I have just read an article on the BBC News website that starts:

"A BBC investigation has revealed widespread allegations of sexual
harassment and abuse in the Afghan Police Force."

It's at:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/world-asia-57343435

My initial reaction was "why on earth is the BBC doing this?" and the
second "who is paying for it?"

Any answers?

--
Jeff Gaines Wiltshire UK
I take full responsibility for what happened - that is why the person that
was responsible went immediately.
(Gordon Brown, April 2009)

On 04/06/2021 08:49, Jeff Gaines wrote:
>
> I have just read an article on the BBC News website that starts:
>
> "A BBC investigation has revealed widespread allegations of sexual
> harassment and abuse in the Afghan Police Force."
>
> It's at:
>
> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/world-asia-57343435
>
> My initial reaction was "why on earth is the BBC doing this?" and the
> second "who is paying for it?"
>
> Any answers?

<https://www.bbc.co.uk/aboutthebbc/whatwedo/worldservice>

--

Jeff

On 04/06/2021 in message <s9co1j$b6p$1@dont-email.me> Jeff Layman wrote:

>On 04/06/2021 08:49, Jeff Gaines wrote:
>>
>>I have just read an article on the BBC News website that starts:
>>
>>"A BBC investigation has revealed widespread allegations of sexual
>>harassment and abuse in the Afghan Police Force."
>>
>>It's at:
>>
>>https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/world-asia-57343435
>>
>>My initial reaction was "why on earth is the BBC doing this?" and the
>>second "who is paying for it?"
>>
>>Any answers?
>
><https://www.bbc.co.uk/aboutthebbc/whatwedo/worldservice>

So licence fee payers pay for it. About time th BBC was privatised.

--
Jeff Gaines Wiltshire UK
Those are my principles – and if you don’t like them, well, I have
others.
(Groucho Marx)

On 04/06/2021 10:46, Jeff Gaines wrote:
> On 04/06/2021 in message <s9co1j$b6p$1@dont-email.me> Jeff Layman wrote:
>
>> On 04/06/2021 08:49, Jeff Gaines wrote:
>>>
>>> I have just read an article on the BBC News website that starts:
>>>
>>> "A BBC investigation has revealed widespread allegations of sexual
>>> harassment and abuse in the Afghan Police Force."
>>>
>>> It's at:
>>>
>>> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/world-asia-57343435
>>>
>>> My initial reaction was "why on earth is the BBC doing this?" and the
>>> second "who is paying for it?"
>>>
>>> Any answers?
>>
>> <https://www.bbc.co.uk/aboutthebbc/whatwedo/worldservice>
>
> So licence fee payers pay for it. About time th BBC was privatised.

In the past we have paid for troops to go round the world colonising
other nations, and currently sometimes they are sent to places like
Afghanistan & Iraq to keep peace. This is of no interest and benefit to
me personally, so obviously it's about time the Army was privatised.

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

I used to have bad Grammar, but now I could not care fewer.
Brian

--

This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...
briang1@blueyonder.co.uk
Blind user, so no pictures please
Note this Signature is meaningless.!
"Jeff Gaines" <jgaines_newsid@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:xn0myqek6mrlmnk01s@news.individual.net...
>
> I have just read an article on the BBC News website that starts:
>
> "A BBC investigation has revealed widespread allegations of sexual
> harassment and abuse in the Afghan Police Force."
>
> It's at:
>
> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/world-asia-57343435
>
> My initial reaction was "why on earth is the BBC doing this?" and the
> second "who is paying for it?"
>
> Any answers?
>
> --
> Jeff Gaines Wiltshire UK
> I take full responsibility for what happened - that is why the person that
> was responsible went immediately.
> (Gordon Brown, April 2009)

The thing is that it is probably hardly surprising its going on considering
how the Afghans seem to be nearly always fighting each other and keeping
women down and indeed anyone else who does not fit with their blinkered view
of reality. I like the idea that we do get news from abroad, since you
don't really want the us situation where most people are so ill informed
about world events that they should not be incharge of a catapult, never
mind a huge armed force and nuclear weapons.
Brian

