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.
pounce | 06.11.06 – 1:22 am
You claim that by singling out Iraq & Afghansistan & Lebanon the BBC is displaying bias in its coverage of the cluster bomb issue.
this bias, you claim, arises because these examples point the finger at America and Israel.
You also remark that ‘3 others have a much larger death toll ‘.
There’s quite a lot wrong with your reasoning here.
First, the survey period for Afghanistan covers 26 years during which the US was militarily active there for only about 5. The majority of casualties would, therefore, have been most likely caused by SOVIET cluster bombs.
You go on to say the BBC is showing anti-Americanism by leaving out mention of Laos and Vietnam.
But who dropped the cluster bombs on Laos and Vitenam?
“During its wars in Indochina, the U.S. dropped enormous amounts of cluster bombs. A B-52 bomber fitted with two Hayes dispensers could drop 25,000 bomblets on a single bombing run. It’s estimated that some 90 million CBU-26 bomblets were dropped on Laos (and the CBU-26 is just one of 12 different kinds of cluster bombs that have been recovered there to date).”
http://www.itvs.org/bombies/bombs.html
And who dropped the cluster bombs on Vietnam?
“In Vietnam, people are still being killed as a result of cluster bombs and other objects left by the US military. Estimates range up to 300 per year.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cluster_bomb#Civilian_deaths_from_unexploded_cluster_bomblets
So, if the BBC’s aim were to point the finger at the US – then it surely would have majored on these two rather than Afghanistan where the Soviets were mostly to blame?
Of course, there IS a better explanation.
Iraq, Afghanistan and Lebanon were singled out because they are of contemporary rather than historical salience.
Cockney
And surely Ian Wright is the ultimate symbol of BBC dumbing down??
I think he is the ultimate symbol of Greg Dyke’s “hideously white” announcement, after all he even got his own BBC saturday show talk special! I wasn’t sure if Adrian Chiles was too happy with being called by Wright “Chilesy!” A comparison with QT is appropriate, take a look at the panels for Final Score on Sat. afternoons that we keep seeing! Not forgetting that last season they even had music by 50 cents as an introduction.
Channel 4 is broadcasting a programme entitled: “JIHAD TV” tonight at 11 p.m. A ‘Radio Times’
preview:
“Islamic terrorists are not only using guns and bombs to wage war against the West. Journalist Paul Eedie looks at how the jihadis have
harnessed the power of the mass media, using television and the internet to spread propaganda and reach potential recruits.”
Are ‘John Reiths’ and the BBC
committed in their anti-Jihadi
struggle? Frank Gardner, BBC Security
Correspondent, wrote an interesting
piece, “The growth of ‘online Jihadism’, (25 Oct.) which was rather
hidden away on the BBC news-site:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news 6086042.stm
The treatment yesterday by the BBC of the announcement of Sadam Husseins death sentence had so many moments of astonishing bias. Just two here…
Andrew North’s report for BBC1 News at 19.40pm had images of the reaction by the Shia and then Sunni in Iraq, but completely ignored the Kurds!!
What the Iraqi Kurds think just doesn’t seem to matter for some BBC journalists, they think that showing how the Palestinians reacted more meaningful!
On News 24 we had Mike Sergeant reporting live from a North London Iraqi-Kurd restaurant (at 17.26pm) going from table to table asking customers their reaction to the sentence, three individuals all approved, but Sergeant clearly wishing to give the impression that he was attempting balance, idiotically introduced the second person with:
“But you are not entirely happy with the verdict”.
The person, indeed, wasn’t pleased at all, unfortunately he spoke such bad English that he was barely comprehensible, however he wasn’t happy with such a short death of hanging by only 30minutes, he estimated, this was simply too good for him. The third person interviewed over dinner, a woman, with a child sitting next to her, also agreed with the sentence but was unhappy that it was so short and wished that he could be tortured often, one of her relatives had been tortured by Sadam and his henchmen.
Presumably some jaws dropped in the BBC studios with North London restuarant goers yearning for torture. But then, BBC News 24 switches to Barnie Choudrey in the studio managing the HYS website, and he says at the beginning to camera, when asked by the studio presenter what has been the reaction of viewers sending in their emails on HYS,
“Rather like Mike’s some for and against!
He then proceeded to read out some of the HYS comments, that wanted to hang Bush & Blair, disgraceful comments that have already been noticed in this blog.
