.
Before I start, I’ve changed the text at the sidebar dealing with telling this blog about examples of bias from “aagh, don’t email me, I can’t cope” which is basically what it’s said for the last few months to the slightly more optimistic:
You can send it to the Letters Editor at nataliesolent AT aol DOT COM, and it is at least possible that I will not lose it or ignore it. A generally better option is to post it as a comment, even to an unrelated post, preceded if appropriate by the words “Off topic”.
While I was away “Captain Bill” pointed out a story about the recent referendum in Brazil on whether it should be legal to buy guns. He wrote:
Saw your post on the defeat of the UN-suggested total gun ban, just after I read:
Personal security dominates Brazil poll
“…And yet the Brazilian people have voted in a referendum to reject a proposal to ban the sale of firearms.
So what happened? To outsiders, this referendum looked like a no-brainer.
In a country where one person is killed with a gun every 15 minutes, surely the public would vote in favour of an outright ban on gun sales?
Wrong. By a resounding 64% to 36%, Brazilians decided to keep the gun shops open. …”
Seems to me as if the writer is more of a (biased) no-brainer than the citizens of Brazil. Was this supposed to be a news item?
In defence of the writer, Steve Kingstone, he did give a reasonable summary of the actual arguments of those who supported the right to own guns in the paragraph headed “Black market.” This is an improvement on previous attempts by the BBC to cover the issue of guns, which tended to diagnose the alleged psychological problems of supporters of gun rights rather than engage with what they actually thought. (See here, for example, although I was pleasantly surprised by this a few weeks later.)
Nonetheless the rather superior tone taken by Mr Kingstone with his talk of “no-brainers” is not justified. He does not know “outsiders” in general share his opinions.
And although it is a little harsh to single out Mr Kingstone, his piece says nearly all the things BBC reports always do say when the Beeb thinks the wrong side has won a vote.
- The winning bad guys’ campaign was “slick” (i.e. the ad-men bamboozled the rustics).
- The losing good guys’ campaign was “lacklustre” (i.e. the people would have been persuaded if only the messenger had been worthy).
- What voters really wanted to do was give the ruling party a scare (they weren’t actually saying what the vote seemed to say).
I’m not saying that these factors were not there in the Brazilian gun referendum. Such factors often are very influential. But you can all amuse yourselves by looking back over… hmm, various recent votes on European issues would do, and spotting how important these themes suddenly become when the vote goes awry from the Beeb point of view.
And most of the time, if the bad guys’ campaign happens to spend more than their opponents you can bet you’ll hear it described as “well-funded”. Conversely, if the side of virtue (as defined by the Beeb) triumphs, then the money spent is not usually an issue. Mr Kingstone is not guilty on this count, as he did say that the Yes campaign was “heavy in celebrity razzamatazz, and light in penetrating argument.”
Phil, re: “As an amendment to motion (S2M-3471) in the name of Trish Godman, after “acknowledges that” insert “Rosa Parks was a member of the American Communist Party and that”.”
Uh… if they add that BS in, there is going to be a shriek of horror from their ideological allies in the US.
Rosa parks was a member of the Democratic Party, not the CPA (Communist Party of America). Although it is presently difficult to tell the difference (ahem!), the Democrats do not, in any way, want to have themselves associated with the CPA. That would be a political death penalty in the US. Most rank and file Democrats not in Washington DC are not even vaguely socialist, and would switch parties in a heartbeat if the Democrats were associated with the CPA. Having this come from an official source, such as Parliament, would horrify them.
Colin Fox needs to seriously rethink what he’s trying to do. He would alienate his spiritual pals in the US.
Rosa Parks was a woman who got fed up one day and refused to move to the back of the bus, the single most important action that mobilized the Civil Rights Movement that brought so much improvement to the US. She’s a hero to everyone with any sense. And she is not, by any stretch of the imagination, a communist, or a “political” figure of any other description. She wasn’t a political activist, she was an innocent citizen who got pulled into the stream of history by her courage.
Error in the above comment: That’s ComPUSA, Communist Party USA, not CPA. That’s what I get for writing a message while so tired :(.
Mamapajamas
According to this and other sources I have seen, Rosa Parks was an activist for the NAACP. That does not make me respect her achievement the less: she was politically active by peaceful means for a worthy goal. In fact the NAACP decided to make hers the test case because she was well-respected locally and possessed a calm temperament that would neither flare up nor cave in under the stress of the inevitable publicity, hostility, hassle, and legal proceedings.
It really is an insult that the BBC and other media outlets should use the same word for those who seek reform by peaceful means as they use to describe terrorists. The two categories are opposites.
