…doesn’t mean the Beeb has to agree. This “story” is bogus. President Bush, after all, was not slow to declare a state of emergency along the Gulf Coast. Mayor Nagin’s reaction to this “news” is laughable and hypocritical but the Beeb is happy to serve us New Orleans sludge.
Update: DFH, one of our B-BBC commenterati has two very helpful posts here and here. Auntie can’t get away with what she once did.
Dumbcisco – you beat me to it. I listened to this woman (Canadian ? Belgian ?) hectoring people to fit her script. She lets “Alexander” a former British soldier on then cuts to “someone in Basra” who turns out to be part of some grouping and is anti-Coalition and rabbits on about Baghdad.
She had her script and noone was going to be allowed much airtime unless they learned her lines.
It is funny to listen to a desperate woman in a LOndon studio trying to get Iraqis to view their own daily lives as she has determined they should.
The BBC is no longer irritating…..it is just the last refuge of the old Radio Moscow crowd
I now see little point in continuing with the World Service. It does not serve Britain, it attacks Britain.
dumbcisco | 06.03.06 – 3:58 am | #
Remember this is the arm of the Foreign Office not the licence-fee – this is Jack Straw territory
How comes no muslim films are nominated, IBC?
Obvious….they can’t make films…..the L Ron Hubbard of Medina hadn’t seen any good ones and decided Hollywood was too Jewish so he banned it in his little red book
Last week the BBC have a sympathetic interview to an Islamist who had returned from detention in Pakistan. The usual stuff, how he was innocent and misunderstood, had been badly treated. The BBC as usual lapped up the creep’s moaning, did not stuff his traitorous beliefs down his throat.
The Sun seems to be on his case – a slightly different tone to the BBC’s :
http://www.thesun.co.uk00547,00.html
Why don’t we run a book each day on what stories the today prog will give prominence to ?
My tips for today – the Amnesty report on Iraq, and Archbishops Rowan Williams on Guantanamo.
They ahve already referred in their review of the papers to the FT talking about Amnesty. Hardly – the FT is leading on telecoms takeovers, and the FT home page lists several dozen stories but NOT the Amnesty report.
http://www.ft.com
The Guardian and sometimes The Independent determine BBC agendas………..the FT is pink and for that reason might be held to attract BBC types, but it has numbers in it and words assembled in a structure unappealing to BBC types
This morning I had a much more relaxing and anger-free start to the day. No Today. No sanctimony from St James or righteous anger from Hector Humphreys, no latest garbage from Rowan Rasputin, no Blame Bush, no “it’s all spiralling out of control as the country edges further towards civil war Iraq”. It was called Radio 2 and it was wonderful.
However, I did catch a couple of minutes early on, where they were talking about the Oscars. They were in shock – how could a big issue (gayness) film like Brokeback Mountain not win best film? However, the fact that another big issue (race) film Crash won it was alright. So predictable.
Anyone see any of “facing the Truth” on BBC2? I heard a clip on PM the other night. I know that the awful Bishop Tutu runs it, but that doesn’t really matter. My point is that for the viewer this is voyeurism. It is particularly bad because the viewers can convince themselves that this is really not like Big Brother (for Sun readers) but is instead purely educational/helpful/for the social good. However, what good does it serve to film murderers saying to their victim’s families “it was nothing personal”? Frankly it is pukable. The murderers should rot in jail and the BBC should avoid the pretension that it is some sort of counsellor or social worker to those whose lives have been destroyed by barbarians.
The other pernicious aspect is the feeling created by the BBC that here are two opposite sides, each requiring to be understood, empathised with. What an obscenity for the bereaved. And then there is Tutu……..
A reporter on the bbc tv news just described HSBC’s profits as “excessive” – surely a matter of opinion not fact.
How does BBC online deal with the fact that its big feature story on how Bush knew that the levees were going to be breached turned out to be, well, not quite the Full Monty?
Easy, turn to more important matters:-
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/4774868.stm
Same target, different “ammunition”.
