BBC drops fictional terror attack . . .

[saintjohn]

. . . to avoid offending Muslims

The BBC has dropped plans to show a fictional terror attack in an episode of Casualty to avoid offending Muslims.

The first show of the hospital drama's new series was to have featured a storyline about an explosion caused by Islamic extremists.

Now the bomb will be set off by animal rights campaigners instead.

A BBC spokesman said: "With any storyline there are lots of ideas that get put forward but don't make the series."

source

Btw, I just had a little fun with Google:

"to avoid offending muslims" - 15.400 hits

"to avoid offending christians" - 200 hits

"to avoid offending hindus" - 29 hits

"to avoid offending buddhists" - 1 hit

"to avoid offending animal rights activists" - 0 hits

[web_norah]

the BBC is a publicly funded institution paid for by all British citizens, and as i am sure you are aware of this, in England there is a very large population of muslims, christians, catholics and other ethnicities and religions.

why do people have such a hard time seeing this fact? and the reasons *why* they thread carefully around issues such as this?

[JMT]

right. muslims blowing things up? that's a bit of a stretch.

[cire]

Originally Posted by saintjohn

Btw, I just had a little fun with Google:

"to avoid offending muslims" - 15.400 hits

"to avoid offending christians" - 200 hits

"to avoid offending hindus" - 29 hits

"to avoid offending buddhists" - 1 hit

"to avoid offending animal rights activists" - 0 hits

The world is bowing down, one at a time. Give Muslims another 50 years and they will be running things, due to the fact they have choked the world into submitting to their every whim. Basically they are slowly making everyone pussies, which means later all they have to do is bitch slap us and we will do as they say.

[V. Barbarino]

Originally Posted by web_norah

the BBC is a publicly funded institution paid for by all British citizens, and as i am sure you are aware of this, in England there is a very large population of muslims, christians, catholics and other ethnicities and religions.

why do people have such a hard time seeing this fact? and the reasons *why* they thread carefully around issues such as this?

The BBC is out of tough with reality. Same assholes who don't use the word "terrorist".

[web_norah]

Imus was fired over his nappy headed ho's comment - to avoid 'offending people of color' ....nothing wrong there but people still bitched and saw no harm in his tirade.

It is a similar scenario, some just don't get it and that's fine too.

[slamminshaun]

Norah, would you have supported banning the Da Vinci Code from movie theaters? As you know, it offended many Christians worldwide who were more or less told to just "get over it already". I don't recall any uproar from the media over Madonna performing a mock crucifixion on stage at her concert. Will and Grace seem to offend Christians on their NBC show with no problem....

Why don't you just admit that offending Muslims is taboo, while offending Christians is edgy and trendy.

[saintjohn]

Originally Posted by web_norah

the BBC is a publicly funded institution paid for by all British citizens

I thought they were subjects, not citizens

Anyway, I get your point, but why the double standard? The BBC is concerned about insulting Muslims, but not animal rights activists?

[slamminshaun]

South Park was banned by their network from showing Mohammad in their show, but nobody complained when Jesus took a shit on George W. Bush and the U.S. flag in one of their episodes. Yeah, no double standard there....

click here

[saintjohn]

Originally Posted by web_norah

It is a similar scenario

Except that Imus wasn't directly supported by the government. Like you pointed out, the BBC show is funded by taxpayers, and that complicates things considerably.

You might remember (or may have read about) the furor over the Andres Serrano photograph Piss Christ. Back in the late 80s, Serrano received a $15,000 grant from the National Endowment for the Arts to produce the work, which many Christians still find blasphemous.

Personally, I'm delighted that Serrano is free to create such works, even if it offends people. I don't think that the government should be using tax dollars to support art that is plainly meant to provoke and offend members of a certain religion, however.

I can't imagine what sort of reaction there would be today if Serrano created a similar work using sacred Islamic icons.

At the same time, I doubt that anyone at the BBC would've bothered to re-write a script to avoid insulting Christians, Hindus, or Buddhists. They certainly don't seem to have any qualms about offending the delicate sensibilities of the ALF.

So, again - why the double standard?