Please use this thread for off-topic, but preferably BBC related, comments. Please keep comments on other threads to the topic at hand. N.B. this is not an invitation for general off-topic comments – our aim is to maintain order and clarity on the topic-specific threads. This post will remain at or near the top of the blog. Please scroll down to find new topic-specific posts.
Open thread – for comments of general Biased BBC interest:
Bookmark the permalink.
“Serious anti-dhimmitude abounds in some parts of the BBC.”
sounds like a serious power struggle if you ask me.
blair’s legacy and all that.
lets put ourselves into Blair’s shoes – for just a minute.
and lets imagine ourselves , as Blair, going to mediate with Israel.
wouldnt you feel embarrassed, with Ehud Olmert in front of you pointing out that the BBC is part of the problem?
with the BBC’s output , is it any wonder that Bush brushed him off and sent Condi instead?
these are serious big consequences for the 6th form “reporting” of most of the BBC news output.
apologies – the stealth edit piece did not refer to paul reynolds.
it referred to this piece:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/5211930.stm
Archduke 27.07.06 – 11:24 am
But there’s no doubt about the long-term winner, right across the Middle East: it’s militant Islam.
That’s an unusually frank admission from the BBC. We’ve known for some time which horse it’s backing, but that really does clarify things.
may i add to the above – blair privatising the BBC leaves a big legacy – for future PMs.
it gives future PMs the “nothing to do with me guv -its private” excuse.
right now, its just viewed by outsiders as state controlled media i.e. the PM gets the blame for Feargal “cry me a river” Keane.
not a good position to be in.
bryan -> well, that was written by John “magnificent taliban” simpson.
he hovered over northern israel in a helicopter tonight , looking down on the israelis.
meanwhile “cry me a river” was up close and personal with hezbollah supporters.
i leave you to derive the subliminal metaphor.
taol->
“Incidentally, the Ahmadis – a small Muslim sect – are having a beano in the Hants countryside this weekend. About 30,000 of them are gathering for the annual Jalsa Salana.”
its on bbc local news right now.
“ahmadi” is never mentioned.
they are just called “muslims”.
oh dear god. this really *is* stupid reporting.
“But there’s no doubt about the long-term winner, right across the Middle East: it’s militant Islam.”
LOL…is that what they think??
The worlds great Islamic Powers, Iran, Syria, and Saudi, would LOVE to go and drop a few bombs on Israel right now….
But they ain’t…..you want to know why???
Because the real Winner, is UNCLE SAM……who has prooven that he has Iran and the rest trembling in their boots, and made them terrified to act against Israel……….the Islamic powers are now showing how scared they are of the real winner….
The only super power in the world. The USA…..
Going into Iraq was a master stroke…..
And the whole world is watching, and waking up to how the whole Islamic world has been outflanked by the USA…..and he is now sat in the middle of it, making sure it goes his way……….
lol. 🙂
re-prisoner exchange article. The BBC in order to tell the truth must tell who are we talking about.Kuntar is a murderer terrorists, lazy BBC journalists, including JR, exclude vital and available information with a purpose. By white washing terrorissts they create the impression these terrorists are morally equivalent. The Israeli soldiers were KIDNAPPED FROM WITHIN ISRAEL WITHOUT ANY PROVOKATION ANS AS THE ACCOMPLISHMENT OF A STATED INTENTION BY HIZBALLA. In contrast, each of the prisoners in Israeli prisons were captured for a reason. (BTW JR, your attempts at reducing when convinient important information are pathetic. The original article was correct, i still remember this vicious terrorist attack vividly and also know a member of the family.)
Moral equivalence is prevalent and intentional in BBC reporting, examples are numerous, and patterns are consistent. For ex. Lebanese casualties are referred to as civilians. So Hizballa and its enablers are launching massive attacks, and they are civilians–pathetic.
Note-I think JR is employed and paid to keep this blog busy in order to keep people engaged and , therefore, unable to scrutinise.total waste of energy on a person who is slippery and incapable of clear thinking.
Why did the BBC lead on the Al Q message ?
I can understand Al Jazeera giving top prominence to the rant of an evil nutter in a cave – but why does the BBC give him a platform ?
As far as I can see no other UK media led with Al Q. Not the Guardian or Indy, not the Times or Telegraph.
Why does Al Q appear to get resonance at the BBC ?
I may have missed it – but has the BBC yet reported the capture almost intact of the main Hezbollah command centre in the south, complete with stacks of computer etc info on the command structure, order of battle etc ?
Why doesn’t the BBC give us the NEWS ?
