Saturday, December 08, 2007

BBC Casts Joseph & Mary as Asylum Seekers

The Spectator has a story about how the BBC are making a new version of the Nativity, with Joseph and Mary as asylum seekers turned away by Britain. Feel free to have any of the following reactions...

A) You couldn't make it up
B) Why oh why oh why
C) It's political correctness gone mad
D) The BBC Drama department wants its collective head read
E) All four

We look forward to the BBC Drama Department making insulting dramas about other religions. No names, no pack drill. But they won't. They would be too scared of the reaction, whereas they think Christians and Jews will just sit there and take it. One day they may be surprised. The Spectator puts it well...

You'd have a bit more respect for them if they also did a story about a bit of an oddball -- let's call him Mohammed -- who thought he had a hot line to God, was a bit too keen on waging war and not at all queasy about massacring Jews -- but we doubt you'll see that on a BBC screen any time soon.

Do read the full story HERE.

UPDATE: Well done to the commenter who spotted the, ahem, deliberate mistake in the headline. All's well etc...

119 comments:

Brian said...

Which of the animals in the stable will be called Mohammed?

Anonymous said...

With Herod to be played by Michael Howard.

Probably.

Machiavelli's Understudy said...

I'm not sure why this has made you put your "Outraged, of Tunbridge Wells" hat on, Iain, as I normally give you a bit more credit for being relatively sane.

What exactly is the problem?

It is simply a modern adaptation of a classic work of fiction. Channel Four did the same with its Exodus drama a few weeks ago. I don't recall you ever getting all uppity about Baz Luhrmann's adaptation of Romeo and Juliet. Did you?

As for upsetting the Christians... Surely it's an example of how much more capable most of them are (Stephen 'Batshit' Green excepted) in coping with other people interpreting their beliefs and allegories? You only see one-dimensional interpretations of Islamic beliefs because there are Muslims who are either incapable of i) coping with the concept of tolerating other people in a civilised manner OR ii) being vocal in the belief that their religion can withstand the test of a one-off television drama. A sizeable number of them just about managed with rejecting the Sudanese position on soft toys last week (without the usual addendum of "but..."), partly because many did think it ridiculous, partly because others realised it would be the last straw for so many others fed up with making exceptions for and having to 'understand' the religion of peace.

Anyway, do you seriously give credence to the belief that you can get knocked up without human assistance of some kind? Joseph must have been the most gullible man in the entire Middle East...

Anonymous said...

yet another reason if required why I never watch the damn channel.Their news coverage would make hitler blush.

Anonymous said...

MU,

I think Iain's (and the article's) point is that the BBC wouldn't even dare of making anything that could be seen as mocking other faiths, particularly Islam. It is indeed true that Christians in general are a lot better at accepting new thinking, interpretations and what have you. And that is something for which its followers deserve substantial praise. But their kindness and decency towards those who continually re-package their faith in trendy (and sometimes offensive ways) just means people will do it more and more. The BBC are doing this because Christianity is a soft target that won't complain too much (or threaten bombings/beheadings) and can therefore be ignored.

Anonymous said...

f) Disband the BBC.

Newmania said...

It is simply a modern adaptation of a classic work of fiction.

Machievelli - That is an exceptionally shallow post. In Islington a while ago they did a nativity based on a mother and child who were temporarily housed in a garage . I wrote in to ask where Joseph was.
On the other hand there are elements in the Christian tradition that spring from its slave and stoic history that are rather socialist and there are plenty of tendy vicars who would this "super"
I think the modern misinterpretation comes from overlaying a degraded concept of "LOVE" which arose from Medieval romance implying merely foolish fondness devoid of the of justice. LOVE , the greatest Christian virtue is a far deeper concept and may be love of duty or country or loyalty to ones family or nation justice is always involved otherwise love is self love and an evil.This is an example of self love by the BBC and therefore a sin of the worst kind , a sin of pride.


I have no faith myself but admire and respect the Christian tradition and the sort of wearisome adolescent dog eared remarks Machievellis Jock strap , obviously thinks amusing effects much like a new ring tone played on the train hour after hour.

Painful

Anonymous said...

Marquee Mark - Michael Howard is a civilised man and wouldn't stoop so low.

Machievelli's Understudy - What a nasty piece of work you are. You are not big enough or powerful enough to degrade Christianity. "It is simply a modern adaptation of a classic work of fiction."

No, asshole. It's the history of a great and powerful religion, and if it is true, you're toast. Our entire compassionate, advanced Western society (I excuse the BBC from this description) is based on Christianity.

I do look forward, though, to seeing the BBC musical of the minute Mohammad first set eyes on Aisha and fell in lust with her.

"Only six----
And oh what a dream!
Eyes that sparkle and shine!
She's six----, she's beautiful and she's mine!"

She was so tiny that when her mother picked her up off the swings and hurried her over to Mo's pad, it is on record that little Aisha was out of breath trying to keep up with her mother. She was carrying her little doll with her.

Chris Langham could play Mohammad.

Anonymous said...

Some mistake surely! You must mean JOSEPH and Mary, not Jesus and Mary LOL!

Anonymous said...

That article is a waste of electrons. It's not like the BBC hasn't done hundreds of faithful nativity story recreations in everything from Blue Peter to serious drama over the years. It is just as easily argued that in the past the BBC was for many years an arm of the Church of England. Why not interpret the story in a different fashion? It's just another case of some Christians who take themselves far too seriously to become indignant. And an opportunity for some to feign indignation.

The only small, valid point he made is that the BBC are unlikely to reinterpret Muslim stories. But then it is understandable because Christians in this country are highly unlikely to resort to violence or to insight violence unlike the minority hardcore of Muslims.

Anonymous said...

The problem, Machiavelli's Understudy, is that the Nativity is a Christain belief and we are sick and tired of being mocked by the craven BBC and having to pay for it to boot. The day the BBC do an equally bullshit version of Mohammed's Story - just think of the fun - he can be cast as an Elvis Presley look alike truck driving paedophile with a 13 year old bride - is the day I'll shut my mouth about it. Of course they wouldn't dare.

Oh and Gallmaufry - I think it should be the donkey. Hee-haw!

Anonymous said...

What is it about militant atheists like Machievelli's Understudy that drive them to try to destroy the faith of others with such vicious, mean-spirited, fanatical frenzy?

Why do the fundamentalist atheists care so much that other people - the vast majority of people on earth, have faith? Why does it matter so much to them? Surely other people's souls and beliefs are matters for their own consciences, not the haranguing of simply furiuous fleas?

