Ritter comments:
Something missing here?
‘Honour killing’ relatives guilty [BBC story on the murder of Banaz Mahmod]
Context maybe? What was the killer(s) motive? The BBC know, but are unable to tell us.
Anyway, what’s missing? Oh, here it is:
Father guilty of daughter’s “honour killing” [Reuters story on the same murder]
“Her family decided to kill her because they believed the relationship had brought the dishonour as Suleimani was an Iranian Kurd and not a strict Muslim”
BBC News. Half the story.
theres a have your say on the issues at the bottom though. might be fun
It was an ‘Honour killing’ as described in the headline?
‘Miss Mahmod was killed after falling in love with a man her family did not want her to marry.
Her father and uncle ordered the murder because they believed she had shamed the family, the three-month trial heard.’
The link to the report on the right says about her sister:
‘Bekhal Mahmod, 22, was beaten and called a whore and accused of being too Westernised, jurors heard’
Or this from the linked report about the boyfriends feelings:
“Her parents are a very strict Muslim family,” he said. “It would be hard for people to believe me.
They would be saying, ‘No Banaz’s family would never touch alcohol, he is a Muslim’.”
or the linked report entitled ‘Killed for loving the wrong man ‘.
Or the coverage among the headlines on BBC national news bulletins, which described the boyfriend as being from a different caste or clan?
I liken this blog to the programme “Most Haunted” on Living TV.
Bear with me on this!
By spending so much time obsessing on its subject matter, the lack of any resulting evidence leads to a conclusion which is in complete contradiction to its stated aim.
In the case of “Most Haunted”, we can pretty much say there is no such thing as ghosts.
In the case of B-BBC, we can pretty much say that the BBC is not biased.
However there’s plenty of evidence here to support the theory that most contributors to B-BBC have Right Wing sympathies and vote Conservative, whose membership is utterly paranoid about the corporation’s coverage of them.
This parallels the barmy “liberal media bias” myth you hear so much about from US conservatives. Many claim now to get their news only from blogs, so visceral is their loathing of the media in general because of its supposed (and again, unproven) liberal bias.
I’d venture that blogs are the most partisan, and therefore unreliable sources of news. One wonders what it is about objective reporting that people with conservative sympathies so object to?
Ben
Well, every time I’ve known something about what’s being reported, the BBC report has always been biased leftwards.
Real life experience, me old cock! Are you sure you’re not watching too much television?
BBC WHITEWASHING A JIHADI KILLER: “these do not appear to be the thoughts of a stone-cold killer”
This entire report is aimed at giving a sympathetic account of a wannabe cut throat … typically the BBCgives him the final words … a clarion call to Jihad as a means of attaining heaven.
“I just can’t imagine how other Muslims… including my own brother can go about their daily lives as normal, rejecting the strife of the battlefield. Today Islam needs those who are prepared to fight to the death.
“I must rejoin my contingent I must make an all-out immense effort. I have come to the conclusion to just go for it.
“I am still allowing this world to overcome me… once I am back on the field Allah will improve my health automatically.
“Do not waiver or become weak against the enemy. This is the only way I can be reunited again with mummy and daddy in jannah [heaven].”
Why couldnt the Islamic ass lickers at the BBC simply publish the fulltranscript of their “hard won” document and save the cry me a river routine.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/6750911.stm
However there’s plenty of evidence here to support the theory that most contributors to B-BBC have Right Wing sympathies and vote Conservative, whose membership is utterly paranoid about the corporation’s coverage of them.
Ben | 14.06.07 – 1:41 pm
I have never voted Conservative in my life. I have always been a supporter of the left until just a few years ago, when like Nick Cohen (who is not a Jew) and Melanie Phillips (who is a Jew) I realised that the left has lost its way.
I still have no intention of ever voting Conservative.
Right Wing sympathies and vote Conservative, whose membership is utterly paranoid about the corporation’s coverage of them….
Does that include Tony Blair who had something to say on the subject of the “feral madia”?
Can we expect Newsnight to follow this up?
WHY ARE THE HYS READERS RECOMMENDED COMMENTS ALWAYS OFF MESSAGE
There is a looming problem at the BBC Website …. after years of trying to brain wash their readers most are still off message with their commnets which are typically barred and also off message with their recommended comments …
http://newsforums.bbc.co.uk/nol/thread.jspa?sortBy=2&threadID=6622&edition=1&ttl=20070614135344&#paginator
“However there’s plenty of evidence here to support the theory that most contributors to B-BBC have Right Wing sympathies and vote Conservative, whose membership is utterly paranoid about the corporation’s coverage of them,” said new Beeboid Ben
Well, Ben, talk us all through your view on what James Naughtie meant when he said “If we win the election…” to Ed Balls.
