The third story on BBC News Online’s home page just now (immediately below the story about today’s terrorist, sorry BBC, insurgent attacks in London) is headlined UK boy wrongly labelled bomber, complete with a picture and paragraph reading:
Evidence that London bomber Hasib Hussain visited Pakistan is called into question by a teenager sharing his name.
The story itself begins:
Evidence showing that all three of the London bombers of Pakistani descent visited Pakistan last year has been thrown into doubt.
A photograph of a passport purporting to show bomber Hasib Hussain was in fact that of a 16-year-old British boy with the same name.
The photo, together with documentation showing two other bombers visited Pakistan, was published on Monday.
This may well be true, with the clear implication from the BBC’s story and headline presentation that Hasib Hussain (the terrorist) hasn’t been to Pakistan. But (and there’s so often a ‘but’ with the BBC these days), if we look elsewhere, including at the BBC’s own recent coverage (obviously long forgotten about in the BBC Viewsroom), we find in, for instance, Suicide bombers’ ‘ordinary’ lives that:
Teenager Hasib Hussain had been known as a tearaway during his early teens.
Newspapers reported how he would start fights with fellow pupils at the Matthew Murray Secondary school in Leeds.
He left school in July 2003 with seven GCSEs.
Around this time, he was sent to Pakistan to visit relatives. He also went on the Hajj pilgrimage to Mecca, grew a beard and began to wear robes.
Despite becoming devoutly religious, he was arrested for shoplifting during 2004.
According to Pakistani officials, Hasib Hussain also visited Karachi last July, but when he left and his port of exit have not been established.
So, whilst the Hasib Hussain that visited Pakistan 12 months ago may well not have been Hasib Hussain the terrorist, it seems quite clear that Hasib Hussain the terrorist did visit Pakistan at least as recently as 18 to 24 months ago, when, according to the BBC, he “grew a beard and began to wear robes”.
These facts about the travels of Hasib Hussain the terrorist are very pertinent to today’s BBC story about the possible identity mix-up with Hasib Hussain the non-terrorist, yet today’s BBC story omits these facts entirely and infers that Hasib Hussain the terrorist hadn’t visited Pakistan at all, even though they don’t actually say that. Once more we are left to wonder if this sort of inaccuracy is down to ignorance and incompetence or if it’s a straightforward attempt to manufacture one story out of another.
Well that fatwa went down a storm.
Perhaps the fatwa just means they would have been fined a couple of virgins when they reached the pearly gates (or whatever they have in Muslim Heaven).
Please – can we stop the trite remarks aout 72 virgins ? This is meant to be a serious site.
Crass remarks demean the purpose of the site.
This whole story will now be conclusive “proof” to most Muslims that the 7/7 attacks were jointly done by Mossad and MI5.
I resisted the temptation to watch the BBC today. I was already angry enough about yet another set of attacks on people going about their daily business. I gather BBC World did not bother to mention that anyone of an “Asian extraction with a beard” was seen running away.
BBC Viewsroom, I like that.
At least spare some sympathy for a 16 year old who has found his passport photo splashed onto newspapers in connection with mass murder. This is not just the Beeb’s incompetence, but that of a whole set of overeager journos and blundering public officials. Furthermore, in this particular instance, the implication of the story is quite clear: it casts doubt onto whether that terrorist visited Pakistan LAST YEAR (it’s in the quotation you use) and does not imply that he hadn’t been there at all.
I know that this is a BBC blog but has anyone seen SKY this morning. Jaw dropping multi culti rubbish from a day spent reporting from outside a mosque in birmingham.
The authorities must be in a state of panic.
Sky can do as it likes as far as I’m concerned. It doesn’t harrass me for cash.
BBC provides space for a few letters from Israelis, who at an individual & non-political level, express solidarity with Londoners & talk of the practicalities of life under threat of terrorists.
The BBC then choose to invite comments from others to these letters, with the inevitable result.
That’ll teach’em to write to the BBC.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4679373.stm
What, you mean responses like:
“Israel has endured more hardship in her short life than some countries in their entire lifetimes.”
“I have many Israeli friends and visit often… We could learn a lot from their example.”
“I appreciate this article on the Israeli plight because much of the world has forgotten about the everyday struggles that occur against terrorism in some countries.”
“It was the clear lack of such harsh condemnation in the UK of suicide bombings in Israel that allowed a situation where young Muslims could be turned into suicide bombing murderers in England.”
Damn that evil biased BBC!
Polite Notice
john b has promoted assasination on his website in the past.
True, but at least I don’t break into donkey sanctuaries at night for illicit animal sex.
whats going on at sky news
Nothing whatsoever.
embarrassing!!
“Man shot on tube”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4706787.stm
Its obviously too soon to know if he was a terrorist, but if he was, I’d say justice has been done.
If he was involved with the attacks then he certainly *deserved* it – I’m still not massively comfortable with the police apparently offing people execution-style when they’ve already got them on the ground, though…
………on the ground strapped with explosives.
I think Dan means responses like this, John b:
I can assure you that the two American commenters are from the heart of moonbat territory.