The bias of BBC journalism is quite astonishing- there was NOBODY in that North London restaurant that was “against” Choudrey! Viewers had just heard three pro death penalty views, and two of them wanted him to be tortured as hanging was too simple and quick! But, rather than listen to what had been said, he already had his BBC balanced perspective formulated, eager to repeat the Bush and Blair are war criminals perspective…
“Rather like Mike’s some for and against!
What a foolish journalist Barnie Choudrey is, another example of dumbing down!
Letters to the Guardian…..
Monday November 6, 2006
The Guardian
Mourning the loss of impartiality on the BBC
http://media.guardian.co.uk/mediaguardian/story/0,,1940135,00.html
“Like John Simpson, who this week leapt to the defence of BBC “impartiality”, I began my near 40-year broadcast career in BBC TV news. It was impartial then; it certainly isn’t now.
I have seen my own visual material presented in an entirely different timeline, totally distorting the actual event that I witnessed, and at no time did the intellectually lazy journalists ask me what I witnessed. I also have seen raw camera material destined for both BBC and ITN come out in completely different forms on air. The bias in both cases was pro-establishment during the Thatcher years.
As we expect politicians to declare an interest, should we not expect ourselves to do the same when asked to comment on a system that has provided succour to ourselves and our families as it has in John’s case?
I believe that few employed by the BBC can have a truly objective view of the BBC’s political and social bias.
We on the outside do not like the PC Stalinism, urban bias, sloppy technical, artistic and journalistic standards that BBC News now represents, and if you really want examples, I can point to a Newsnight interview with the PM on a train. Neither the cameraman, reporter, editor, sub or indeed tea lady noticed that between cutaways and the body of the interview the train direction reversed. It is called crossing the line, it is as basic in TV news as learning your alphabet. That the BBC sought to defend its gross incompetence is again a glaring example of how those within have lost all objectivity about the system that they are in. Precision with words and pictures is vital in a political world that seeks to distort both.
Chris Harnett, Southampton
Public service TV inquiry launched
http://media.guardian.co.uk/broadcast/story/0,,1939072,00.html
“The culture, media and sport select committee has announced an inquiry into public service media content.
Early next year, the committee will look at a range of issues facing public service television, including its prospects once the UK switches over to digital television.
It will also look at “the viability of existing funding models for ITV, Channel 4 and [Channel] Five” and “the case for public funding of broadcasters in addition to the BBC”.
Also on the agenda are the future of children’s television and news. The committee said it will look at “the future of key areas of public service, media content such as news provision and children’s programming”.
Media regulator Ofcom’s proposal for a “public service publisher” (PSP), funded by the public purse, will also be discussed, as will “the case for provision of public service material on new media”.
The future of public service TV is a hotly debated topic as the switch to digital comes closer.
Ofcom has already investigated the issue – which led to its suggestion of setting up a PSP – and last month the former ITV chief executive, Charles Allen, also called for an inquiry into all the big channels’ public service output.
The select committee is inviting interested parties to make submissions by January 18 2007.”
Cockney
That’s funny cause everyone I know of whatever affiliation (apart from the sprinkling of mutes who occasionally visit Al-Emirates Islamic SuperLibrary) loathes Arsenal with a passion. Something to do with the very unBritish way they squeal like a stuck pig every time someone goes within 20 yards of them, has the temerity to beat them or suggests that they might not be quite as good as they’d like to believe.
Actually, it’s because you live on the North Circular Road, in a South Herts slum called Edmonton. And no-one suggests that we’re not quite as good as we think we are.
As for dissing Ian Wright Wright Wright, is it cos he is black?
‘Victims’ or ‘plumbers’?
Paris airport faces strike threat
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6114974.stm
“Unions at France’s main airport, Charles de Gaulle in Paris, have threatened to call a strike over alleged bias against Muslim workers.
Seventy-two workers, mostly Muslims, have lost security clearance at the airport since May 2005.
Officials say the workers posed a risk because of alleged links to groups with “potentially terrorist aims”.
What is it with muslims and plotting to blow people up?
alan | 06.11.06 – 10:12 am
It wasn’t ‘hidden away’. It was also broadcast over the airwaves!
Mr John Reith wrote;
“There’s quite a lot wrong with your reasoning here. First, the survey period for Afghanistan covers 26 years”
Thank you for the above statement in which you try to pick the bones out of my post.