BBC Morning TV 0910 hrs The intro – the glitz – the glamour – the stars – the super size egos – the red carpet – the plunging necklines – the Oscars.
George Clooney acceptance speech, “I’m proud to be outta touch”
(with mainstream America says BBC)However according to the BBC reporter you’re not. BBC repoertor signs off with “Movies about the oil industry, homosexuality and racism, proving that Hollywood is not just about glitz and glamour”
Why do the BBC airhead liberals salivate over loadsamoney American liberals? Red Carpet? or just Reds?
Matthew Norman’s media diary:
“ONCE AGAIN, events make it rather difficult to reach the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport to discuss her reneging on the deal to keep live Test cricket on terrestrial TV, after being lobbied by the Sky TV boss James Murdoch. As media-related scandals go, this one seems destined to take a back seat. Meanwhile, there is no truth in rumours that Tessa Jowell’s department has negotiated the sale of the entire BBC archive to Silvio Berlusconi’s Rai network for a timeshare on a Ligurian villa, a turbocharged Fiat Uno and half a bottle of sambuca.”
Makeover TV celeb in ‘hate crime alert?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/4770858.stm
Wahey!
“A reporter on the bbc tv news just described HSBC’s profits as excessive – surely a matter of opinion not fact.”
indeed. the more HSBC make , the more the pension of Vera Smith, 79, living in Dorset, goes up in value.
this simple equation seems to escape these Beeboids.
turning to the BBC website, what do i see, yet again.
yup , its Iraq-war-is-wrong:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/
“Amnesty says Iraq abuses continue”
“However, the fact that another big issue (race) film Crash won it was alright. So predictable.”
i’ve seen Crash on DVD.
its crap. in fact , its toe curlingly crap. i sympathised more with “Gollum” in Lord of the Rings more than any “character” in that Crash film.
Re: The Oscars on the Today Programme
I can’t remember the exact wording, but this is the general gist. I’m pretty sure they used the word ‘proved’
“Brokenback Mountain failing to win the Oscar for Best Picture, provided the biggest upset of the evening. However, the Accademy proved its belief in diversity and inclusiveness, by awarding it to the anti-racist film Crash”
Eamonn->”It was called Radio 2 and it was wonderful.”
same here. switched to Radio 2 in the mornings months ago. i feel far happier, not depressed, and i have a cheerier view of the world.
i mean, if i listened to Today at 08:52 i’d have George “i’m an eco-freak” Monbiot telling me that i am evil for using an airplane.
The Sky news site always carries a snapshot of the day’s front pages in the UK press. Today they lead on a variety of stories. Not one of them leads with the Amnesty report. Yet the BBC website and the World Service are leading with it. Without giving any proper right of reply to US or Iraqi authorities.
Another clear example of anti-Coalition bias.
Which is compounded by the fact that it links to yet more articles on Abu Ghraib, including one by Paul Reynolds.
Perhaps Paul Reynolds could explain this utter obsession at the BBC. Why did the BBC never have a similar obsession about Saddam’s jails, which were far far worse ?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4717486.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/3701941.stm
And who in the mainstream British public wants Andrew Marr to give airtime to a book by Moazzim Begg ?
dumbcisco-> right now on Irish radio is a piece on American wounded in Iraq and how they get evacuated, and treated medically. descriptions of the injuries. interviews with field surgeons, and the soldiers themselves, describing the injuries incurred from suicide bombers.
no hysterics – just the facts:
http://www.rte.ie/radio/
live stream:
http://www.rte.ie/smiltest/radio_new.smil
Grimer
I caught that piece on Today about the Oscars. Now my grey matter may be deteriorating by the day but I remember the phrase used as:
Brokenback Mountain failing to win the Oscar for Best Picture, provided the biggest upset of the evening. However, the Accademy proved its belief in tolerance and progressive values, by awarding it to the anti-racist film Crash
BBC criticises “excessive” rise in profits:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/tv_and_radio/4330272.stm
Hah hah, only joking. This rise is “necessary”, don’t you know.
