Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Over 150 complaints were received from people who felt the coverage was too sympathetic.

Nearly 200 complaints were received from people who felt the coverage was too unsympathetic.

This is a classic example of observer bias, of course.

Kilkrazy wrote:This is a classic example of observer bias, of course.

I don't see it that way at all.

Pics or it didn't happen?

Ahtman wrote:

Kilkrazy wrote:This is a classic example of observer bias, of course.

I don't see it that way at all.

The BBC gushed over his visit quite a bit I have to say. There was coverage but no critical analysis of many things such as one of his senior figures saying the UK looked like a third world country because of all the black people and the pope declaring that 'aggressive atheism' was akin to 'nazism' which is just ignorant and sadly ironic in many ways. There were also demonstrations made against the pope but these received little coverage. His apology to abuse victims was widely described as an 'apology' in the press but if you just read the transcript it sounds like nothing of the sort. He "acknowledged" the sorrow of it rather than saying "sorry" or indeed proving that actions speak louder than words and doing things like opening vatican archives to police investigations and the like.

Seems like a lot of the time the BBC didn't want to rock the boat, and that's not what they are there for given their charter that demands impartiality.

'aggressive atheism' was akin to 'nazism'

Oh the sweet taste of irony
and on so many levels

I thought the coverage was excellent. I didn't watch any of it.

So does the BBC need to invest in some more bias-o-meters?

Atheism like Nazism what a pile of .

Atheism is like a simile.

Chibi Bodge-Battle wrote:

'aggressive atheism' was akin to 'nazism'

Oh the sweet taste of irony
and on so many levels

Sure, just because Nazis were aggressive atheists doesn't mean aggressive atheists are Nazis. I confess to not seeing any irony in the comparison, however . . .

Ahtman wrote:Atheism is like a simile.

I thought atheism was like a radish. Have I been misinformed?

Manchu wrote:

Chibi Bodge-Battle wrote:

'aggressive atheism' was akin to 'nazism'

Oh the sweet taste of irony
and on so many levels

Sure, just because Nazis were aggressive atheists doesn't mean aggressive atheists are Nazis. I confess to not seeing any irony in the comparison, however . . .

I'm sure you know what they are refering to, but are knowledgeable enough to know that inferring from it that the Pope is or was a Nazi is wrong.

I'm a bit annoyed he's not coming to Ireland, so that people can be all discontented with him and I can hate them for directing their anger at the wrong people.

Manchu wrote:

Chibi Bodge-Battle wrote:

'aggressive atheism' was akin to 'nazism'

Oh the sweet taste of irony
and on so many levels

Sure, just because Nazis were aggressive atheists doesn't mean aggressive atheists are Nazis. I confess to not seeing any irony in the comparison, however . . .

its cos the pope was a member of the hitler youth, there is also the fact that althought the ss had near idol worship of Hitler, the rank and file Germans who carried out the attempted extermination of the Jews were Christians, either Catholic or Lutheran, primed to their anti-Semitism by centuries of Catholic propaganda about 'Christ-killers' and by Martin Luther's own seething hatred of the Jews. (and the rise of Nazism had nothing to do with 'aggressive atheism' but with the after effects of the first world war mostly) and Hitler had the open support of many of the most senior catholic clergy in Germany and the less demonstrative support of Pope Pius XII. THAT IS THE IRONY.

As for the television coverage, not just on the BBC i didn't watch any of it, it just wasn't interesting.

Da Boss wrote:
I'm sure you know what they are refering to, but are knowledgeable enough to know that inferring from it that the Pope is or was a Nazi is wrong.

+ 1 to this, we have to remember that from around 1942/3 to 1945 the Hitler youth was compulsory for both boys and girls. This means the majority of people over 60ish who lived in Germany will have been in the youth.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

BluntmanDC wrote:...Hitler had the open support of many of the most senior catholic clergy in Germany and the less demonstrative support of Pope Pius XII. THAT IS THE IRONY...

