Chief Executive of BBC Broadcast from 1996 to 1999:
Double standards in dealing with Islam
Sir, I applaud the BBC’s news treatment of the Danish cartoons (report, Feb 4). On its website, however, the cultural cringe is evident and double standards obtain. In its history of Islam we read: “One night in 610 he (Muhammad) was meditating in a cave on the mountain when he was visited by the angel Jibreel who ordered him to “recite” . . . words which he came to understand were the words of God.” This is written as fact, no “it is said” or “Muhammad reported”. Whenever Muhammad’s name is mentioned the BBC adds “Peace be upon him”, as if the corporation itself were Muslim.
How different, and how much more accurate, when we turn to Christianity. Here, Jesus’ birth “is believed by Christians to be the fulfilment of prophesies in the Jewish Old Testament”; Jesus “claimed that he spoke with the authority of God”; accounts of his resurrection appearances were “put about by his believers”.
WILL WYATT
Chief Executive, BBC
Broadcast, 1996-99
Middle Barton, Oxon
– take a look at the two following letters as well. As my colleague Laban asks on his blog:
…for how long has it been mandatory in the Met and on the BBC to call Mohammed ‘the Prophet Mohammed’? [note capital ‘P’] I haven’t noticed Jesus being referred to as ‘the Lord Jesus Christ’ lately.
Indeed. I shall now return to my current B-BBC sabbatical. TTFN.
The police finally get their arse in gear and reluctantly arrest this lunatic after three days of public pressure and protest:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4687996.stm
Note how this article is classic BBC – ostensibly about the arrest but actually another platform for him and his MP to broadcast their political opinions.
However, there is another point. I presume he was arrested for impersonating a suicide bomber? If so, when are the police going to arrest this one?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/4666132.stm
Haven’t the BBC given the lunatic from Luton a good alibi? “I saw that the BBC made it permissable, so I thought if they can do it, why can’t I?”
Note the classic Liberal naivity from the Luton MP in the above article:
“He acted on impulse – couple of friends, they got on the train and got to London, and I believe this was a impulsive, foolish reaction to what he saw was the offence of the publication of those cartoons.”
That’s right – he just happened to impulsively have all of the clothing and equipment of a suicide bomber (except the bomb) with him. So where did he ‘impulsively’ get this stuff from?
The MP said “said earlier he was unaware of the conviction but that he still took the apology at face value.”
That’s because you are either ludicrously naive or you don’t want to be made to look a fool, even though you clearly have.
Islamic extremist, conviction for drug dealing – hey yeah, I’ll believe every word he tells me is true unless proven otherwise.
I don’t know who is the more dangerous person – the extremist drug dealer or the MP.
OT
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml;jsessionid=IUQ10R0SIOTGDQFIQMFSFGGAVCBQ0IV0?xml=/news/2006/02/07/unavy.xml&sSheet=/portal/2006/02/07/ixportaltop.html
this is really concerning, and the ignorance of the BBC to avoid reporting such a story is worrying..
http://myblog.de/kewil/art/2845859
In Dante’s Inferno Mahomet is represented as being in Hell with his entrails hanging out. I wonder what he might have been wearing at the time of his death?
Interestingly the Beeb can show the Anne Frank in bed with Hitler cartoon, that is racist, but not the ones that are anti-Muslim.
So, Patrick Hall, Labour MP for Bedford (Majority:3383), was unaware that he was a convicted drug dealer when he co-drafted his statement for him and later stood in front of the media backing him. One of those precious politically embarrassing moments that tells us a lot about how desperate some MPs are for votes. What was he doing at his house in the first place that day? Strange that the BBC omit the name of his political party.
I notice the BBC Russian website consistantly refers to “prorok Mukhammed”, the prophet Mohammed.
People have been shot for carrying table legs in bags yet this guy is photographed standing next to a police van in what looks like a suicide vest. This chap was lucky, or the result of benign benevolence.
I haven’t seen any BBC reports that have said ‘the Prophet Mohammed (Peace Be Upon Him)’. Yet.
In the interests of neutrality, the BBC should really say ‘the Islamic prophet, Mohammed’ – assuming it has to preface his name at all.
After all, there were many prophets and (to coin a beloved BBC phrase) some might say that it is only their followers who afford them ‘prophet’ status. To capitalise Prophet is plain silly. Besides, I thought ‘Peace Be Upon…’ was only said to ships?
🙂
O/T: does the BBC still refer to the Queen as ‘Her Majesty, the Queen’ or the Pope as ‘His Holiness, the Pope’ on its news broadcasts? I can’t remember if it does.