Pete_London,
That sounds about right.
And there I was thinking the Oscars were interested in the ‘best’ films, not the most ‘trendy’.
I’m glad the BBC has set me straight.
thankfully, the American public haven’t lost the plot, and dont seem to like nanny-state-hollywood lecturing.
crash box office takings – piss poor by american standards:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0375679/business
purely by way of comparision, here’s the gross american takings for “revenge of the sith”
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0121766/business
“crash” really is a crap film. almost as bad as that Iraq-war-is-wrong tv drama “over there”
Eamonn->”It was called Radio 2 and it was wonderful.”
same here. switched to Radio 2 in the mornings months ago. i feel far happier, not depressed, and i have a cheerier view of the world.
Archduke
Same here too, could not face Andrew Marr interviewing Moazzemm Begg on ‘Start the Week’ that, I noticed, coincides with the release today of his book “Enemy Combatant: A British Muslim’s Journey To Guantanamo And Back” So listened to Radio 3. But admit to having listened to that popmpous prig, James Naughtie,interviewing both Glenda Jackson & DEFRA lady wotsaname over Jowellgato this morning, spoilt my cornflakes.
SO how was Marr and Begg?
From: BBC criticises “excessive” rise in profits:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/enter…dio/ 4330272.stm
“So if, for example, if you are interested in world music or Baroque music, on the web we can offer you at a very marginal cost a personalised radio station,” Mr Thompson said.
Which would also seem to be way, way outside the remit of the Charter. The BBC is described therein as a broadcaster and offering a “personalised radio station” is by definition not broadcasting. It’s not a public service.
For those R2 morning listeners…. 🙂
The 8:10 interiew on R4 ‘Today’ was wildly unbalanced.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/today/listenagain/ram/today4_20060306l.ram
The subject? Tessa Jowell.
I held hope for a brief spell that Humphries would be interviewing Jowell, perhaps in the aggressive style that he used against that polite US lawyer last week re Gitmo. No chance. Why not. The BBC is biased and Jowell is one of their own (left/Labour).
The two people interviewed were Glenda Jackson and Margaret Becket!!! Naughtie of course was all sweetness and light to his Labour chums. Where was the Conservative spokesman? Were they invited on to the programme? If not, why the hell not? Boy-king Cameron needs to takle the BBC in the style of Alister Campbell, or at least get an press sec ‘attack dog’ who he can get to do this business.
The BBC are running amock with impunity. It’s a joke.
http://newsforums.bbc.co.uk/nol/thread.jspa?threadID=1237&&edition=1&ttl=20060306115128
Putting questions to Moazzan Begg seems to have generated a less than sympathetic postbag on the website.
i’ve seen Crash on DVD.
its crap. in fact , its toe curlingly crap. i sympathised more with “Gollum” in Lord of the Rings more than any “character” in that Crash film.
archduke
Yeah, me & the wife thought so too – actually we stopped watching Crash after about 40mins. I thought Brokeback & Constant Gardener were fairly good, but dunno what all the fuss is about Crash. Theme (racism) over substance (crap film)?. Glad we’re not alone.
“Boy-king Cameron needs to takle the BBC in the style of Alister Campbell, or at least get an press sec ‘attack dog’ who he can get to do this business.”
if you read the Sunday Times magazine article on the boy King, sadly , that wont be the case.
there are no plans for a Campbellesque attack dog.
JH
I see you have got there first.
http://newsforums.bbc.co.uk/nol/thread.jspa?sortBy=2&edition=1&ttl=20060306115931&messageID=510577񼩱
Go along and vote, vote, vote! Clearly we are all very un-PC. How very worrying for the BBC.