I have never encountered this bilious fanaticism in any other country. In fact, not in the rest of the British Isles, either. It seems to be an English phenomenon. Perhaps it springs from all those toxic militant drawing room atheists from the beginning of the last century, like Bertrand Russell and that lot?

It's an interesting pathology and someone should do an academic study into these people.

copydude said...

I think it's a wonderful idea.

The story so far: Mary has failed to get fast tracked as a nanny and Joseph is struggling with his Polish lessons.

There is a star in the sky over the Little Town of Sangatte, which attracts the attention of Chinese fishermen watching their cockles by night . . .

John M Ward said...

Agendas, Iain, agendas...

If you are serious about becoming a candidate for election, you are going to have to become prepared for the huge change in this country's underlying culture.

I had to do so; and even today am battling through heaps of such stuff as hundred-plus-page politically-correct (or slanted, more like!) "strategies" and "frameworks" that waste so much Officer time and energy to create (to a formula anyway), when they should be doing the real job itself instead.

The decline in standards, and pandering to powerful lobbies, has become so pronounced in recent decades -- and especially during the past decade -- that it is clear that Satan really does have a strong foothold in Britain today.

And so many of the people fall for it all, time and again...

Anonymous said...

Surely the biggest qualm is the bastardising of this story to push the beebs agenda. I was also unaware history was a "one-dimensional interpretation".

Anonymous said...

"It is simply a modern adaptation of a classic work of fiction"

An adaptation that diverges so far from the source material as to change the basic points is generally considered a bad adaptation.

Joseph was a rather well to do artisan who, if you believe the story, was related to the Davidic royal family. He was not not some sort of poor rootless asylum seeker, which completely changes the status of Jesus within the story.

Anonymous said...

As a Christian, I can't see what the problem is here. They WERE asylum seekers. Why should telling the truth insult anyone?

The Secret Person said...

Ah, you may have the inside line on breaking political scandal and Westminster gossip but I pipped you on PC gone mad!

Anonymous said...

Who is this "Jesus" bloke anyway?

Anonymous said...

Come on, if they were typical asylum seekers, they would have reached Bethlehem by way of France.

Man in a Shed said...

In reality the immigrants and colonisers were the Romans.

Jesus, Mary and Joseph became asylum seekers as they tried to protect their identity from an over zealous government that wanted to kill Jesus. ( A warning against government power ).

The BBC could have done its story easily - based on the actual story line. But that wouldn't have been left wing and biased enough for them.

Just remember these people need to be privatised and forced to get real jobs doing something actually useful for the country rather than living of the rewards of the TV licence fee protection racket that is the main cause for imprisonment of women in the UK.

Sorry for the long quote below - but it is advent:

<< Matthew 2 >>
King James Bible
1 Now when Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judaea in the days of Herod the king, behold, there came wise men from the east to Jerusalem, 2 Saying, Where is he that is born King of the Jews? for we have seen his star in the east, and are come to worship him. 3 When Herod the king had heard these things, he was troubled, and all Jerusalem with him. 4 And when he had gathered all the chief priests and scribes of the people together, he demanded of them where Christ should be born. 5 And they said unto him, In Bethlehem of Judaea: for thus it is written by the prophet,

6 And thou Bethlehem, in the land of Juda, art not the least among the princes of Juda: for out of thee shall come a Governor, that shall rule my people Israel.

7 Then Herod, when he had privily called the wise men, enquired of them diligently what time the star appeared. 8 And he sent them to Bethlehem, and said, Go and search diligently for the young child; and when ye have found him, bring me word again, that I may come and worship him also. 9 When they had heard the king, they departed; and, lo, the star, which they saw in the east, went before them, till it came and stood over where the young child was. 10 When they saw the star, they rejoiced with exceeding great joy. 11 And when they were come into the house, they saw the young child with Mary his mother, and fell down, and worshipped him: and when they had opened their treasures, they presented unto him gifts; gold, and frankincense and myrrh. 12 And being warned of God in a dream that they should not return to Herod, they departed into their own country another way.

13 And when they were departed, behold, the angel of the Lord appeareth to Joseph in a dream, saying, Arise, and take the young child and his mother, and flee into Egypt, and be thou there until I bring thee word: for Herod will seek the young child to destroy him.

14 When he arose, he took the young child and his mother by night, and departed into Egypt: 15 And was there until the death of Herod: that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying, Out of Egypt have I called my son.

16 Then Herod, when he saw that he was mocked of the wise men, was exceeding wroth, and sent forth, and slew all the children that were in Bethlehem, and in all the coasts thereof, from two years old and under, according to the time which he had diligently enquired of the wise men. 17 Then was fulfilled that which was spoken by Jeremy the prophet, saying,

18 In Rama was there a voice heard, lamentation, and weeping, and great mourning, Rachel weeping for her children, and would not be comforted, because they are not.

Anonymous said...

Twice in the last fortnight you've had a "pop" at different branches of Christianity.

A couple of weeks ago you accused the Bishop of Oxford of being impartial in the current sleaze enquiry, on the strength of an incident that happened ten years ago. You were asked then to provide evidence of impartiality, but ignored the request.

A few days ago you were critical of using a song aimed at small children in a Christening service.

There are reasons why the BBC's depiction of Mary and Joseph as asylum-seekers is odd as a metaphor, (like the reason they were going to Bethlehem in the first place - because the authorities had demanded they return to Joseph's place of birth for a census.)

I'm not sure whether you're now trying to cynically win back the "Churchgoer vote", or what your motivation for this post is, but as someone who actually goes to Church, I'm not in the slightest _offended_ by what the BBC have done.

Sabretache said...

How about 'None of those four'; rather 'fair comment' designed to make knee-jerk outraged of Tunbridge-Wells's look at themselves in the mirror for a change?

For God's sake get a life. Just what exactly are you so sensitive about?

As for '... a hot-line to God' and 'a bit too keen on waging war' - Sounds more like George W Bush & Co to me.

And - 'Not at all queasy about massacring Jews'??? I think you'll find it is a Western European Christian country that holds the record in that particular department.

Iain Dale said...

Mark. Did you actually read what I wrote? How in God's name am I having a go at Christianity? I am defending the original nativity! I sometimes wonder...

Anonymous said...