And what about those Catholic members who worked against Hitler. We have to remember (note I do not in anyway think what Hitler did during the war was right or good, I'm just stating this) that Hitler managed to pull Germany out of financial ruin, give jobs to many people and pretty much saved Germany from the treaty of Versailles. Also remember that the extermination camps were relatively secret IIRC. Not many people knew about them. There were rumors but nothing really concrete until the allies reached Germany.

I'm still confused. What does this have to do with radishes?

Well this thread went herp derp faster than usual. Much like radishes.

Ahtman wrote:Well this thread went herp derp faster than usual. Much like radishes.

You're just being a radishist! Don't be a Hatah!

Frazzled wrote:

Ahtman wrote:Well this thread went herp derp faster than usual. Much like radishes.

You're just being a radishist! Don't be a Hatah!

Only aggressive hatahs can be radishists! I'm only passive-aggressive.

He seems to have been well received by the crowds...

Shoulda gotta set of white wall tyres.

Manchu wrote:Sure, just because Nazis were aggressive atheists doesn't mean aggressive atheists are Nazis. I confess to not seeing any irony in the comparison, however . . .

Guessing as an ex Nazi he feels like he has some insight into these issues

The gangs of rainbow shirted atheists burning churches/Mosques/Synagogues/Temples in Blighty.
Atheists stopping people worshipping here.
People of faith being discriminated against by an atheist government. Most of whom will confess to some form of belief and afaik MP's will soon be attending the state opening of Parliament where the Crown is "Protector of the Faith".

All in all the infallible one must be correct by definition
oh the irony.

wizard12 wrote:

BluntmanDC wrote:...Hitler had the open support of many of the most senior catholic clergy in Germany and the less demonstrative support of Pope Pius XII. THAT IS THE IRONY...

And what about those Catholic members who worked against Hitler. We have to remember (note I do not in anyway think what Hitler did during the war was right or good, I'm just stating this) that Hitler managed to pull Germany out of financial ruin, give jobs to many people and pretty much saved Germany from the treaty of Versailles. Also remember that the extermination camps were relatively secret IIRC. Not many people knew about them. There were rumors but nothing really concrete until the allies reached Germany.

yes there was Catholics who did protest but the problem stems from the leadership of the church, and although alot of the popullation didn't know what was going on in places like Auschwitz, but they all saw the ghettos, they all saw the Jews and Gypsies and any other 'undesirerable' get kicked out of their homes, have their assets stripped.

Manchu wrote:

Chibi Bodge-Battle wrote:

'aggressive atheism' was akin to 'nazism'

Oh the sweet taste of irony
and on so many levels

Sure, just because Nazis were aggressive atheists doesn't mean aggressive atheists are Nazis. I confess to not seeing any irony in the comparison, however . . .

Except Nazi Germany had very little to do with atheism, Hitler was against secular schools and many atheist organisations were shut down, Hitler even claimed that he had stamped out atheism in Germany.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_Nazi_Germany#Atheists

It's a bit like when some people try to claim Darwinism (and by extension atheism) was responsible for the Holocaust, when in fact what the Nazis did was unscientific nonsense and not all all based in evolutionary theory seeing as eugenics has nothing to do with natural selection.

It's a bit cheap to bring up that fact that the current Pope was in the Hitler youth. But if we wanted to talk about a homophobic, sexist organisation which has played a part in the deaths of millions, say due to certain anti-condom rhetoric exacerbating the spread of HIV in Africa, the catholic church don't need to look as far as atheism.

Not even cheap Howard
it's just a given, free of charge.

The history of the Catholic Church is riddled with aggressive histories all of its own. just another layer of irony.

I wanted the Archbishop of Canterbury to challenge the Pope to a game of Warhams 40 Million.


I'd support Williams, because Catholics have been bringing him down recently, and he needs a break. That and us Anglican bruthas gotta stick together.

Who's the Pope?

An old guy with a stick.

There is a lot of irony in this thread, but it's not the alleged irony that's being noted.

Manchu, you're a religious guy, so here's a hypothetical question: if the pope declared a religious practice to be against catholic doctrine, and a high-ranking bishop did it anyways, would devout catholics be justified in physically attacking him to bring him to justice?