…
Take a look at this fascinating exchange between the American Expat and Paul Reynolds of the BBC. I think Scott nails him with the logic of saying that either you report a claim of 100,000 civilian deaths (or more) in Iraq, and examine the methodology critically for the reader’s sake, or you don’t report it at all. Reynolds’ response?
‘It was simply a figure. I reported it. . What’s the problem?’
Yeah, no big deal.
Update 02/04: thanks to commenters, a challenge for Paul Reynolds (who added his comment too)- how about quoting this site’s analysis, which highlights the vital fact that 80% of the IBC civilian death count is male?
100,000? Not according to this BBC website
“Iraqi civilian deaths shrouded in secrecy
By David Gritten BBC News website
Recent figures from the campaign group Iraq Body Count put the minimum number of civilians killed in Iraq since the US-led invasion three years ago at between 33,710 and 37,832.”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4830782.stm
However the wording was not accurate enough for this website:
“Iraqi Civilian Deaths: Time To Know the Truth. Gabriele Zamparini, The Cat’s Dream.
March 22, 2006http://www.uruknet.info/?p=m21810&l=i&size=1&hd=0
Helpfully the BBC’s david Gritten replies that it’s been amended.
The BBC replies:
Dear Gabriele,
Thank-you for your feedback on my article.
I have changed the second paragraph to read “many of those deaths” rather than “the majority of those deaths”.
Regards,
David Gritten
However Gabriele Zamparini does not appear impressed.
The amended para now reads
“Although many of those deaths were caused by insurgent attacks, multi-national forces stationed in Iraq ostensibly to protect the population have been responsible for a significant number post-invasion.”
Gabriele Zamparini of
http://www.uruknet.info/?p=m21810&l=i&size=1&hd=0
still doesn’t understand. Still it’s nice to know that a BBC journo is prepared to change some words in his original report after an email of what appears to be an anti-american website.
Reported Minimum
33773
Reported Maximum
37895
The IRAQ BODY COUNT Database
http://www.iraqbodycount.org/database/
http://www.sacredcowburgers.com/leftovers/showpics.cgi?factaid
http://www.sacredcowburgers.com/leftovers/showpics.cgi?our_next_finest_hour
Nice one
BLACKBURN
STOP PRESS
The Committee at Masjid Al Hidayah Mosque on Millham Street, Blackburn, in conjunction with Muslim Scholars from Blackburn and Preston, have withdrawn their invitation to Condoleezza Rice to visit their mosque as part of her forthcoming tour of the region on Saturday 1 April. This decision is evidence that the bulk of the community are strongly against the visit.
http://www.stopwar.org.uk/
Is Blackburn a suburb of Baghdad?
“The IRAQ BODY COUNT Database” – I remember this. They’ve broadened a little bit, but it used to be the case that their members were generally unconnected with statistics:
http://www.iraqbodycount.org/contacts.php
Specifically the majority were former musicians or music students, and there was a retired librarian. In fact if you search for “ERIC CLARKE” you find what seems to be the original line-up.
It includes a “professor of music at the University of Sheffield”, “a lecturer in music at Sheffield University”, “a guitarist … and a graduate student in music at the University of the Arts in Philadelphia”, “a co-founder of Musicians Opposing War (who is) an Associate Professor in the School of Music at Northwestern”, and best of all, a man who was “awarded a doctorate for his holistic critique of Mozart’s Cosi fan tutte in 1989”.
It is wrong to go for the man rather than the ball. And perhaps some of these people have simply totted up figures rather than applying complicated maths. I am sure they lead happy lives and are not short of money. I hate them because they are a kind of establishment. They are a society. They are probably better-off than me and healthier than me. They probably earn more than me and lead more interesting lives with each other. I imagine their blogs get lots of comments and they have lots of friends who share and reinforce their opinions. They share a money-earningplace with their friends, who recommended them for the post. They are an establishment and I hate them.
On a rational level I do not find these people convincing either individually or as an organisation. They seem to have come to a conclusion first and then sought to bolster it second, which is what the “hoax moon landing” people do.