Rob
He was arrested under the Criminal Justice Act 2003 which is the catch-all legislation whereby we’re all liable to arrest for anything. I believe then that this arrest is connected with breaking rules of early release from prison. It’s not necessarily a public order matter. But, so wide are the powers of the police under this bill, he could be arrested for just being an ugly customer or making a fool of his MP (for which he should be congratulated rather than condemned).
Ian Barnes
Contrary to the DT story, interviewed on Today Sir Allan West gave a sickeningly complacent view of the state of the Royal Navy: all the usual guff “second most powerful in the world” etc etc. Very few worries there then.
“He was arrested under the Criminal Justice Act 2003 which is the catch-all legislation whereby we’re all liable to arrest for anything.”
The Policeman’s Blog currently has a great cartoon of plods policing the “Death” placards being recalled to Trafalgar Square because someone called a police horse gay….
DBurbage-> you mean this cartoon?
http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/4399/1929/400/coppers.4.jpg
here’s another spot-on one , published in the Sun
http://images.thesun.co.uk/picture/0,,2006060061,00.jpg
“In the interests of neutrality, the BBC should really say ‘the Islamic prophet, Mohammed’ – assuming it has to preface his name at all.”
ooh. dont you know the BBC rules for not mentioning the I or M word?
It’s here :
http://coppersblog.blogspot.com/
@ umbongo.
listen, the facts are really very simple.
The labour government have sold off ships like no ones business.
they dont care, dont want to know and are totally ignorant.
Alan West shouldnt have to play politics, but the civil service and forces have become so politicised, lets not forget new labour are to thank for that.
What i find just downright stupid, is the lack of thought by No.10.
Clearly not as bright as they make out.
fake suicide bomber – fake apology
all the usual guff “second most powerful in the world”
Hasn’t done too much since 1945 though and it was much more impressive in The Battle of the Atlantic…………..one day Labour will realise we are on an island – at least in Ernest Bevin’s day people holidayed on the English coast rather than Tuscany or Bermuda and they knew we had water all around and needed to import food and materials
Abu Hamza guilty !!
Watch the appeals start and extenuating circumstances being paraded on BBC…………
More violent demonstrations (sorry, protests) on their way following the conviction of Abu Hamza…
It’s hardly ground-breaking news (although BBC thought to publish it at the end of the fake suicide bomber piece) but did anyone notice: 4 student journalists who published a Mohammad (PBUH etc etc) cartoon in their tawdry Cardiff rag were suspended by the enlightened students’ union. As the Angelic Upstarts used to say: “Student power what a shower”…
OT
Lunch time news. i thought the report on Hamza was really good. It asked a fundamental question:
Why wasnt something done sooner given that the police knew about his intent?
I think that question should be redirected to No.10, who as usual interfere on anything and everything.
The Home Secretary needs to clarify why his government was so inactive.
In light of Hamza’s arrest, i do hope people in power, are watching his followers, because judging by the radicalism, for example of the guy on Newsnight last night, i’d say, i hope the Police are alert at the moment?
The Home Secretary needs to clarify why his government was so inactive.
the Government……………..it is Her Majesty’s Government…….it does not belong to any politician
Ian Barnes –
Why wasnt something done sooner given that the police knew about his intent?
It’s very simple. Nothing was done because he’s a muslim. The government cultivates the muslim vote and the police have long been ordered to lay off them. For the same reason no arrests were made at the demonstration on Friday. Ahh you say, so why was he eventually arrested? That’s also simple. The US had begun extradition proceeding against him. We’d be obliged to extradite him if all was in order unless he was charged with offences here, so he was finally charged. This was done to keep him out of US courts where he’d receive a far harsher sentence than he would in the UK. Although I’m happy to see him convicted in this case I’d much rather see him stand trial in the US. It’s a pyrrhic victory.
Rick and Ian Barnes –
Re. the Royal Navy – you hold the very much mistaken impression that the government is pro-British and makes decisions with the interests of Britons in mind. You need to turn that prism round the other way. Because this is a government of anti-British Gramscians, ex-student union Gramscians, ex-activist Gramscians and ex-polythechnic lecturer Gramscians, all will make sense when you realise that the only aim of this government is to cling to power while destroying this country. Not only do they have no regard for our armed forces they actually HATE them. As the Senior Service the Royal Navy is top of the list for destruction. Because the military has long stood for much of what is good and decent in Britain they must be destroyed. F’kin ell, if people would only read up on their Gramsci many pennies would drop.
darn. so we’ve kept abu hamza out of Guantanamo?
and remember we also let Omar Bakri leave for Lebanon.
Pete_London makes a good point. Anyone I’ve ever met with a British military background was a Tory voter – irrespective of class or background.
Pete_London,
good to see you back commenting.
Yep, my Grandad was in the RAF all his life. He was from a ex-mining town awash with poverty, high-unemployment and, not surprisingly, it was a Labour hotbed.