Alan:
“They hang homosexuals, and they hang naughty children”
Not quite right Alan.
They hang children who have been abused by naughty men.
John Reith:
This has already been mentioned on this blog, but would you say that this is an accurate account of the state of Lebanon right now?
“Beirut was on the floor, there were only around two buildings still standing. It wasn’t like it used to be.”
“When I went to Beirut before all the houses were nice. Now they’re all knocked down and all the people are gone. It’s empty. I don’t want to go back again.”
“When I spoke to my brother and sister they said that all the buildings in Beruit were crushed down and there was dust all around. They are sad.”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/cbbcnews/hi/newsid_5210000/newsid_5218300/5218390.stm
—————–
This article is for children, who, if they watch the BBC news reports from Beirut will be confused when they see the reporter standing in front of well lit buildings, in view of busy traffic as they sign off for the night.
Read the quotes above again Mr Reith, and tell us if you see the truth, or do the girls come from an Hizbollah controlled area of Beirut?
If so, shouldn’t there have been some background info?
next time galloway is on the bbc , keep this article in mind
http://www.socialistworker.co.uk/article.php?article_id=9334
“I side with the resistance to that injustice. Hizbollah is leading that resistance. I do not hesitate to say, and Blair and his law officers may take note, that I glorify that resistance.
I glorify the Hizbollah national resistance movement, and I glorify the leader of Hizbollah, Sheikh Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah.”
“Why doesn’t the BBC give us the NEWS ?
dumbcisco ”
and they whacked about 100 or so hezbollah as well, during that “8 israeli dead” so called “disaster”. recovered a lot of intell as well on hez operations.
as i said before – i can understand why they didnt flatten the place before they sent in the troops – they were after the intell.
why else did they send in the elite Golani brigade?
re-Lebanese prisoner-Kuntar
http://www.opinionjournal.com/best/?id=110008710
John Reith:
This has already been mentioned on this blog, but would you say that this is an accurate account of the state of Lebanon right now?
“Beirut was on the floor, there were only around two buildings still standing. It wasn’t like it used to be.”
“When I went to Beirut before all the houses were nice. Now they’re all knocked down and all the people are gone. It’s empty. I don’t want to go back again.”
“When I spoke to my brother and sister they said that all the buildings in Beruit were crushed down and there was dust all around. They are sad.”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/cbbcnews/hi/newsid_5210000/newsid_5218300/5218390.stm
—————–
This article is for children, who, if they watch the BBC news reports from Beirut will be confused when they see the reporter standing in front of well lit buildings, in view of busy traffic as they sign off for the night.
Read the quotes above again Mr Reith, and tell us if you see the truth, or do the girls come from an Hizbollah controlled area of Beirut?
If so, shouldn’t there have been some background info?
John Simpsons Q&A on the BBC web site seems to be a bit misleading with this:
“Q: Isn’t there a United Nations force stationed in southern Lebanon? What is its mandate, and has it accomplished its mission, or even anything substantial?
Gary Westmoreland, Schuyer, Virginia, USA
Unifil (UN Interim Force in Lebanon) has been stationed in southern Lebanon for 28 years, but the great powers prevented its having any serious mandate. As a result it has had to stand by helplessly and watch while groups attack Israel from Lebanon and Israeli forces fire across the border or invade. It can be dangerous work, as the killing of the 4 UN workers by Israeli shellfire shows, but it is also thankless”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/talking_point/5216708.stm
Which “great powers”? I’m sure if it was just the USA then he would have named them – but leaving this throw away phrase in gives the impresion that it must be in fact the USA as it is at the moment the only super-power. I would be interested to know which countries he is refering to.
Send Pizza to the IDF
http://5thnovember.blogspot.com/2006/07/how-to-send-kosher-pizzas-to-israeli.html
guido finally picks up on something that gone around the blogosphere for the past 3 weeks.
actually – pizzaidf i first discovered on THIS very blog.
having said that, i welcome Guido, with his sudden outbreak of common sense over tittle tattle.
There was a long item on last night’s Ten o’clock News about the police success in busting London criminal factory making guns from replicas and supposedly disabled weapons bought on the internet. Fascinating detail about the weapons – but not a word about the criminals involved. Could this be because they were not white home grown types?
The anti-Israeli stance of the BBC is well known. What has truly shocked me over the last few days is the brazen and unashamed manner with which the BBC has been critical of Israel, whilst barely mentioning Hezbollah.