In fact, I dredged most of that from a memory of reading this, which I was trying to remember until I simply went to Google and looked up “holistic iraq body count”:
http://oliverkamm.typepad.com/blog/2003/09/pilger_truth_an.html
It’s a man called Oliver Kamm. He’s terribly handicapped by the photograph, which is likely to be used against him.
“Other members include a lecturer in international relations, an Anglican ordinand, another musician, and a research psychologist. The last of these – John Sloboda – is the leader of the group and a founder member of the Network of Activist Scholars of Politics and International Relations (though ‘activist scholar’ is as meaningless a juxtaposition as a ‘cat-loving scholar’ – the adjective is irrelevant to the noun – and Sloboda is in any case a psychologist, not a political scientist).”
WAR CRIMINALS NOT WELCOME HERE
“The most unwelcome visit to Liverpool since Oswald Mosley came here in the
1930s”, is how the mass circulation Liverpool Echo newspaper describes
Condoleezza Rice’s visit to the city on Friday 31 March, organised for her
by UK Foreign Secretary Jack Straw. Oswald Mosley was the leader of the
British fascist party, the BUF. Condeleezza Rice, George Bush’s Secretary of
State, is one of the architects of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and
directly implicated in the horrific levels of death and destruction
inflicted on those countries.
http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/regions/liverpool/
Calendar – Announce an Event
Fri 31 Mar 1pm Protest Condoleezza Rice Visit Outside LIPA on Hope Street as it plays host to Neo-Condi. If you happen to own an orange jump suit then it would be funny if you wore it.
Fri 31 Mar 5pm Protest Condoleezza Rice Visit Steps of Metropolitan (Catholic) Cathedral, Mount Pleasant.
Sat 1 Apr 12 noon-2pm Liverpool Friends Of Palestine Vigil Steps of St Luke’s (bombed-out) church, Berry St.
Liverpool City of Culture 2008 cough!
Condoleezza Rice is not welcome in the north west
Home secretary Jack Straw has invited US secretary of state Condoleezza Rice to north west England.
In response nearly 200 people gathered in Blackburn • Straw’s constituency • on Friday of last week for an anti-war meeting.
The audience heard George Galloway MP and Lindsey German of the Stop the War Coalition condemn Rice’s planned visit.
http://www.socialistworker.co.uk/article.php?article_id=8480
200 people? heavy man
No need for the Police to photograph this mob, they do it themselves.
http://www.labournet.net/events/0603/condi1.html
We ask the musicians of The Royal Liverpool Philharmonic Orchestra not to play for her.
ask? that’s one way of putting it.
You can be sure Condoleeza Rice will be unfazed by British hospitality. If you want to violate the law of holes, hey, go right ahead….
En passant, which is to say O/T but only sort of:
The sceptered isle now shimmers with the brilliance of fish rotting by moonlight.
Splendid going, chaps! Right on cue, the UK replaces Canada as the planet’s Great White Waste of Time: you’re fresh out of Dunkirk spirit, protected by a stripped, underfunded military soon to be fighting with French equipment, and headed for interesting times with Gordon Brown’s soggy nail-bitten hand at the tiller. Wow-oh-wowee!
Thank God you’ve still got the BBC, right? Oh, and don’t forget “Susan.”
But who else needs you?
You’re sure you’re on the right blog, KMM? We all know what’s wrong with the UK (and the rest of Europe for that matter) and don’t need you to rub our noses into it. Try one of the left wing blogs.
P.S.: I don’t believe you’re American. You sound more like a German.
Study your contempoary history,and you should conclude, we are not at war. This is just the prelude. The pattern is well established. The lines on the map are being drawn up. Bothsides believe they can not,will not, and must not lose. The BBC/MSM have been instructed to keep things carm like they do. The populations are being primed on both sides. “Lefty liberals” dont know which way to run. Real liberals have lost their confidence in their country and themselves. Real socialists are “spinning” their webbs in fury.
However we are still not at war.
We are at the “Spanish-civil war” stage in proceadings. I give it between 2 to 3 years before the shit really hits the fan.