I’m sceptical about this communist claim. She was deeply religious: a Methodist. It says in the link that in 1996 going to church was one the main ways she spent her time.
Still, I suppose she could have had an early fling with communism. Plenty did.
Mamapajamas,
Regarding guns, I think the Florida laws are right on. What criminal is going to mess with someone with a gun ready to defend themselves? It makes perfect sense. And the bit about the car tags was really smart. Here in Georgia, we have the right to shoot an intruder once they enter the home. But I think there has to be evidence of forced entry. We can also carry around a handgun as long as we have a permit for it. It’s a good idea, especially for ladies, as long as they know how to aim! Btw, regarding Jesse James, I discovered a few years ago that I’m related to him! No joke. But I swear I’m nothing like him!
I believe Rosa Parks’ union was communist-affiliated at one time (Textile Workers). However, if Rosa Parks was ever a commie, what she did in the end was make the world safe for Republican Condi Rice and Billionaire Capitalist Oprah! So, not much of a commie in the end anyways.
As a caucasian German I admire what Rosa Parks did and achieved.
No matter what her political creed was back then – it required a lot of courage to do what she did and I’d like to think that American society is the better for it these days.
Rest in peace, Rosa Parks. You’re a hero.
Yes, I agree Joerg. She did make it a better place. Clinton was right about that in his eulogy.
Bill O’Reilly had two great discussions on “What do blacks owe whites” and “What do whites owe blacks” the past two days.
Yesterday he had Shelby Steele on, today it was Al Sharpton’s turn. Both pretty much followed the same line of thought. Black people have empowered themselves and they’re reaping the benefits now. And it’s not because of socialist organisations like the BBC that happened. Brave people took brave decisions and a whole people got rewarded.
There are loads of middle class black people in the US these days and they’re god fearing as well as focussed on family values. I guess some of us (whites) can learn a lot from them. I never encountered a more closely knit and more caring family than that of my Sweetie’s – and they’re all black.
Re Rosa Parks I should point out that Colin Fox is himself a Communist (Trotskyite version, yes we have half a dozen in the Scottish Parliament) and that these people will exploit anybody and anything. I’d be relieved to have it confirmed that she wasn’t a Communist, though.
I think Natalie’s got it bang right about Rosa Parks. Peaceful, dignified protest in a just cause is unarguable. Which makes me wonder why, say, Yasser Arafat never tried it against Israel.
Clinton was right about that in his eulogy.
Susan
But I wonder how accurate Clintons recollection that, at 9 years of age, following the news of Ms Parks bus demo, he immediately made his own bus stance on the segregated Arkansas school bus & went to sit at the back.
Dan –
Clinton went to the back of the bus but didn’t sit down. That way he left himself some wiggle room.
Maybe we can have an affirmative action bus, where whites have to move to the back?
to: WILL
Mate, you are entitled to your view.
I am entitled to mine. I’d call it fact, as oppposed to Conspiracy theory, we all know this government abuses its power. If ever proof is found, believe you me, they’ll be informed.
I don’t believe a word the Government says.
I also know the Blairs control the legal system in Britain.
I can see the linkage via government.
Perhaps you might care to have a look as well.
You pro Blair supporter, you.
Take it easy.
Take it easy.
Ian Barnes
You too, Ian. Someone has to support Blair – there are very few of us, & I don’t vote Labour because he is not supported by my Labour MP.
But I wonder how accurate Clintons recollection that, at 9 years of age, following the news of Ms Parks bus demo, he immediately made his own bus stance on the segregated Arkansas school bus & went to sit at the back.
Clinton said that? — I only heard part of his speech. What a shameless huckster. I guess I shouldn’t be surprised. I bet he tried to stop the bullets from hitting JFK in Dallas, too.
Susan – yes its true. The guy is really is a star politician.
“I remember, as if it were yesterday, that fateful day 50 years ago,” he said.
I was a 9-year-old southern white boy who rode a segregated bus every single day of my life. I sat in the front. Black folk sat in the back. When Rosa showed us that black folks didn’t have to sit in the back anymore, two of my friends and I, who strongly approved of what she had done, decided we didn’t have to sit in the front anymore. It was just a tiny gesture by three ordinary kids.”
http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=47217
thanks dan
I read that he was furious when he wasn’t invited to give a speech at Ronald Reagan’s funeral. He’s probably waiting for Teddy Kennedy or some other prominent Democrat to die just so he can give a speech at their funeral too.
What a ham. Grade-A honey-smoked pure Virginia porker.