He was a Tory.
Obedience, stratification, knowing your place, not questioning your betters – the military echoes the Tory ethos to a T.
Just teasing, folks – gawd bless our brave boys.
I am familiar with Gramsci and with Frankfurt School Marxism – I take your point
After listening to the Hamza report at lunchtime it came as no shock to hear the vicar of the church near the finsbury park mosque claim that (what he said) was no worse than what the BNP were saying!
last nights newsnight was enlightening to say the least.
paxman got a dig in early, “why dont you live in iran?”
I can say with modest pride that way back in 2003 this website picked up on the BBC tendency to report the religious claims of Islam, but not other religions, as facts rather than beliefs.
However Mr Wyatt is mistaken when he says that the BBC add “Peace be upon him” whenever the prophet’s name is mentioned. It may have happened once or twice in moments of multicultural enthusiasm. Most of my Beebwatching this week has been done at the website, but I have caught a few TV news broadcasts and I haven’t heard that phrase. Mr Wyatt may have mistaken the Home Secretary, who does say PBUH, for a BBC presenter – an easy mistake to make.
ADDED LATER: Yes, shamelessly making use of my knowledge of the B-BBC Haloscan password. I’ve just re-read Mr Wyatt’s letter and now I see that his “whenever” was referring to the BBC website account of Islam rather than the Beeb generally, as I first thought. He’s quite right.
interesting – there’s an image of mohammed on the supreme court in the U.S.
http://ibloga.blogspot.com/2006/02/supreme-court-enters-mohammed-cartoon.html
And I thought the BBC was a non-Prophet organisation.
Ironic that the university rag which suspended its editor and three contributors name is “Gair Rhydd”, which means “Free word” or “Free expression” in Welsh.
Cardiff University is well on the way to favoured Dhimmi status with its “unique Centre for the Study of Islam” which aims to “promote a greater understanding of Islam and the life of Muslim communities in the UK.”
What we need is a centre, unique or otherwise, which promotes a greater understanding in Islam of life in a free democracy like the UK.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/4689442.stm
I have just been watching Frank don’t shoot me I’m a muslim” Gardiner on News 24. When will the BBC start calling him by his Muslim name as he is just a mouthpiece for the muslim world.
Obedience, stratification, knowing your place, not questioning your betters
Toryism? Sounds more like a centrally planned economy.
just caught this on the times website:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-2028521,00.html
“A Bedfordshire Police spokeswoman said that Khayam was arrested this morning under the Criminal Justice Act 2003 for breach of parole and was being conveyed to prison. She said that the instruction to arrest him came from the Home Office”
hang on a minute. didnt i hear Charles Clarke saying to parliament that such matters were to be left to the police?
And who has given the Home Secretary the right to tell the police who or who not to arrest?
even though i think that fake suicide bomber should be shipped off to Gitmo, i find this political interference in the police very worrying.
http://www.msn.co.uk/htx/governmentwaste/Default.asp
this is a brilliant summaryand the truth exposed about government waste of taxpayers money…
Archduke
Even more worrying is the fact that the police had to be told to arrest him, four days after the offence.
Things are looking up at the BBC, Abu Hamza is going to appeal!
“Even more worrying is the fact that the police had to be told to arrest him, four days after the offence.”
indeed Rob – it also begs the queston – are the Home Office telling the police NOT to arrest somebody?
political expendiency over defense of the realm? a very worrying state of affairs.
Rob Read
Cheers. You know how it is – three weeks in Australia/work/a week on the slopes/laziness all conspire to keep one from doing what one does best – having a good ol’moan,
archduke
Well what a favour the BBC did us with Newsnight last night! That Choudery fella was so ignorant, so rude, so offensive and so bloody annoying with his constant interruptions that (as you say) Paxman tells him to go and live in Iran if he doesn’t like it here! And how enlightening too that the response was (IIRC) “Why should I? The whole world belongs to allah.” Please BBC, we need to see more of that hairy bloke called Choudery on ourr screens.
O/t The Sky News drongo reporter broadcasting live outside Finsbury Park Mosque telling the viewers about the arms cache found there stated that Hamza’s fingerprints weren’t on the weapons. 😆
stated that Hamza’s fingerprints weren’t on the weapons
so what ? Who was running the mosque at that time ? Maybe they should watch that Channel 4 footage
havent they just moved on to the Regents Park mosque? thats were Choudery’s crowd marched from.
i wonder if any beeboids will do a BNP-style hidden camera expo of that crowd.
Certainly this government has been working for eight years at destroying Britain from within, as Pete_London – and others – say. And now Charles Clarke is telling the police who to arrest. And it’s not a police state?
Several days of intelligent discussion on really important issues and now we’re back to Gramsci and nutcase conspiracy theories??!!
Boo!!