Those who forget their history are bound to repeat its most terrible past consequences.
Their is so many simularities between 1936 and 2006 that it simply beggers belief. That no political pundit anywhere has “picked up” on it.
Remember we still have an Official Secrets Act. No body who would really be “in the know” would be allowed to say anything, anywhere, anyway. Or MI5 would shut them up. Maybe permanately.
I dont know what you lot think but I feel more like a mushroom every day.
Kept in the dark and fed a load of BULLSHIT.
As Douglas Adams said DONT PANIC. It just will not help.
Some might call me a Neo Conservative. I think I am a very ordinary person indead, who has read a few history books. But it does not matter what any of us think because now,”what will be will be” anyway.
Sorry to upset anyone, but on this matter I really do hope to god, I am wrong.
Gary, you’re wrong.
Re: Iraqi civilian deaths. It might not be the US military’s job to count the number of deaths but when it’s presumably part of the overall plan to present a ‘before v after’ picture in which ‘after’ wins, you’d have thought that somebody official might have had a go. Otherwise the media have no choice but to rely on the amateurs.
Wow this non-event in Sfaffordshire seems to get bigger with police raids on houses and cars being taken away……………at what stage will BBC News do an in-depth in this non-reported story ?
Last night on Granada’s Regional News programme, they interviewed one Audrey White, with no background info, from the stop the war coalition.
She was on to ‘protest’ Condaleeza Rice’s visit to Liverpool. She ranted on like Dierdre Spart or a member of the Revolutionary Communist/Trotsky Workers party.
A quick Google showed her to be a member of the Socialist Party the latest manifestation of Militant.
She was as usual not subjected to any hard questioning.
Gary,
I dont know what you lot think but I feel more like a mushroom every day.
Kept in the dark and fed a load of BULLSHIT.
Thanks for the laugh.
Maybe we should form the PFLM – Popular Front for the Liberation of Mushrooms.
Well we know that the SWP and its front organisations are not representative of the general public …………..so they must be representative of the media elite
Off Topic
Last night on BBC News, a certain Professor Richard Sennett, of the LSE was commenting on the French Riots.
Anyone would think he was an economist. But the more he spoke, the more I got suspicious. He was talking about the Government having enough money to give us a good welfare system etc.
I checked him out and guess what.
He is a sociologist and therefore a good commentator on the social aspects. But the BBC had him on for ages about the economic issues.
Oh and by the way, he is of course a socialist.
http://focus.msn.de/bildung/bildung/berliner-krawallschule_nid_26935.html
Interesting story the BBC will not report. Berlin-Neukoelln school has 80% NOn-German pupils and is out of control.
Arabs are running the show and beating up the Turks, and the Germans are a minority – meanwhile the SPD administration looks the other way. The Police say at least 30 Berlin schools are out of control.
Interesting take on events Gary. Not sure on the timescale.
Unless Iran freezes it’s nuclear ambitions, there will certainly be war. It just depends on how the rest of the Muslim world reacts. If they have any sense, they’ll keep well away. If, they have a death wish, they’ll back Iran.
Let’s just hope that our army actually gets the money it needs between now and then.
I am sorry Gary, but I can see no correlation between 1936 and 2006. In 1936 it was clear that Germany was an aggressor and that war was likely. With whom do you expect us to go to war with this time?
I do know the feeling about being a mushroom though, and the BBC’s deliberate withholding of facts just adds to this.
Gary, I agree we are not really at war • the west really isn’t mad yet. The left is making friends with the enemy of its enemy, but I think will lose heart when the enemy starts turning on them too.
A common theme of this site is the BBC’s love of Islam. No, the BBC doesn’t particularly like Islam. I can’t see Sandi Toksvieg in a burkha, nor can I see Andrew Marr or Humphreys out stoning a few gays.
But the BBC does hate Christianity (particularly Protestant Christianity) enough to side with the Muslims against a common enemy but it will have its limits.
