starting with the One O’Clock News with Anna Ford – who informed us about the outcome of a government investigation into the crash of an RAF Hercules “Jet” in Iraq (killing ten service people). How many decades has the Hercules (the C130 to our US cousins) been in service? What kind of plane did the Iranians crash just this week? Was it a jet? No. It has four large twirly things called propellors – always has had.
Why is it, that with all of the resources of BBC News, these clowns, all of them, can make and broadcast such a basic error in a major news programme? Don’t they watch the news themselves? Don’t they instinctively know what a Hercules looks like? It wouldn’t surprise me if these people couldn’t recognise a London bus (why yes, it’s small, black and bulbous, paid for on the BBC account, isn’t it? 🙂
Later, on News Twenty-Bore (Sky News having been contemptuously cast aside today – too much Emma Vacuous and Ginny Gormless these days), we have, among other things, Nick Higham, on the subject of hostage-taking in Iraq, informing us that 41 hostages have been “executed” so far. Nick, have some decency old chap – whatever your PC BBC guidelines say, these people were not executed (implying some kind of judicially sanctioned killing), nor even simply ‘killed’ – they were murdered, barbarically so. Please try to remember that.
And then we got to Caroline Haw-Hawley. Oh dear. More to follow…
Can’t argue with the BBC’s intent (though wording murky) on the HoL torture ruling
(Charles Clarke) said the government did not use evidence it knew or suspected had been obtained by torture but the ruling had clarified the appropriate legal test of what was admissable.
Thursday’s ruling centres on how far the government must go to show improper methods if obtaining information from suspects have not been used.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4509530.stm
However despite that 1001 (D)HYS responders think that the ruling will stop the UK prosecutors utilizing evidence that they know to have been obtained by torture (maybe even tortured by UK security forces).
The ubiquitous Sir Ming is perhaps of the same mind
Lib Dem foreign affairs spokesman Sir Menzies Campbell said it was a “landmark judgement”, which would have implications for other cases coming before the courts.
He said it showed “an independent judiciary has once again been more effective in defending individual rights than this government”.
The BBC tells us
Canada’s prime minister has urged the US to “listen to its conscience” and take further steps to reduce emissions linked to global warming.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4508928.stm
They don’t tell us
Kyoto is not working…emissions in 11 countries have grown not shrunk, in Canada, the gap is an embarrassing 30 per cent
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,542-1894254,00.html
Obviously doesn’t embarrass PM Martin (but then he doesn’t appear to be embarrassed – & obvioulsy blameless- about the mis-spending of C$100millions of taxpayer money whilst he was Finance Minister)
Perhaps the BBC knowing about that secret embarrassment is too polite to mention it.
dan
From Mark Steyn this week:
What planet are the eco-cultists on?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2005/12/06/do0602.xml
In the past third of a century, the American economy has swollen by 150 per cent, automobile traffic has increased by 143 per cent, and energy consumption has grown 45 per cent. During this same period, air pollutants have declined by 29 per cent, toxic emissions by 48.5 per cent, sulphur dioxide levels by 65.3 per cent, and airborne lead by 97.3 per cent. Despite signing on to Kyoto, European greenhouse gas emissions have increased since 2001, whereas America’s emissions have fallen by nearly one per cent, despite the Toxic Texan’s best efforts to destroy the planet.
And a couple of weeks ago:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2005/11/29/do2902.xml
These days, the world is full of worriers, forever announcing plans and targets for this and that. And 2012 isn’t that far away. I notice, for example, that signatories to the Kyoto treaty are meeting in Montreal this week – maybe in the unused Olympic stadium – to discuss “progress” on “meeting” their “goals”. Canada remains fully committed to its obligation to reduce its greenhouse-gas emissions by six per cent of its 1990 figure by 2008.
That’s great to know, isn’t it? So how’s it going so far?
Well, by the end of 2003, Canada’s greenhouse-gas emissions were up 24.2 per cent.
Meanwhile, how are things looking in the United States? As you’ll recall, in a typically “pig-headed and blinkered” (Independent) act that could lead to the entire planet becoming “uninhabitable” (Michael Meacher), “Polluter Bush” (Daily Express), “this ignorant, short-sighted and blinkered politician” (Friends of the Earth), rejected the Kyoto treaty. Yet somehow the “Toxic Texan” (everybody) has managed to outperform Canada on almost every measure of eco-virtue.
