I thought I’d create a special post to recognise something from the BBC website which is very interesting. Paul Reynolds has taken, in his opinion articles, to updating by means of clearly bracketed insertions into the main text. Further from stealth editing it would not be possible to get. This latest piece is currently featuring alongside the BBC’s top story, the cartoon controversy. I’m interested to know what people think of this, and no doubt Paul would be too. In principle I think it would be a massive step forward for BBConline if it became the norm and not the exception. The current article includes among its updates some of the things the internet has uncovered about the Danish Imams delegation, including the origin of the ‘Muhammed with a pig’s face’ cartoon- sourced back to one of France’s quainter traditions: the pig squealing competition.
Regarding the Reynolds analysis, I think that the BBC are still underplaying the role of the Danish Imams in conjunction with the diplomats of various Middle Eastern countries. It is, for Reynolds, only ‘one aspect’, and very much the fag end of his analysis. I was interested in this Winds of Change analysis, which went further even than I have in alleging conspiracy. One other thought: Reynolds says, regarding the fake cartoons, that ‘Western diplomats appear to have missed this entirely’. It is hard to apportion blame, but somewhere along the line governments depend on the media to pick up news and publicise it. The BBC should have been questioning their sources for a story that they’ve been covering on and off for five months. The BBC should have been looking in detail at the Danish cartoons: this was not a matter for intelligence, but media diligence and scepticism.
“Paul Reynolds has taken, in his opinion articles, to updating by means of clearly bracketed insertions into the main text.”
yeah , noticed that myself. rather like the common “UPDATE:” meme that you see on blogs.
maybe Paul “gets it”. so far, i have had little to complain about his articles – very fair, balanced, all views covered. and he doesnt try to spin his own angle. he just REPORTS.
i like it. more of it please.
i especially like this bit:
“Update: A reader has e-mailed to say that the original of the “pig” picture was from a “pig-squealing” competition held in France every summer.”
thats paul being honest – a reader, a “source” , updated him with more information, and he’s credited that.
thus, i would guess, it would encourage freelance amateurs to send more info over to Paul so that he can flesh out stuff he’s writing about – THATS important. one central tenet in blogging is that you credit your sources. maybe we’re seeing in Paul the first BBC melding of professional journalism with amateur blogging. perhaps.
overall ,i like his approach – i really do.
just one more thing on this, and i dont know if its connected to Pauls style of article – but the fact that Jonathan Dimblebey on Any Answers last week, didnt even know about the fake cartoons and the Danish imam tour shows that the Beeb had seriously bad researchers feeding Mr Dimblebey the proper , full, information surrounding the issue. It was unbelievable that the fake cartoons were never mentioned – even the Danish Prime Minister knew about them and was furious about it.
If that is the case, maybe Paul is doing the right thing and is trying to break out of the BBC bubble, and thus not be caught out , like Mr Dimblebey was.
Just a thought.
I don’t think Any Questions/Answers has researchers personally – I suspect if they did they would identify the interest groups represented by the callers, since few are real members of the public as opposed to interest groups who use the programme to get airtime.
Yes, a great idea to update electronic articles (easily), like people do in the blogosphere already.
There is no excuse with electronic copy, not to do so, and I also hope it catches on.
This programme has been inserted for broadcast Thursday 9th on BBC Radio 4. The fake cartoons were mentioned in the trailer. (They have clearly substituted it for Open Country)
13:30
Open Country
9 February 2006
Malcolm Brabant travels to Copenhagen to investigate the origins of the dispute over the Prophet Mohammed cartoons.
On the surface it looks like a question of freedom of speech versus religious issues, but there are more complex elements on both sides of the argument.
As Malcolm Brabant learns, the reaction from the Muslim community has been fuelled by anger about the way immigrants have been treated in Denmark for decades.
Followed by News.
If you’re reading this Paul, great work! I’ve been following Biased BBC over the past 6 months or so. It’s always been good when you’ve dropped in to give your opinions on the news and the way its reported.