I agree also that the battle is a long one, but I think demographics will play an important role. The two big demographic influences are the rise in Muslim populations in Europe and the very young % of the populations in Muslim countries (e.g. Iran). The question is: will the young Muslims in Europe go radical, or will the young Muslims in Iran reject the rigid lives of their parents and choose to wear jeans, travel, drink Coke, listen to Britney and watch Hollywood (i.e. lead a western life out of choice). I don’t know, but whichever trend prevails will determine who wins this thing.
O/T – Identity Cards
There’s an e-mail from Rory Bremner doing the rounds about identity cards. Apologies for posting this at such length, but I thought B-BBCers might be interested. Has the BBC fulfilled its public service remit by covering these issues in detail, one wonders?
—–Original Message—–
From: Rory Bremner [mailto:rory@roryb.net]
Sent: 24 March 2006 08:08
To: Rory Bremner
Subject: ID cards- please read and circulate..
Dear all
Apologies if you’ve received this already, but as you’ll agree it makes
alarming reading.
Please circulate it to as many friends as possible.
There’s a lot of this kind of legislation going on at the moment that needs to be more widely known and resisted.
This was written originally by Frances Stonor Saunders.
Frances Stonor Saunders is the former arts editor of The New Statesman, author of The Cultural Cold War, Diabolical Englishman and The Devil’s Broker and was awarded the Royal Historical Society’s William Gladstone Memorial Prize. She lives in London.
“You may have heard that legislation creating compulsory ID Cards passed a crucial stage in the House of Commons. You may feel that ID cards are not something to worry about, since we already have Photo ID for our Passport and Driving License and an ID Card will be no different to that. What you have not been told is the full scope of this proposed ID Card, and what it will mean to you personally.
The proposed ID Card will be different from any card you now hold. It will be connected to a database called the NIR, (National Identity Register), where all of your personal details will be stored. This will include the
unique number that will be issued to you, your fingerprints, a scan of the back of your eye, and your photograph. Your name, address and date of birth will also obviously be stored there.
There will be spaces on this database for your religion, residence status, and many other private and personal facts about you. There is unlimited space for every other details of your life on the NIR database, which can be
expanded by the Government with or without further Acts of Parliament.
By itself, you might think that this register is harmless, but you would be wrong to come to this conclusion. This new card will be used to check your identity against your entry in the register in real time, whenever you present it to ‘prove who you are’.
Every place that sells alcohol or cigarettes, every post office, every
pharmacy, and every Bank will have an NIR Card Terminal, (very much like the Chip and Pin Readers that are everywhere now) into which your card can be ‘swiped’ to check your identity. Each time this happens, a record is made at the NIR of the time and place that the Card was presented. This means for
example, that there will be a government record of every time you withdraw more than £99 at your branch of NatWest, who now demand ID for these transactions. Every time you have to prove that you are over 18, your card will be swiped, and a record made at the NIR. Restaurants and off licenses
will demand that your card is swiped so that each receipt shows that they
sold alcohol to someone over 18, and that this was proved by the access to the NIR, indemnifying them from prosecution.
Private businesses are going to be given access to the NIR Database. If you want to apply for a job, you will have to present your card for a swipe. If you want to apply for a London Underground Oyster Card, or a supermarket loyalty card, or a driving license you will have to present your ID Card for a swipe. The same goes for getting a telephone line or a mobile phone or an internet account. Oyster, DVLA, BT and Nectar (for example) all run very detailed databases of their own. They will be allowed access to the NIR, just as every other business will be. This means that each of these entities will be able to store your unique number in their database, and place all your travel, phone records, driving activities and detailed shopping habits under your unique NIR number. These databases, which can easily fit on a
storage device the size of your hand, will be sold to third parties either legally or illegally. It will then be possible for a non-governmental entity to create a detailed dossier of all your activities. Certainly, the government will have clandestine access to all of them, meaning that they will have a complete record of all your movements, from how much and when you withdraw from your bank account to what medications you are taking, down to the level of what sort of bread you eat – all accessible via a single unique number in a central database.