--

This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...
briang1@blueyonder.co.uk
Blind user, so no pictures please
Note this Signature is meaningless.!
"Jeff Layman" <jmlayman@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
news:s9co1j$b6p$1@dont-email.me...
> On 04/06/2021 08:49, Jeff Gaines wrote:
>>
>> I have just read an article on the BBC News website that starts:
>>
>> "A BBC investigation has revealed widespread allegations of sexual
>> harassment and abuse in the Afghan Police Force."
>>
>> It's at:
>>
>> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/world-asia-57343435
>>
>> My initial reaction was "why on earth is the BBC doing this?" and the
>> second "who is paying for it?"
>>
>> Any answers?
>
> <https://www.bbc.co.uk/aboutthebbc/whatwedo/worldservice>
>
> --
>
> Jeff

In article <xn0myqhmtmvrckg01t@news.individual.net>, Jeff Gaines
<jgaines_newsid@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> >
> ><https://www.bbc.co.uk/aboutthebbc/whatwedo/worldservice>

> So licence fee payers pay for it. About time th BBC was privatised.

Odd to assume that we in the UK have zero interest in any events abroad.

And the costs of the WS were transferred TO the BBC BY recent Govenment. So
blame the Government who felt it better to drop the costs onto the BBC
rather than go on paying for it. It seems unlikely a commercial
organisation woulkd run it as it stands.

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/intro/electron.htm
biog http://jcgl.orpheusweb.co.uk/history/ups_and_downs.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

On 04/06/2021 in message <593753396enoise@audiomisc.co.uk> Jim Lesurf wrote:

>In article <xn0myqhmtmvrckg01t@news.individual.net>, Jeff Gaines
><jgaines_newsid@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>>
>>><https://www.bbc.co.uk/aboutthebbc/whatwedo/worldservice>
>
>>So licence fee payers pay for it. About time th BBC was privatised.
>
>Odd to assume that we in the UK have zero interest in any events abroad.
>
>And the costs of the WS were transferred TO the BBC BY recent Govenment. So
>blame the Government who felt it better to drop the costs onto the BBC
>rather than go on paying for it. It seems unlikely a commercial
>organisation woulkd run it as it stands.
>
>Jim

There is an enormous difference in having an interest in events abroad and
seeing my licence fee spent on an in depth investigation.

A commercial organisation would, hopefully, take a commercial approach to
it.

--
Jeff Gaines Wiltshire UK
I take full responsibility for what happened - that is why the person that
was responsible went immediately.
(Gordon Brown, April 2009)

On 04/06/2021 08:49 am, Jeff Gaines wrote:
>
> I have just read an article on the BBC News website that starts:
>
> "A BBC investigation has revealed widespread allegations of sexual
> harassment and abuse in the Afghan Police Force."
>
> It's at:
>
> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/world-asia-57343435
>
> My initial reaction was "why on earth is the BBC doing this?" and the
> second "who is paying for it?"
>
> Any answers?

A. Because the BBC fully believes in and supports the extremist liberal
/ left agenda. It cannot conceive of anyone - not even an ultra-orthodox
adherent of Islam in a Muslim country - not agreeing with it (or even
having the right not to agree with it).

B. We pay for it.

On 05/06/2021 10:56, Jeff Gaines wrote:
>
> There is an enormous difference in having an interest in events abroad
> and seeing my licence fee spent on an in depth investigation.

For all you know the investigation cost nothing extra. Most probably
your licence fee is spent on employing a given cohort of full-time
reporters, who otherwise would have had nothing to do on slow news days.

> A commercial organisation would, hopefully, take a commercial approach
> to it.

So corruption, abuse, etc, would never be investigated and just carry on.

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

On 05/06/2021 11:41, JNugent wrote:
>
> On 04/06/2021 08:49 am, Jeff Gaines wrote:
>>
>> My initial reaction was "why on earth is the BBC doing this?" and the
>> second "who is paying for it?"
>>
>> Any answers?
>
> A. Because the BBC fully believes in and supports the extremist liberal
> / left agenda. It cannot conceive of anyone - not even an ultra-orthodox
> adherent of Islam in a Muslim country - not agreeing with it (or even
> having the right not to agree with it).

Do I take it then that you approve of the violent abuse and subjugation
of 50% of the world's population? If, as I hope, not, why should it not
be a valid subject for an investigation, wherever it occurs?

> B. We pay for it.

See my other reply, you don't know whether the investigation cost
anything over and above the BBC's normal ongoing foreign news budget,
and if so whether they funded the extra themselves alone.

The *real* scandal here is the original abuse itself, the failure to
tackle it in official circles in Afghanistan, and the fact that bigots
here can be so indifferent to it as to use it as just another pathetic
excuse to knock the BBC.