Surely the BBC would be only to keen to bring this to world-wide attention?
The whole point of ‘Kyoto’ is signing the document. It has absolutely nothing to do with restricting CO2 emissions.
By the way, this is Nick Cohen. He’s a left wing journalist:
http://www.nickcohen.net/?page_id=5
This article appeared in the New Statesman last week:
WHERE HAVE ALL THE PACIFISTS GONE?
http://www.nickcohen.net/?p=53
In short, he looks at splits on the left since 9/11 (the kind of thing Christopher Hitchens has covered) and at how the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament and Searchlight (anti-fascist magazine) have been taken over by the Socialist Worker Party tendency.
It includes this little nugget:
The turmoil in small groups may seem trivial but it reflects the fracturing on the wider liberal left. In classic socialist terminology, we are seeing a fight between “anti-imperialists” and “anti-fascists”. The anti-imperialists see US power as the greatest threat of our day. The reckless brutality of the Bush administration appals them, as does Tony Blair’s willingness to go along with it. This view so dominates the mainstream liberal press and parts of the BBC that it often seems like the only left-wing view. The danger for the anti-imperialists is that they will end up on the far right. A few are already there. The anti-fascists see totalitarianism as the greatest threat of our day and say that in the struggle against it any democracy is better than every dictatorship. Our voice dominates only the left-of-centre weblogs.
Obviously doesn’t embarrass PM Martin (but then he doesn’t appear to be embarrassed – & obvioulsy blameless- about the mis-spending of C$100millions of taxpayer money whilst he was Finance Minister)
Notice the lack of words like ’embattled’ when they are talking about leaders they like even if they’re corrupt.
If you want to be a clever dickie, then I suggest you should look what is behind those twirly things called propellers. Yes- a jet engine.
0/10 pedantry
t
The C130 is great aircraft in which I have been lucky to fly in.
Whilst Mr Hatfield’s allusion to the fact that the C130 has turbo prop engines is useful, I do not think the point he is trying to make detracts from the criticism made.
Notwithstanding its engine, the C130 is propelled by its propellers and not by its a jet eflux. I think this is the distinction most people understand and was one I certainly understood as a child raised on an air force base.
I have no expertise here, but I seem to recall old commando comics pitting the poor old spit against the ruthless hun in his me262 jet. The herc’s got props, four big ones. It’s not a jet.
Thank you Esbonio for out-pedanting TH – there’s always one clever-dickie, to use his own term, isn’t there.
Yes, TH, I know about turbo-props – but I don’t expect Anna Fraud to be that up on aviation. I do expect her to know that a Hercules isn’t a ‘jet’ though, not in the way that she and the general public use the term.
Still, thank you TH for at least posting an on-topic comment – it’s more than the usual crowd of “Biased-BBC as Chat Forum” have bothered to do! 🙂
P.S. TH, having reviewed your blog with a similarly pedantic eye, I’m surprised that you feel the need to point out that you were a criminal advocate – advocate would have sufficed! 🙂
Here, for Anna and Tony, is another famous American military jet:
http://www.army-technology.com/projects/abrams/
In low flight:
http://www.1800goguard.com/images/nascar_desktops/FlyingTank_1024x764.jpg
.
Dear Prof. Hatfield,
for a comparison of jet engine vs propeller see
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jet_engine and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propeller_engine
O/T: Censorship alert at (D)HYS:
http://newsforums.bbc.co.uk/nol/thread.jspa?sortBy=2&threadID=542&edition=2&ttl=20051208201742&#paginator
The top recommended post in this thread yesterday was one that was highly critical of Islam, but not extreme. It’s been removed.
Any idea what it said Susan? The top recommendation just now isn’t exactly complimentary! Sadly Google’s cache doesn’t contain a copy.
Andrew,
It was something which dwelt on how Islam divides the world up into infidels and Muslims (which is true BTW). But I couldn’t recreate it from memory, alas.
“Still, thank you TH for at least posting an on-topic comment – it’s more than the usual crowd of “Biased-BBC as Chat Forum” have bothered to do!”
I do my best!
t
Since posting here, my SITEMETER has gone mad. Must be contrails
I think the Canadian Prime Minister might be attacking the USA over Kyoto precisely because Canada’s record is so poor. Shame the BBC deliberately decided to ignore this basic political ruse and report his speech in the most credulous way possible.