I read this in Amanda Platell's column today and gave it the benefit of the doubt as being a wind up. After all we can't go on thinking that the BBC is full of mentally retarded, "creatively challenged" f***wits can we? How wrong I was. They have now gone beyond parody with this tired, predictable and mendacious twaddle. Perhaps we can now coin a phrase whereby anything that could be thought up by a 13 year old to shock their parents could be termed ,"Doing a BBC."

John M Ward said...

Verity wrote: "What is it about militant atheists like Machievelli's Understudy that drive them to try to destroy the faith of others with such vicious, mean-spirited, fanatical frenzy?"

It's because they have nothing worthwhile to contribute. It's a common enough phenomenon, and certainly very common among (though not universal in) atheists and suchlike.

Interestingly, it is the most evil members of the opposition in our Council who wait outside the Chamber until after the Mayor's Chaplain has finished before filing in, in full public view, of course.

I think that tells something of a story in itself...

BEAR FIGHTS IN OUR ROAD said...

Ian.
Thou shalt not take lord thy god's name in vain.

Anonymous said...

We look forward to the BBC Drama Department making insulting dramas about other religions. No names, no pack drill. But they won't. They would be too scared of the reaction, whereas they think Christians and Jews will just sit there and take it.

Iain, I hardly ever see you get down to absurd reactionism but this takes the biscuit.

Firstly, how is it insulting to any religion? There's plenty of Christians who try to come to this country every year and get rejected on spurious grounds.

If your point then is that they're allowed to make dramas about Joseph/Mary, but not other religions - surely that is a good thing?? Don't you want the freedom to re-interpret historical events or not?

Are you trying to be Melanie Phillips or something?

Sunny
LiberalConspiracy.org

Newmania said...

Iain did you see that in New Statesman you got a mention apparently David Cameron was talking about you and your new print monthly...coo you get about a bit don`t you.

Machiavelli's Understudy said...

I think Iain's (and the article's) point is that the BBC wouldn't even dare of making anything that could be seen as mocking other faiths, particularly Islam.

I accept that, and I acknowledged it in my first post (and is something that seems to have been missed by some others). Isn't it rather telling that other faiths don't come in for alternative interpretations? I do not see this as mocking Christian beliefs- anybody who does needs their head examined.

If other faiths can't cope with having their beliefs and stories analysed, interpreted and pulled apart and put back together, that isn't just their problem- it's our problem, too. Nobody has the right to prevent the free expression of others or to not be 'offended' (quite how is beyond me). The problem we have is that the sensibilities of some people regarding their Invisible Sky Fairy friends are so trivially breached that they cannot manage to deal with such instances without resorting to disproportionate and swivel-eyed responses, as Theo van Gogh find out to his expense.

These same swivel-eyed responses are found here- when I called these allegories for what they are- classic works of fiction- the response was that of anybody who cannot see the wood for the trees. Can somebody tell me how and why they are not works of fiction? I don't contest that they are very good stories- some are quite riveting- but that does not mean that, in parallel, I put the Hobbit at the centre of my belief system.
I especially like how Verity allows herself to make the insinuation that Mohammed was a paedophile, yet Christianity is the be all and end all of civilisation (you were wrong, by the way, love). What is it about such militant Christians that drive them to try to destroy the faith of others with such vicious, mean-spirited, fanatical frenzy? I blame the tequila and heatstroke.

Naturally, I agree that the BBC ought not to be funding such outrages of the highest order- but then, they ought not to be funded by the licence payer at all.

Machiavelli's Understudy said...

PS- Anybody who implicitly uses Pascal's Wager to suggest I'm going to Hell really shouldn't bother stepping outside...Ever. "Just in case..."

Anonymous said...

Outrageous and hurtful. Very hurtful to Christians. I hope lots of people ring in and complain.

Anonymous said...

Thank you, Man in A Shed.

Mark Harrison, no Iain wasn't critical of the song. The thing is, see, it wasn't a hymn and a Christening is a holy event. Second, the song is for children who can understand it, not newborn babies. Du-uh.

Lady Finchley - You've got your facts wrong. Aisha was married to Mohammad when she was six, having been pulled off her swing by her mother and taken to Mohammad's house at Mohammad's wish. Being the gent he was, he didn't "consummate" the marriage until she was a mature woman of nine.

Anonymous said...

Iain I'm afraid I think you're having a bit of a Daily Mail moment here. I'm assuming you have seen a pre-showing of the drama? If that isn't the case, might be a good idea to watch it and then pass judgement.

Machiavelli's Understudy said...

It's because they have nothing worthwhile to contribute. It's a common enough phenomenon, and certainly very common among (though not universal in) atheists and suchlike.

I wouldn't know about atheists... Perhaps you'd have to ask one, rather than presuppose (although that seems to be all that councillors are capable of)?

Interestingly, it is the most evil members of the opposition in our Council who wait outside the Chamber until after the Mayor's Chaplain has finished before filing in, in full public view, of course.

I think that tells something of a story in itself...


Yes, clearly there is a satanic cult assembling in Medway- it's the only possible conclusion! Perhaps we need a good old-fashioned ducking or burning at the stake? We haven't seen one of those for a while.

Or it could just be that they don't want to take part in your ritualistic ceremony. Why is that a conspiracy?

You take hyperbole to a whole new level, I must say.

Anonymous said...

cath dibble.
Would anybody in their right mind contemplate wasting a minute of their lives watching a drama with a synopsis including Mary, Joseph, asylum seekers, single mum, and Somali hitman dreamt up by the BBC? Answers on a postcard.

Anonymous said...

I suspect the point of Iain's post was the 'tug-at-the-heartstrings asylum seeker' thrust of the interpretation.

If Joseph and his family were being instructed to go back to their home base for a census, then ipso facto they weren't asylum seekers - or surely not until the flight into Egypt? So hi-jacking the Nativity Story to make a none too subtle political point is presumably what is getting up Iain's nose.

Re the argument between believers and non-believers - as an agnostic, I don't get het up about believers until they start shoving their views down my throat; this I have experienced personally and painfully from Orthodox members of my own family, but not quite so finally as kuffars have copped it from certain Islamic regimes, or members of my own race have suffered at the hands of so-called Christians, or Palestinians at the hands of certain Israelis .....

Anonymous said...

So Iain is now pro-censorship. It seems to me that atheists will soon be the only people who espouse free speech, the freedom to choose and to live (a Conservative philosophy of getting over burdensome government and laws off our backs).

So long as the BBC are not intent on inciting acts of violence or provoking hatred then they are well within the law.

Yak40 said...

Typical Beeb but it might flop anyway, given the ignorance of much of the population nowadays.