You seem to have somehow overlooked these comments, john b.
Have a nice day, thank you for playing.
Justin Webb watch your back! Bit of anti-american fare, brought to you by the BBC Director of Factual & Learning.
Apparently American’s can’t say ‘Herb’ and only 16% have a passport. Oh how these Americans are stupid!
The war, brought to you by the White House
http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,3604,981171,00.html
John Willis, Director, Factual and Learning
http://www.bbc.co.uk/pressoffice/biographies/biogs/executives/johnwillis.shtml
Anyway what he talking about – ‘consolidation’? He seems to fear it… I would like to know more.
StinKerr: the comments you cite are the only ones on the whole piece to be even slightly anti-Israeli, they are outweighed 3:1 by the pro-Israeli ones, they’re all perfectly civil – and only one of them (Sophia’s) actually blames Israel and the Israelis for the problems. An excellent example of BBC balance, or even pro-Israeli leaning; only a fanatic could see anti-Israel bias here…
“Consolidation” is when a single company or a small number of companies own a large proportion of the media (like when the same dodgy right-wing tycoon owns the best-selling tabloid, the second-best-selling broadsheet, and the most popular pay-TV platform…)
…..but at least I don’t break into donkey sanctuaries at night for illicit animal sex……
I had a written invitation and we are in a caring relationship 🙂
“Consolidation” is when a single company or a small number of companies own a large proportion of the media (like when the same dodgy right-wing tycoon owns the best-selling tabloid, the second-best-selling broadsheet, and the most popular pay-TV platform…)
Because its wrong to be right-wing and own anything…..
I did what you did, John B. I picked and chose what I needed to support my point and disregarded the rest.
It’s not my normal way of operating, but I got caught up in the spirit of what you started.
Had you merely said that there were different opinions there I wouldn’t have disagreed. Being one-sided, though, caused me to provide the other side similarly selected.
Call it a demonstration turned the other way. 🙂
Neither one of us was being completely fair. I’m sure you get the point.
I actually intended to mention the “3:1 pro/anti” point in my first comment, but forgot – I agree my quoting alone needlessly created a misleading impression.
& no, nothing wrong with right-wing people owning anything. It’s when they own *everything* that you get problems…
The John Willis piece is complete b*llocks. If US companies want to put a bit of capital into UK TV then fantastic. We might get some original programming rather than endless repeats. We have sufficient regulation to insure against over-consolidation.
If they go OTT on the flagwaving b*llshit and adbreaks then nobody will watch and they’ll have to adapt to British taste. If FoxNews abysmal ultra-right dirge from the Brit point of view that’s probably why it’s tucked away on Sky channel 92764 and nobody watches it. Al-Jazzera is there too and that’s also a bit extreme for mainstream British tastes.
The Beeb and its employees should be focused on broadcasting events of national importance, impartial news and well funded intellectually stimulating programming not provided by the market. It shouldn’t we worried about US or indeed Botswanan entrants to that market.
“It’s when they own *everything* that you get problems”
It’s when lefties like John B decide that people, who have done nothing illegal, but “own too much” that you get much greater problems. It’s when people decide they own other people and are entitled to a chunk of the fruits of the labours of those who work hard that you get problems.
But then socialism is the replacement for slavery.
Consolidation is a concern in many places. I’ve seen two newspaper towns suddenly become one newpaper towns because of economics. Often their editorial boards are bent in one particular direction. With little to no input from opposing views.
When that one newspaper owns a local TV station and a few radio stations, they have a lot of control over what local news is presented in that market.
Considering that there are usually at least five TV stations in any market, all associated with the five networks and carrying the network national news programs this is not a great concern. Particularly when you realize that between cable TV and the internet people are getting their news from a greater variety of sources.
The single greatest threat is the threat posed to local news. Some things can be ignored or hidden for a longer period, but they always come out. It might just take longer. It’s still wrong, though.
Oh, by the way, that dodgy right wing tycoon has some dodgy left wingers in high positions in some of his TV networks who openly campaign and financially support dodgy left wing candidates in elections. Strange world, isn’t it?
Indeed: only a dangerous communist would suggest that it was bad for companies to have monopoly powers. Damn that Adam Smith, and damn him again…
Tube shooting – BBC1 News have interview with witness but for some reason edit out his comment after the word “cap”
Also no mention of jacket on ceefex
“He [the suspect] had a baseball cap on and quite a sort of thickish coat – it was a coat you’d wear in winter, sort of like a padded jacket
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4706913.stm
john b – I accept that some replies to the Israeli letters are written in the spirit that the leters were written.
But why did the BBC feel the need to request replies to these letters? The Israelis’ letters could have been merely posted as responses to a wider (D)HYS subject?
As I said above the letters were written making personal & non-political points – the BBC invite responses which inevitably include comments on the political situation.
Beware – suggestion that the terrorist (sorry Beeb – “alleged member of the explosive Muslim community”) didn’t actualy have any explosives on him.
The line from the Sky correspondent (approximately): “The police didn’t want to take the chance – fair enough”
I’m refusing to watch the BBC’s line. How long before the excited lefties start drawing comaprisons with the Gibraltar/SAS shootings?
