Comments by "Hobbs" (@hobbso8508) on "BBC News" channel.

  1. In fairness he openly stated that GB News was entirely too radical for him, calling it a UKIP tribute band.
    3
  2. Scotsman, but yes.
    3
  3.  @Bestpolevaulter  Congrats on being ignorant I guess. Want a star? As for "our side" I'm a dual citizen you absolute spanner.
    3
  4.  @Bestpolevaulter  Sorry to make you look pathetic...well, more pathetic. Your assumptions are bad and you should feel well bad. Enjoy basking in your ignorance.
    3
  5.  @shaunguffey9199  Like when he attacked Andrew Neil saying that nobody had ever heard of him because he was incapable of answering the questions presented without sounding like a massive hypocrite?
    3
  6. Almost as if it's an interview, not a debate.
    3
  7. Or that forcing someone to use their body to keep someone else alive is unethical and a breach of their human rights. Abortion advocated don't even argue against life beginning at conception, it just doesn't matter.
    3
  8. They were counters to Ben's opinions to stimulate a robust response to the harshest possible criticisms, allowing Ben to overcome said critiques. And yes, they were actual questions.
    3
  9. Please do, so we can laugh at you.
    3
  10. Actually Ben openly lied multiple times in this exact interview, such as his claim about his own Youtube channel videos.
    3
  11. I mean, he did pretty terribly. He lied about his YouTube channel, didn't recognise quotes from his own book that he was there to talk about, tried to attack the interviewer, shifted questions he was uncomfortable with answering, and showed just how much of a hypocrite he was when his own comments were used to point out just how conflicted his own statements have been. He sounds good at a glance, but any actual research of anything he says yields very little substance. That's why Ben is a good debater, and terrible at everything else.
    3
  12. More showing Ben's direct hypocrisy. His rhetoric is in complete contrast to his book. Ben also apologised after the interview.
    3
  13. That Ben likes to not answer questions and needs to be corrected over and over just to get an answer out of him.
    3
  14.  @bronktug2446  It's almost like the FDA practices have changed in the last 60 years. In fact this exact example was used to tighten regulations. That's why the new vaccines, and everything else for that matter, has been tested on pregnant women and children of specific age groups before being released to said groups. Those trials started in February.
    3
  15. *Andrew Neil vs. putz FTFY
    3
  16. Well of course, he's exposing Ben as a massive hypocrite. Why wouldn't he be annoyed.
    3
  17. You seem to have the gentlemen backwards. Ben is the one lying, failing to answer questions, attacking the interviewers character and running away when attempting to promote his book on how we should stop coarsening public discourse.
    3
  18. Ben admitted that he got destroyed in this interview, specifically because he both broke down and attacked the interviewer multiple times, and also because he quit after being pushed on his beliefs. There are multiple times that Ben either lied or was very economical with the truth in this interview, including his comments on YouTube videos that were posted from his own channel, and his weak claims that after explicitly mentioning Palestinians, that he totally didn't mean all Palestinians, just the majority of them, which makes it okay. As for Andrew Neil being on the left, he isn't. Andrew is famously right-wing, and even left the BBC to go to an ultra-right news channel called GB News. Andrew also wasn't the one to use the word "barbaric" that was Ben's addition. Andrew's entire interview style has always been a Devil's Advocate approach, using difficult questions that directly counter the beliefs of whomever he is interviewing. He has done this for years to political figures on the left and the right. There is nothing "Got ya!" about pointing out direct inconsistencies between Ben's book and his personal rhetoric. He wrote a book about how we should all be less angry and should try to approach political discussions with a more level head, then was surprised when comments he made about Palestinians being uncivilised terrorists get mentioned. Even in this very interview he made claims about how only Zionists are the true Jewish people, and non-Zionists are Jews in name only. He talks about how they are largely irreligious, but that is in fact not true. They are largely non-Zionist, but the majority of Jews in America are religiously Jewish. Ben has a list of lies as his talking points, and they never stand up to real scrutiny. That's why he has always made a career out of being a reactionary. That's why he likes people to come ask questions while he's on stage, because he can cut their mic and get the last word, blatantly misrepresenting their viewpoint in the process.
    3
  19. Was it the part where he said he had never heard of the interviewer, or the part where he rage-quit after his ideological inconsistencies were questioned to the point that he couldn't answer without alienating his followers?