Attack dog ? Old fashioned. Just hint in some BBC interview that TV licence renewals will have a questionnaire attached for public feedback
Re the Mrs Mills controversy: Margaret Beckett • in today’s interview on “Today” with James Naughtie • gave her “killer” refutation of Mr and Mrs Mills’ culpability (and why Mrs Mills should not resign) to the effect that “neither of them did anything illegal”: except, of course, that Mr Mills was not entirely frank with the Inland Revenue and 3 years after the event declared the “gift” of £350,000 as “income”. For this he was charged the tax owed plus interest + PENALTIES. Penalties are charged when an illegality has taken place • it’s up to the Revenue to decide on whether to impose penalties or take the taxpayer to court. If the taxpayer in question is a tax adviser, it is ALWAYS the practice of the Revenue (unless there are almost unprecedented reasons to the contrary) to prosecute and/or charge very large penalties indeed. Mr Mills was not subject to criminal prosecution and paid relatively insignificant penalties. I wonder why. Mr Naughtie (was he badly briefed or was there something else?) let Mrs Beckett’s erroneous statement go completely unchallenged.
On a point which might or might not be relevant: in the money-laundering regulations, if a wife knows or suspects that her husband is evading tax by passing off income as a “gift” and does not report this to the appropriate authorities she is aiding in the commission of an offence under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 (“POCA”). Section 328 of POCA states that “an offence is committed if a person enters into or becomes concerned in an arrangement which [s]he knows or suspects facilitates the acquisition, retention, use or control of criminal property [eg proceeds of a tax evasion scheme] by or on behalf of a third party”. It seems to me that , in the appropriate circumstances, signing a mortgage document might very well mean “being concerned in an arrangement etc etc”. Just a thought.
“Enemy Combatant: A British Muslim’s Journey To Guantanamo And Back”
It’s the “back” bit that grates
JH
On Start The Week this morning Moazzim Begg got a fawning introduction from Andrew Marr, who talked about his “remarkable” book and then used the word “remarkable” later on. Charles Allen, who has written a history of the evils of Wahabbism, got about one-third of the time given to Begg.
The commenters on that newsforum are virtually unanimous in asking the obvious question – why did you go to terrorist training camps ? Andrew marr did NOT ask that question, did not probe the known jihadist beliefs of Begg.
Begg came across as a slippery creep, as glib as so many other Islamist apologists that the BBC endlessly gives airtime to.
Incidentally, the other guests on Start The Week were Rod Liddle and a very leftie American author who was asked to spout more about politics than about her detective stories. They discussed the high unemployment etc of South Side Chicago for quite a while before she made it clear that it was mostly African Americans who were unemployed there.
How far we’ve fallen. 60 years ago a Briton would have been hanged for training and working with the enemy.
He now promotes his cause and his book courtesy of the BBC.
Hey come on – let’s have some balance here! I know Begg has a few questions to answer, but on the other hand it is interesting to consider why he has never been charged or convicted with anything. That’s also an interesting one. Mind you, neither was Arafat, or, so far, all those wanna-be decapitators and suicide bombers outside the Danish Embassy in London the other day.
Perhaps it is something to do with lack of hard evidence from Afghanistan actually proving he did what many of us suspect he did? Does anyone know any more, because the BBC will not address the Begg issue in a way that satisfies anyone.
Attack dog ? Old fashioned…..”
Rick | 06.03.06 – 12:18 pm | #
Maybe so, but Campbell laid the biggest ‘hit’ on the BBC in years with the scalps of the Chair and the DG (Hutton affair).
If the Conservative party hired the likes of Campbell, we might start laying some more ‘blows’ on their arrogant beeboid faces.
Pete_London writes:
” 60 years ago a Briton would have been hanged for training and working with the enemy.”
Very true. Then again, 60 years ago, a Briton wouldn’t have been called ‘Moazzim’.
The BBC’s promotion of this odious man and his elevation to the status of martyr, not even making a pretence of examining the truth of his tale, is probably the worst thing I have seen from them yet.
And people wonder why some of us conclude the BBC is beyond reform. It must be got rd of.
Eamonn
There are two reasons people like Begg are not tried in the UK. First and foremost, the CPS is totally squeamish about prosecuting Islamist nutters – from Abu Hamza down. Second, as far as I can see there has not been a specific offence about going to training camps. As Begg was not in arms against UK forces it would not be possible to charge him with treason – and the CPS would shy off that anyway.