This is quite a significant leap from a simple ID Card that shows your name and face. Most people do not know that this is the true character and scope of the proposed ID Card. Whenever the details of how it will work are explained to them, they quickly change from being ambivalent towards it. The Government is going to COMPEL you to enter your details into the NIR and to carry this card. If you and your children want to obtain or renew your passports, you will be forced to have your fingerprints taken and your eyes scanned for the NIR, and an ID Card will be issued to you whether you want one or not. If you refuse to be fingerprinted and eye scanned, you will not be able to get a passport. Your ID Card will, just like your passport, not be your property. The Home Secretary will have the right to revoke or suspend your ID at any time, meaning that you will not be able to withdraw
money from your Bank Account, for example, or do anything that equires you to present your government issued ID Card.
The arguments that have been put forwarded in favour of ID Cards can be easily disproved. ID Cards WILL NOT stop terrorists; every Spaniard has a compulsory ID Card as did the Madrid Bombers. ID Cards will not ‘eliminate benefit fraud’, which in comparison, is small compared to the astronomical cost of this proposal, which will be measured in billions according to the
LSE (London School of Economics). This scheme exists solely to exert total surveillance and control over the ordinary free British Citizen, and it will line the pockets of the companies that will create the computer systems at the expense of your freedom, privacy and money.
If you did not know the full scope of the proposed ID Card Scheme before and you are as unsettled as I am at what it really means to you, to this country and its way of life, I urge you to email or photocopy this and give it to your friends and colleagues and everyone else you think should know and who cares. The Bill has proceeded to this stage due to the lack of accurate and complete information on this proposal being made public.
Together & hand in hand, we can inform the entire nation if everyone who receives this passes it on.”
—— End of Forwarded Message
I made a formal complaint to the BBC about the Humphrys interview with Colleen Graffey about Gitmo on 3 March. Yesterday I finally received an anodyne email reply from a Paul Kettle of the BBC. It was sent from info@bbc.co.uk.
But when I tried to protest at the failure to deal properly with the grounds of my complaint, the email bounced back saying that they did not read the info mailbox any more. I was directed instead to their website – but there was no clear way there to respond directly to Mr Kettle. I had to copy and paste text from the email reply to a Word document, taking out all the remaining HTML garbage such as wrong indents etc, and then copy it into another of the BBC’s online complaint forms, and re-submit it. It could then be another 3 weeks before I hear anything.
Is this rigmarole and delay how the BBC fobs off complaints ? By effectively cutting off the line ?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/4863358.stm
you can always rely on Blair to run and hide when the sugar hits the fan..
and returning as if nothing were wrong…what a coward and spineless PM we unfortunately have…wonder where he gets his ideas from..?
one question though: can someone please ask: what the total cost of his little holiday to Asia was? including flights, hotels, security, expenses, everything was please?
and the environmental cost of his jet set life style..honestly, who does he think he is? preeching to everyone about the environment when he is the biggest polluter..
but can he also be reminded that the buck stops with him for his loans scandal…dont let him squirm his way out of this one…should be interesting what the police have to say….lets hope they are not leant on by NO.10 or the Home Office so we can have an impartial investigation.
Moreover, i hope they focus on the Corruption charges, specifically relating to the award of govt contracts to companies who have given donations to the Labour Party. Forget the peerages…they are the tip of the ice berg
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/default.stm
can i also say, amazing how Blair’s return to the UK and all the turmoil he has caused is not even mentioned on the BBC’s homepage at all….
This writer sadly concludes that all the platitudes about the RoP are worthless. The battle is not just with the Islamists – because the core of the RoP supports sharia “extremes” such as death for converts to Christianity. And we can see today in Burnley how rudely the Islamic community chooses to treat the foreign minister of our closest ally.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2006/03/staring_down_shariah.html
Where are the shouts of “Racism” concerning the anti-Rice protests?
If the BNP were protesting the beeb would quickly be reporting racism.
But of course it is impossible to be left-wing and racist, isn’t it?
Take Ken Livingstone for example.
GB,
Rightly or wrongly I think you’ll find that the protesters in Burnley are angry about the policies of the administration of which Rice is part, rather than the fact that she’s black…
Livingstone however has been skating very close to the wind recently.