See: http://neweconomist.blogs.com/new_economist/2005/03/james_naughtie_.html
HYS RECOMMENDED COMMENST ON IMMIGRATION ALSO OFF MESSAGE
The BBC really must put an end to this!
http://newsforums.bbc.co.uk/nol/thread.jspa?sortBy=2&threadID=6615&edition=1&ttl=20070614135913&#paginator
Ben | 14.06.07 – 1:41 pm |
So Jeremy Bowen is totally unbiased and completely impartial in his Middle East reporting?
Am I mistaken in believing that you are employed by the BBC?
TPO
Yes you are mistaken.
So Jeremy Bowen is biased now is he?
Similar allegations were levelled at Barbara Plett and Orla Guerin and I bet we could go back through every other ME editor and correspondent the BBC has sent and contributors to Biased BBC would level exactly the same accusation.
I mean, the BBC could put the most pro-zionist of correspondents into the Middle East and they’d still be accused of anti Israeli bias on this site.
Honestly, wake up. The issue is with this site and its contributors, not the BBC.
“the BBC could put the most pro-zionist of correspondents into the Middle East and they’d still be accused of anti Israeli bias”
If only al-Beeb would give us the chance to find out what contribuotirs would do in such a case. Somehow I don’t think it will.
Are there any pro-Zionist reporters on the BBC?
Thought not.
Similar allegations were levelled at Barbara Plett and Orla Guerin…
Outrageous!
Anonymous:
This entire report is aimed at giving a sympathetic account of a wannabe cut throat …
You’re so right… read this. Had me in tears….
“as his mind deteriorates at the same rate as his stomach, he convinces himself he is going through a test of faith that God has reserved for the chosen.
Know what? That could have been any of us, couldn’t it?
Or this…
Other days, when he is feeling down, he entertains himself with violent jihadi videos or the news. US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice is a “black witch”. Iraqi prime minister Ibrahim Al Jaafari is a “dog of the hell fire, the Shatan [devil] used to live in Wembley.”
Just begging for a shoulder to cry on, don’t you think?
And this…
during the dark days in Pakistan, he attacks local shopkeepers for being not as Islamic as he is because they play pop music. Others are con-men who are eating into his precarious finances…
But most of all, he fears for his brothers-in-arms as the authorities close in.
“Found out some bad news. The relaxing place was done over. 7-8 of the guys taken whilst asleep. 2 others 72ed,” jihadi slang for killed, referring to “martyrs” rewarded with 72 virgins in paradise.
72-ed? I’m practically blubbering with sympathy over that turn of phrase.
There was I thinking that only pounce could take a piece of prose and turn it into such a travesty of its obvious meaning.
Now there are two of them. Would you credit it?
Biased BBC: The Butter on Allah’s Grits
So Jeremy Bowen is biased now is he?
Similar allegations were levelled at Barbara Plett and Orla Guerin and I bet we could go back through every other ME editor and correspondent the BBC has sent and contributors to Biased BBC would level exactly the same accusation.
Ben | 14.06.07 – 2:26 pm
That’s the funniest thing I’ve read in ages!
You really are a comedian Ben 😆
http://www.honestreporting.co.uk/articles/critiques/BBCs_Selective_Voices.asp
http://www.honestreporting.co.uk/articles/critiques/Bowens_World.asp
http://www.honestreporting.co.uk/articles/critiques/Bowen_On_the_Six_Day_Warpath.asp
As for Guerin:
http://www.google.com/custom?hl=en&cof=S%3Ahttp%3A%2F%2Fbackspin.typepad.com%3B&domains=backspin.typepad.com&q=Guerin&btnG=Search&sitesearch=backspin.typepad.com
and Plett:
http://www.google.com/custom?hl=en&cof=S%3Ahttp%3A%2F%2Fbackspin.typepad.com%3B&domains=backspin.typepad.com&q=Plett&btnG=Search&sitesearch=backspin.typepad.com
Cockney:
theres a have your say on the issues at the bottom though. might be fun
Let’s just remind ourselves of the story under discussion…
The body of Banaz Mahmod, 20, was found in a suitcase buried in a garden in Birmingham last year.
Obvious story to have fun with.