But before we go any further could I be so kind as to ask how you can brace your feet in the ground and shout out “Pounce is wrong”
Mr John Reith wrote;
“There’s quite a lot wrong with your reasoning here. First, the survey period for Afghanistan covers 26 years”
Thank you for the above statement in which you try to pick the bones out of my post.
But before we go any further could I be so kind as to ask how you can brace your feet in the ground and shout out “Pounce is wrong” over what you imagine is a bias on my behalf about the BBC reporting.
I think you will find in fact I make it very clear that the collective figure for deaths by submunitions is an amalgamation of start dates. I suggest you read what I actually wrote and not what you presume I wrote.
P.S
Ref this;
A B-52 bomber fitted with two Hayes dispensers could drop 25,000 bomblets on a single bombing run.”
That’s funny as the B52 dropped dumb bombs (which included cluster weapons) The only plane I know of which had two bomblet submunitions was the MRCA. The B52-D (which was used extensively in Vietnam had the big belly upgrade. In otherwords they just made the bomb bay bigger, the B52-G had a rotary carousel fitted in its bomb bay which allowed it to carry a few more cruise missiles. However that weapon wasn’t used in Vietnam. So if you don’t mind could you be so kind as to bring to the table a little more information on the Hayes dispenser. Seen as the B52 sited at Duxford. Is a D and you can actually look underneath the bombay.
(Please excuse me on this one as I have since childhood been something of a spotter on aircraft.)
Remember, this is all fantasy made up by the neo-conzzzzzz…..
‘Man’ or ‘plumber’?
Man ‘planned massive explosions’
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6120560.stm
Gosh I must learn to proof read.
Omit;
“The only plane I know of which had two bomblet submunitions was the MRCA. ”
Insert;
The only plane I know of which had two bomblet submunitions dispeners was the MRCA.
This discussion probably belongs on another board…..but
“Actually, it’s because you live on the North Circular Road, in a South Herts slum called Edmonton.”
I don’t live in Edmonton, and nor do the vast majority of the 526,827,256 other people I know who despise Arsenal for the reasons previously referred to.
“And no-one suggests that we’re not quite as good as we think we are.”
Given the mass delusion permeating N5 these days anyone suggesting the Ars* aren’t rivalling Brazil 70 as the greatest team of all time does just that. I know Filth fans who actually thought they had half a chance against Barca last season – imagine!!
“As for dissing Ian Wright Wright Wright, is it cos he is black?”
Nope it’s solely because he’s the most moronic, monosyllabic, ill informed ‘pundit’ in TV history.
Hmmm. Want some bias research on what BBC viewers think of the BBC so you can justify continued PC multi-culti licence fee poll tax? That’s easy, limit your ‘research’ to an area full of lefty liberal multi-cultis, say…..er – London!
Have Your Say audience research
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/talking_point/4798845.stm
“BBC News are currently conducting some in depth audience research about the Have Your Say section and would like to invite a selection of the audience to contribute.
Because of an overwhelming response so far we have had to narrow our research to specific locations. We are looking for people in the London area.
The research will involve group sessions which will be held in a location somewhere in Central London before the end of November.”
London does not reflect the UK as a whole…. is this ‘research’ being carried out by the team who put together the Question Time studio audience?
If an organisation is not viable in the free-market then it should disapear.
i.e. If people don’t choose to fund an organisation, then that organisation should no longer exist.
Why on earth are they looking for feedback specifically about the Have Your Say section for Christ’s sake?? They ask a question, the public submit a response, stuff gets posted. It’s not rocket science, it’s the most democratic part of the website.
Are they looking for an excuse to widen the definition of ‘offensive’ posts to try and get rid of the Daily Mail editorials which frequently top the ‘most recommended’??
Cockney
Is you suggesting that Ian Wright Wright Wright is “the most moronic, monosyllabic, ill informed ‘pundit’ in TV history” ….. cos he is black?
Ah, and be assured of one thing – those swarthy Catalans know they came damn close to a good arse whipping in Paris. They know it was only the intervention of a referee biased against mad German goalkeepers which saved them in the end. They know.
PeteLondon, you are living proof that football makes normally sensible and lucid people take permanent leave of their senses and start talking ********.
Haha!