I like the way you’ve updated your article and it makes it nice and clear what new information has come to your (and now our) attention.
Altogether, a nicely balanced piece. You’ve given both sides of the argument. While I may agree more with Melanie Phillip’s outlook, I appreciate being able to read both points of view.
Excellent.
Jphn writes:
“As Malcolm Brabant learns, the reaction from the Muslim community has been fuelled by anger about the way immigrants have been treated in Denmark for decades.”
On R4 today the trails for this programme put it rather differently. This is not a verbatim quote but the words were something like ‘…or is it the way Denmark’s immigration poilicy has been implemented?’
I have to confess that my first thought was: ‘Or is it because Denmark had an immigration policy at all and voluntarily admitted people who had absolutely no claim on its society and whose religious beliefs were fundamentally incompatible with Danish values?’
they didnt have an immigration policy. the Danes have one of the most liberal societies on the planet.
lets face facts – the problems started when the muslims came in. not when the hindus, or sikhs or vietnamese or chinese or whatever came in. they all integrated or generally didnt really bother the danes too much. the muslims didnt.
end of story. thats the problem.
GCooper – That was going to be my point. Denmark didn’t have colonial links with any of these hellholes, yet it accepted immigrants to whom it owed absolutely nothing, zero, zilch, nada, rien. I have a sneaking suspicion that the Danish electorate, like the Brits and the Dutch and everyone else in Europe, had no say in this.
This seems to have been some weird – and I will even say sinister – agreement among European/British governments and the Arab League. I haven’t read Bat Ye’or’s book, but I believe she gives safe evidence that stands up to scrutiny for this.
I imagine Paul Reynolds reads blogs and appreciates their value to the professional journalist.
I suspect that many ‘dead-tree’ and broadcast journalists (Bob Fisk has said as much) are a tad snooty and see the blogosphere as a rather grubby assemblage of amateurs, conspiracy theorists, loons and bigots.
They may be correct to do so in some cases but blogs are a highly dynamic source of information (can a source be ‘dynamic’?). Journalists also know that they cannot afford to be sloppy with their facts or how they present them because the eagle-eyed blogger will be onto them like a flash.
I had the ‘pleasure’ of following his set-to with Scott Callahan over the Libby/Wilson affair, and mighty enjoyable it was too, though probably not for the protagonists. Their arguments were sometimes heated but the debate was a sophisticated one and the tone was always respectful.
OT.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4424118.stm
Dr Kalim Siddiqui;
“The Muslim Parliament was a political institution which would govern Muslims for themselves on the understanding that the rest of society doesn’t want to know them – and if that’s the case, then that’s how they should live,” recalls Ehsan Masood, a journalist at the time for the Muslim magazine, Q News.”
http://www.muslimedia.com/ks-memorial.htm
Dr Kalim Siddiqui on “the global Islamic movement: outline of a grand strategy”
“I joined gangs of Muslim boys who beat up Hindu boys and threw stones at trains carrying British troops.”
“Relief subbing at the Guardian”
(ho ho ho)
“In Iran the leadership of the ulama, especially of Imam Khomeini, and a continuous ijtihad, have produced results that, if repeated in other parts of the world of Islam, would lead to a global Islamic Revolution. ”
Is that scary? sorry if its not – I’m not that studious. Just thought it would be interesting to get your opinions.
Hmmmm … scary? We think only in intent … or foolish, impossible dreams. Are there enough camels in the world for the whole world to produce enough camel dung when the world reverts to cooking over camel dung fires? Are there enough camels in the world to carry the world’s tourists from country to country in caravanserais? Given that there would be no more planes or cars built? And one would be extremely fearful of travelling in any vehicle built in a Muslim country.
Rob White, you have not explained to us why the advanced and secular West would have the faintest interest in this option.