Isn’t it?
Isn’t it, though?
.
Rueful Red | 14.06.07 – 2:44 pm
If only al-Beeb would give us the chance to find out what contributors would do in such a case. Somehow I don’t think it will.
During the 6 Day War the BBC correspondent was Michael Elkins. I have no idea if he was a Zionist, just as I have no idea if Bowen is one in his heart.You can hear Elkins here:
http://www.otr.com/elkins.shtml
After that, I vaguely remember, the BBC Jerusalem corr was Asher Wallfisch. I can’t find any of his reports on the net. Pity.
Honestly, wake up. The issue is with this site and its contributors, not the BBC.
Ben | 14.06.07 – 2:26 pm |
Your post has to be one of the more humourous ones that I have seen here in a long while.
You make our case without realising it. Keep up the good work.
BBC Bias: A place where even bijan daneshmand fits in.
During the 6 Day War the BBC correspondent was Michael Elkins. I have no idea if he was a Zionist, just as I have no idea if Bowen is one in his heart.
John Reith | 14.06.07 – 4:56 pm
You, Defective Bullshit and Ben are proving to be even funnier than the Marx Brothers today – thanks for a good laugh 😆
Now I no longer watch the BBC news because of it’s bias and pro Islamic anti Western stance on just about everything. However I do watch Sky news and have just seen and heard Salma Yaqoob of the Respect Party when taliking about Immigration Packs compare honour killings to binge drinking. Anyone see it? It’s sickening.
I repeat to those defenders of the BBC
WHAT ABOUT THE BALEN REPORT!
Let’s see it and allow us to decide if we’re right or wrong.
Don’t hold your breath.
‘Ben’,
Same old let’s paint everyone as something they are not then bring it down strawman policy.
Are you hillhunt in disguise?
Conservative? I have never voted or supported them in my life.
Right wing? Please see above and add BNP, UKIP, etc.
Am I the only one? Certainly not, many posters have made that clear over time have a look back at the archives.
Is this blog about political parties? No, its about bias from the BBC.
Is this blog about political inclination? No, its about bias from the BBC.
Does it matter if some or even many of the posters are right wing or Conservative? No, its about bias from the BBC.
You either just don’t get it or you are intentionally wumming, at the moment its not clear which.
“Honestly, wake up. The issue is with this site and its contributors, not the BBC.”
Ben’s plaintive cry makes it clear that Al-Beeb and it’s brainwashed supporters are starting to feel the heat from the spreading disillusionment with Al-BBC.
“After that, I vaguely remember, the BBC Jerusalem corr was Asher Wallfisch.”
Oh, come on JR, as an Al-BBC hack you must have access to most of the Korporation’s records.
You don’t “vaguely remember” – you have the information right there at your fingertips.
“The issue is with this site and its contributors not the BBC.”
In this statement HAS such a horrific amount dangerous “thought police” bullshit tottalitarian inferences, I will not even start to frisk it ALL.
However it was ‘nice’ of Ben to show us more quickly and far more openly then John Reith has ever done, what complete and utter contempt he has for his fellow countrymen.
Doesn’t it strike Ben as odd that radical Lefties *NEVER* complain about bias in the BBC? I mean if it really was entirely objective and middle of the road you’d expect them to offend somebody on that side of the spectrum occasionally. More then occasionally actually, such people tend to be easily offended.
Ben is also making very clear his opinion that only stupid or evil people could *possibly* disagree with his politics.
“The issue is with this site and its contributors not the BBC,” says Ben.
Which is uncannilly similar to what we all think about the BBC – the issue we have with it is its site and its contributors. Curious, that. But Ben thinks only he is right, of course.
And we’re still waiting for Ben/Bullshit D/hillhunt to eplain away as non-biased things like the Naughtie comment, or Orla’s tears – or any of the comments on the sidebar of the homepage.
I wish they’d give it a try.
Roxana:
Doesn’t it strike Ben as odd that radical Lefties *NEVER* complain about bias in the BBC?
Not strictly radical lefties, but here are a couple of random hits from the other side…
The incendiary and irresponsible reporting of the British naval personnel abduction last week was a disgrace to the profession and the issue of flawed and biased coverage is becoming ever-more problematic. The media was prone to supine and lazy journalism in the build up to both wars in the Gulf. Politicians and lobbyists must no longer be allowed to bully a weakened and pliable media to sell a misguided war on terror by perpetuating armed aggression in Iran and Afghanistan.
http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/regions/scotland/2007/04/366829.html
Contradicting claims that the media is biased against Israel, the study (by the Glasgow Media Group) suggests that Israeli perspectives predominated in TV news as a result of a “well-developed system of lobbying and public relations” and the “close political and communication links which exist between the US and Britain.”
http://www.hero.ac.uk/uk/research/archives/2004/reporting_conflict.cfm
Biased BBC: You mean…not everyone thinks like us?