No idea if his lack of vocabulary, interpersonal skills, ability to frame a coherent argument and his ludicrously myopic bias derive from an overtly masculine, aggressive and anti-learning ethic endemic amongst 70s Afro Caribbean youth.
I sure as hell know he shouldn’t be raking in licence fee payers cash in some misguided attempt to capture the ‘yoof’ moron market though.
Correction by pounce | 06.11.06 – 11:53 am |
“could you be so kind as to bring to the table a little more information on the Hayes dispenser.”
Can’t help you much here I’m afraid, Pounce. I’ve only encountered the Hayes Dispenser in the context of the delivery of chemical/biological weapons.
It was certainly fitted to B52s and B57s in Vietnam when they were used in defoliation programmes.
Quiz Time
Which is The Times, which is the BBC?
British Muslim ‘wanted to blow up Tube train under Thames’
Man admits UK-US terror bomb plot
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6044938.stm
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-2440025,00.html
A free licence fee to the winner.
Heron
I can see through you. I know you’re joshing 😉
Cockney
I’m shocked I tell you, shocked, at your attitude. You must have a cold cold heart not to be charmed by that infectious laugh, boyish grin and gold tooth glinting under the studio lights. I’ll ponder your words when we play the Mickey Mousers next Sunday at the Emirates, sat amongst 60,000 fellow gooners, chucking back the free booze.
This week’s BBC Question Time panel http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/question_time/6120458.stm
Conscious of fairly representing the ethnicity of the United Kingdom, QT will have 2 muslims on a panel of 5 (that’s 20%)
Geoff Hoon MP (Labour)
Sir Malcolm Rifkind MP (Left-wing tory – anti Iraq war)
Rageh Omaar (muslim, BBC/Al-Jazeera hack)
Saira Khan (muslim)
One guest TBC (?)
What is Rageh Omaar on for? Has he got a book to plug or something?
Even though the QT researchers have 2 muslims on the panel – one has seen islamic fundamentalism in her own family and she didn’t like it:
Go and live in Saudi Arabia, mad mullahs
by Saira Khan
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2092-2046828_1,00.html
“She was the only Asian girl in her class, one of only three at her comprehensive. Her father was strict, telling her: “It is the woman who carries the respect for the family.” In a school where uniform had been abolished, he made her wear one. When he saw her walking back from school with her knee socks pulled down to her ankles, he whipped her legs from ankle to thigh with a wire coat hanger. She wasn’t allowed to cut her hair and never went to discos like her classmates.”
The BBC and half a story;
Man ‘planned massive explosions’
A Muslim convert planned to detonate a dirty bomb and launch an attack on London’s Tube, a court has heard. Former Hindu Dhiren Barot, 34, from London, planned “massive explosions” in a synchronised attack in the US and UK. Barot, who admitted conspiracy to murder last month, planned to pack limousines with gas cylinders and also use a radioactive “dirty” bomb. Lawyers for Barot have insisted that he had neither funding nor bomb-making materials at the time he was caught.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6120560.stm
Reading the above story the BBC gives the impression that Barot was simply a pissed off Muslim who was big on rhetoric and small on action. This can be exemplified by the quote found under his photo at the top of the page;
“Barot had not received funding or materials ”
Wrong,
What the BBC web page doesn’t state is that Barot is a top al-Qaeda operative. He fought in Kashmir (He’s even wrote a book on his time there) and in Afghanistan, in fact according to the BBC lunchtime news he was one of al-Qaedas top instructors in Afghanistan. He was sent to America in 2000 to recce an attack but after 9/11 he was relocated to London. He was caught in the planning phase of an attack on the Uk. Just because he hadn’t received funding doesn’t make him innocent. At least the Indian times doesn’t have the myopic reporting stance of the BBC.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/cms.dll/html/uncomp/articleshow/818941.cms
The BBC and half a story….
Richy 06.11.06 – 1:36 pm
Gotcha! (I knew someone here would try this dishonest trick).
You compare chalk and cheese.
That is: instead of comparing the Times story dated 6 November with the BBC story dated 6th November (both written after the defendant’s religious background was established in court), you chose to compare the Times 6 November story with the BBC’s 12 October story – when it wasn’t.
Try chalk with chalk:
Times 6 Nov first para:
A terrorist plotted to explode a series of bombs in Britain, causing “the loss of innocent human life on a massive scale”, including blowing up a train while it travelled underneath the Thames and using a dirty bomb.