“have a sneaking suspicion that the Danish electorate, like the Brits and the Dutch and everyone else in Europe, had no say in this.”
i would guess – the European Union forced them to have their “quota” of muslims maybe?
it is indeed bizarre that several hundred thousand muslims would end up in Denmark. i can understand it in terms of the British commonwealth, or the Dutch Indonesian empire – but denmark?
who the hell in the Middle East has denmark invaded? was there some vast Danish empire that enslaved millions of muslims i didnt know about?
and indeed your point on whether this was put to a vote is valid – who the hell decided that this was good idea? were the danes asked for their opinion on this?
my guess is that it was the European Union.
“Is that scary? sorry if its not – I’m not that studious. Just thought it would be interesting to get your opinions.”
i thought that the Muslim parliament has been disbanded and now the MCB with “Sir” Eggball Scrawny , being the current flavour of the month amongst the dhimmified political elite.
At first glance it’s easy to be fooled into thinking that these rioting Muslims we see on our screens are avid readers of the international press, of course they are not, almost all of them are illiterate. Muslim literacy is actually the biggest problem according to Spengler here in a fascinating article.
Why can’t Muslims take a joke?
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/HB07Ak02.html
More than any people on Earth, the Danes should know the terrible price of religious humor, for the first great Christian humorist arose from their dour midst as if by immaculate conception. “Humor is intrinsic to Christianity,” wrote Soren Kierkegaard, because “truth is hidden in mystery”. But Kierkegaard the humorist was sent to the Danes after the Enlightenment had laid waste to Christianity, that is, after the French revolutionary army had conquered traditional Europe. He wielded humor out of desperation, after Denmark already had started down its long slide toward secularism.
Re: immigrants in Denmark. A revealing interview from 2000 with a Danish Red Cross worker, Carina Hildegard Gundersen, regarding Islamic activities within refugee camps outside of Copenhagen , has some gems and insights, if your stomach can wade through the wnd junk
http://w114.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=19100
To the archduke – our royal greetings! That their laughable “parliament” has morphed – these people think long term; they don’t have anything else to think about- into “sir” siqbal’s outfit had escaped our royal notice.
All part of a long-term plan and the British let it happen rather than appear “intolerant”. When one is at war, one must be intolerant of the enemy. That is our personal experience. It’s best not to take prisoners. Less mess later. Otherwise, you’re cleaning up forever. As with Saddam. Shoot him in his little cess tank. The tolerance of the suicidal.
Still no “Abu Hamza” your reaction… I wonder why.
And now indonesians (muslims) are angered by the Playboy Bunny:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/4689054.stm
Cute!
It wouldn’t be: Abu Hamza – your reaction; but Abu Hamza – your tributes. Surely you know how this works by now?
Folks, I have close friends in Denmark. I have been listening to their descriptions of what has been going on there with the Muslim population for years.
According to my friends, the situation of the Muslims immigrants there is the same as anywhere in Europe, but more accute because Denmark is such a small country — they were welcomed in at first, they were given generous welfare benefits, free healthcare, education, and every opportunity to blend in with a peaceful and prosperous Western society.
Some did, but many (most?) did not. These non-assimilating immigrants started in with the usual: honor killings, gross sexual harassment of “slutty” non-Muslim women, lots of violent crime directed against the non-Muslim population (in a nation where crime levels were previously startingly low to non-existent); low participation in the job market; demands for sharia implemented piece-by-piece; refusal to intermarry with the existing population in favor of importing cousin-spouses from the “old country” — an abuse of family reunification laws that resulted in a mushrooming of the original Islamic immigrant population from a few thousand to more than 200,000 today. Imams went on Danish television and bragged openly that the Muslims would “outbreed” the Danes and then take over their society and implemement sharia, including the killing of apostates. One Imam stated openly that Danish women “deserved” to be raped because of their manner of dress. (Do a Google on this, you’ll get more detail.) There was a brutal gang-rape of a 13-year-old retarded girl by Muslims a few years ago that caused a lot of angst. Muslims threw stones at participants in a Gay Pride parade — another incident that caused the natives to get restless.
