Ho hum, Kofi Annan wins an environmental prize:
‘UN secretary-general Kofi Annan has been given one of the most prestigious environmental awards, the Zayed Prize.
The citation noted his “personal leadership” on sustainable development…
The winners of the prize, which honours former UAE President Sheikh Zayed, share $1m (£564,000); previous awards have gone to Jimmy Carter and the BBC.’
The last paragraph was slightly rodent-fragrant – and the name rang a bell. Is this anything to do with The Zayed Centre for Coordination and Follow-Up? Coincidentally:
“The Centre has also hosted and worked in conjunction with notable personalities such as former presidents Bill Clinton and Jimmy Carter, and French President Jacques Chirac. Its activities have been highly praised by former vice president Al Gore, as well as a wide range of former high-ranking State Department officials. This report reviews the Centre’s activities, lecture series, research, and publications.”
Read more about the Centre here (you knew I was holding something back for dramatic effect, didn’t you?).
In space, no-one can hear you scream. In a princely despotate, no-one can use the prince’s name without government authorisation (intriguing snippet here).
how on earth can an unbiased news reporting agency be credited with anything remotely akin to “personal leadership” on ANYTHING other than the highest standards of journalistic efforts?
especially on controversial and multifaceted issues (such as sustainable development)?
i’m still angry
if that awarding body viewed the historical mistreatment of any group other than jews the way the memri linked article suggests, i doubt that kofi or the bbc would want to be mentioned on the same page with them
and the un is supposed to be the last great hope for mankind (along with the eu, of course)?
we are in dire straits
Strictly speaking, the awarding body and the centre may be two distinct entites. I do however imply that since they exist in what could hardly be called a free society, both are under the control of the same ruler. Should anyone be proud of accepting money from a ruler who allowed the Centre for Follow Up to exist and to use his own name?
toby:
thanks
i’ll have to be more careful
Now I’m really pissed off: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/4533474.stm
Talk about un-biased reporting. Ramadan, love it… Christmas, make fun of it where you can… (says the IBC).
But the piece above is even worse. Quote: “Screenprinter Ben Flynn, who helps run the gallery, said: “Last year we hung a Father Christmas from a noose out of the first floor window – but Westminster City Council made us take it down.”
Stop the BBC scumbags!
I’ve just registered my first ever complaint to the IBC:
“How much lower can your “reporting” get? This is a shame! Keep celebrating “ramadan” but don’t you think you will get away with your anti-christian bias. Your “Whine about Christmas” Have your say was bad enough but this takes the proverbial biscuit. The BBC is nothing more than a shameful pro-Islamist propaganda piece. May your demise come soon and painfully!”
“…Mr Lewis had considered putting up a black Christmas tree “with hand grenades instead of baubles” for the big day. Instead he will visit his mother in London, a fellow Christmas hater, to make sure she is not alone…”
And that comes from an organisation which opposes all wars for the sake of it!
You can sense I am really pissed off now. Time to lay down and rest.
“I think a lot of people think about it but do get trapped in this ritual of having to buy stuff for people when they don’t really want to and having to send out all these cards. I don’t like the insincerity.
“It grows into this huge festival of consumerism… and it indoctrinates children into a consumerist lifestyle.”
Simply stop being a part of that ritual, you moron, it’s your own decision. After all we’re not a socialist society just yet (no matter how much the Beeb wants it).
Lemme know if it’s just me who missed the irony in that piece… I’ve also written an email to John Gibson of Fox News (the guy who wrote the book “The war on Christmas”).
OT
Have you noticed that not only the BBC but other Muslim apologist, like the Guardian, have struggled to hide terrorist’s Muslim identities and have hit upon a novel way to hide the fact that they are Muslims? The new trend seems to be to refer to them by their job titles. The BBC recently referred to a Muslim terrorist simply as a plumber. Today the Guardian calls a Muslim terrorist a “market trader”.
There is a drawback to this approach as there might be a backlash against plumbers, market traders, ets.
I wonder if their unions will rally and call for an end to this discrimnatory practice?
More here:
http://ussneverdock.blogspot.com/2005/12/uk-muslim-planned-revenge-attack.html
0T
I just heard Montague apologizing for something Gen Patrick Cordingley said earlier in the programme which had apparently ’caused offence’. Can anybody enlighten me as I didn’t hear the piece in question.