BBC 6 Nov opening para:
A Muslim convert planned to detonate a dirty bomb and launch an attack on London’s Tube, a court has heard.
Former Hindu Dhiren Barot, 34, from London, planned “massive explosions” in a synchronised attack in the US and UK.
Ref the Terrorist above here is a the cover of his book;
Click to access esaalhindi.pdf
Pounce
“according to the BBC lunchtime news he was one of al-Qaedas top instructors in Afghanistan”
….so the BBC is doing background/analysis on this court report then?
So what’s your beef?
Sky manages to convey the key points much better than the BBC:
Charges: Dhiren Barot ‘Dirty Bomb’ Plot Details
Updated: 13:25, Monday November 06, 2006
http://news.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,30000-1239814,00.html
“A British al Qaeda terrorist planned to kill thousands of people in the UK and US in a series of “massive” attacks, a court has heard.
Sky are calling him a terrorist (no scare quotes). Even when a terrorist is a self-confessed terrorist, the BBC will still call him a ‘man’!
“Dhiren Barot led a conspiracy to commit mass murder and achieve, in his own words, “another black day for the enemies of Islam and a victory for the Muslims”.
His plots included using radioactive dirty bombs, a petrol tanker and even an attempt to flood London’s Underground network by blowing up a Tube train under the Thames.
“Imagine the chaos that would be caused if a powerful explosion were to rip through here and actually rupture the river itself,” the terrorist wrote.
Sketch of Barot in the dock “That would cause pandemonium, what with the explosions, flooding, drowning etc that would occur.”
Barot, who pleaded guilty to conspiracy to murder at a hearing last month, wanted to “emulate” the Madrid train bombings, which killed almost 200 people, Edmund Lawson QC said.
The sentencing hearing at London’s Woolwich Crown Court, was told of Barot’s “gas limos project”, the main part of which was recovered in Pakistan.
Mr Lawson said the American “bombings” were initially planned in 2000 and 2001 – before the September 11 attacks.
Is anyone aware of the New Yoik Times recently publishing information to the effect that Saddam Hussein’s regime was close to building a nuclear weapon? I don’t know anything about it but LGF has the following articles which need a bit of reading:
The NYT/IAEA Conspiracy
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=23217_The_NYT-IAEA_Conspiracy&only
Hoekstra Responds to NYT Nuke Article
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=23210_Hoekstra_Responds_to_NYT_Nuke_Article&only
This one is short and to the point:
Thank You, Mr President
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=23209_Thank_You_President_Bush&only
I’d just like to say “thank you” to President Bush and to the men and women of the US military, who—by the New York Times’ own admission—took out a terror-sponsoring regime in Iraq that could have constructed a nuclear weapon within months, as soon as sanctions were lifted enough for them to obtain sufficient fissile material.
Saddam’s Nuclear Plans
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=23208_Saddams_Nuclear_Plans&only
I ask because, well, the BBC has somehow overlooked what seems to be pretty strong evidence that the soon-to-be-swinging Stalinist dictator was close to getting a nuke.
John Reith:
“according to the BBC lunchtime news he was one of al-Qaedas top instructors in Afghanistan”
……………………………
JR – We have ‘instructors’ down the gym, and ‘operatives’ clean our offices at work.
This guy is a self-confessed terrorist. He’s admitted to plotting mass murder of innocent civilians. Sky call him a terrorist and they operate under strict OFCOM impartiality and accuracy rules. Why can’t the BBC bring themselves to say terrorist when it’s the most appropriate word to use????
BBC online choose to put the following as a final para on an item about ID cards
Mr Blair, who was asked many times about the death penalty to which Saddam Hussein was sentenced on Sunday, said he opposed the death penalty in general, but said it was a decision for Iraq to make.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6120220.stm
However the broadcast news is putting this higher on their agenda.
I didn’t see the press conference, so perhaps the media can take pleasure in putting Blair on the spot re the death penalty, but their obsession leaves them out of touch with their audience.
Support for/against the death penalty to operate in the UK is about 50/50. I am sure that far fewer are exercised about its application other parts of the world.
But our media carry on as if the death penalty was opposed by the vast majority in this country.
BBC DG Mark Thomson proposes to subsidise local newspapers from licence fee increase…
Society of Editors: how the BBC will go ultra local
http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/greenslade/2006/11/society_of_editors_how_the_bbc.html
“BBC’s much-feared ultra local TV service and came armed with an olive branch – and his wallet, writes Stephen Brook.
