a very good troll or incredibly terrible at understanding context.[/QUOTE] Is this why the entire country still doesn't know the attack was an Islamist terrorist attack?

[QUOTE=Bichak;41244367]Is this why the entire country still doesn't know the attack was an Islamist terrorist attack?[/QUOTE] 2troll4me

[QUOTE=Bichak;41244220]It's not national. Not even BBC's newspaper mentions the Islamist intention of the attack. [editline]29th June 2013[/editline] Tell me why BBC didn't publish the Islamic intention.[/QUOTE][url]http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-22636240[/url] ""I asked him if he did it and he said, 'Yes,' and I said, 'Why?' And he said because he has killed Muslim people in Muslim countries, he said he was a British soldier and I said, 'Really?' and he said, 'I killed him because he killed Muslims and I am fed up with people killing Muslims in Afghanistan, they have nothing to do there.'" [url]http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-22624100[/url] The whole goddamn article is about radical Islam in Britain. [url]http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-22630303[/url] "According to senior Whitehall sources the people carrying out the attack were heard to say: "Allahu Akbar [God is Great]", BBC political editor Nick Robinson reported." [url]http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-22673164[/url] Article of the murderer's ties to al-Shabab They did not attempt to hide the murderer's ideology, they just didn't revel in it as I know you'd have loved them to. Quite frankly, using the term "chimp out" seriously sort of exposed everything we need to know about you.

[QUOTE=Bichak;41243874]Because the media isn't supressing such imagery to leak around, right? Your media even censored Woolwich beheader's Islamist talk. You can't find it on Youtube anymore.[/QUOTE] The media (BBC) refrains from reporting by racial profiling or labelling belief and creed (Muslim, Christian, Jew etc) by orders from the government, this is to suppress stereotyping of ethnic/racial groups being labelled as murderers, thieves, job stealer's, fanatics etc. The media generally does not post gore, nor am I aware they have censored anything as the Woolwich attackers speeches were reported on the news and in the papers at the time. What they have done is a media blackout on the whole thing, besides a few reports here and there. They don't want people being hyped up by the press to attack otherwise innocent people and property. Its not the British media or governments fault that Youtube deleted the video, unless they specifically ordered it.