, Yanks (like me) are thankful (but not really surprised) over stories such as this one. Will the Beeb deem it newsworthy? [Note to Beeb lurkers:It’s based an ABCNews poll (PDF) and methodologically sound (PDF). So, why not go ahead and report some good news for a change? I’m still capable of being surprised, even by the Beeb.]
Hat tip: Instapundit
Kerry B
Yanks and the West have been there before. After occupying Germany Nazi guerrillas (the werewolves) were active for years but patience was rewarded. The last vengeful act of a former SS soldier who killed American troops resulted in 700,000 German workers downing tools and demonstrating in favour of democracy and peace.
Bosnian Muslims (not even to mention Kosovan/Kosovar ones) generally have warm, even very warm feelings towards the USA and Americans, too, I imagine for broadly similar reasons to the Afghans. (The anti-american hatred and fervour in some parts of “Republika Srpska” or the “Serb Republic” in Bosnia is, however, palpable.)
It is excellent news – you will let us know if you do notice the BBC report it won’t you!
saudia arabia is about to legally(!) gouge out the eye of an indian worker from trivandrum south india.this in punishment for the accidental loss of an eye by a saudia national.has the bbc covered this story?
Off topic but why has the the BBC taken it upon itself to act as a conduit for conversion to Islam?:
Laptop link-up: Live at the mosque
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4511780.stm
Do you imagine there’ll be a “Live at the Synagogue” session or “Live at the Temple” or, God forbid, “Live at the Church” session.
Don’t hold your breath.
If the “Questiontime” audience is truly a balance of public opinion, then last night’s programme would indicate that the LibDems are the largest party.
P
“Songs of Praise” every Sunday?
OT
Can someone reconcile the statement in this NASA press release
NASA researchers, using data from the agency’s AURA satellite, determined the seasonal ozone hole that developed over Antarctica this year is smaller than in previous years.
With this report on BBC Views Online?
BBC Online “Americas” has room for
Conservative Mayor James West was recalled from his post in Spokane
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/4509142.stm
(Yes that’s that famous metropolis, Spokane.)
But not
Kofi Annan, the secretary general of the United Nations, lied about what he knew of his son’s business activities at the time of the Iraq oil-for-food programme, according to the senior investigator charged with examining his conduct.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2005/12/09/wannan09.xml&sSheet=/news/2005/12/09/ixworld.html
dan writes:
“If the “Questiontime” audience is truly a balance of public opinion, then last night’s programme would indicate that the LibDems are the largest party.”
Some things never change. Whether the BBC actively selects audiences to suit its agenda, or whether it simply refuses to control the maniuplation of them by others, the result is the same: the deliberate promotion of a misrepresentation of public opinion.
And does this achieve anything? Ask David Cameron: elected almost certainly against the instincts of his Conservative voters, who believe his opinions are widely held by the public at large.
Did anyone bring up the subject of the Lib Dems financial donors ? The Times have done some fine reporting on this subject but it haven’t seen it picked up on the BBC as yet.
Last night, whilst Question Time was plowing its Gramscian furrow, and altogether sicker spectacle was to be seen and heard on Newsnight. The subject was the ‘peace campaigners’ who are being held in Iraq by somebody. The BBC has been talking up requests by islamo-nutters (Abu Aqada?) for the release of the useful hostages but the BBC doesn’t ask why people who hate the west and westerners would appeal for the lives of these (useful) idiots. Bruce Kent (formerly Chairman of CND – but not declared as so by the BBC) spoke about how peaceful old Mr Kember is. Then one of the BBC’s interviewers dressed a la Ahmadjinedad (shirt, no tie – probably out of respect) had a cosy tete-a-tete with one Moazzam Begg (described as ” a Briton who was detained by the Americans at Guantanamo”) wherein they agreed that islam was peaceful etc etc et sickeningly-cetera. Can’t the BBC just stop this for a day and give us some real reporting?
OT
Militants/terrorists, terrorists/militants – when you can’t tell the truth you end up scare quoting your own lies:
Israel rounds up 19 ‘militants’
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4513080.stm
“Israel arrested 19 Palestinian militants in raids across the West Bank overnight, the army says.”
The IDF, of course, say they arrested 19 “terrorists”:
http://www1.idf.il/DOVER/site/homepage.asp?clr=1&sl=EN&id=-8888&force=1
.
PJF
The BBC has a long history of misquoting the IDF amongst others. The first line of that piece is: Israel arrested 19 Palestinian militants in raids across the West Bank overnight, the army says.
Whener you see anyhing like that you can bet that the IDF actuallt said something different.