Off Topic: Why didn’t a blog about BBC bias discuss the Stonewall report about endemic homophobia in the organisation?
The BBC is failing to report properly on the heated debate in the US on illegal immigration. Matt Frei’s article was a clear example of outright bias in favour of illegals and against the proper application of laws in a constitution supposedly based on law.
In the UK, the BBC presents the huge (uncounted) numbers of illegals as adding to the economy, whereas there is ample evidence that there is a net disbenefit and massive social costs – including the risks of severe housing water shortages in the SouthEast. In the US likewise the BBC makes out that the economy would collapse if laws were properly applied. It ignores the fact that many legitimate Americans – including legal immigrants who have followed proper procedures – have their living standards depressed by illegals undercutting wage rates and avoiding taxes. It ignores the violent crime and drugrunning that is endemic among many illegals – a large proportion of the California prison population are illegal Mexicans. And it ignores the evidence that – worst case – cutting out illegal labour in agriculture would add a miniscule amount to the average US family budget.
The US debate is now taking a nasty turn, with many Mexicans flying their flag ahead of the American flag. Just like the Paris Muslims who do not see themselves as French and do not want to be French. And just like the large element of the Muslim community in Britain that actually rejects Britishness, rejects democratic decisions taken by the elected British government and endorsed by the British parliament, rejects the idea of freedom of expression – rejects tolerance. All with overt encouragement from the biased BBC, day in day out.
“Reconquista” is the rally-cry of many extremists among the Mexicans. Just as re-conquest, re-imposition of the Caliphate is what so many here in Europe want. And the BBC takes their side, refuses to analyse the situation clearly, and refuses to weigh the views of the indigenous community including many legal immigrants from other lands.
http://www.washtimes.com/op-ed/20060329-084824-8472r.htm
dumbcisco : ditto. My complaint was not addressed either. They say the interview was “suitably rigorous”.
Did your email look anything like this … noting that it’s a different person replying?
>>
Thank you for your email regarding the ‘Today programme’ on 3 March. Please accept my apologies for the delay in replying. We know our correspondents appreciate a quick response and I regret that you have had to wait so long on this occasion.
The interview that morning with the Kuwaiti man in Guantanamo Bay was a piece of newsmaking journalism and a rare insight into the conditions of the prisoners being held there. John Humphrys’ interview with Colleen Graffy, a member of the US Administration, was suitably rigorous. While we appreciate that our presenters’ interview techniques are not to all listeners’ taste, they do try to challenge government representatives – both British and foreign – and hold them to account on controversial policies.
Once again, thank you for taking the time to contact us with your feedback. Please be assured that your comments have been added to our daily audience log which will be made available to the ‘Today’ production team and indeed Senior BBC Management.
Regards
Jonathan Dunlop
BBC Information
D Burbage
The reply I received was identical to yours.
Even though the complaint I made was probably different. My point was specific – that Humphrys refuses to listento , indeed interrupts, the legal argument upheld in the Supreme Court that Gitmo detainees are subject to the laws of war and NOT to the internal criminal law of the US.
But I received the same anodyne brushoff as you. Except it was signed by a different BBC acolyte. Which is just another sign of overmanning !
D Burbage
The post at 11.33am was me
OT
this bit of FREE amateur film is more entertaining than most of the stuff the BBC puts out at huge cost.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6283096511750618839
In the UK, the BBC presents the huge (uncounted) numbers of illegals as adding to the economy, whereas there is ample evidence that there is a net disbenefit and massive social costs
Such as translators at each hearing, translators for health care, translators in schools, housing benefit, local authority expenditure not recognised by Central Govt as related to “immigrants” and the whole panoply of State funding not caputured in one category but hidden in various program budgets
and for my TV coverage of US politics I take a mix of
c-span.org – for all sorts of clips in Congress and elsewhere
Fox News, mainly because it is more accessible than the other MSM networks. I would watch the others if they gave more clips easily.
exposetheleft.com
for lots of daily clips, highpoints
plus a scanning of
realpolitics.com
for a broad selection of the US press each day.