“compare honour killings to binge drinking.”
Respect is getting desperate and stupid.
” This parallels the barmy “liberal media bias” ”
Oh but ‘liberalism’ as the Americans call it so is so widespread and ubiquitous you can’t even tell its there. They must be mad he says. But Ben (or Hillhunt) simply covers his eyes to see.
Hillhunt has been trying to troll us into expressing some shockingly right-wing sentiments just so he can discredit the B-BBC blog and use it as the subject of a new article for the mouthpiece of the Communist conspiracy – The Guardian. A newspaper so powerful it can bring down elected governments.
Just Ban “Ben” and Ban Hillhunt.
Liberalism:
From the Naked Communist (Cleon Skousen)
Noted in U.S. Congressional Record on January 10, 1963
Current Communist Goals:
3. Develop the illusion that total disarmament [by] the United States would be a demonstration of moral strength.
11. Promote the U.N. as the only hope for mankind. If its charter is rewritten, demand that it be set up as a one-world government with its own independent armed forces. (Some Communist leaders believe the world can be taken over as easily by the U.N. as by Moscow. Sometimes these two centers compete with each other as they are now doing in the Congo.)
16. Use technical decisions of the courts to weaken basic American institutions by claiming their activities violate civil rights.
17. Get control of the schools. Use them as transmission belts for socialism and current Communist propaganda. Soften the curriculum. Get control of teachers’ associations.
19. Use student riots to foment public protests against programs or organizations which are under Communist attack.
20. Infiltrate the press. Get control of book-review assignments, editorial writing, policymaking positions.
21. Gain control of key positions in radio, TV, and motion pictures.
22. Continue discrediting American culture by degrading all forms of artistic expression. An American Communist cell was told to “eliminate all good sculpture from parks and buildings, substitute shapeless, awkward and meaningless forms.”
23. Control art critics and directors of art museums. “Our plan is to promote ugliness, repulsive, meaningless art.”
24. Eliminate all laws governing obscenity by calling them “censorship” and a violation of free speech and free press.
25. Break down cultural standards of morality by promoting pornography and obscenity in books, magazines, motion pictures, radio, and TV.
27. Infiltrate the churches and replace revealed religion with “social” religion. Discredit the Bible and emphasize the need for intellectual maturity which does not need a “religious crutch.”
28. Eliminate prayer or any phase of religious expression in the schools on the ground that it violates the principle of “separation of church and state.”
29. Discredit the American Constitution by calling it inadequate, old-fashioned, out of step with modern needs, a hindrance to cooperation between nations on a worldwide basis.
30. Discredit the American Founding Fathers. Present them as selfish aristocrats who had no concern for the “common man.”
31. Belittle all forms of American culture and discourage the teaching of American history on the ground that it was only a minor part of the “big picture.”
38. Transfer some of the powers of arrest from the police to social agencies. Treat all behavioral problems as psychiatric disorders which no one but psychiatrists can understand [or treat].
39. Dominate the psychiatric profession and use mental health laws as a means of gaining coercive control over those who oppose Communist goals.
40. Discredit the family as an institution. Encourage promiscuity and easy divorce.
41. Emphasize the need to raise children away from the negative influence of parents. Attribute prejudices, mental blocks and retarding of children to suppressive influence of parents.
42. Create the impression that violence and insurrection are legitimate aspects of the American tradition; that students and special-interest groups should rise up and use [“]united force[“] to solve economic, political or social problems.
Roxana | 14.06.07 – 7:00 pm |
Roxana – Good to see you back.
You’ll see that we’ve aquired a few oddities since you were last here.
Must off to my bed now. Night night everyone.
Can’t speak for the Beeb but when the Left over here claims the ‘Media’ tamely joined the chorus for Bush’s ‘rush to war’ they are lying in their teeth. I was there guys.
PS: Thanks for the kind words TPO.
Ben,
support for B-BBC = right wing?
Hmmm….I’ve never voted further right than Lib/Lib-Dem/SDP in over 30 years of voting.
Like Pounce and Dave T, I was also a career senior NCO in the British Army.