To be polite, John Willis is somewhat provincial. When you live in a country slightly smaller than the state of Oregon (that’s over on the left coast, one down from Canada), I suppose it’s difficult to conceive of driving thousands of miles without having to wave a passport at anyone.
Add to that the fact that Americans can enter Canada and Mexico without a passport or visa and we have an entire continent we can freely move about on without a passport.
The fact that there are regional accents also seems to be beyond him. He was working in Bahstin, fergawdsake. What did he expect?
He also seems to have missed the Rather fake documents story. I wonder why he didn’t bring that up, or Jason Blair, for that matter.
Seems like an appropriate choice for the Beeb to appoint as director of Factual and learning. (whatever the hell that’s supposed to be)
Uh, was that directed to me? Was there something you didn’t understand in my post?
Let me reduce it for you:
Consolidation is bad for local news. Consolidation makes little difference to national news.
Murdoch has rabid lefties working for him as chief and deputy chief executives.
There, I hope that’s clear enough.
John B not “massively comfortable” about “execution-style” killing on tube at Stockwell. We’re not bothered over here, mate – take yr wingeing to the BBC “PM” programme, you’ll get prime billing there!
Willis not the wasteland that is the rest of US television
Typical arrogance from the feather-bedded BBC.
Don’t BBC executives look at their own schedules – Everytime I turn on BBC daytime its a programme on car boot sales, house renovation/purchase at home home & abroard or cookery.
There is really no distinctive quality, at any time, that distinguishes BBC from a combination of what is available on C3 & C4.
The only conclusion then, is that Johnny B. Jihad would have been massively comfortable had the police let the terrorist detonate himself.
And by the way ya big dope, don’t bother replying with crap like, “well the police didn’t know whether he had explosives or not”… under his thick padded coat despite it being over 90 degrees on the tube in July. Because you know what, Johnny B No Good, that’s the effing point.
Incidentally, the BBC didn’t have any problems calling the 1999 bombing of the Admiral Duncan pub and the murder of three gay people a terrorist act perpetrated by a “terrorist” – and in case anyone asks, neither do I.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/332807.stm
espresso,
I hope the BBC made sure to look into the root causes of the bombers motives.
I hope the bombers mum got to give an interview for her loverly son, dressed in traditional KKK outfit.
I hope if his uncle said the Gays “deserved it” the BBC would ignore it as an irrelevance.
I hope the statement that “the vast majority” of the Neo-Nazi community do not support bombings was prominently published.
Wake Upand change the channel: The BBC are on the other side.
I’m refusing to watch the BBC’s line. How long before the excited lefties start drawing comaprisons with the Gibraltar/SAS shootings?
The Muslim Council of Britain said Muslims were concerned about a possible “shoot to kill” policy.
Spokesman Inayat Bunglawala said: “There may well be reasons why the police felt it necessary to unload five shots into the man and shoot him dead, but they need to make those reasons clear.
“It’s vital the police give a statement about what occurred and explain why the man was shot dead.”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4706787.stm
It’s taken about 4 hours for a “shoot to kill policy” to get mentioned. I think the liberal “hand wringing” will start within 48 hours and it will offically be “the police’s fault” by this time next week.
“…The Muslim Council of Britain said Muslims were concerned about a possible “shoot to kill” policy…”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4706787.stm
Hm, how about some concern about the fact that four people tried to detonate bombs yesterday?
Not sure if there’s a “Shoot to revive” policy in place just yet…
‘They unloaded five shots’ – this headline on the News Homepage gives me the creeps as it is. What does this tell us? Didn’t they aim properly? Did they use too many bullets? Hm…
Nobodyy loathes al beeb more than I do but thier coverage of this mornings events was streets head of SKY who were showing a multi culti “islam is a peacefull and beautiful religion” peace of whacked out relativist junk during all of the fast moving events of this am.
My point in highlihting this is to show just how poorly served we are by broadcast MSM.
Rupert Murdoch would have turned in his gave had he watched SKY today.
I know he`s still living, but he`d have died a death at the stateof his own channel today. Bring in Roger Ailes from Fox and give SKY the shot in the arm that it so badly needs. All they have to compete with is the rotten beeb and they`re failin even in that.
I don’t know what all the fuss is about. We were reliably informed last night on (BBC’s) News24 that …. “once again London’s Transport System was attacked”.. Presumably they meant one step up from vandalism ..
No terrorists here, move along……
espresso,
I hope the bombers mum got to give an interview for her loverly son, dressed in traditional KKK outfit.
Right on cue…
Bomber’s mother speaks of anguish
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/4706893.stm
Yes… and what did she say?
“Mrs McLeod, who converted to Islam at around the same time as her son, added: “May Allah forgive our living and dead and have mercy on us all.”
Hm… wonder what “our” and “all” means in this context.
I agree Sky News has been awful today but then again they have not yet threatened to send me to jail…
Ok, this is a little unfair, but still telling:
Terrorist Flees; Runs to BBC.