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

On 05/06/2021 in message <s9fli2$1ca5$1@gioia.aioe.org> Java Jive wrote:

>On 05/06/2021 10:56, Jeff Gaines wrote:
>>
>>There is an enormous difference in having an interest in events abroad
>>and seeing my licence fee spent on an in depth investigation.
>
>For all you know the investigation cost nothing extra. Most probably your
>licence fee is spent on employing a given cohort of full-time reporters,
>who otherwise would have had nothing to do on slow news days.

I don't know and nor do you.

>>A commercial organisation would, hopefully, take a commercial approach to
>>it.
>
>So corruption, abuse, etc, would never be investigated and just carry on.

That's not the job of the BBC.

--
Jeff Gaines Wiltshire UK
Every day is a good day for chicken, unless you're a chicken.

On 05/06/2021 in message <s9fmbv$1m9n$1@gioia.aioe.org> Java Jive wrote:

>On 05/06/2021 11:41, JNugent wrote:
>>
>>On 04/06/2021 08:49 am, Jeff Gaines wrote:
>>>
>>>My initial reaction was "why on earth is the BBC doing this?" and the
>>>second "who is paying for it?"
>>>
>>>Any answers?
>>
>>A. Because the BBC fully believes in and supports the extremist liberal /
>>left agenda. It cannot conceive of anyone - not even an ultra-orthodox
>>adherent of Islam in a Muslim country - not agreeing with it (or even
>>having the right not to agree with it).
>
>Do I take it then that you approve of the violent abuse and subjugation of
>50% of the world's population? If, as I hope, not, why should it not be a
>valid subject for an investigation, wherever it occurs?

That's a rather silly assumption. The point is it is NOT the job of the
BBC to investigate.

>
>>B. We pay for it.
>
>See my other reply, you don't know whether the investigation cost anything
>over and above the BBC's normal ongoing foreign news budget, and if so
>whether they funded the extra themselves alone.

You don't know wither.

>The real scandal here is the original abuse itself, the failure to tackle
>it in official circles in Afghanistan, and the fact that bigots here can
>be so indifferent to it as to use it as just another pathetic excuse to
>knock the BBC.

Rubbish, it's not the BBC's job.

--
Jeff Gaines Wiltshire UK
640k ought to be enough for anyone.
(Bill Gates, 1981)

In article <xn0mys1kboidzai01y@news.individual.net>,
Jeff Gaines <jgaines_newsid@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> On 05/06/2021 in message <s9fli2$1ca5$1@gioia.aioe.org> Java Jive wrote:

> >>A commercial organisation would, hopefully, take a commercial
> >>approach to it.
> >
> >So corruption, abuse, etc, would never be investigated and just
> >carry on.

> That's not the job of the BBC.

As we learnt again a couple of weeks back, it would be better if the
BBC regularly investigated itself for the same issues, certainly more
relevant.

Bob.

On 05/06/2021 15:23, Bob Latham wrote:
> In article <xn0mys1kboidzai01y@news.individual.net>,
> Jeff Gaines <jgaines_newsid@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>> On 05/06/2021 in message <s9fli2$1ca5$1@gioia.aioe.org> Java Jive wrote:
>
>>>> A commercial organisation would, hopefully, take a commercial
>>>> approach to it.
>>>
>>> So corruption, abuse, etc, would never be investigated and just
>>> carry on.
>
>> That's not the job of the BBC.

I don't think that many would agree that investigative journalism is not
the job of a news gathering organisation such as the BBC.

> As we learnt again a couple of weeks back, it would be better if the
> BBC regularly investigated itself for the same issues, certainly more
> relevant.

Certainly they were remiss over the Princess Diana interview affair,
which I presume is what you are referring to, but the more recent
panorama (I think?) investigation was an attempt to put that to rights.

And anyway that doesn't mean that they shouldn't be investigating other
scandals as and whenever and wherever they occur.

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

On 05/06/2021 14:09, Jeff Gaines wrote:
>
> On 05/06/2021 in message <s9fmbv$1m9n$1@gioia.aioe.org> Java Jive wrote:
>>
>> On 05/06/2021 11:41, JNugent wrote:
>>>
>>> On 04/06/2021 08:49 am, Jeff Gaines wrote:
>>>>
>>>> My initial reaction was "why on earth is the BBC doing this?" and
>>>> the second "who is paying for it?"
>>>>
>>>> Any answers?
>>>
>>> A. Because the BBC fully believes in and supports the extremist
>>> liberal  / left agenda. It cannot conceive of anyone - not even an
>>> ultra-orthodox adherent of Islam in a Muslim country - not agreeing
>>> with it (or even having the right not to agree with it).
>>
>> Do I take it then that you approve of the violent abuse and
>> subjugation of 50% of the world's population?  If, as I hope, not, why
>> should it not be a valid subject for an investigation, wherever it
>> occurs?
>
> That's a rather silly assumption. The point is it is NOT the job of the
> BBC to investigate.