It’s off-topic, but I couldn’t help but notice a story that appeared in most of the news yesterday. The president of Iran stated that it would be fantastic if Israel could be moved to Europe. He also downplays the significance of the holocaust, and claims that Jewish people have used it to make other countries feel sorry for them. Google news reveals that this stance has been swiftly condemned by Kofi Annan, as reported in newspapers and websites as far afield as South Africa, China, New Zealand, India and so forth.
Yet the BBC’s sole report doesn’t appear on the front page of their news website. It appears instead in the sidebar of their Middle East section, as “Iran’s president says move Israel”. A search for the words “Israel” and “Europe” returns this single news story, a short and concise entry, and there are no comment pieces, no polls, no invitations for the public to share their views. And yet it seems quite a nasty thing for the president of Iran to say; I would expect greater coverage.
Dot dot dot. I was struck by this report at Mosnews, a Russian news agency:
http://www.mosnews.com/news/2005/12/09/israeliran.shtml
It is headlined “Russia Dismisses Iranian Leader’s Call to Move Israel to Europe” and reveals that Russia’s foreign minister has declared that Iran’s “proposal” is “unacceptable”.
The thing which alarms me is that… well, the impression I get is that Russia has given the matter some thought, and has actually contemplated the practicalities of moving Israel to Europe. (I am admittedly unsure of the historical context; perhaps the Soviet Union during the Second World War contemplated giving part of Germany to Jewish people, I have no idea, and perhaps they have a dusty sheaf of plans somewhere that Stalin was working on before he died (perhaps dusted off in 1979)).
I envisage a BBC poll in the not-too-near future, entitled “Israel in Europe?”. Maybe it will ostensibly be about whether Israel should join the EU; because a long journey starts with a little step.
It will be accompanied with an editorial article, which will point out that Israel is included in the Eurovision song contest, and that Jewish emigration to Israel has slowed down in recent years, and that there are strong ties between the people of Israel and those of Europe – indeed, many Israelis actuall have European ancestors. There will be a list of famous German Jewish people, with Einstein near the top. There will be polls and opinion pieces and articles and segments in programmes and tie-ins and references and so forth, in order to build up a buzz. The BBC’s stance will have to flip and flop.
The mind swims in a sea of possibilies.
OT:
Today on Radio 5 was the first time I heard Zac Goldsmith described as a “millionaire environmentalist” as oppoed to simply an “environmentalist”.
Nothing to do with the company he now keeps, surely?
BBC journalists are usually very quick to provide their audience with the benefit of their opinion & interpretation.
However, no such explanatory opinion expressed here
The head of the world’s oldest Islamic movement has called for the release of Briton Norman Kember, abducted in Iraq.
“All laws locally and internationally consider kidnapping a crime, particularly when it targets innocent peace activists who are known for their activity and solidarity for the Iraqi cause.”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4514138.stm
Why won’t the BBC (or other media) make clear to their audience that all the pleas for the “hostages” release demonstrate that it is only the anti-democratic & terrorist forces in Iraq that are considered to be “the Iraqi people”?
dan
That piece – MUSLIM GROUP URGES KEMBER RELEASE – also tells us:
The Muslim Brotherhood, while officially banned, is very influential in Egypt, with a surge in support for independents standing on its behalf in last month’s general election.
Oddly enough, that BBC doesn’t regard it important enough to tell us just why the Muslim Bruvverhood is banned in Egypt.
I really don’t think that the BBC will be giving us the results of that Afghan poll. They can give us this though…
“Bush sees Iraq improving” (with no scare quotes, either!)
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/4507410.stm
So it would be reasonable to expect a
“Afghans see Afghanistan improving,” headline, wouldn’t it?
un-news, again.
1327,
Like they won’t be telling us about Charles Kennedy’s financial woes.
un-news.
And the BBC have almost completely ignored Ahmadinejad’s comments denying the holocaust – they tell us he said this…
“If European countries claim that they have killed Jews in World War II… why don’t they provide the Zionist regime with a piece of Europe,”
but the BBC did not tell us he also said this….
“Some European countries insist on saying that during World War II, Hitler burned millions of Jews and put them in concentration camps,” Ahmadinejad said. “Any historian, commentator or scientist who doubts that is taken to prison or gets condemned.”
http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/story/0,1280,-5467117,00.html
That’s from the Guardian, so we know that the BBC has seen it.
un-news.
why is the bbc not reporting this ?,anywhere. http://www.expatica.com/source/site_article.asp?subchannel_id=25&story_id=26036&name=As+many+as+60+cars+still+burn+nightly+in+France
Dan & G Cooper
Re the BeeB’s attitudes to politics
The BBC is not a supporter of ‘New Labour’; it is certainly not Blairite.