ALL FREE.
I am increasingly cutting the BBC out of the loop. I have followed US politics closely since the Kennedy election of 1960, and can no longer trust the BBC to give a fair picture. Instead the BBC uses its massive news budget to filter and warp the news. I really don’t want biased crap from Matt Frei, John Humphrys and their ilk.
ID Cards WILL NOT stop terrorists; every Spaniard has a compulsory ID Card as did the Madrid Bombers. ID Cards will not ‘eliminate benefit fraud’, which in comparison,
True, but once you have lost comntrol of your borders you are left with little else. My objection is that the Card in itself should define you as a British Citizen but it may not……………
Fortunately, the chaps you blew up trains on 7 July last year carried Credit Cards otherwise one wonders how long the Met would have needed to find out their names…………..
BTW……..how did Mohammed Sidique Khan get a job as a Classroom Assistant in Leeds ? Didn’t Capita do its job then ?
Rick
And you will now find that many of the social budgets are now administered my ethnic staff who often skew their decisions in favour of “their lot”. Try getting a council flat in Tower Hamlets, for example.
On the immigration issue raised by dumbcisco, last night’s Newsnight was a priceless example of the Left’s uncanny ability to move like synchronised swimmers, or a flock of flying geese, without apparent command.
Just as the issue is being raised in the USA, the notorious halfwits at the IPPR have proposed an amnesty for illegals in the UK.
Having aired the IPPR’s point of view, without a mention of the organisation’s role within ZaNuLabour or its position on the political spectrum, Newsnight’s idea of a balanced panel to discuss the proposals comprised spokedrones from ZaNuLab, the Tories and that noted sage… Polly ‘barking’ Toynbee.
Newsnight seems to stagger from bias to bias these days – consistent in only one thing: its sheer, bloody awfulness.
D Burbage,
That really is spooky. Here is my reply.
____________
Dear Mr XXXXXXXX
Thank you for your email regarding the ‘Today’ programme on 3 March. Please accept my apologies for the delay in replying. We know our correspondents appreciate a quick response and I regret that you have had to wait so long on this occasion.
The interview that morning with the Kuwaiti man in Guantanamo Bay was a piece of news making journalism and a rare insight into the conditions of the prisoners being held there. John Humphrys’ interview with Colleen Graffy, a member of the US Administration, was suitably rigorous. While we appreciate that our presenters’ interview techniques are not to all listeners tastes, they do try to challenge government representatives – both British and foreign – and hold them to account on controversial policies.
Furthermore, BBC journalists are well aware of our commitment to impartial reporting. They are expected to put their own political views to one side when carrying out their work for the BBC. They seek to provide the information which will enable listeners to make up their own minds; to show the political reality and provide the forum for debate, giving full opportunity for all viewpoints to be heard. Senior editorial staff, the Executive Committee and the Board of Governors keep a close watch on programmes to ensure that standards of impartiality are maintained.
Please be assured that your comments have been fully registered on our daily audience log. This internal document will be made available to the ‘Today’ production team and Senior BBC Management.
Once again, thank you for taking the time to contact us with your feedback.
Regards
Paul Wheeler
BBC Information
______________________________________
http://www.bbc.co.uk/ – World Wide Wonderland
—–Original Message—–
>{Title:}
>{FirstName:} X.
>{LastName:} XXXXXXXX
>
>{Email:} XXXXXXXXX@gmail.com
>{PhoneNo:}
>{Postcode:}
>{PostRegion:}
>{Country:} England
>
>{About:} Radio
>
>
>{RadioStation:} Radio 4
>{ProgrammeName:} The Today Programme
>{TransmissionDate:} 03/03/06
>
>
>{Comments:}
>I wish to make an official complaint about this mornings interview on the Today Programme. The interview took place at 8.10am and was conducted by John Humphries. The lady being interviewed was Colleen Graffy.
>
>John Humphries was intolerably rude. He interrupted, berated, shouted at and browbeat Ms Graffy. Every time she tried to give a calm and reasonable response to one of John Humphries rants, she was shouted down as the interviewer descended into further righteous indignation. This does not qualify as ‘intelligent speech’ and failed to inform the audience of anything buy the BBC’s own prejudices.