The Half-Blood Welshman said...

What's new about this? The Communist composer Rutland Boughton did much the same thing after the General Strike in 1926, setting a modern dress production of his opera "Bethlehem" in a miner's cottage, with Jesus as a miner's son and Herod as William Joynson-Hicks, the then Home Secretary who had just spectacularly defeated the miners (cue comparisons above with Michael Howard)?

The difference was of course, that Rutland Boughton was both halfway competent at staging things and an intelligent, intellectually consistent man who hated ALL organised religion equally - unlike the Beeb on two counts! Moreover, there was certainly a viable comparison to be made between a Nazarene carpenter and a Welsh miner - both poor, both held under the cosh, both ordered about freely by the government for reasons that were often far from benign. There isn't quite the same resonance with asylum seekers, very few of whom have to come to Britain rather than, for example, seek asylum in France.

I'm a Christian, but personally I would have said if the BBC are going to show their ignorance of the Bible - and almost certainly do a botch job of it on recent form, incidentally - why not let them make fools of themselves?

The Half-Blood Welshman said...

What's new about this? The Communist composer Rutland Boughton did much the same thing after the General Strike in 1926, setting a modern dress production of his opera "Bethlehem" in a miner's cottage, with Jesus as a miner's son and Herod as William Joynson-Hicks, the then Home Secretary who had just spectacularly defeated the miners (cue comparisons above with Michael Howard)?

The difference was of course, that Rutland Boughton was both halfway competent at staging things and an intelligent, intellectually consistent man who hated ALL organised religion equally - unlike the Beeb on two counts! Moreover, there was certainly a viable comparison to be made between a Nazarene carpenter and a Welsh miner - both poor, both held under the cosh, both ordered about freely by the government for reasons that were often far from benign. There isn't quite the same resonance with asylum seekers, very few of whom have to come to Britain rather than, for example, seek asylum in France.

I'm a Christian, but personally I would have said if the BBC are going to show their ignorance of the Bible - and almost certainly do a botch job of it on recent form, incidentally - why not let them make fools of themselves?

Link to my blogpost on this here.

Anonymous said...

unclejoe - well I certainly won't be watching it but then I'm not one of the people who seem to be wasting a considerable amount of time and energy criticising something that hasn't been shown yet. If I felt as strongly about a drama as some of the PPs appear to, I'd make very sure I watched it and then complain vociferously if my fears were confirmed.

Anonymous said...

MU - Mohammad was a paedophile. I didn't insinuate it. He married Aisha when she was six and he had seen her on a swing. Mohammad was 54 at the time. "It's in the koran, yes it's in the koran! It's the cutest little story since islamics began."

To be fair, though, this piece of spite against Christianity is not being manufactured by the islamics in Britain. It is our very own bitter, twisted (il)liberals at the BBC. Quelle surprise. I'm shocked.

I couldn't be bothered reading through MU's wanabee manipulative post because it was too self-excusing and I almost dozed off.

Judith makes a good point.

Anonymous said...

5:47- You're another bitter, twisted, angry little thing, aren't you?

Did anyone in the 37 posts ahead of yours suggest that the BBC is not within the law?

What was the point of your post? Were you pretending to be taking a loftier look at this issue? Don't you people know how transparent you are? You're destructive little vipers. Why on earth would anyone want to destroy someone else's faith? I mean, why? What the hell is the bloody point?

Anonymous said...

I hardly ever read the comments on your blog and this lot show the reason why. Some people have missed the point of what you wrote, some people have completely misunderstood what you wrote and nobody - not even you Iain - has bothered to find out exactly what the plot really is!

Go and read the actual BBC story - the Speccie blogger got it wrong...

So you and all your commenters are wittering around venting their spleens with no regard to the facts. How hilarious.

Anonymous said...

I'm so glad that I'm not a christian .... I don't have to endure the embarrassment of being aligned with the mad, serpent-tongued verity - I bet the C of E aren't too chuffed either, about having her shouting the odds on their behalf.

I'm guessing she is really mad Mel Phillips' slightly madder younger sister.

Anonymous said...

verity: "... the vast majority of people on earth, have faith."

Source please verity

Anonymous said...

Well done for changing the headline, Iain. But the story STILL talks about Jesus, not Joseph LOL!

Anonymous said...

Verity, I stand corrected.

Actually that adds just the right amount of piquancy to my Elvis look alike truck driving Mohammed storyline. Now that I know Aisha was 6 years old (can somebody please explain why the underclass just love to call their daughters Aisha?)she can be a mini-Vicky Pollard character replete with Croydon face-lift and shiny tracksuit. Hooray!

Iain Dale said...

Anonymous 6.22 - Oh dear. It must be the excitement of having my new bed delivered today!

Vienna Woods said...

The trouble with the BBC is that they are full of idiots that are allowed to do as they like without any redress except to the OTT PC clique of the Labour Party. Something like this should have never got off the ground, let alone to be put into production. It's OK making modern versions of the Nativity as long as the story line is not warped to deliberately offend sections of our society. It's also wrong to adopt any religious story into a pseudo immigration yarn which is not going to go down well with the majority of the indigenous population who view immigration as the single biggest problem facing society today. I don't doubt for one minute that some of the clowns at the BBC mistakenly believe that to make the Nativity story so, will somehow convince us that the poor immigrant should be welcomed with open arms and not blagged as the biggest ever mistake by the NuLab party machine!

Machiavelli's Understudy said...

Verity, I'm well aware that Mohammed was a paedophile, and yes, you did insinuate it (you just weren't explicit enough to say that he was).

He's still an intrinsic part of the Islamic faith, so what's your excuse for going out of your way to piss on their parade?

Every time I come across your name in the comments section of a half way decent or readable blog, my heart sinks and my soul weeps for humanity. Your rabid pathological need to verbally smite any poor soul who dares disagree with your self-righteousness is tedious and your 'armchair general' worldly insights myopic. Well-travelled and learned you are not- a typical whingeing expat you are.

You were a noisy walt on Samizdata and nothing seems to have changed since.

I seem to remember a few months ago that you offered this blog some respite from your rhetoric- what happened there?

Anonymous said...

Anon 6:19 - wrong, wrong, wrong, you moron. Making decisions about the religious affiliation, if any, of someone you don't know is excruciatingly infantile. Please. Do us a favour and strive to act like a 12-year old.

6:22 - Well, there are something like 2.2bn Christians; Judaism 14m. l.5bn muslims; around 1bn Hindus; around half a billion Buddhists; Sikhism has around 23m believers; There are around 4m Jains. And traditional Chinese religion almost 500m.