Thus, we are having endless BBC articles on the use of UK airports to transfer arms to Israel, whilst completely ignoring the question of the supply of rockets to Hezbollah. Why can’t the BBC spend a little of our taxpayer’s money looking at that interesting little question?
At the moment we have Ming Campbell on Today yet again criticising Israel whilst barely mentioning Hezbollah or the role of Iran. He uses all the usual memes – disproportionate response, collective punishment etc. All these things are accepted without question by the Today team.
Montaquinn takes Ming Campbell apart with this searching question with regard to a certain donor to the Lib Dems who might be on his way to prison:-
“It’s rather embarassing for you isn’t it?”
Is that really the best that the Today team can do? Can you imagine in your wildest dreams this cotton wool approach being applied to a similar matter if it ocurred in the Conservative party?
George Galloway is being given prime air time this morning at 10.00am to spout he’s hatred towards Israel on Talk Sport,i used to think Talk sport knew the time of day,i got that wrong.I think it’s a disgarce how this nut can be entertained at all.
How can people far better educated than me not see the threat from Islamists?words fail me.
Do your best guys and Gals to phone talk sport and put this prat in his place.
And as an alternative approach to the Lebanon crisis (is the BBC capable of an alternative approach?), they feature a Lebanese musician who has combined his music with sounds of the Israeli Air Force bombing Beirut. Just the sort of “issue based” arts feature that the Newsnight review would love, with the added advantage that it keeps our minds away from the difficult questions, such as the true nature of Hezbollah and the Iranian administration.
Perhaps tomorrow we could have Nasrallah’s rantings interspersed with exerpts from Auschwitz survivors singing Hatikvah in the newly liberated death camp?
Eamonn
I think you’re being rather selective in your review of that Ming Campbell interview on the Today Programme. I recall it went something alont the lines of:
Today: You donor … banged up for maybe 10 years … it’s rather embarassing for you isn’t it?
Mingzies: It’s nothing to do with us.
Today: Thank you Lord Sir Mingzies.
Ahh see the bugger squirm.
The Today programme (recently renamed “Al Manar”) 8.50am:
“Does America have a chance here to, in some ways, redeem itself?”
As ever, a very balanced question by MontaQuinn.
“They want to bring democracy to Syria and Iran, they are destroying it in Lebanon”
An outrageous statement from Montaquinn on the Today programme.
I quite like the idea of Galloway getting his own slot on Talksport….
I can’t think of a better spokesman to show the ordinary Talksport listener how looney the Islamonutters are !
I’ve heard talk about Galloway being an MI5 plant. I’m no conspiracy theorist, but he’s doing such a fine job it wouldn’t surprise me if it’s true !!!!
AL Beeb and the half the story;
“When Israel invaded Lebanon in 1982, the initial pretext – reflected in the codename given to the operation, Peace for Galilee – was to push PLO guns about 40km (25 miles) back from the border, beyond range of northern Israel.”
While the above it true BBC, you kind of leave out the assassination attempt in LONDON of the Israeli ambassador’ on the 3rd of June 1982 by the terrorist organisation belonging to a certain Abu Nidal. It was that which lead to the Invasion on the 6th of June.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/5222154.stm
Oh and BBC I’ve started doing screen dumps;
http://www.photohosting.info/uploads/4a67b808d0.jpg
Just in case.
That article by Jim Muir seems to be an unremitting attack on Israel and its policies.
But at least he has no difficulty in ascribing blame to Hezbollah for the 1983 bombings of the US and French barracks.
BBC and half truths;
“Discussions indicated that, while Britain observed a UN arms embargo by withholding weapons from the Arab side, Soviet-supplied Czech weaponry reached Israeli forces.”
So what is the BBC trying to say here that the Jews had weapons while the Arabs were denied them?
I think you will find that the fledgling state of Israel was out numbered by the neighbours in everything bar spunk and tenacity. At the start of the war Israel had 1 tank, and no planes. The Arabs had 40 tanks and 74 aircraft. That may explain why Eygpt was able to annex Gaza and Jordan the west Bank. And history tells me that Jordan only lost the west bank in 1967 (19 years later)
Here just to help your script writers for the future;
http://img238.imageshack.us/img238/8466/1948arabisraeliwarmay15june10tj6.jpg
BBC and half truths;
“Britain came close to involvement in the 1948 Arab-Israeli war, newly released secret Cabinet papers reveal.
As the UK faces decisions on the latest Middle East crisis, the documents show the then Labour cabinet feared an RAF base could be overrun by Israel.
Prime Minister Clement Attlee prepared measures to defend the site near Amman.”