This is what stimulated Denmark to vote a center-right coalition in place in the government, which enacted some mild — I emphasize VERY MILD — laws to restrict the importation of the cousin-brides.
It sounds like the Beeb is all set to do one of their patented, ignorant and inflammatory hack-jobs against Denmark. All the more reason for us to band together and “Buy Danish.”
It should be noted that my friends are former left-wingers who voted socialist and social democrat for years previous to the aggressive Islamic actions against their country.
I should also add that Danish people aren’t “racists” — one of the Princes of the Royal Family married a Chinese woman and has two bi-racial sons with her. The Chinese princess is extremely popular in Denmark.
Also I noticed many Orientals working in shops while I was there a few years ago and they seemed perfectly happy and well0assimilated.
I was also treated to a scene of numerous Arab Muslim immigrant able-bodied men — Palestinians, I was told — sitting in the middle of the town square, smoking hookahs for hours whilst the rest of the town went about its business on a workday.
Another factoid about the Muslim population in Denmark: despite making up less than 5 percent of the population, they suck a whopping 40 percent of the country’s welfare benefits!
Of course, none of this background will be provided by the Beeb — while they concentrate on putting out a politically correct hatchet job on Denmark.
That’s because multi-culturalism trumps, Susan… we’re not going to assimilate you, you may assimilate us.
Perhaps one day the burghers of Denmark will realise that their country does not exist for these Muslim fanatics; they see no more than a village offering food, health care and paying them benefits as a kind of tribute – like the Treaty of Hudaibiyah – and one day they will happily assent to a reversal of roles as Islam replaces their secular society with a religio-political creed to replace the vacuity where Christianity once stood.
If they need a guidebook they could read “Biedermann und die Brandstifter” a nice book which shows how the middle class nurtures its enemies and then seems bewildered when they turn on it.
Kudos to Mr Reynolds for this. He’s clearly one of the better journalists at the BBC.
I was reading this article concerning the imprisonment of Mr Hamza. I found the ordering strange. It begins thus:
“He has already been in jail since May 2004, and will appeal. His lawyer said he considered himself “a prisoner of faith” subject to “slow martyrdom”.
…
Passing sentence at the Old Bailey, Mr Justice Hughes told Abu Hamza: “I do not make the mistake that you represent Islamic thinking generally”.
It is only from mid-way down that we get to read of the crimes committed by Mr Hamza.
Perhaps this is a stylistic format rather than an example of deliberately emphasising some points over others: namely that he could be a matyr and that his views don’t represent the mainstream of muslim opinion.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/4690224.stm
http://tinyurl.com/82epm
Matthew D’Ancona is much less Blairite today……
“I do not make the mistake that you represent Islamic thinking generally”.
Well that is an intersting thought, inspired more by wishful thinking than in-depth appreciation, I presume
What’s with all this cap-doffing, forelock-tipping deference to Paul Reynolds? At most, he’s a second-rank journalist, not productive or perceptive or distinguished in any way. Very “B form”. Yet you slather praise…
Are today’s welfare-state Brits now just natural born serfs conditioned to a life of clutching at straws and waiting for the next crumb? Sure looks that way.
The Today Programme – two snippets.
The “political” head of Hamas is allowed to give a party political broadcast on behalf of his new look, Beeboid-friendly organisation.
Conclusion of Hamas: It’s all the fault of the Jews
Conclusion of the BBC: It’s all the fault of the Israelis
Later, Peter Hitchens and Lindsay German are interviewed about the old left, socialism etc. Question: The comments of which of these two reduced the interviewers to sniggers?
Answer: Well it wasn’t the one who supports suicide bombings in Iraq and thinks Israel should disappear.
Well Paul Reynolds seems to be making increasing sense, and others have pointed out that Justin Webb has been fairer lately.