    3
  20. Even Ben didn't side with Ben. Ben tweeted how he got destroyed in this interview.
    3
  21. Because he isn't. Not that it would change any of the questions if he was.
    3
  22.  @joeoreilly3039  Except the questions don't represent his own bias as they aren't opinions he holds.
    3
  23. He was comparing the statements in Ben's book to previous statements he had made, contrasting them to show he's a massive hypocrite. How is that not current or relevant?
    3
  24. @Ivan Mektyn Or just make a better disease. What a bunch of noobs.
    3
  25.  Blood for Dracula  Again, you're thinking of covid.
    3
  26. Really, because he just ran from his own comments and attacked an interviewer over questions he couldn't answer. The simple fact is that Ben is a very good convincer, but his points tend to lack real substance.
    3
  27. The video title doesn't say that, so you must be referring to Ben's tweet where he openly stated he got destroyed.
    3
  28. Actually it brings up quotes from years before as they are direct contrasts to Ben's book. Ben used his book to preach civility, all the while he had literal years of tweets showing he's not just part of the problem, he was practically spearheading it. The questions were designed to give Ben an opportunity to respond and explain his position, but instead he either lied about the content of the old tweets, or dodged the questions by waving it off as a dumb thing he did. At no point does he actually take responsibility for his own actions. Imagine if instead he had come out and said "yes, I said some horrible things in the past that allowed me to come to the turning point that is my book" but he would never do that, because that would mean he could never act like that on Twitter again, which would be a shame since he still posts crap like that regularly. In the last week his entire feed is filled with open-ended and factless claims that Democrats are corrupt, exploitative, hacks and more, and that was just this week. He has gone full bore in the events of the Texas shooting, and is throwing insults out daily to cover.
    3
  29. He's actually biased towards the right, but is asking tough questions of Ben. Good journalists can separate their personal opinions from their questions to interviewees.
    3
  30.  @deborahwyndham-lewis5188  Not really funny, more sad that you feel the need to laugh at facts.
    3
  31.  @joepaul4471  Because dehumanising the people presenting facts to you is the only way you can maintain your ignorance.
    3
  32. How is it that Ben learnt from this mistake and you didn't?
    3
  33. 1. Ben is wrong about most things, and struggles to back himself up here, just touting wide claims as if they are facts. This is in fact his forte, and you bought it hook line and sinker. 2. The interviewer dug up old quotes to draw a contrast between Ben's book about political discourse and his own rhetoric. It was perfectly appropriate and shows that Ben is part of the problem with political discourse in America, not the solution. 3. Ben did upload those videos, they are on his YouTube channel. Ben is wrong and lied to cover for himself. Sorry you have never witnessed a hard interview before, but this is what it looks like.
    3
  34.  @mogznwaz  Aged like milk.
    2
  35. Was it the part where Ben attacked the interviewer, the part where he lied about his YouTube channel, the part where he called all non-Zionist Jews JINOs, the part where he called his old tweets dumb then tried to defend them anyway, or the part where he ran away?
    2
  36. You think contrasting Ben's book with his own actions is smearing?
    2
  37.  @thedescendergrimoire7893  "thats his point of view as a Praticing Jew, He can be bias in his religion but i dont think it is zealotry... and whats bad about that?" Who said it was bad? As you say, this is his point of view. So why are old tweets about it suddenly irrelevant? "Did he say something horrible about the Jews that vote for OBAMA?" Yes, he said they weren't real Jews and should turn in their badges. I don't think anyone who has a rich religious and cultural heritage wanted to be told be a zealot that they aren't really a part of that religion or culture. It's smallminded and offensive. "what he want in this interview is current political discourse not targeting his previous tweets...how can you have a political discourse if you have an interviewer that is outdated in current events and using 9 year old tweet." Because they represent his CURRENT views. "if I am Ben Shapiro I will think that the interviewer will discuss the current events not embarrassing the one he is interviewing..." The current event in this interview is Ben's book, which is being directly contrasted to his actions and views. You don't get to write a book about how politics is too angry, then get to brush off all the times you were a part of that anger. "that is not Journalism..." It's actually very good journalism, and Ben recognised as much.
    2
  38.  @thedescendergrimoire7893  You can't write a book about how America's largest struggle is the struggle for the national soul, and complaining about how we are so angry with each other, then brush off various statements and actions where you have done a lot to worsen the situation. His book disagrees with his discourse.