So the BBC sells this image of a belligerent Israel bullying the neighbours and the worlds superpower was willing to defend the BBCs ideological masters. Sorry Al Beeb Britain did get involved;
22 May 1948
During the final stages of the British evacuation from Israel, the RAF station at Ramat David is attacked in error by Supermarine Spitfires of No.2 Squadron, Royal Egyptian Air Force. During the course of three separate attacks on the station, two RAF Spitfires of No.32 Squadron were destroyed and a further eight Spitfires of No.32 and No.208 Squadrons damaged. Additionally, a Douglas Dakota of No.204 Squadron was destroyed and a further two Dakotas and three Auster OP6s damaged. Four Egyptian aircraft were shot down by RAF Spitfires and a fifth by anti-aircraft fire.
http://www.rafmuseum.org.uk/milestones-of-flight/british_military/1948.html
And as for presenting the image that Britian can always win. Sorry Al Beeb for an Organisation which hates anything about the United Kingdom (apart from the Beeb tax) you kind of leave out the RAF Mosquito shot down by the IDF over the Suez canal in Nov 1948 as you do the flight of Spitfires shot down in Jan 1948 by the IDF.
Strange how you tell only half a story.
Silly me the BBC link to the above two posts of mine;
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/5222922.stm
Al Beeb defending those who wish to kill us.
pounce | 27.07.06 – 12:03 am | #
———————————-
I have screen grabs of the before and after stealth edits if anyone needs them.
http://ussneverdock.blogspot.com/2006/07/uk-bbc-covers-up-for-hezbollah.html
http://5thnovember.blogspot.com/2006/07/how-to-send-kosher-pizzas-to-israeli.html
have a look at the comments.
seems like Guido has managed get the hug-an-Islamist crowd out of the woodwork.
mick in the uk | Homepage | 28.07.06 – 12:43 am |
“only around two buildings still standing (in Beirut)….etc
Read the quotes above again Mr Reith, and tell us if you see the truth”
No, I would say it didn’t correspond to the truth as I know it.
But then neither does my daughter’s vivid • but I suspect largely imaginary • story of her personal encounter with the Tooth Fairy.
These are small children, for heaven’s sake!
Do you really expect accurate bomb-damage assessments out of the mouths of babes and infants?
You are making a fundamental category error • one not uncommon here. The BBC does not offer any warranty that the non-BBC people it interviews • whether they be small children, terrorists, generals or prime ministers • are TELLING THE TRUTH. Many of them talk utter rot. Some even tell deliberate lies. The BBC’s job is NOT to cherry-pick the sensible and truthful and discard the erroneous and mendacious • no, the BBC’s responsibility is to offer a balanced and wide range of voices spanning the waterfront of opinion and experience. The viewer/listener/reader then gets to decide whom he or she believes and what weight he/she gives to any interview.
The piece you link to flags up a forthcoming set of interviews with Israeli children. Personally, I would have preferred both to run at the same time, but I guess that wasn’t possible. Instead, pro tem, the piece links to an interview with a child in UK with family in Israel. Imperfect, but fair enough.
Eamonn
Ming Campbell … uses all the usual memes – disproportionate response, collective punishment etc.
Yes Ming “false prospectus” Campbell. As he uses the same lines each time why don’t the BBC save the taxi fare & just replay from the Ming library?
a Lebanese musician who has combined his music with sounds of the Israeli Air Force bombing Beirut. Just the sort of “issue based” arts feature that the Newsnight review would love
Already heard his efforts on R5 – he’s obviously going for the Jimi at Woodstock vibe, man.
Interesting that he tapes the sound of the Israeli bombs from the balcony of his apartment.
The BBC didn’t see fit to ask why he didn’t take shelter. Arabs seem to have a reckless disregard for their own safety in wartime. We saw it in Iraq where the US column advancing to Baghdad had to negotiate its way past Iraqis in pickups taking the family to the beach for the day.
Any wonder why they die in Lebanon when they are too stupid to take shelter?
Al Beeb and its Blogg’
What are the newspapers saying this morning?
“The Daily Mail: Why do the BBC’s war reporters refuse to wear ties?
Shouldn’t that be;
”Why do the BBC’s war reporters wear their blue body armour (without tin lid) while everybody else is in T-shirts”?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/2006/07/bbc_in_the_news_friday_9.html
pounce
“Shouldn’t that be;
“Why do the BBC’s war reporters wear their blue body armour (without tin lid) while everybody else is in T-shirts”?”
‘cos they’re more afraid of the Health & Safety police than they are of Hezbollah/IDF
Now that’s pure Humphrys/Naughtie humour.