So, as there are around 6.6bn people on the planet and the major religions add up to having around 5.2bn adherents, that comes steaming in as a majority by my math.

I cannot believe Iain had to wait six or eight weeks for a bed he'd ordered.

Little Black Sambo said...

May I congratulate other posters on not (so far) referring to Christians' "Imaginary Friend". In one or two cases that must have taken some self-restraint.

Anonymous said...

Why don't you give the BBC the benefit of the doubt until it's been screened?

My understanding is that it will be acted out on the streets of Liverpool. The BBC did a similar thing a couple of years ago about the crucifixion. When I read the previews of the Easter broadcast I had doubts - it featured actors including Keith Allen and songs including Morrisey's "Heaven Knows I'm Miserable Now." However, when I watched it I was moved.
At least it's something at Christmas with a Christian theme as opposed to soaps.

Ralph Hancock said...

Iain, glad to hear the bed finally arrived. May you have many more happy hours of unconsciousness.

Newmania said...

God I`m so ashamed I didn`t notice. You know after there climb down on the treen propoganda day and the recent abrupt shift away from their usual Labour support i `m suprised at the BBC risking this . Its such an obvious own goal and i hear there are real fears about what may happen to them if the Conservatives get in.

There are some old grudges to be paid off

Anonymous said...

Verity,

"Michael Howard is a civilised man and wouldn't stoop so low."

Can you turn your irony filter off, please?! It may be interfering with your reception....

Anonymous said...

You are off line Iain-- very few people know who Joseph and Mary are!

Anonymous said...

"this is a drama as fresh and relevant today as it was 2,000 years ago – the intimate, personal story of a pregnant young girl set against a backdrop of political tension and unrest." - Beeb's website.

Call me a nit picker but isn't the emphasis on some sort of messiah?

Anonymous said...

Verity

You ask why anyone would want to destroy someones religion?

The answer is logical and simple.

To replace it with a different religion which reflects all the religions of the world. Which as you should know are all astronomically based on the same star formations and have the exact same story lines running though all of them. Albeit with different names.

ALL the worlds major religions are based on astrological SUN worship. For a quite obvious reason, we would all be as dead as Do Do's without it.

What the masses are told their religion is all about and what it actually is all about, as far as High theology is concerned, are almost exact opposites.

This is why the Bible was not even allowed to be read by ordinary catholics for well over 1 thousand years. They may have worked out the truth of the bible all by themselves, and the ruling elites of the day would never allow that to happen.

The BBC is part of this NWO plan. It does what it does for a very big reason. Although many that work for the BBC have very little idea they are being used for this purpose. However they are being USED every second of every day, all the same.

Stop worrying about Muslims they are not our enemy and not our greatest threat, this is and has always been, our own ruling elites.

The BBC claims constantly that it is anti-racist and anti-war. But its actions cause racism, distrust, division and conflict every time they open their big fat masonic mouths.

You can carry on thinking its all just a 6th form ignorant liberal cock-up if you cant handle the real truth quite yet. However I started seeing virtually everything as a long term giant fascist masonic NWO conspiracy years ago.

The BBC is as dangerous as hell and it inhabits by force virtually every household in the country. Most people understandably believe that if they have to pay for something they might as well use it every now and again at least.

This is possibly the biggest mistake they can make in their entire lives.

Many in my Jewish community banned watching any TV as long ago as I can remember.

I did not understand at the time why this was the case. But I very much do now.

The BBC is not only incredibly dangerous it is profoundly EVIL, in all senses of the word.

It represents a elitist establishment fascist type agenda of such incredible lying evil, it really is often impossible to find words in the English language to describe adequately quite how dishonestly evil the BBC as an organization really is.

The NWO is real. So real in fact. that it is a massive herd of unseen and unreported elephants rampaging though the living room. The BBC however have never even mentioned the concept of a NWO EVER, as far as I know.

How can any informed individual have any confidence in the BBC reporting or its programming when the NWO's agenda and the BBCs agenda are absolutely exactly the same in every single microscopic detail?

Ralph Hancock said...

IAIN'S GOT A BRAND NEW BED

Come here pardner ... Iain's in the sack
He's right out cold ... but I think he's coming back
He sure ain't dead
Iain's got a brand new bed

Come here Tories ... and dig this crazy scene
It ain't too fancy ... but at least the sheets are clean
He sure ain't dead
Iain's got a brand new bed

He's rootin' for David ... he's rooting for Dave
Don't write him off 'cause he's gonna be saved
He's doin' the Diskgate, the Cash for Honors, Brown Jumps Back
See ya later, agitator

Come here pardner ... Iain's in the sack
He's right out cold now ... but I can wake him up again
He sure ain't dead
He's got a brand new bag

Oh Iain! The sheets are cerise
Iain ... the sheets are cerise
The pillow's blue ... duvet too
He's snoring like hell, like that deevision bell
That sound ... it shakes the ground ...
Hey ... wake up
Hey! Hey! ... wake up
Hey! Hey! ... he's out cold ... gettin' old
Wake up! Hey! Hey!

--- Apologies to the ghost of James Brown

Anonymous said...

The reason the BBC go in for this sort of thing is, it's "controversial" and "ground breaking" and will epater les bourguois. They love it!

Unfortunately this attitude is not confined to television. It is rife in the subsidised theatre where grotesque, gimmicky, and above all "controversial" productions are all the rage.

But as Charles Moore points out in today's Telegraph, Hell will freeze over before the BBC makes a film about Mohammed.

Anonymous said...

Charlotte, dear, Charlotte do you know who Keith Allen IS? - a drink sozzled, coke addled Groucho club habituee who is mistakenly called an actor and who lives off the fame of his daughter who is a good deal more talented than he is. For that reason alone I couldn't possibly be moved. Mind you, Morrissey has gone way up in my estimation these days.

Anonymous said...

Atlas Shrugged, flee the internet! Your tinfoil hat is useless here!

Anonymous said...

Verity

You can quote possibly accurate figures. But the figures tell a lie. Therefore your conclusions are incorrect.

By far and away the majority of the population of the world are deeply or covertly 'religious' they just may not follow a formal structure.

Socialism to me is a type of religion as is fascism, communism and even atheism. They are all belief systems that can be corrupted by evil intentions. Which they all are, all the bloody time, ever since they were all first conceived.

