Face transplants – touched-up

This week, the BBC published an article about people getting face transplants… 

BBC article here.

In the article, the BBC said “In the UK we could hear any day that a patient has been chosen to become the world’s first recipient of a full face transplant.”

But as the “prince” Harry lobbox showed: the BBC cannot be trusted (well actually the BBC showed LONG ago that it couldn’t be trusted, but most find it hard to come out of denial, but only now that the MSM has said it, suddenly everyone else is saying it. Welcome to the club firends – I just wanna ask you why did it take you so long?)  and today, lwtc247 can reveal his growing suspicions that indeed the BBC may well, once again, be telling us a pile of lobbox…

 

 Top: Richard Perle and Nasreen Suleaman

Update of the update…

A growing body of evidence suggests that in fact not only has the full face transplant already happened but that in fact Perle’s possible transplant above is in fact the SECOND FULL TRANSPLANT.    :O

All will be revealed later…

–

–

–

–

BBC Journo’s Blogs – huh?

 

I have to laugh at the idea of BBC journo’s having a blog. I think I’ve only ever been to 3, and only story in each:

1)That idiot who told us the BBC lost tapes relating to its output on 9-11 (WTC-7 pre-collapse) because of cock-up and not conspiracy.

2)Mr. Preston on the Nothern Rock(bottom)

3) Justin Webb’s about Hillary and Obama doing a deal. (today)

It’s nuts that they have a blog, becasue they already express ‘their opinion’ in their news reports. Even if you say their reports do not contain their own opinion as that would be unprofessional of a BBC journalist (pfffffff!) I can guarantee you: Any personal opinion they do state in their blog is NOT going to be anything that contradicts what they say or implied in their standard report.

Is the blog therefore for debate?
You must be joking! No BBC journo blogger is going to change his mind from anything that gets said on his blog. Look at Justin Webb’s He has 8 comments. Here’s the best bits as to what they say:

commentator 1: “You must be out of your mind. get real”
commentator 2: “talk of…are premature to say the least. ”
commentator 3: “I find this article very strange…You do not appear to be an “honest broker'”
Justi commentator 4:“I’ve just read another one of your brilliant blogs and articles”
commentator 5:“The implication in your comment Justin is that somehow for him [Obama] to continue his candidacy would be taking the moral low road”
commentator 6: “What are you taking and where can I get some?”
commentator 7: “Your comment…you reporters are either too ignorant or too blind…insulting…Perhaps you need to check your moral high-ground. Seems to me you are in quicksand. ”
commentator 8: “Shouldn’t it be the other way around…do some math before getting all whipped up”

Somehow I can’t image Justin telling people where he gets banana-skin and Jumbo Rizla’s from.

Is it to let people let off steam?
Possibly. It can be argued that letting off stream can be a good thing, but I have little doubt some use its consequences (post-release apathy) to allow the rot to continue, and therefore, facilitate ‘the venting of steam’.

Is it becasue of panic?
Aaah. I suspect so. The BBC is doing a great job at self-assisted suicide, when it does things like take footage of “prince” Harry (securely) in Afghanistan while keeping it hidden from the eyes of its financiers – the public. An organisation who does not launch a major attack on mass murderer Tony bLiar now that it is well known that Andrew Gilligan was right and David Kelly was right, and today it agree to a “D-notice” about keeping stumm about a very curious event in Iraq where some British people doing strange things were captured last year. Worthy of mention of course, is it’s overwhelming desire NOT to look behind the “official story”, in total opposition to what should be a journalists chief obligation of serious events like the awful July bombings in London 2005.

The BBC’s believeability has been rotting away like the mind of a British PM that’s been in office too long, and it’s ex-audience is on the web getting REAL news, real honest analysis or even propaganda that reinforces their mindset – without needing to lie that it’s neutral.

I would love the BBC {well, the news and political wing of it} to actually be the organisation it spends lots of our money trying to kid us into thinking it is what it pretends to be –  But it isn’t!– and people are turning away from it, only returning when it does it’s job and brings to the public the corrupt workings of the shady establishment players, politicians and filthy rich. So the BBC tries to get in with the in-crowd.

Surely that is the reason why the BBC has blogs.

Just to finish, not too long ago, the BBC would have a reporter and a film crew somewhere around the world whereby the studio reporter could ask them questions (LOL!) and the on-site reporter would answer. The sound and imagery were damn fine. Now however, we get some blocky shaky, lag-prone freezing 512 pixel hand phone image with crackly sound. Not only that but it conns people around the world to submit images of news events. Interactivity? lobbox! cheapskateism, so Nick Witchell can make fawning propaganda with “prince” Harry in the most secure place in Afghanistan murdering people and making it seem somehow “honourable” and “brave”

Now strangely, Noel Edmonds doesn’t seem quite so annoying!  

 –

–

–

–