>
>I also note that BBC interviewers never behave in this manner when interviewing people who are anti-American, pro-Kyoto, left wing, islamofascists, etc. How strange…..
>
>I am sick of the constant bigoted poison that the Today programme spews forth on a daily basis. There is no attempt at balance and presenters regularly take sides in debate, especially when defending the BBC’s own pet projects/campaigns (Kyoto, Make Poverty History, New Labour, George Galloway, Islam, Multiculturalism, anything EU, etc).
>
>I wish this complaint to be fully investigated and I expect a prompt reply.
>
>{EndofComments:}
>
So, Paul Wheeler and Jonathan Dunlop really are ‘of one mind’ on this issue.
They really must be brain-washing them on these journalism courses…..
I saw that report on illegal immigration on Newsnight and the reaction to the proposal by the (left-wing but fact not mentioned) IPPR to grant amnesty to illegals. The IPPR report that deportation of each illegal migrant costs £11,000. Where does that figure come from? Could it be:
flight – £500
fees for ‘human rights’ lawyer – £10500.
The BBC’s ‘reporter’ focused on a couple from Bolivia and their two young children having to live in bedsits and avoid the police etc. Kirsty Wark asked why we are “making life so hellish for those migrants”. Surely the answer is that they can and should go home. The BBC’s bias on this issue is self-evident; likewise for the illegals in the US.
Grimer
Add Paul Kettle to that list of BBC repliers using an identical text.
And there may well be more or them !!!! Huge overmanning – the BBC will end up as a busted pension fund.
In the old days, all you needed for sending out a cyclostyled letter was a rubber stamp for the signature. Cost = about £1.
Cost of at least three rubber-stamping BBC complaints staff = £100,000 per annum including overheads ?
Should this issue not be raised on Newswatch ?
Grimer
You were lucky to get the extra paragraph. It’s actually quite informative insofar as it says
“Furthermore, BBC journalists are well aware of our commitment to impartial reporting.”
and can ignore it with impunity
“They are expected to put their own political views to one side when carrying out their work for the BBC.”
note : expected, not required….
“They seek to provide the information which will enable listeners to make up their own minds;”
seek and ye shall find? not always like missing out exactly why prisoners were held in Belmarsh, like missing out the whole countryside alliance march …
” to show the political reality”
in other words a political viewpoint like ‘this means the Americans are in the wrong [Iraq/Gitmo/Kyoto/anything] doesn’t it?’
“and provide the forum for debate,
giving full opportunity for all viewpoints to be heard. ”
Until interrupted after 0.3 seconds by John Humprhys when he’s talking to (at) someone from a right-wing party, like in many complaints 🙁
As far as all lefties are concerned, over Condi Rice, you cant acuse them of being racist or sexist. They hate Black people and women getting on in life and being any type of conservative, just as much as anyone else. The choice is clear. Do the British people think they would be safer and more prosperous under American influence. Allied to free ( liberal ) market capitalism. Or under German/French socialist control. Allied to Islamic goverments, oil, power, and money. Modern real European socialists would gladly accept occupation from MARS as long as the “bug eyes” promised to ZAPP the USA first. Such is their level of BBC inspired brain damage. With the likes of A Lurker. It is not that his infomation is generaly wrong. It is the dangerously wrong conclutions that they come to. I feel sorry for him it must be bit of a shock right now to be a “Liberal Lefty”. That is finding out that you dont really exsist, and never have.
I dont have this debate within myself. I know which side I am on. It is clear where the likes of A Lurker G Galloway and most at the BBC stand. The same place they would have been standing in 1936. The wrong, and future, beaten one. This power struggle has been going on for most of the last 135 years. Whether it breaks out in all out WAR soon, is the unknownable thing. However the signs are as bad as at any time since the 1960s Cuban Missile Crisis.
Remember peace is only the gap between wars.
PS Good eh!! I am still allowed to be rude to people from MARS……Arnt I?