The BBC would do good by never concerning itself with religions of any kind, if it can possibly help it, and just stick to non-secret agenda entertainment and information.

The BBC does not, because it is not good, it is evil with very evil intentions.

The BBC has a long held corporate religion all of its own called, The Divisive NWO British Establishment MSM Masonic Propaganda Religion. A religion even the tea ladies are indoctrinated into before they serve one cup of Horlicks.

A religion that also, no body especially the BBC ever talks about so it never gets corrupted, or changed for many decades.

Anonymous said...

Oh dear. Is it possible to give Atlas shrugged a little break Iain? I think we may all have heard enough now about the Masonic / Jewish / Lizard / Fenian / Papish conspiracy to rule the world, yawn, whatever. Try reading a few sceptical websites before spouting off.

Anonymous said...

Marquee Mark - Perhaps you were heavily influenced by Tony Blair's anti-Semitic posters of Mr Howard as Fagin and other fictional Jewish characters?

Mr Howard is a civilised man, although it takes one to know one, so I can understand your bafflement.

Fred writes: "You are off line Iain-- very few people know who Joseph and Mary are!" You mean, other than the world's 2.5bn Christians?

MU - You call my post an insinuation? Where I say Aisha was hauled off her swing, aged six, and was hurried to Mohammad's house because he had seen her? Then wrote a take-off of "She's only sixteen" except I wrote "She's only six----"? And I said Chris Langham could play Mohammad? And you think that an insinuation?

Charlotte Corday - As Judith pointed out, Joseph and Mary were not "asylum seekers". They'd been ordered to attend a census, which is why they were en route, meaning they were legitimate. The BBC has a big fat research department. Too bad some little lefty scrote couldn't have been told to read the story of Jesus's birth, so they could get it right. Avoid large embarrassing mistakes.

MU, stop intuiting things about me that you could not possibly know. You make yourself look weak and foolish.

Anonymous said...

Atlas Shrugged: "Stop worrying about Muslims they are not our enemy and not our greatest threat, this is and has always been, our own ruling elites." D'acuerdo, and I had said something similar further up. The drawing room intelligensia of the early 1900s.

Tachybaptus - FUNNY!

Iain will never show his face on his own blog again.

Trumpeter - Agreed. That's why no one goes to see British movies - including the British. It's all destructive little lice crawling around bringing us "a fearless look at ..." and "exploring the underbelly of ..." whatever.

The head-pounding inevitability of it all ...

I want the Beeb razed to the ground. Don't split it up and sell it off because some ravening lefties will survive and spawn. Just destroy it and put them all on welfare.

Anonymous said...

Joseph and Mary were asylum seekers, they went to Egypt to escape Herod.

Chucklenuts said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Anonymous said...

Perhaps a prodcution company should make a version of the crucifixion.

A Prime Minister (Pilate) asks the people who they want to save - The BBC (Jesus) or Sky (Barabas) and the people choose Sky. The Prime Minster washes his hands of the BBC. We then watch as the BBC gets crucified on the cross of Commercial TV.

Of course it is a rather tenuous link to the story of the Crucifixion (although closer to the truth than this BBC Nativity debacle) but it would be an excellent future policy for one of the political parties!

Anonymous said...

Mary and Joseph were asylum seekers. they fled Bethlehem for Egypt in fear of their lives, only returning after several years. I am christian and I am not offended

Anonymous said...

Anonymous 9:32 - Yes, but that was much later, AFTER the nativity. (helpful hint: nativity signifies birth) So, uh, no, they weren't asylum seekers at the time of Jesus' birth - they were in Bethlehem for the census. As for being asylum seekers later that is still dubious as Joseph was a well to do man with something to contribute in Egypt. They were not dependent on the Pharoah for benefits.

Anonymous said...

t is far healthier for Christianity to be mocked than ignored -it shows that it exists strongly enought to worry those who wish to kill all faiths.

Woodbine Willie wrote a poem in the 20s (or maybe earlier) about Jesus weepong on the streets of Birmingham because he was ignored. Apathy is a worse enemy that mockery. After all the priests and soldiers mocked!

However, in the interests of inclusivemess I do expect to see Jerry Springer interviews Mohammed or Krishna and Kali -the opera!

If not I think the BBC can be had for discrimination.

Newmania said...

We don`t see enough of the teenage Jesus do we .....

MARY: Jesus ...do tidy yourslef up
JESUS: "Mum I `m growing a beard God ...you don`t let me do anything you .... god ..I`m, going to my room"
MARY" Yes dear and no more messy miracles please..."

Anonymous said...

if you want to complain call 08700 100 222 bbc programmes customer services just said they are unaware of the programme....

Tapestry said...

no need to invent. real unchristian acts are being committed by the government sending home people who thought they were in secure employment in Britain.

http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/2007/12/mean-spirited-device.html

of course the BBC will find it hard to deal with anything real.

Johnny Norfolk said...

The BBC hates Britain and all it stands for. They are a subversive influence and have much to answer for.

Anonymous said...

cath dibble.
I am currently working on my own interpretation of the nativity. It involves Mary, Joseph, a warm hearted prostitute, an asylum seeker who gets beaten to a pulp by Eton schoolboys, but still manages to find a cure for cancer, and a space monkey. I hope you find the time to view as I would value your opinion. I shall now lie down to recuperate.

Anonymous said...

I'm personally looking forward to a muslim story "for today". Perhaps the persecution by the British state of an innocent female muslim fright-headware afficionado who has security clearance to work "air side" at a major British airport and who writes "lyrical" poetry about terrorism. And collects bomb-making information, but only in a lyrical sense.

Modern day poet persecution. First, Oscar Wilde, now Samina Malik. Is there no justice?

Anonymous said...

Uncle Joe, you forgot to add, in your plot outline, that the asylum seeker being beaten up by Eton schoolboys gets rescued by a gang of hoodies - giving rise to much "colourful street dialogue" - redistribute a businessman's wallet to a kebab shop to give the asylum seeker food and spend the rest of the money and credit cards on ho's, trainers and new mobile phones.

In more rural environments, there is happy-slapping on the village green in lieu of Morris dancing. At the end of which, everyone goes to the bar to enjoy a lovely glass of islamic mint tea.

The movie is a kaleidescope of modern day Britain, for which we should all give thanks to Tony Blair, who seems to have scarpered and the BBC. Oh, and the EUSSR.

Anonymous said...

verity.
I'm disappointed there's no room for a space monkey in your scenarios. Perhaps if we changed him into a crack head space monkey you would be more accommodating. Many thanks for your input. I am sure this will be of great interest to the BBC production team.