Can pressure from blogs like this be making a difference?
re what Eamonn said above
from the today site:
“Is the left wing obsolete in British politics? Mail columnist Peter Hitchens and Lindsey German of the Socialist Workers Party join us.”
so the today program insinuates that Mr Hitchens is extreme right as much as the SWP is extreme left, whereas a BNP v SWP matchup would has been vastly more appropriate.
Funny considering Peter Hitchens was a Trot at York University who has now reformed with maturing years
Looks like a ‘plumber’ in the picture:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/talking_point/default.stm
“If they need a guidebook they could read “Biedermann und die Brandstifter” a nice book which shows how the middle class nurtures its enemies and then seems bewildered when they turn on it.”
There’s another book which sounds as if it is along the same lines, although it is a bit more infamous, called “The Camp of the Saints”, by a man called Jean Raspail who is French.
It’s about how European society becomes overwhelmed by asylum-seekers, although it is condensed into a much shorter time-scale than real life. It was written back in 1973.
The BBC’s major thesis is that Abu Hamza is unrepresentative of islam which is a religion of peace. That is what is being broadcast incessantly.
I watched with disbelief the hatchet job on Denmark on Newsnight last night. That really was toxic material, not for the false impression of the danish people, but for the INTENT behind the lies.
Then when I wake up to Radio 4 in the norning, I hear “the prophet mohammad”. I don’t think so!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biedermann%5Fund%5Fdie%5FBrandstifter
http://pedia.nodeworks.com/B/BI/BIE/Biedermann_und_die_Brandstifter/
The Finsbury Park Mosque is apparently more “inclusive” now:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4690132.stm
“Inclusive” is the BBC’s favourite word. But how “inclusive”, I wonder? Does the local Church playgroup meet there? Will the Finsbury Feminist Society ever be permitted through the door? What are the odds of a Jewish person, or a homosexual, lasting more than 30 seconds there?
“Inclusive” is a relative term, BBC. Please make it clear what it may mean, don’t just print this man’s comment as gospel truth (or Koranic truth). At least put it in scare quotes, for goodness sake.
ot
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4691958.stm
i think this is one of the best covered stories of late by the BBC news team. They are asking very good questions of the Police and Home Office.
However, when i saw this last night i was somewhat taken aback
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/4688554.stm
Mrs king’s funeral should have been politics free. Instead one gentleman decided to criticise the president over WMD, which conveniently the Clinton’s were on hand to ‘diffuse and make it look like we were the good guys’.
I must say to the Clinton team, very bad of you making politics at a funeral. Its cheap and if the truth gets out it will blow up in your faces.
There appears to be a bit of a transatlantic tussle at the moment, the british ambassador to the US, releasing sensitive emails pointing the finger at Bush, and now this?
Followed by the FBI saying that the British govt knew about Hamza and al quaeda links to the mosque in question?
all interesting stuff….
Appologies if these have already been posted, Iv’e not been able to access blogger for the past 24 hours. All links come via Jihad watch:
http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/010066.php#comments
http://www.memritv.org/search.asp?ACT=S9&P1=1024
Hamas Leader Khaled Mash’al at a Damascus Mosque: The Nation of Islam Will Sit at the Throne of the World and the West Will Be Full of Remorse • When it’s Too Late
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/newspaper/0,,171-2028033,00.html
A majority regard the Jewish community and its links to Israel with suspicion. More than half both think that it is right to boycott Holocaust Memorial Day and believe that the Jewish community has no interest in the plight of the Palestinians and has too much influence over British foreign policy.
Nearly two fifths (37 per cent) believe that the Jewish community in Britain is a legitimate target “as part of the ongoing struggle for justice in the Middle East”. Moreover, only 52 per cent think that the state of Israel has the right to exist, with 30 per cent disagreeing, a big minority. One in six of all Muslims questioned thinks suicide bombings can sometimes be justified in Israel, though many fewer (7 per cent) say the same about Britain. This is broadly comparable to the number justifying suicide attacks in ICM and YouGov polls of British Muslims after the July 7 attacks.