This was an appalling murder. One year on, the BBC ensure we do not forget:-
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/merseyside/5216236.stm
This was an appalling murder. Will the BBC carry a similar article one year on?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/london/5087702.stm
The UN was quick to release transcripts of the UN observers in South Lebanon, and the BBC even quicker to broadcast it. The question arises, where are the reports records emails from these same UN observers of Hezbollah activity taking place outside the front door of the UN bunker.
Some people may say that they are now dead as a result of their own negligence in not reporting such activity in accord with UN resolutions.
Being paid by the UN and not doing the job they are paid appears normal practic within the UN.
“Those stuffed shirts had finally better get used to the idea that Bolton won’t stop until the UN is changed from the personal fiefdom of a few corrupt bureaucrats into a useful international organization that can truly contribute to the peace and security of the world.”
http://rightwingnuthouse.com/archives/category/united-nations/
These, by the way, don’t take the form of the BBC correspondent saying “Israel wickedly bombed civilian targets last night”. You only catch it on the edge of a remark. The reporters themselves often don’t know they are doing it. It is their unconscious choice of verbs and nouns, their tone of voice, the selection of pictures and the attitudes to spokesmen that you have to watch
Peter Hitchens writing here http://hitchensblog.mailonsunday.co.uk/
Get your T-shirt here
http://www.zahal.org/Army/infantry/p4.htm
Good stuff here classic battle that will be discussed for years
The Battle of Bint Jubayl and Hezbollah’s Army
http://www.military.com/blog/counterterror
Mr John Reith wrote;
“‘cos they’re more afraid of the Health & Safety police than they are of Hezbollah/IDF”
Got to love those Health & Safety police. I mean unable to explain why an Innocent man got slotted they use H&S in which to present an image of justice .What a joke.
Now excuse me while I try and find my White hat which I require (As per H&S) in which to perform my Burt Lancaster routine at the local big top.
(Mind you I preferred him as Capt Vallo than Mike Ribble )
Appears Hizbollah was doing a better job of monitoring than the UN, makes you laugh don’t it?
“The Hezbollah bunker in Bint Jubayl was taken nearly intact. Hezbollah attempted to destroy the equipment in the bunker, but was not successful in destroying it all, according to an intelligence source. Abu Jaafar, the Hezbollah commander in southern Lebanon, may have killed himself rather than being captured. The Israeli troops seized Hezbollah computers, documents and monitoring devices used to observe the Israeli border, in addition to the “electronic surveillance equipment, weapons and communication devices made in Iran” which was reported yesterday. The bunker served as the equivalent of a Hezbollah headquarters and command and control center for the southern border.”
have the BBC visited this place yet or are the suckers still going on Hizbollah escorted tours.
“Psst! very cheap! escorted tours of rubble, plenty of photo opportunity. Free hizbollah cap badge”
SiN -> hmmm… rather like John Simpson looking down on the israelis from a helicopter last night, followed by “cry me a river” in a hezbollah area, with no hezbollah on display.
Disgruntled Right Winger:
http://www.zahal.org/Army/infantry/p4.htm
Great link, Sir. I’m going shopping this weekend. I think a ‘Golani Warrior’ t shirt should put me in the mood for when I next go shooting some wildlife.
And the one top left on this page:
http://www.zahal.org/tshirts/p9.htm
will be brought just for the liberals in my local. I love the smell of seething liberal on a Friday night.
Is there Blood on the BBCs hands???
I just saw Fergal Kean reporting on the lunchtime BBC news, and he said they were going in with an “Aid Convoy” to southern Lebanon….and that the “aid” convoy was “PAKCED” with western media……???
Then they had to turn back due to heavy fighting…..and another BBC reporter (how many do they send to the same place??) said that he saw a hundred or so people, in the town they went too…and all these people just wanted some food and water, or to get out…they needed transport…….
So….should’nt have the “Aid” convoy have been taking in AID!!!!!! And not reporters???
…..and if they had’nt “PACKED” in so many western reporters, could they have started to evacuate some of thoe people…..???
The irony was of course lost on the blind propagandists at the BBC….
However, it was a “Muslim Humanitarian “AID”” operation…..so no wonder they took reporters, little food and water, and left the needy behind……
Al-Beeb does it again……and the whole world is watching their collapse under Islamic Propaganda…..
lol.
“The Daily Mail: Why do the BBC’s war reporters refuse to wear ties?
Because Bowen is very proud of his manly hairy chest. He is also fond of “ball-crushingly tight trousers”.