It sounds like a “Mr Bonkers writes: …” comment to me

Also, not to be critical of TV generally, but it’s full of commissioning editors and producers new into the game, with lots of contacts that have got them there. Taking someone with a track record and history of achievement is probably a check on the eficacy of the the media’s overall recruitment system.

I’d actually like to see less religion on television and more american comedy…..

There’s a channel on Sky called “Comedy Central” which is pretty much dedicated to American comedy — channels 126, repeated on 127, plus an ‘extra’ channel on 128.

Here’s the British version of the Comedy Central website (has more info, funny clips etc): http://www.comedycentral.co.uk

Platinum, you should watch a brilliant show called “Two and a Half Men” if you don’t already — it’s pretty lairy stuff and I have a feeling it’ll appeal to your sense of humour.

I second that – I like the British ones too

Only Fools and Horses gets my vote for the best show ever

Andy:

I found the ‘bearded’ amusing as well… but remember, that was in the Quail’s parody, not in the actual Mail ‘article.’

Can’t y’all just imagine marvin Willett saying this:

WHAT IS IT WITH PEOPLE FEELING ANYTHING BUT “KILL ALL OF THEM”

during WWII?

Other Marvin – you think you’re the voice of Sunny’s conscience. Guess what – you’re not. Nor do Sunny (and some other posters) represent the full spectrum of views on this site anyway.

Yes yes – of course we don’t have anything against these wogs! It’s just… THEY’RE NOT LIKE US!!

Or, as with the most regressive ‘Muslims’ (i.e. the Taliban), they’ve got so much in common with you, you probably wish YOU could show that much conviction in YOUR bigotry…

Nothing makes Dacre and the Mail ejaculate en-masse like an imagined sense of victimhood, though. I love the fact that Dacre simultaneously boasts about his paper’s sales and representing ‘Middle England’, and yet seems to suspect his opinions are not those of the majority, considering how much the Fail bashes anyone that doesn’t fit its target market.

I’m fascinated they decided to highlight the fact he is “bearded”…

“Beards of terror”, folks.

We all know Asians have an irrational love for the bearded ones, like economist Paul Krugman.

Wolf Blitzer on CNN.

Richard Branson.

Amitabh & Abishek Bachchan.

Prince during the early 90s.

And, last but not least, let’s not forget the swapshopping legend that is Noel Edmonds.

Personally I think they ought to replace Songs of Praise with an hour of Muslim sermons.

Televising some clips of Nusrat Fateh Ali Khan’s various qawwali concerts would be better. Might correct a few misinformed/paranoid preconceptions too.

In fact, I can help. Here’s an extract from one of the late maestro’s nephew Rahat Fateh Ali Khan’s best live performances on Indian TV in recent years:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ueUsrIrCMM

See, not so scary, although it’s anathema to the hardline Wahhabi/Taliban types. And not a beard of terror in sight.

I wonder how many complaints would be made if it were an Israeli, with a sincere belief in Zionism!

That may well have drawn a reaction of the head of our national broadcaster was a citizen of another country and not a British citizen. Aquil Ahmed is a British citizen, his citizenship was not the issue, his religion was.

Secondly, if the appointee had been someone with a sincere beleif in zionism, why would anyone complain? since when has zionism and Judaism been one and the same? Secondly what does someones political beleifs have to do with their job which is about religion?

We would complain too if people attacked the appointment of a Jew on the basis of their religion.

Heh MaidMarian.

If anything it’s only right wingers who make complaints like about appointments such as Aaqil Ahmed’s and your example Jew. Lefties don’t give a stuff other than maybe there should be no/less religion on TV (see MaidMarion @3).

Willett you twat, are you really called marvin, or is that name there by accident?

We all know Asians have an irrational love for the bearded ones, like economist Paul Krugman.

Or is that just me?

Do they expect him to over-represent the ‘extremist’ element of the ‘facial-hair-wearing community’, perhaps?

Speaking as a (well-trimmed), moderate purveyor of beardiness, I’m more than a little concerned.

How about the following:

1) Why should we want to blame and punish all Muslims for the actions of a minority who have created havoc in Muslim communities as well? Read the post about the poisoning of the Afghan school girls?

2) How does appointment of Mr. Ahmed equate with “turning our world over to the craizies of the rag-headed arabs”?

3)What gives your stupid idiotic self to call Arab rag heads — I guess you would not mind me calling you as a bigoted ignorant Fool — Its far more deserving than your comment

4) Wanting to kill off an entire community for its belief or faith is genocide — why do you think there is anything right with committing crimes against humanity?

Enough elaboration or you need more.

Who’s that then Boudicca? Christians? English people? People who aren’t Muslims?

Why wouldn’t Mr Ahmed commission programs critical of Islam? Are your ’suspicions’ based on anything other than his faith?

I’ll stop asking questions now.

We will happily put up with critical programmes about the crusades; the cathars, the inquisition etc being aired provided there is balance and it isn’t a case of
Islam good/Christianity bad/Judaism evil.

I have a horrible suspicious that Islam good/Christianity bad/Judaism evil is exactly what we are going to get.