Anonymous said...

Uncle Joe - You are assuming an arcane common knowledge I neither have nor want.

So stop pestering and go away.

Anonymous said...

The Men on the Clapham Omnibus:
< What shall we do with this Mark Thompson who preaches blasphemy to our people? >

The crowd < CRUCIFY HIM, CRUCIFY HIM, CRUCIFY HIM >

Pssst . . the replacement BBC Director General won't be quite so quick to make an irreverent programme simply to be controversial.

Anonymous said...

Iain, this really is beneath you.

The Christmas Story rightly points out that Joseph and Mary were on the margins of society, and not living in the lap of luxury. If Jesus came back today he would be born to poor migrants, not wealthy landowners.

[The Son of Man hath not place to lay his head kinda thing..]



And before you fall into the tired old cliche of the BBC making copy from Britain's policy on migration, you should ask whether you will also be giving Michael Bond a good kicking for writing about Paddington Bear being questioned for being an illegal immigrant / asylum seeker, depending on the state of the paper work provided to him by his Aunt Lucy in Peru.

This really is very tired, dull b*!!*cks, and there really is far more interesting TV related stuff you could be discussing - like the return of Sheep Dog Trials to the box...

Anonymous said...

Just stop paying the BBC TV Licence and they can't do a thing about it unless you speak to them.

www.tvlicenceresistance.info

Vienna Woods said...

My sister living in the UK does some charity work in an Oxfam shop. Last week two English women came into the shop and were browsing the Christmas cards, some of which had a Christian religious theme. One said to the other, "Dear God, they're even bringing religion into Christmas now!" It made me wonder that if we cancelled the Christmas holidays through lack of interest in the real meaning, what an uproar this would bring and the oh so mouthy atheists would suddenly become born-again.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...
"There's plenty of Christians who try to come to this country every year and get rejected on spurious grounds."

Such as having no right to be here?

Newmania said...

"i hear there are real fears about what may happen to them if the Conservatives get in."

If only! Sadly, the hopeless tories wouldn't have the balls for it. And Al-beeb will be sloshing tax-payers money into tory bank accounts via 'appearance fees'.

Anonymous said...

Considering Joseph was a carpenter, Jesus' family was probably rather well off. People merely assume Jesus was impoverished because of his bizarre proto-socialist lambasting of the rich.

And besides, Michael Bond isn't tied to a contract of impartiality!

Manfarang said...

ordovicius
"Who is this Jesus bloke anyway?"
Not that much known about him.Born in 7BC.A wandering healer,born a Jew,lived as a Jew and died as a Jew.

Anonymous said...

10:50 - The Christmas Story rightly points out that Joseph and Mary were on the margins of society, and not living in the lap of luxury.

Well, there wasn't really a lap of luxury in the ME in those days. But they were hardly on the margins of society. They were middle class enough to have to attend a census to determine how much tax they owed for the year. They had to travel slowly because Mary was very heavily pregnant, so by the time they got there, all the rooms were taken by others attending the same census. So for shelter, they had to grab the stable when it was offered. It wasn't because they couldn't afford a room.

If Jesus came back today he would be born to poor migrants, not wealthy landowners.

Why is that? You're either a dirt poor migrant or a wealthy landowner? Were he born today, he would be born to a middle class man who owned and ran his own business,like Joseph.

Anonymous said...

verity.
Space monkeys are usually found in Mexico in vast numbers bashing away at a computer keyboard until something resembling a load of bollcks emerges. They go under the collective name of Verity. I hope this proves informative for you.

Anonymous said...

Lady Finchley:
I do know who Keith Allen is and I've read details about him on popbitch that are far more scurrilous than the ones you mention.

However, the TV version of the Crucifixion I saw was impressive.

I'm not quite sure about Verity's remark because I wasn't debating whether Joseph and Mary were asylum seekers.

All I was saying was give it a chance: "Judge not that ye be not judged." St. Matthew 7:1.

Ben Bow said...

Thompson was educated at Stoneyhurst, a leading Catholic Public School. How disappointing that after such a privileged education this man can stoop to broadcasting disgracefully profane and puerile programmes as Gerry Springer and now this cheap travesty depicting The Nativity.
After traducing Her Majesty, debasing Blue Peter by abusing the trust of Children, not forgetting so many other practices defrauding core Viewers, one has to wonder what's behind the agenda of this unshaven Old Boy from Stoneyhurst who promotes such evil practices.
Seems he has sold his soul for a mess of potage.

hatfield girl said...

'... and Herod as William Joynson-Hicks,'
Half-Blood Welshman, thank you, that has cheered my wet and gloomy Sunday afternoon.

Anonymous said...

Charlotte Corday - I think the BBC has had more chances than any organisation on the face of the earth and I, for one, am not according it a chance. It is institutionally racist against the indigenes of this country, institutionally anti-family and anti-democracy. Its news is slanted and prejudiced, it is destructive of British (indeed, civilised) values that have taken centuries to build up and is way, way, way "over-represented" with immigrants.

They faked footage of HM and were fully intending to broadcast it as fact before they were caught at it.

I'm going on form. No chances.

Anonymous said...

verity - I don't believe you would be so foolish as to apply a concept such as 'Middle Class' to a society 2 thousand years old !! What next ??

Deciding that a Roman Centurion is a bit too working class for your taste ?

And Iain, you should give the BBC the benefit of the doubt on religious humour, now that they are showing Omid Djallili on prime time BBC - he is hysterically funny, and doesn't avoid tricky issues of race , religion and ethnicity...

Anonymous said...

Erm, in what sense is it 'insulting' to cast Joseph and Mary as refugees? That sounds to me like a pretty close approximation to what they were - a pair of nth degree emigrants forced to return to the man's homeland by a brutal dictatorship.

I suppose no one would object if they were, say, returning Zimbabwean expats?

Come to think of it, you couldn't really object if it was a man and his, er, umarried partner who was pregnant with someone else's child.

Anonymous said...

Beats me why they can't just leave it alone. The Nativity is a delightful story with a strong message about humility. Perhaps that's why the Beeboids and their ilk hate it so much.

Anonymous said...

Verity said ..."They faked footage of HM and were fully intending to broadcast it as fact before they were caught at it."

The BBC didn't fake it, the inedpendent production company did. The BBC were under the impression that it represented the actual sequence of events.

Anonymous said...