LOL! Only an anti-BBC bigot would suggest that investigative journalism
is not the job of a news gathering organisation such as the BBC.

>>> B. We pay for it.
>>
>> See my other reply, you don't know whether the investigation cost
>> anything over and above the BBC's normal ongoing foreign news budget,
>> and if so whether they funded the extra themselves alone.
>
> You don't know either.

Exactly, but you're the one complaining about paying for it, not me, so
you're the one that needs to go and find some facts.

>> The real scandal here is the original abuse itself, the failure to
>> tackle it in official circles in Afghanistan, and the fact that bigots
>> here can be so indifferent to it as to use it as just another pathetic
>> excuse to knock the BBC.
>
> Rubbish, it's not the BBC's job.

Investigative journalism is *EXACTLY* the job of a news gathering
organisation such as the BBC.

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

On 04/06/2021 08:49, Jeff Gaines wrote:
> My initial reaction was "why on earth is the BBC doing this?"

Maybe because we trained the Afghan police?
<https://www.gov.uk/government/news/uk-and-us-troops-work-together-to-train-afghan-police>.

However, I'm sure the Chinese government would agree with your policy
that the BBC should not investigate alleged wrongs in foreign countries.

On 04/06/2021 08:49, Jeff Gaines wrote:

> "who is paying for it?"

BBC World News is commercially funded. (If you look at the BBC News
channel, you will see interludes in which there are things like "this
week in past years". These will be commercial breaks when broadcast
overseas.)

It looks like it still gets funding from the FCO, although that falls
short of its needs. There was a recent, one off grant, as well, towards
combatting fake news.

Although the short fall comes from licence fees, the FCO sets conditions
on its content, which effectively mean it has to include foreign current
affairs.

<http://downloads.bbc.co.uk/bbctrust/assets/files/pdf/our_work/world_service/2016/wsol.pdf>

<https://www.bbc.com/mediacentre/2021/world-service-funding>

Finally, there is enough demand for foreign news in the UK to generate
the advertising that funds AlJazeera (Russia Today also claims to be
commercial).

On 05/06/2021 in message <s9g6ej$523$1@gioia.aioe.org> Java Jive wrote:

>>>Do I take it then that you approve of the violent abuse and subjugation
>>>of 50% of the world's population?  If, as I hope, not, why should it not
>>>be a valid subject for an investigation, wherever it occurs?
>>
>>That's a rather silly assumption. The point is it is NOT the job of the
>>BBC to investigate.
>
>LOL! Only an anti-BBC bigot would suggest that investigative journalism is
>not the job of a news gathering organisation such as the BBC.

Only in the UK, there are agencies they can pick feed up from for foreign
news.

>
>>>>B. We pay for it.
>>>
>>>See my other reply, you don't know whether the investigation cost
>>>anything over and above the BBC's normal ongoing foreign news budget, and
>>>if so whether they funded the extra themselves alone.
>>
>>You don't know either.
>
>Exactly, but you're the one complaining about paying for it, not me, so
>you're the one that needs to go and find some facts.

You replied to my question with an answer that you didn't apparently
check, what was the point of that?

>>>The real scandal here is the original abuse itself, the failure to tackle
>>>it in official circles in Afghanistan, and the fact that bigots here can
>>>be so indifferent to it as to use it as just another pathetic excuse to
>>>knock the BBC.
>>
>>Rubbish, it's not the BBC's job.
>
>Investigative journalism is EXACTLY the job of a news gathering
>organisation such as the BBC.

It may be justifiable in the UK but not abroad.

--
Jeff Gaines Wiltshire UK
It may be that your sole purpose in life is to serve as a warning to others.