Let’s make a deal, he in effect told local newspaper editors.
Thompson pledges to work with local and regional newspapers on its planned “ultra local” service, offering local news via the internet and via digital TV, and even suggested the BBC might pay local companies for content!
Ears pricked up from the local editors in the room.”
NO, NO, NO! What does Mark Thomson think he is doing? This is defacto extending the enforced state funding to local newspapers…..
He must be stopped.
Ritter
The Sky and BBC stories are more or less identical in terms of what you identify as the ‘key points’. Look:
SKY:
Imagine the chaos that would be caused if a powerful explosion were to rip through here and actually rupture the river itself,” the terrorist wrote.
BBC:
The prosecution said Barot had written: “Imagine the chaos that would be caused if a powerful explosion were to rip through here [London] and actually rupture the river itself.
“That would cause pandemonium, what with the explosions, flooding, drowning etc that would occur.”
SKY:
Barot, who pleaded guilty to conspiracy to murder at a hearing last month
BBC:
Barot, who admitted conspiracy to murder last month
SKY:
Mr Lawson said the American “bombings” were initially planned in 2000 and 2001 – before the September 11 attacks.
BBC:
Barot’s plans for bombings in the US were initiated before the 11 September attacks, then shelved, but worked on as late as February 2004, Mr Lawson maintained.
Sorry JR – did you say the BBC had called him a terrorist?
How Anti-US sentiments at the BBC give rise to bias in BBC economics reporting:
BBC report that the Eurozone economy growing at 2.6%. The BBC say the economy is ‘gathering pace’.
BBC report that the US economy growing at 2.9%. The BBC ask if this is ‘the end of the American Dream?’
When I was at school, 2.9% was higher than 2.6%. Has something changed? Answers on a postcard to the BBC’s so-called ‘economics editor’ Gavin Davies.
Eurozone economy gathering pace
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/6120972.stm
“Raising its forecast, the Commission now expects that economic growth across the 12 nations that share the euro will grow by an average 2.6% in 2006.”
The end of the American dream?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/5303590.stm
“After growing at more than 3% a year in 2004 and 2005, the pace picked up to a blistering 5.6% annual rate in the first quarter of this year – although the pace has since then slipped back to 2.9%.”
John Reith:
Re: my post on this thread at 05.11.06 – 9:03 pm
– which I ended thus:
“I’ll raise from my friends and supporters a full £1,000 and donate it to Children in Need, or Comic Relief, or whatever charity you care to nominate John, in exchange for you and another BBC journalist of standing agreeing to partake in a demonstration of the evidence of The Guardian’s conspiracy. Now think about this. That’s a full £1,000 to charity and all you have to do is sit still with your eyes and ears open while I demonstrate the evidence to you.
“What do you say?
“Of course, for my £1,000 I’ll want to video your reaction to the evidence when I present it, but hey, according to the Beeb my evidence isn’t up to much is it? So that shouldn’t be a problem for you, should it?”
I’m still waiting for your answer.
The BBC and their biased middle east editor:
It’s ‘slit your wrists’ time, with Jeremy Bowen! Just remember, it’s all your fault!
Analysis: Iraq’s divisions reinforced
By Jeremy Bowen
Middle East editor, BBC News
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/6120826.stm
some choice outtakes:
“Perhaps Saddam Hussein will accept his fate on the gallows as an occupational hazard of being a despot. Or maybe he never intended his own rules to apply to himself.
Hmmm. Saddam’s ‘own rules’? That would be brutal torture and death instead of a fair trial? It is pretty sickening to compare the treatment of Saddam during his trial, to the treatment Sadaam gave out to his enemies and their families. Yeah, pretty sick – moral equivalence?
“US President George W Bush, who is confronted every day with the consequences of his disastrous decision to invade Iraq, presented the trial as an achievement for Iraqi democracy and constitutional government.
Who knows what will happen long term, no-one knows, but history may probe GWB right on this one. It’s somewhat biased for Bowen to be calling the invasion ‘disastrous’ – he should be remaining impartial – shouldn’t he?
“The 2003 invasion injected a huge dose of instability into the region. Its consequences will be played out over the next generation.“
Thanks for the reminder that, if some islamic fascist state throws a nuke or two our way at some point over the next 20 years, we should remember that it’s all our fault.