I don’t believe they embrace any particular political party.
Judging by John Humphries and ‘Paxo’, I think the BBC despises politicians as a group.
On one hand, it seems to fear those who can harm the cause of the BBC but has contempt for the rest.
I also think the Beeb measures each political party against the BBC’s aggregate of institutionalised attitudes that pass for a philosophy. (I say attitudes because an organisation tends to acquire the outlook of the people who form that organisation)
If there are politicians that the Beeb respects, you tend to find the ‘character’ of that person mirrors the ‘character’ of the BBC (people such as Menzies Campbell(Kt), the late Robin Cook and Shirley Williams • sober, solid citizens with a good line in sanctimonious claptrap and a Masters degree in specious argument). The remainder are wheeled in whenever the BBC needs a good quote or thinks that some ‘line’ needs to be ‘pushed’ (or occasionally somebody is dragged in to be pilloried (shades of a Chi/Com public denunciation), as a ‘comedy turn’, to highlight how ‘daft’ an argument is).
Castro`s Cuba is thier spiritual home.
werter5075
You wrote:
why is the bbc not reporting this ?,anywhere.
The 60 cars being torched every night is just the ‘background count’ (in fact, it might be slightly below normal?) 🙂
(the website
http://no-pasaran.blogspot.com/
is always worth looking at)
If the BBC highlights this, then more awkward questions have to be asked.
Such as Who?
and Why?
and How long has this been going on?
and What is Blaque Jacques Chirac doing about it?
and What was he doing about it before?
All these awkward questions, and more, might have awkward answers. We might learn that people who have been portrayed as ‘Victims in a state of Desperation’ aren’t all they seem.
What a magnificent moment. Radio 5 Live, with Peter Allen and Jane Garvey in the studio just went over live to Montreal and the Climate Change Trough Fest to hear Bill Clinton’s speech.
Cue one Bill Clinton slagging off the Kyoto Treaty and giving the reasons why his administration would not sign up.
20 seconds later cue one Peter Allen apologising that they can’t bring us any more of that!
These Climate Change Fundamentalists want the middle classes out of thier cars, off cheap flights and living in caves. What a shame low cost airlines and cheap cars are catching on like wildfire in India and China!
Ashley Pomeroy
FWIW The Soviet Union (and particularly Stalin) contemplated “moving Israel” not to Europe, but to the very far east of Russia, a inhospitable and previously largely uninhabited and uninhabitable place called Birobidzhan, entitled “The Jewish Autonomous Region”. It still exists (see http://www.eao.ru/eng/?PHPSESSID=787f07eea14cee93520d12dff11fcb6a)
for the webste of the Government of the region. Despite the name, approx 4% of the pop there are Jewish today (source: 2002 census).
The USSR began to institute antisemitic policies from Stalin’s latter years (say 1948-53).
Although the territory was set up in the 1920s (partly as a view to “create a secular Jewish proletariat” – – although the remote location several thousand miles away from where Jews had been permitted to live under the tsarist regime suggests that the intentions were not all so benign…) A major anti-jewish plot (known as the “doctor’s plot”) was in the offing in early 1953 – some historians think that it was planned to enforce the deportation of all jews in the USSR to this place in the far east. (Many far bigger national groups had been moved over similar distances during World War II at stalin’s behest, most notably Chechens, Kalmyks, Crimean Tatars). But Stalin died, so it didn’t happen.
I wouldn’t attribute any remotely similar motives to the present Russian regime, whatever their (many) faults. (You might like to bear in mind that the current PM, Mikhail Fradkov, is ethnically Jewish too, although he does not follow any religion.)
I think MosNews is a bit of a dodgy source, too – as you might be able to sense if you search through much of their website.
[Deleted]
OT
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/default.stm
Currently using a ‘CIA Killed Lennon’ placard as the main picture for a story about the 25th anniversary of Lennon’s death. I don’t think even the most ardent conspiracy theorist believes that one. But the beeb give it prominence with the picture and in the article.
P_L “Cue one Bill Clinton slagging off the Kyoto Treaty and giving the reasons why his administration would (not) sign up.”
That’s interesting, Channel4 News stated specifically that Kyoto was supported by the Clinton administration.