Begg used to run a bookshop. I wager that his bookshop circulated filthy jihadist propaganda. (Just like the Dewsbury bookshop linked to the 7/7 bombers) Begg won’t do that again. But he should have been prosecuted years ago, for incitement to violence for circulating jihadist texts and videos.
Eamonn ” Hey come on – let’s have some balance here! I know Begg has a few questions to answer, but on the other hand it is interesting to consider why he has never been charged or convicted with anything.”
Wouldn’t the evidence be tainted by Begg not having been read a caution at the time of arrest, immediate access to a lawyer etc etc?
Are the normal criminal justice laws capable of dealing with someone arrested on a foreign battlefield?
The BBC itself reports today that 4 guys have been arrested under the Prevention of Terrorism Act, apparently with some link to the 7/7 bombings.
But cannot find room for a link to the story among the dozens of links on its news homepage.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4777472.stm
Suppresio veri again. Keep it all under wraps, don’t let the british public know the extent of jihadism in our midst. Fits neatly with the BBC’s parallel suggestio falsi – portray evil jihadist creeps like Moazzim Begg as poor downtrodden innocents.
George Clooney – sometimes referred to as George C. Looney, I understand.
How comes no muslim films are nominated, IBC?
Best foreign language film
Winner: Tsotsi (South Africa)
Don’t Tell (Italy)
Joyeux Noel (France)
Paradise Now (Palestinian territories)
Sophie Scholl – The Final Days (Germany)
Paradise Now Two young Palestinian men — Khaled and Said — have been friends since childhood. They are both recruited to carry out a suicide bombing in Tel Aviv.
(What does IBC mean, please)
“The arrests were NOT in connection with last July’s London bombings, she said.”
so they were preparing a brand new terrorist atrocity.
“Metropolitan Police anti-terror officers arrested the men following the operation at a residential address in Bradford”
bradford. no surprises there so.
when is the Israeli style defence wall being built around that town so, eh?
blair gives jowell “full support”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4777592.stm
thats the kiss of death confirmed so. i’ll give her about a week.
tops.
No mention of the religion of the suspected terrorists. Sikhs, I suppose, or some of those Christian fundamentalists that Rod Liddle was attacking on Start The Week this morning – as a trailer to his Channel 4 Despatches prog tonight. Liddle focusses on their separatist schools – funny he did not put madrassa-like schools under the microscope.
IBC – Islamic Broadcasting Corporation, I assume.
Well, Jim Naughtie really savaged Margaret beckett on Today this morning. Well, perhaps he didn’t. Less of a “political interview” and more of “sit in the comfy chair, Margaret, and we’ll shake our heads sadly at the thought of one of our friends being attacked in the media”.
Sorry if this has been already posted, but this (D)HYS is quite interesting:
http://newsforums.bbc.co.uk/nol/thread.jspa?sortBy=2&threadID=1237&edition=1&ttl=20060306132338&#paginator
Pose your questions to Moazzim Begg – one of the gitmo detainees. The first two pages of most recommended are all negative. This one is particularly good:
Added: Monday, 6 March, 2006, 10:47 GMT 10:47 UK
Why is the BBC giving a self confessed AlQaeda supporter/activist/terrorist a platform to spread their propaganda and lies. Torturing scum like him is going to save lives, not nice but it is a fact, Viva Guantanamo !
alex, london
Recommended by 24 people
Sign in to recommend comments
Alert a Moderator
Watching the BBC I weep for the future, but then the people of this country renew my faith in them when I see things like this HYS page.
So they have arrested 4 persons in the Bradford area – 3 at the Bradford University halls of residence……….Terrorism Charges…….wonder how they will be described by the BBC ?
Prince Charles of Arabia
is off to Saudi Arabia soon, sucking up to our enemies.
Expect fawning, spineless coverage from Al BBC…