Anyway, good to see the BBC encouraging our deadliest enemies in their attempt to become more media friendly (i.e. not slitting the throat of unfortunate Jewish victims live on television):
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4508640.stm
They also get in some quality anti-war and anti-US copy too.
BTW, The commentator’s name was Something Koehler. The Beeb left a response to Koehler in the thread — proof that it was there originally:
If there is any truth at all in Mr Kohler’s unenlightened words, it can be attributed not to Islam, but to the social structures of the Arab world which, if we are to call them wrong, we cannot do so with some degree of guilt. Centuries of Western arrogance, embodied most notably by the clumsy colonisation of the Middle East, has resulted in the stunted progression of its countries. Therefore Mr Kohler, I say to you two things: do not confuse the Middle East with Islam; and secondly, if, from the snug comfort of Washington, you do point such simplistic accusations at the ‘backwards’ ethics of Arab world, look a little further and you shall find your own society is perhaps the deeper cause.
Rich, Oxford
Earlier I saw an ultra-positive article on the BBC site about the Muslim Brotherhood’s success in the Egyptian elections. I was in work so couldn’t post on it. Surprisingly (or not surprisingly) this article has disappeared from the BBC website and the following has taken its place:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4510608.stm
What struck me was thinking about how the BBC would have reported the success of the Nazi’s in the German election of 1930. It’s a shame the article has been removed, because it struck me that the BBC could have written the same thing about the fledgling Nazi party in 1930, i.e. lies about being dedicated to non-violence and democracy, etc. It was truly a disturbing article.
Ah, Oxford, joint-capital of “Western Guilt” along with Islington in London. How strange that South Korea can recover from “Western Imperialism” in a mere 40 years, whereas the Middle East is still “stunted” 900 years after the First Crusade! Who knows, perhaps SOMETHING happened in the intervening years.
Susan, I had a look at the highly-recommended posts on the ‘Islamic Extremism’ topic and was encouraged to see that most of them are critical of radical Islam, some using strong language.
I hope those who came out of the closet as ex-Muslims wont attract any fatwas.
“Amid widespread interest in Islam, the BBC News website is hosting a live laptop link-up from one of the biggest mosques and community centres in London…”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4511780.stm
Huh? Widespread interest in Islam by who? Muslims? Are they trying to convert us to Islam now? Wouldn’t surprise me at all. What’s next? A virtual mosque so we can all pray to Allah? This is getting scary!
Islam is integrated into the State, unlike other faiths which are separate from the State. This is all down to Mohamed who declared himself ruler of the State and made Islam a state religion. If people want to follow the Muslim faith they should leave it at that, but they can’t because they are told they must do everything in their power to convert others to Islam with the aim of making the state Islamic. It is a precondition of their religion and that is why it will always have difficulty existing in a secular society such as the UK.
If the BBC wants balance how about link ups to Sikhs, Hindus, and Buddhists?
d_g: That’s why I call it the IBC (Islamic Broadcast Corp.). Imagine a “live laptop link” to a Christian church. Unthinkable.
Anybody who didn’t know anything about Britain would think it was (already) an Islamic country, if all they did was read the IBC’s website. This is truly the message that the IBC puts out there. I’m amazed that British people put up with this relentless IBC proselytizing for a foreign ideology that has NOTHING to do with the august culture or history of Great Britain.
Is it within the IBC’s charter to proselytize relentelessly for a single religion? If not they are clearly in violation of that remit.
I think that Kember sounded very composed, & his comrade almost laid back, in delivering their captives demands in their video.
Alltogether more relaxed than the victim of a different kidnapping, where we saw the anguished face of the US contractor, now thought dead.
Is this a pantomime that nobody in the media dare comment upon? – (alternatively I’m consumed by a conspiracy theory)
Susan: I’m expecting to see the half moon on the IBC website anytime now. I’m with you on the IBC theme, by the way. They are simply shameful.
It’s official then. They are now the IBC. Good name for them.
Susan writes:
“I’m amazed that British people put up with this relentless IBC proselytizing for a foreign ideology that has NOTHING to do with the august culture or history of Great Britain.”
The problem is why we’re here. There is nothing we can do about it. The BBC is utterly beyond the control of the people who pay for it. Even if we elect a different government, the BBC rolls along, pursuing its own goals, absolutely oblivious of dissenting opinion.