He never was, Dan. Read this peace for a view on the issue: http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2004/01/22/EDG8J4E2CE1.DTL
Very interesting because it shows you what US Democrats are all about.
venichka:
“FWIW The Soviet Union (and particularly Stalin) contemplated “moving Israel” not to Europe, but to the very far east of Russia”
Sergo Beria tells in ‘Beria my Father: Inside Stalin’s Kremlin’
that:
“In February 1944 the Jewish Anti-Fascist Committee[of the USSR] wrote to Molotov to ask for a Jewish republic to be established in the Crimea.
At the beginning Stalin said neither yes or no. But he soon gave preference to the creation of a Jewish state in Palestine – a Socialist state, which,as he saw it, would become an advanced satellite of the USSR in the ME and enable Moscow to expand its influence forward in this oil-rich region.”
N. Rosenberg, the chairman of the American Jewish Joint Distribution Commitee met with leaders of the Jewish Anti-Fascist Committee in July 1943 and Rosenberg spoke of making the Crimea ‘a Jewish California’. This idea had been already been discussed in 1924.
The leaders of the Jewish Anti-Fascist Committee were shot in 1952 having been accused of spying for the US and UK.
Yeah, Pete_london. If I was a muslim terrorist, frankly, I’d be doing business with the Muslim brotherhood. If only to prove the pathetic weakness /ineptness/haplessness of Jack “where’s the nearest fence” Straw.
OT. Charles Moore superbly excoriates sappy peacenik Anglican wimpiness in the face of unfettered muslim aggression…
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2005/12/10/do1002.xml&sSheet=/opinion/2005/12/10/ixopinion.html
It occurs to me that the Archbishop, and other Western church leaders, are indeed promoting a Western political agenda, but it is almost the opposite of the one he described. The agenda – and, in the case of the Anglican Church, this is very closely co-ordinated with the British Government – is to try to placate. Sorry about the Crusades, sorry about George Bush, sorry, sorry, sorry, they say, in the hope that Muslims will start to say sorry, too. But where is the evidence that this pre-emptive self-abasement is working? The grim fact is that the development of Christian/Muslim official dialogue has coincided with much greater Muslim persecution of other faiths than 30 years ago.
Front page on Animal Farm News 24…
under this earth-stopping headline
“UN poised for new climate talks”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4512696.stm
No! Get away!
“Delegates at a UN climate conference in Canada have reportedly agreed on talks to cut greenhouse gases after 2012, but it is unclear if the US is included.”
2012. Agreed on talks.
Hold the front page.
And charge everyone $140 for the privilege.
Quickly, Robin. To the climate conference pole!
Thanks, Dizzzzy, it’s most interesting to see the perspective of what passed for “civil society” in that time and place.
(Obviously the context is that Crimea had just, in 1943 been depopulated, with its entire native population deported in one night to Uzbekistan and other parts of Central Asia. Another contextual point is that in the very early Soviet period – pre-Stalin- there had been nominally autonomous Jewish territories in some parts of southern Ukraine, just west of Crimea – Crimea then was part of Russia, only being transferred to Crimea in 1954)
Given the tensions which have (understandably) resurfaced since the Crimean Tatars have been permitted to return to their “green island” (post-1989) we must be thankful that the Crimea idea never gained the approval of anyone in a position to take a decision on such matters.
The Jewish Anti-Fascist Committee were killed off one-by-one after the State of Israel was established (the fact that the USSR was the first state to offer it full diplomatic recognition), which was when the Soviet antisemitic campaign really hit full speed.
There’s more info on the very bizarre “Zion in the far east” (which today I think has possibly the only daily Yiddish newspaper in the world?) in this book
http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/0520209907/qid=1134180514/sr=8-1/ref=sr_8_xs_ap_i1_xgl/202-2631044-0817428
O/T: ‘BBC to get into Blogging.’
An unnamed spokesperson for the BBC said: “It’s vital for us to get a foothold on to the most marginalised media, news and opinion platform out there. By doing so, we hope to assist in ensuring that this platform and its people will always remain unbroadcasted. After all, we already have the state media and its associated apparatus, the fawning jourmalists, and the all the rest of it; but we still need to challenge and obfuscate information from all other sources,including that of the proles. This is sure to be a good first step.”
“The BBC’s political editor, Nick Robinson, started a blog last week, called Nick Robinson’s Newslog.
His first post includes this text:
[…] The BBC is about to start a trial series of blogs, each of which will be built using the kind of software employed by millions of weblogs around the world. This is the first of that trial.
Robinson’s blog isn’t the first one the BBC has done – earlier this year, there was Newsnig8t by BBC journalist Paul Mason. That, too, was (and still is) hosted on TypePad.