On 05/06/2021 19:50, Jeff Gaines wrote:
>
> On 05/06/2021 in message <s9g6ej$523$1@gioia.aioe.org> Java Jive wrote:
>>
>>>> Do I take it then that you approve of the violent abuse and
>>>> subjugation of 50% of the world's population?  If, as I hope, not,
>>>> why  should it not be a valid subject for an investigation, wherever
>>>> it  occurs?
>>>
>>> That's a rather silly assumption. The point is it is NOT the job of
>>> the BBC to investigate.
>>
>> LOL! Only an anti-BBC bigot would suggest that investigative
>> journalism is not the job of a news gathering organisation such as the
>> BBC.
>
> Only in the UK, there are agencies they can pick feed up from for
> foreign news.

a) Why should we have to trust other agencies to be unbiased?
b) Other agencies would have to be paid for, so your concerns at the
cost literally don't add up.
c) We can sell news to other agencies, thus recouping some or all of the
cost:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BBC

"Around a quarter of BBC's revenue comes from its commercial subsidiary
BBC Studios (formerly BBC Worldwide), which sells BBC programmes and
services internationally and also distributes the BBC's international
24-hour English-language news services BBC World News, and from BBC.com,
provided by BBC Global News Ltd. In 2009, the company was awarded the
Queen's Award for Enterprise in recognition of its international
achievements.[14]"

>>>>> B. We pay for it.
>>>>
>>>> See my other reply, you don't know whether the investigation cost
>>>> anything over and above the BBC's normal ongoing foreign news
>>>> budget,  and if so whether they funded the extra themselves alone.
>>>
>>> You don't know either.
>>
>> Exactly, but you're the one complaining about paying for it, not me,
>> so you're the one that needs to go and find some facts.
>
> You replied to my question with an answer that you didn't apparently
> check, what was the point of that?

To remind you ...

On 04/06/2021 08:49, Jeff Gaines wrote:
>
> My initial reaction was "why on earth is the BBC doing this?" and the
> second "who is paying for it?"

My point was that actually you had no idea of any costs that were or
were not involved, and that without this information your inference that
your licence-payer's money was being wasted was groundless.

>>>> The real scandal here is the original abuse itself, the failure to
>>>> tackle it in official circles in Afghanistan, and the fact that
>>>> bigots  here can be so indifferent to it as to use it as just
>>>> another pathetic  excuse to knock the BBC.
>>>
>>> Rubbish, it's not the BBC's job.
>>
>> Investigative journalism is EXACTLY the job of a news gathering
>> organisation such as the BBC.
>
> It may be justifiable in the UK but not abroad.

Nonsense. BBC News is an international news gathering organisation with
output across the world. No-one outside the UK would listen to it if it
didn't cover the rest of the world adequately:

BBC News reaching highest ever global audience
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-53517025

"BBC News is now reaching its largest ever audience outside the UK,
according to new figures.

A total of 438 million people from around the world came to BBC News on
average every week in the year to March."

This wouldn't happen if they concerned themselves only with UK affairs.

Rightly or wrongly, the BBC is funded by what is in effect a tax. You
don't get to decide what your money from other taxes goes towards, for
example a slice of it goes to fund international scientific
collaborations and I don't see you moaning about those, and there's no
particular reason why the BBC tax should be any different. In reality,
you're just having yet another irrational moan at the BBC, because it's
what people like you do, it's just a pastime for the hard of thinking.

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

We've taken to listening to the WS a lot of the time rather than the
'domestic' BBC News as it gives a much wider report on the World.

Jim

In article <s9fcck$2cs$1@dont-email.me>, Brian Gaff \(Sofa\)
<briang1@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
> like the idea that we do get news from abroad, since you don't really
> want the us situation where most people are so ill informed about world
> events that they should not be incharge of a catapult, never mind a huge
> armed force and nuclear weapons. Brian

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/intro/electron.htm
biog http://jcgl.orpheusweb.co.uk/history/ups_and_downs.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

On 05/06/2021 12:15 pm, Java Jive wrote:

> On 05/06/2021 11:41, JNugent wrote:
>>
>> On 04/06/2021 08:49 am, Jeff Gaines wrote:
>>>
>>> My initial reaction was "why on earth is the BBC doing this?" and the
>>> second "who is paying for it?"
>>>
>>> Any answers?
>>
>> A. Because the BBC fully believes in and supports the extremist
>> liberal / left agenda. It cannot conceive of anyone - not even an
>> ultra-orthodox adherent of Islam in a Muslim country - not agreeing
>> with it (or even having the right not to agree with it).
>
> Do I take it then that you approve of the violent abuse and subjugation
> of 50% of the world's population?

No, and that's a stupid thing to ask, even by your standards.

>> B. We pay for it.
>
> See my other reply, you don't know whether the investigation cost
> anything over and above the BBC's normal ongoing foreign news budget,
> and if so whether they funded the extra themselves alone.

We pay for it.