    2
  39.  @thedescendergrimoire7893  "You mean his dumb tweets. he critic it and clarify it why did he said that." No, he said it was a dumb thing to tweet, he never clarified anything, and even announced in this interview that his views have not changed. That makes them CURRENT views, which makes them relevant. "As i said the interviewer just read it out of context." So what is the context? Given that Ben provides the context, and that context is that those are his views to the letter. "He said mean things about Jews and Arabs but there is a following tweet why he said that because HAMAS that is indoctrinating his people." And that makes it okay? "He said the truth but in bold way and you think he is part of that anger?" No, he's an extremist and you just happen to support his extremist views. "I think you just want to feel that the interviewer did the right job" He did do a good job, Ben admitted as much. "It is obviously not a journalistic way do an interview." You don't think researching someone's views and statements, then asking them about those views and statements, is a good way to interview?
    2
  40. You seem very confused by the whole exchange it would seem. The point Andrew Neil was making by pulling up old tweets was that Ben literally wrote a book about how we need to improve our political discourse, only to be shown to be a massive hypocrite. All he had to say was that he had learnt from his mistakes, and that this book was written in response to his previous actions and the actions of others. Instead he goes on a complete tirade, unable to admit that he may have been wrong in the past, instead saying that he tweeted dumb things, never admitting that anything he said was wrong. And no, Neil did not question Ben's loyalty to Judeo-Christian beliefs, he asked what those beliefs were. you just want someone who will bend over backwards for Ben and won't challenge him. Neil doesn't do that, he does difficult interviews. Neil is also a Conservative, so not sure what politics you want him to watch.
    2
  41. He didn't publicly set it straight. In fact the Palestinian tweets Ben still claims to this day that they are taken out of context....even though he included the context. He said: "Apologies! You are correct re: slur about Arabs. Not all Arabs like open sewage and blowing things up. Just Pals and their allies" "I think it has much more to do with the fact that Palestinian leadership supported by Pal population uses millions for terror." He's not apologizing or retracting these statements, he is saying that other people are wrong for calling him out on it. And yes, the right-wing interviewer has done this to people on the left multiple times.
    2
  42. Was it the parts where he lied, the parts where he couldn't explain his own views contradicting his actions, or the part where he denounced his previous tweets only to show that he still holds those views, meaning he was sorry for saying it not for being a bigot?
    2
  43. Then why are all the Democrat ideas polling over 50% among voters? Medicare for all: 69% More strict gun control: 66% The government should do more to combat climate change: 65% Abortion: 61% Infrastructure spending: 56% Free college: 79% Same sex marriage: 67% There's a reason the Republicans stopped winning the popular vote.
    2
  44. Because instead of actually showing how he changed his mind or explaining his position at all he simply attacked his interviewer.
    2
  45. But he isn't on the left. The questions posed are designed to create a counter to Ben's arguments, they are not the interviewers own views.
    2
  46.  @shughy1  The scary part is that you believe that, then continue to vote for policies that actively disadvantage the working class.
    2
  47. I learnt that when backed into a corner Ben Shapiro will lie.
    2
  48.  @danielberry4765  Sure, lets break it down then: Ben doesn't know what Devil's Advocate is, even when it's explained to his face, and thinks that a critique of his views is akin to an attack. Ben thinks the Conservative movement has thought leaders. Ben thinks life begins at conception. Ben doesn't know what an interview is. Ben is perfectly willing to put words into someone's mouth to make them look bad, like adding the word "brutal" to a question. Ben assumes everyone critiquing him is on the left. Ben wrote a book about improving public discourse, then was offended when examples of him coarsening public discourse are brought up. Ben will lie about his own YouTube channel to try and "win" the interview. Ben thinks that talking to people on the other side is the same as improving public discourse, when we can see from this very interview that the way he talks to people on the other side is reprehensible, so why would that improve anything. Ben thinks Obama was a fascist. Ben thinks that the majority of Jews in America are irreligious, which is false. Ben hates Palestinians, and will lie and twist his own statements to stop from sounding like he hates Palestinians. Ben doesn't know how the BBC is funded. Ben gets very salty when he perceives an attack, continuing to bring up his own mischaracterisation of a question as a reason for him to act like a child. Ben is deeply offended at the idea that people have never heard of him. Ben doesn't recognise quotes from his own book. Maybe if you had watched the interview and not mindlessly supported Ben at every turn you would have learnt something too.
    2
  49. Which left wing would that be? Are we watching the same video?
    2
  50. Agreed, but still better than Ben.
    2