Jeremy Bowen, your very unbiased middle east editor. Not.
jr
Been otherwise engaged and just caught up with this:
TPO
I have now found your question about Liz Forgan.
JB-H noted that while she was a senior employee at Channel 4 (before she joined the BBC) she campaigned (along with many other senior figures in the independent TV sector) against a clause in the Broadcasting Bill that the independent sector thought too onerous and might constitute a violation of freedom of speech.
The text of her lecture is here:
http://209.85.135.104/search?q=c…uk&ct=clnk&cd=1
The nub of her argument was:
“David Mellor has decided that the antique notion of having to achieve a balanced viewpoint across each individual series of television programmes must be carried on lock, stock and statutory barrel into the new era of pluralism. The obligation to balance every series of programmes has proved unduly rigid for a four-channel system. It is perverse for a system where there will be more television channels than national newspapers. That doesn’t mean that the idea of fairness in public service broadcasting has become old fashioned. But this literal, censor’s, approach, counting minutes and reducing intellectual argument to a game of eenie-meenie-minie-mo, amazes our European colleagues and should have been thrown out as an anachronistic and unjustifiable infringement of freedom of expression. ”
That was Channel 4’s position.
The BBC, by contrast, is committed to due-impartiality.
When Forgan argued against it, she was arguing that it shouldn’t apply to Channel 4.
That does not mean she didn’t take another view when representing the interests of the BBC.
When, by way of analogy, a senior executive of BP leaves to join Shell, he’s likely to take quite a different position on oil industry issues in his new job than he did in his previous one. It doesn’t mean he’s a hypocrite.
Hope that answers your question.
John Reith | 02.11.06 – 11:07 am |
Although I’m one of John Kerry’s dumbass types who went into the forces rather than ‘uni’ I can still detect dialectic writhing when I see it. (more commonly known as bullshit. So , no it doesn’t answer the question.
By the way, being close to someone in a major oil multinational I have to point out that your analogy is erroneous.
Have a look again at JBH’s link. it is the wiff of corruption I’m referring to.
Love the bit about ‘antique notion of having to achieve a balanced viewpoint’ though, typical socialist vermin claptrap.
http://www.aim.org/aim_report/A4…/A4723_0_4_0_C/
Talking of socialist vermin
The major news story for today is this:
I won’t step aside in cash for peerages case says Goldsmith
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=414699&in_page_id=1770&in_a_source=
Goldsmith refuses to stand aside in cash-for-peerages investigation
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/11/06/npolitics06.xml
On the BBC, I think not.
http://search.bbc.co.uk/cgi-bin/search/results.pl?scope=all&edition=d&q=%22cash+for+peerages%22+%2B+goldsmith&go=Search
This however sums up the BBC’s news output:
‘I woke yesterday to the main Radio 4 news bulletin lead — a claim that Third World countries would be affected most adversely by global warming. This isn’t news — far less headline news — in any sense of the word.
At that time of the morning, I was once advised by an American TV news producer that ‘only two stories really count as news — that Russian missiles are inbound over Canada and doctors have found a cure for death’.
News is what we talk about and what is relevant to our lives. On that basis, you can ignore BBC news for weeks — or until something real happens, a catastrophe or a tragedy.
Most of it is public relations material sent out by the Government, action groups and charities.
Small wonder we hear so much about the personal foibles and preferences of the newsreaders. They are more interesting to us than the guff they repeat.
Hardly a day passes without hearing of their pregnancies, their squabbles, their salaries or their place in the newsreading pecking order.’
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/columnists/columnists.html?in_article_id=413416&in_page_id=1772&in_author_id=227
No racial hatred plan – BNP man
http://uk.news.yahoo.com/06112006/344/racial-hatred-plan-bnp-man.html
“The court has heard that he said people in Bradford and Keighley were living in a “multiracial hell-hole” and went into detail about how young white girls in the area were being groomed for sex and prostitution by Asian gangs.”
Is our impartial al-beeb covering this?….. somehow I can’t imagine that the headline
Bradford ‘multiracial hell-hole’
would ever pass the BBC censors.
jr
I’ve been flipping through the various threads and I have to say your output is prodigious and the breadth of subject matter you cover (albeit often misinformed) is truly astounding.