> The *real* scandal here is the original abuse itself, the failure to
> tackle it in official circles in Afghanistan, and the fact that bigots
> here can be so indifferent to it as to use it as just another pathetic
> excuse to knock the BBC.

The UK, let alone the BBC, is not the world's policeman.

On 05/06/2021 03:23 pm, Bob Latham wrote:
> In article <xn0mys1kboidzai01y@news.individual.net>,
> Jeff Gaines <jgaines_newsid@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>> On 05/06/2021 in message <s9fli2$1ca5$1@gioia.aioe.org> Java Jive wrote:
>
>>>> A commercial organisation would, hopefully, take a commercial
>>>> approach to it.
>>>
>>> So corruption, abuse, etc, would never be investigated and just
>>> carry on.
>
>> That's not the job of the BBC.
>
> As we learnt again a couple of weeks back, it would be better if the
> BBC regularly investigated itself for the same issues, certainly more
> relevant.

+1.

On 08/06/2021 11:32, JNugent wrote:
> On 05/06/2021 12:15 pm, Java Jive wrote:
>
>> On 05/06/2021 11:41, JNugent wrote:
>>>
>>> On 04/06/2021 08:49 am, Jeff Gaines wrote:
>>>>
>>>> My initial reaction was "why on earth is the BBC doing this?" and
>>>> the second "who is paying for it?"
>>>>
>>>> Any answers?
>>>
>>> A. Because the BBC fully believes in and supports the extremist
>>> liberal / left agenda. It cannot conceive of anyone - not even an
>>> ultra-orthodox adherent of Islam in a Muslim country - not agreeing
>>> with it (or even having the right not to agree with it).
>>
>> Do I take it then that you approve of the violent abuse and
>> subjugation of 50% of the world's population?
>
> No, and that's a stupid thing to ask, even by your standards.

Then you can have no objection to the BBC doing its job, which for a
news organisation is investigative reporting.

>>> B. We pay for it.
>>
>> See my other reply, you don't know whether the investigation cost
>> anything over and above the BBC's normal ongoing foreign news budget,
>> and if so whether they funded the extra themselves alone.
>
> We pay for it.

But you don't know whether any extra costs were incurred.

>> The *real* scandal here is the original abuse itself, the failure to
>> tackle it in official circles in Afghanistan, and the fact that bigots
>> here can be so indifferent to it as to use it as just another pathetic
>> excuse to knock the BBC.
>
> The UK, let alone the BBC, is not the world's policeman.

The BBC is, among other things, an international news gathering
operation, and they were just doing their job.

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

On 08/06/2021 12:05 pm, Java Jive wrote:

> On 08/06/2021 11:32, JNugent wrote:
>> On 05/06/2021 12:15 pm, Java Jive wrote:
>>> On 05/06/2021 11:41, JNugent wrote:
>>>> On 04/06/2021 08:49 am, Jeff Gaines wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> My initial reaction was "why on earth is the BBC doing this?" and
>>>>> the second "who is paying for it?"
>>>>>
>>>>> Any answers?
>>>>
>>>> A. Because the BBC fully believes in and supports the extremist
>>>> liberal / left agenda. It cannot conceive of anyone - not even an
>>>> ultra-orthodox adherent of Islam in a Muslim country - not agreeing
>>>> with it (or even having the right not to agree with it).
>>>
>>> Do I take it then that you approve of the violent abuse and
>>> subjugation of 50% of the world's population?
>>
>> No, and that's a stupid thing to ask, even by your standards.
>
> Then you can have no objection to the BBC doing its job, which for a
> news organisation is investigative reporting.

The UK, let alone the BBC, is not the world's policeman.
>
>>>> B. We pay for it.
>>>
>>> See my other reply, you don't know whether the investigation cost
>>> anything over and above the BBC's normal ongoing foreign news budget,
>>> and if so whether they funded the extra themselves alone.
>>
>> We pay for it.
>
> But you don't know whether any extra costs were incurred.

Which part of "We pay for it" is too difficult for you?

>>> The *real* scandal here is the original abuse itself, the failure to
>>> tackle it in official circles in Afghanistan, and the fact that
>>> bigots here can be so indifferent to it as to use it as just another
>>> pathetic excuse to knock the BBC.
>>
>> The UK, let alone the BBC, is not the world's policeman.
>
> The BBC is, among other things, an international news gathering
> operation, and they were just doing their job.

The UK, let alone the BBC, is not the world's policeman.

That's a job for the UN or something of that stature.