9:32 - Someone said today Mary and Joseph would have been on welfare, or something similar - can't waste my life looking it up - and I responded, no, today, they would be middle class people who own their own business. Of course there was no middle class then, but Joseph had a skill which other people paid him for. He wasn't a labourer or animal herder or grape picker or whatever.

How can I see this Omid Djallili, BTW?

10:18 - And the programme editor or whoever the hell he was, accepted it hook, line and sinker despite the fact that it was so extraordinary, even a little production assistant would have questioned its veracity.

But the Beeb was eager, oh so eager, to believe it ... and oh so eager to elevate Annie Leibowitz to equality with Her Maj that they issued a statement saying they apologised to The Queen and Annie Leibowitz - as though any insult or offence had been done to Leibowitz.

They are vicious and they imagine themselves sly. But to most of us, they are as transparent as glass.

Anonymous said...

I have no objection to Mary and Joseph being depicted as asylum seekers in principle. It's just such a drab and drearily obvious "dramatic" construct. In fact so very BBC.

Anonymous said...

Why should they be brushed with the tar of the BBC's fevered imagination when we already know their story?

They weren't "asylum seekers". Harriet Harmon isn't a retired Can Can dancer from Le Moulin Rouge. Jack Straw isn't a Wildean purveyor of aperçus.

Incorrect.

They were going, as a legal requirement, to the tax collector. How many islamic immigrants to Britain have done anything so refreshing?

The BBC wants to diminish Mary and Joseph. That's the point of all this.

As though they could.

Anonymous said...

Charlotte dear, I unfortunately know the cretin so there's nothing that you can tell me about him. Popbitch indeed!

What is there to judge? - the BBC yet again trying to drag Christians in the mud. And if they are going to do that be historically correct at least. Again and very slowly for the slow ones...Joseph who was a carpenter, a skilled worker and Mary had to go to Bethlehem for the census. Couldn't find a room and had to find shelter in a stable. End of story. Didn't have to flee to Egypt till after the visit of the Three Wise Men.

I still think Verity and I could do a great film project on Mohammed and the child bride. Bring on the fatwah!

Anonymous said...

I do not want the BBC broken up. I want it razed to the ground and left for three years until the toxicity of the building, of the corridors, of the offices, of the furniture has dispersed into the mysterious Al-Gore atmosphere.

Anonymous said...

Why stop at a new bed, I hear most new TV's have something called an 'OFF BUTTON' - something I've been lucky enough to use when something distasteful comes on.

Matt Wardman said...

How does fleeing to Egypt in fear of persecution prevent them being asylum seekers?

Just wondering.

trinitylaw said...

Perhaps someone has already said this but, unless I have missed something, Jospeh and Mary were indeed asylum seekers, given their flight to Egypt when they fled Herod's persecution. So, erm, it's hardly that daring to cast them as modern day asylum seekers. On the contrary, surely it is an important part of the story of the incarnation that God took human flesh in circumstances that were far from easy and comfortable, and if that is the point that is being made by the filmakers I should have thought that it's precisely the kind of thing we should be being asked to remember about the Incarnation.

Anonymous said...

I'm a Christian and I think this sounds really good. Jospeph and Mary did become asylumn seekers (what a strange distinction they were NOT asylumn seekers when Christ was born. Did they become somehow "worse" later on?) I wonder if many of the outraged "Christians" on here will be watching? Probably too busy in church. Or more likely frothing at the mouth about some other ill thought out "slight" while down another slab of turkey and another pint of creme de menthe.
The Manchester Passion was brilliant, I have high hopes for this too. Promise you'll watch it Iain and repert back?

Anonymous said...

Beg pardon Iain, but they were asylum seekers actually> It's just an accurate portrayal of who joseph and mary would be if they were in the UK today. There is nothing "politically correct" about it and it really hasn't the slightest thing to do with treading carefully around other religions.

Roger Thornhill said...

The issue is that the BBC is stuffed to the gunwales with self-loathers, and cowards, to boot.

Verity, 3:28 "Our entire compassionate, advanced Western society...is based on Christianity."

I disagree, it is based on Reason. Western Civilisation only became so once it had put religion into its box.

Anonymous said...

I shouldn't worry Iain; can you seriously imagine anyone watching such tripe? (Well actually I can, but only the same credulous gits that watch all that other touchy-feely 'drama' the BBC seems to produce these days).

I'm more concerned at the misappropriation of licence money for ostensibly no more noble endeavour than offending Christians at Christmas; though of course the BBC editors would say it is there to 'provoke discussion' and no doubt they will claim to have received as many supportive comments as critical ones.

Anonymous said...

Surely this is only an insult if you think asylum seekers are inherently bad people.

Interpreting M&J as part of a victimised group seems sensitive enough to me.

Anonymous said...

Doesn't the "flight into Egypt" from Herod's persecution and massacre of the infants make them...... asylum seekers???

Anonymous said...

Inamicus and others - No. Joseph was well-connected (being from a strand of a royal family), he had a sought-after skill, and they had enough money to keep themselves.

Therefore, you need the BBC's other favourite new definition. Mary and Joseph were migrants! (In the new, BBC sense of migrant, meaning "immigrant".)

"Asylum seekers" are primitive Somali thugs who rape, murder and rob, and other effluent. Migrants are people from the EU, who have skills we need - bar the Romanies - and are going to add to our economy. Can you see the difference?

Mary and Joseph were (im)migrants!

Besides, why is the BBC rewriting ancient history? Can't they think of their own plots? Has the single social housing slapper with four children - Darren, Jermayne, Chelsy and Chantal - by different fathers whose names she can't remember - meme run out?

Gregg said...

Be honest, you loons can't seriously believe this is distorting or mocking Christianity. You're just upset at the idea that someone might dare to portray immigrants in a positive light. Surely it should be atheists like me complaining, about the Beeb doling out propaganda for Xianity and painting it in a falsely positive light.

Anyway, may your seething hatred keep you warm this Winterval. In the meantime, you can get hot under the collar over what some of the godly thought of last year's Manchester Passion, from the same people now bringing us the Liverpool Nativity that's got you so wound up: ekklesia, urbanfaithscape and alaninbelfat.

Actually, if you're really all so angry about this, why don't you all go along and picket the crowds during the performance? Liverpool city centre, this Sunday at 8pm.

Anonymous said...

So Iain. Can I politely ask if you were one of the 700,000 people who did watch the programme this weekend?
I thought it was great.

Iain Dale said...

No I didn't. To be honest I hadn;t realised it was on.