I have this niggling feeling that, having wondered where your career was going in the BBC you hit upon this blog. Armed with that you approached your bosses and suggested a counter attack. Now you run your own department geared to agitprop and counter propaganda.
must go now, my daughter has just woken up.
Why do pupils shun good school meals?
http://newsforums.bbc.co.uk/nol/thread.jspa?sortBy=2&threadID=4639&edition=1&ttl=20061106151233&#paginator
The BBC started this morning with their sneering report on how kids were no longer eating healthy school meals but heading out to the chippy at lunchtime. Much handwringing later and we find out that Jamie oliver is misguided and schools are stupid.
“How can children be encouraged to eat the healthier meals?
Fewer children are eating healthy school dinners despite the high profile campaign led by celebrity chef Jamie Oliver, according to a BBC News survey.
Authorities said that the warm weather and restrictions imposed on vending machines had both played a part in the decline.
Why are pupils rejecting healthy school meals?
Should parents and children have more say in choosing school menus? Does your child eat school dinners or do you provide a packed lunch? Send us your comments.
ok, take look at the comments, I don’t think this follows the Islington liberal narrative….
I like the current No2
“Why?
Because children are idiots.
The idea that they are somehow miniature adults capable of making informed, sensible decisions about their own lives is a pervasive piece of liberal nonsense.
Don’t give them a choice. They’ll have what they’re given or starve!
[dancing_bean]
Recommended by 58 people
and
Why? Because they are given a choice.
Simply make them all sit down for lunch and only let them outside once they’ve eaten something…
Or does contravene some human rights nonsense?
Capt Dave the Hat l
Recommended by 21 people
Sign in to recommend comments
Alert a Moderator
TPO:
I didn’t know you were an ex-forces man. Had I done so I would have suggested you digest carefully all four web pages of this:
http://www.guardianlies.com/Section%203/page2.html
When you’ve finished reading it you’ll wonder why you bothered serving your country when subversives like David Leigh, Andrew Roth, Mark Hollingsworth and Dale Campbell-Savours can literally get away undermining the heart of our democracy and legal system, thanks to the protective shield afforded by our acquiescent, inherently corrupt, leftist media.
For those who would be interested in learning a sensational angle on the Profumo scandal (that the British MSM has a problem airing) I commend it.
John Reith:
I’m still waiting for your answer.
TPO
I thought Guido would be onto the Lord Socialist Vermin thing, and he is. It seems there are still grounds for optimism:
Cash for Peerages : “The Fix” is Falling Apart
http://order-order.com/
Don’t pay any attention to the spin from New Labour – they are shitting themselves. “The Fix” is falling apart. Inside the CPS they are not happy at it being taken for granted that they will be a patsy for Downing Street.
Ritter | 06.11.06 – 3:13 pm
Thanks for that link Ritter.
It looks as if Collet’s defence against the charge of ‘incitement to racial hatred’ is something along these lines:
” I couldn’t have been inciting hatred because my audience was made up of BNP activists who hate Asians already.”
Brilliant.
Who’s his brief?
If he ain’t a QC he yet, he will be after that one.
J B-H
I’m still trying to work out a way of parting you from your £1000 while still protecting operational security.
Wearing a veil’s out I’m afraid.
Meanwhile TPO wants me to read an AIM article of yours again but his link points to a story about Private Lynch instead of Liz Forgan.
He implies there’s some allegation of corruption against Forgan. Is this true?
The decline in pupils eating school meals cos they don’t like the new improved menus is a glorious emperor’s clothes moment.
We adults are brow beaten to live our lives as directed by the BBC & other bien pensants. Kids just say “I don’t want it”.
TPO
“By the way, being close to someone in a major oil multinational I have to point out that your analogy is erroneous.”
Well, I had in mind a man whom I once met who was a very, very senior executive in something I’ll call Oil Company A. Over a drink he told me in detailed terms about the scandalous a certain African way Oil Company B (Company A’s main competitor} had behaved in breaking international sanctions against country.
He seemed genuinely indignant. He went red in the face as he expostulated that Company B’s actions had been ‘outrageous, cynical, amoral …..and downright unlawful’.
I asked him how he knew Company B had behaved in this shameful way.
“Because I used to be their director of operations for Africa,” he replied “and I devised the whole sanctions-busting plan myself.”
For me it was a bit like your encounter with the gentleman now at CNN.