The YouGov poll revealed that a majority of Muslims do not believe that they are treated equally or fairly by British political leaders.
However, according to Populus, 12 per cent of 18 to 24-year-old Muslims believe that suicide bombings can be justified here, and 21 per cent in Israel. A fifth of all Muslims, and a quarter of men, say suicide attacks against the military can be justified, though only 7 per cent say this about civilians.
Supporters of violence remain a small minority, but a wide gulf remains over the fundamentals of freedom of speech and democracy
“What’s with all this cap-doffing, forelock-tipping deference to Paul Reynolds? At most, he’s a second-rank journalist, not productive or perceptive or distinguished in any way. Very “B form”. Yet you slather praise…
Are today’s welfare-state Brits now just natural born serfs conditioned to a life of clutching at straws and waiting for the next crumb? Sure looks that way.
gusset | 08.02.06 – 8:28 am | # ”
Gusset,
This site is dedicated to eradicating the bias in BBC reporting. Paul Reynolds has taken onboard the views of people that post on this site and started producing balanced articles. In my opinion, this is to be commended.
You’re entitled to your view, but for the record, I’m not on the dole and certainly not a ‘serf’.
Incedentally on the Nick Griffin caes:
Am I the only one who thinks he’s having a fine old time knowing that he can be an evil bastard by simply repeating Islamic texts. His defence will always be “Im just qouting from texts freely available in mosques”
Almost exactly the same as Abu Hamza saying the same stuff but in the case of Hamza he wants people to go out and do what he’s saying.
I wonder of in future Imans will start their little talks, after the cake and scones have been passed around, by saying ” It’s fascinating, just yesterday I read that “we should kill the unbeleivers where ever we find them etc”. It makes you think doesnt it. Also our fancy dress this year is Palestinians through the ages, you will find authentic Palestinian costumes and accesories on th e way out”.
I wonder is there a way we can discuss Islam without seeming like evil bastards? Or without fearing for our lives? This beeing what the Jylands press tried to deal with and which the BBC out of “respect continue to run away from.
Then again maybe Ali Sina is actualy Jihn Simpson is disguise.
regarding this story:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4691958.stm
there was a documentary a few years ago, channel 4 i think, that revealed that the french secret service , fed up with MI5 dhimmitude, actually sent a surveillance team to what they termed, “Londonistan”, without the knowledge of the British authorities. That was surveillance – the next stage was to send a hit squad, if the terrorists attacked Paris.
O/T
Now this is amusing:-
http://www.inminds.co.uk/islamophobia-awards-2003.html#t5
If you support the right of Israel to exist you are islamophobic.
As a non-jew I wholeheartedly support the right of Israel to exist.
I suppose the Met Police will now send Brian Paddick round to arrest me.
Note also Hamza’s brief is well immersed in this nonsensical site.
the folks that run those awards are quoted here:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4690132.stm
But the chairman of the Islamic Human Rights Commission, Massoud Shadjareh, said Abu Hamza had been “demonised”.
He said: “We are not surprised by the verdict. We were quite concerned that it would be difficult to get a different verdict because of the demonisation that took place before the hearing.”
With regards to the Paul Reynolds issue, I think that this is a big step forward.
Perhaps it would be a good idea to write to the BBC expressing our approval of the way he updates his articles, and of how he generally attempts to stick to the facts. Maybe his techniques will spread somewhat throughout that organisation.
Our media in Malta is making lots of noise about “respect for the religion of others”. A far cry from how they pick on the Catholic church. What an appalling bunch of dhimmis – it’s heartbreaking.
Deepdiver
thats odd. isnt malta still a quite Catholic country?
update (radio): French satirical magazine that republished the cartoons today – they have now received police protection.
Thumbs up to Paul Reynolds for his step in updating his articles and making it clear where the changes are. It may not be much in the sea of bias at the Beeb but at least it’s a start.
re – police protection for French mag – i’ve not seen this on the BBC site yet:
http://www.rte.ie/news/2006/0208/mideast.html