Which is why, personally, I believe it should be closed down. It is a perfect example of taxation without accountability.
The BBC seems to have taken upon itself the roles of both publicity agent and minder to islam.
Whether this is because the BBC is financially involved with Arab and other muslem countries, or whether it’s because the BBC currently finds islam ideologically useful, remains to be seen.
With regards to the Rich, the Oxford chap whining about how western “imperialism” kept Arab societies down, perhaps he should know that it was actually the Ottoman Empire which colonised that part of the world – a presence lasting several hundred years as opposed to a few decades in the case of Great Britain and france.
And there’s no prizes for guessing the religion of the Ottoman Empire. (Hint: It wasn’t Bhuddism)
I have been having similar thoughts about the Kember “kidnapping” for days.
It’s too “clean” by far. And now we have the moslem bloke locked up in Belmarsh making all the right noises at just the right time.
We even have the death of the American just to up the pressure.
I hate conspiracy theories, but to me, something just doesn’t smell right.
And I’ve never trusted “peace” activists who clearly put themselves in danger.
Hardly very peaceful.
“Imagine a “live laptop link” to a Christian church. Unthinkable.”
Susan, every Sunday there is a national TV broadcast from a Christian church service.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/programmes/songsofpraise/
Although I share concerns about the BBC’s selectively favourable coverage of Islam, I don’t think there’s any need to lose sight of the fact that the BBC does reflect the Christian aspect of British culture.
But anyway, thank God we don’t have to put up with exploitative commercialism on the BBC:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/programmes/songsofpraise/album2005.shtml
.
To the BBC it seems that only western states can commit murder.
the execution of a serial killer by the the US is “murder by the State”.
Those who hold candle lit vigils outside the gates of the prison are “peace activists”. No mention of course that candle lit vigils mught be held for the victims.
When westerners are brutally murdered by decapitation by Islamists, however this is labelled as “Execution by milants”.
The word terrorist is subjudice except when its targets are “star” BBC employees such as Gardner. the closet muslim convert.
As a poster above stated, the BBC is indeed a state within a state similar to the stalinist press or the Goebels propaganda machines of yesteryear.
Anyone with a modicum of logic and common sense can see this and i’m convinced that the silent majority in the UK realise all this.
the question is “Does it still fulfill its role as a propaganda instrument for the Foregn Office et al, or has it actually broken away and acting independantly?”
PJF
It is perfectly possible that I am wrong, but I dimly remember something about the BBC being compelled in its charter, to put out some form of religous broadcasting. AKA the ‘Godslot’.
I think you’re correct, Paulc. I think it’s also part of the BBC’s charter to promote diversity, or some variant buzzphrase.
Still, Songs of Praise isn’t a news story. Neither is the occurrence of Islamic religious activity in mosques. So one wonders just what the feck justification the BBC had for that pathetic puff piece being a featured article on its online news service.
That old laptop mosque thingie had THIS:
Tim Smith, United Kingdom, asks what Muslims would think about councils banning the word Christmas out of fear of offending Muslim residents.
Sheikh Mansour says: “I am shocked – I had not heard of this happening. This shouldn’t happen. Every faith has its special occasions and we must all recognise this and respect one another.”
Well Sheikh M must be the only bloke in the UK who does NOT read the papers or watch the TV as almost every day there are reports of yet more Political Correctness being displayed – usually by officius wee beggars who are not even Muslims. The trouble is, the Muslims get the blame for the actions of some half witted Town Hall non-Muslim worker who makes a decision on their behalf without asking what they might think…..
Deep Diver,
Strange how quickly the Arabs have forgotten their very recent history —
In exchange for Arab recognition of Israel, the Allied powers, in 1919, agreed to the eventual sovereignty of almost 20 Arab states, covering vast oil-rich lands, after a period of mandatory oversight by European powers. The Europeans would proceed to draw the borders of their respective mandates and, in essence, create the system of Arab states that would emerge out of the remnants of the old Turkish Ottoman Empire. In 1922, a couple of years after the Conference, in a land for peace deal, the British would split Mandatory Palestine into an Arab and a Jewish Mandate using the Jordan River as the line of demarcation. The Arabs were granted East Palestine, or Transjordan, which would later become Arab Jordan while West Palestine, or Cis-Jordan, would become the Jewish National homeland of Israel