One major difference between the two blogs – Mason’s was very much a personal blog with a look-and-feel that was far from a BBC standard. Unlike Robinson’s, which has the complete BBC branding in its presentation and clearly is a formal part of the overall BBC web presence. Indeed, its root URL (blogs.bbc.co.uk) indicates that.
First podcasting, and now blogging. It looks like the BBC is beginning to embrace new media in a big way as a means of engaging with its viewers/listeners/readers in a variety of different ways, traditional and non-traditional.
Will we see a blog portal, an offering to those viewers/listeners/readers to create their own blogs as part of the BBC blog domain? I think it would make total sense in the engagement process.
Now that would be a very inetersting move indeed and, apart from anything else, could be the tipping point for broadening out the world of blogging in the UK. Tie it in with the calls for people to send in their photos and you have the makings of a great connection between the broadcaster and a ready source of information.
Further blurring of that gap between traditional news creators and citizen journalism.”
A boot in your face forever.
Chinese police open fire on demonstrators in rural town and “seal” it off: where is the BBC coverage? I couldn’t find it on the “Asia-Pacific” news page.
http://news.pajamasmedia.com/world/2005/12/09/6629440_China_Town_Seale.shtml
Simo,
Archbishop Williams should consider himself lucky that the Pakistanis didn’t kill him for mentioning Christianity on a public platform.
I recall that immediately after 9/11 Musharaff was falling all over himself to express his sympathy to the Americans and assure them that he was on their side. I believe that, in his mind, he was forestalling an American attack and that he knew right away the aircraft were piloted by Islam.
He probably thought the Americans would show as little discrimination in their response as the terrorists showed in their murder of people of diverse faiths, races and nationalities in the twin towers.
‘BBC to get into Blogging.’
An unnamed spokesperson for the BBC said: “It’s vital for us to get a foothold on to the most marginalised media, news and opinion platform out there. By doing so, we hope to assist in ensuring that this platform and its people will always remain unbroadcasted.
Not sure I understand this – am I missing something? Is this a spoof? But, if real, was it a misquote? Is the BBC “spokesperson” openly admitting that their main reason for getting into blogging (…we hope to assist in ensuring that this platform and its people will always remain unbroadcasted) is to silence bloggers?
Back to the Afghanistan poll. The Today programme this morning featured at length a remarkably similar poll conducted in Iraq which showed . . . surprise, surprise, exactly the opposite result.
Plenty of airtime for the Iraq poll, none for the Afghan poll. Can anyone suggest a reason for this unfortunate oversight? I’m sure editors throughout the BBC will be analysing why it fell below its lofty standards of balance and fairness.
Subject to the usual caveats about the statistical accuracy of conducting polls in volatile places (i.e. after Taleban/Saddam it’s not hard to imagine that Afghans/Iraqis might be predisposed towards telling pollsters what they think the blokes with the large guns might want to hear) the Iraqi poll results were also very favourable to the pro-war view.
Sure it suggests that Iraqis don’t want the Americans around for too long but that’s hardly surprising – I wouldn’t ideally like aggressive, twitchy blokes with (ahem) enormous weapons patrolling my neighbourhood either. They are also optimistic for the future and keen on democracy.
As someone who has sat on the fence pending further evidence in respect of the wisdom or otherwise of the war, this poll is one of the best arguments I’ve seen in favour.
Cockney, have you had that sensible (right wing) thinking hat of yours on again? 🙂
OT – the BBC is completely misrepresenting the riots in Sydney. Lebanese Muslims severely roughed up two Aussie lifeguards on a beach. Lifeguards are heroes to Aussies. This is after Muslims going to this particular beach and taunting women for wearing bikinis, pretending to play football and kicking the ball over to a mother and child and bullying her if she complains, gang raping teenage white girls. Well, the usual. A bunch of Aussie roughs took on a gang of them, and the Muslim gang quickly mobilised more help over their mobile phones. They then rampaged into neighbourhoods, on one street bashing in 60 cars with baseball bats and beating up anyone who objected.
The Beeb’s report – here – http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/4521442.stm – is intentionally confusing. Read it and see if you could have figured out what was going on without the background I’ve just provided. Would you know who had taken baseball bats to cars and rampaged through neighbourhoods?
In the very last sentence, they happen to mention that some Muslims beat up two lifeguards.
Verity,
This is being discussed in the uppermost thread by several people, including myself who has been monitoring the Aussie blogs and reading the Aussie online coverage since the situation began with the beating up of the lifeguards. Your background is largely correct. The IBC is in full MinTruth spin mode.