OT
I had to laugh when i read this:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4554766.stm
Well done BBC for reporting it, because i am a firm believer Cherie will run for MP.
If she didn’t want to, why then all the attempts to cover up the interview?
She’ll try to copy her friend Hilary..
OT:
There have been stories on the front pages all week about the new gay marriages that are now legal in this country.
This multi-cultural country. So when can we look forward to hearing “Muslim community leaders'” take on gay marriage and indeed on homosexuality generally?
Al-BBC is generally very keen on allowing Muslims to have their voice heard. I’d like to hear from them on this one too, and I’d like everyone in the country to hear their view of gays and gay marriage.
What could be holding Al-BBC up?
Ian,
Speaking of Cherie, you may enjoy this vintage story from the Grauniad about what the Blairs really get up to on holiday.
As funny as it is, it is also appalling that a pair of superstitious loonies like these could be allowed to run a bath, much less the country.
Merry Xmas…enjoy:-
Primal therapy
…The Blairs became one with ‘Mother Earth’. They saw the shapes of phantom animals in the steam and experienced ‘inner-feelings and visions’. As they smeared each other with melon, papaya and mud from the jungle, they confronted their fears and screamed…
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Columnists/Column/0,,676703,00.html
Camp Commandant: here’s what’s holding them back • a brick through the window and the same treatment as Rushdie and Van Gogh.
Let’s face it • the BBC doesn’t particularly like either Muslims or gays. If they did, they would be taking sides in the conflict between them. If they really liked Islam, they would be flocking on masse to mosques and emigrating to Islamic countries, but they aren’t.
What the BBC/Guardian types really want is for the intelligentsia to rise to the top of society, to have the most money and power and to have the rest of us dependent on their wisdom and control. Therefore, the BBC hate the things that get in the road of this objective. The real pet hates are:
1. Religions that preach an independent relationship with God (i.e. no need to rely on anyone else) • Protestant Christianity falls into this category and is top of the hate list.
2. The family (if you depend on relatives, you aren’t going to be listening to the intelligentsia).
3. Private business. If you are capable of earning a living independently of the BBC bullies (e.g. as a business owner or as his/her employee) then you aren’t going to be playing to the BBC tune.
The BBC types hate these three groups so much they are pretty much willing to strike an alliance with just about anybody who has any of these 3 as a common enemy (‘the enemy of my enemy is my friend’ type thing). Muslims have been a convenient ally.
Another tactic is striking constant division between people. Christian or Muslim. Men and women. Young and old. Rich or poor. Black or white. Straight or gay.
With that prize money, perhaps Annan can repay the possibly bogus discount he obtained his dear Kojo’s Mercedes.
Questions about it certainly get under his skin – this to a Times journalist
the Secretary General’s patience snapped. “I think you’re being very cheeky,” he exclaimed, and continued: “Listen, James Bone, you’ve been behaving like an overgrown schoolboy in this room for many, many months and years. You are an embarrassment to your colleagues and to your profession. Please stop misbehaving.”
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/newspaper/0,,174-1957485,00.html
some muslims say islam is a religion of peace
some muslims commit violent acts in the name of islam and say islam is a religion of (violent) jihad
is it the bbc’s job to decide which is true (and report/sanitize accordingly), or simply to report events EVEN IF IT MEANS STATING ALSO THAT PERPETRATORS ARE MUSLIM INASMUCH AS THEY “CLAIM” TO BE ACTING AS GOOD MUSLIMS?
I know that the BBC wishes to paint his picture that it was the Uk and US that helped Saddam kill his own.
But do they really have to bury the fact that this man got 15 years for actually helping Saddam by using a genocide story
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/4555000.stm
flying giraffe
I can see that you understand the problem. As I am a small business man. A man .A father. Half Jewish. Half protestant. English. White .Married to a hindu. Comprehensive school educated. Independant thinking Conservative Libertarian, you can see why I have a problem living here.
Where does Cherie Blair come from or actually live? If she stands will she represent that constituency, or simply follow our strange British practice of trying to speak for people from a place she has barely visited and maybe couldn’t even find on a map? Would the bbc please do a story or two on the daftness of this system?