For years, my media sources of choice were Radio 4, The Grauniad and the Indie, while still a serving soldier.(Does that conflict with your irrational stereotypical view of B-BBC posters?)
I once trusted the BBC without question – no longer. My concerns are more to do with the objectivity and impartiality of a tax-funded public service broadcaster, not political.
Rhetorical question:
Is this time of year for recently graduated Meeeja students to ingratiate themselves with a potential employer???
I’ve not been around for a while
I see the Troll count is up….the BBC must be getting pretty scared of this place…….
The BBC – Fears Truth
they need some fresh ideas here though. Reith was their best here, but is discredited now, and the others, just seem like office juniors repating their boot licking Mantra???
Media Studies Dropouts I should Imagine…
BBC Wannabes…..lol.
The BBC – Millions are switching Off…..
😉
Personaly, I thought the ‘Best in Show’ was No-Bias Benny implying that anyone who voted for whacked out weirdoes like the Tories was clearly some kind of fringe nutcase.
See, that’s kind of what we’re saying. Even at its nadir the Tories were able to poll around 30% of the votes, with 40% being a realistic objective right now, but the BBC still treats around a third of the population as self-evidently absurd and strange.
I don’t even get half a story from the BBC for my licence fee. I don’t need or use the BBC for news or entertainment and I’m ashamed to be forced to contribute to such a poor quality organisation just so I can watch Sky football without getting a criminal record.
Roxana | 14.06.07 – 7:00 pm
Doesn’t it strike Ben as odd that radical Lefties *NEVER* complain about bias in the BBC?
One of a number of Leftist counterparts to B-BBC is MediaLens. You can find its alerts and message board here:
http://www.medialens.org/
John Reith
Thanks for the link to MediaLens – I think you will find that this editorial from the Morning Star, posted on MediaLens is identical to the dominant analysis of Gaza being offered by the BBC. I listened to R4s News at 10 two nights in a row. On Wednesday night the analysis came from Alastair Crooke – there was no clear red water between what he had to say and this Morning Star comment. Last night no less than four different speakers all said exactly the same thing – that the problem had been caused by the West’s and Israel’s boycott of Hamas. No other analysis offered. This morning we were treated to an extremely soft interview with George Galloway on Today who offered more of the same. Jeremy Bowen for BBC1s 10 c’clock News concurred. Actually the ideology of the SWP, Respect and the communists are indistinguishable from the BBCs editorial line. Thanks for the link.
Ongoing tragedy in Gaza.
Posted by RMS on June 15, 2007, 10:25 am
User logged in as: RMS
“THE ongoing internecine fighting in Gaza represents a Palestinian tragedy that was authored in the West.
It is the logical consequence of the refusal by the US and the European Union to recognise last year’s Hamas electoral victory and the willingness of the Fatah leadership to conspire with the West to reverse that democratic expression of the Palestinian people’s views.
After lecturing Palestinians on the need for democratic norms, including elections, even under conditions of Israeli occupation, the West imposed collective punishment on them for voting for the wrong party.
It encouraged Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert to reject negotiations with elected Palestinian Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh.
And both the EU and the US followed up Israel’s confiscation of Palestinian tax revenues – estimated at present to be worth $700 million – by imposing trade and aid sanctions on the Palestinian people.
The imperialist states also supported President Mahmoud Abbas’s decision to make Palestinian security forces answerable to him personally rather than, as previously, to the Ministry of the Interior.
The most likely catalyst to the heavy fighting in Gaza this week was President Abbas’s request to the Israeli government to permit military forces loyal to him to import weaponry and armoured vehicles.
Given the Palestinian president’s claim that some Hamas figures were “planning a coup against legitimate institutions,” such an increase in armaments could only be seen as a means of seeing off his Islamist opponents.
If there has been any evidence of an attempted coup, it has been in the opposite direction – a bid to undermine the elected government by increasing unemployment, hunger and desperation to the extent that the Palestinians turn against it.
This should come as no surprise. It is a classic US tactic, which has previously been used successfully in, for example, Nicaragua.
And there is always the possibility/likelihood of the Israeli Defence Force taking advantage of the situation to trawl in troubled waters.
Earlier this week, Tel Aviv’s Knesset foreign affairs and defence committee chairman Tzahi Hanegbi told Israeli army radio that it would be “insane” to arm Fatah, because the weapons would fall into Hamas hands, adding that the Israeli government was considering backing Fatah forces in the West Bank.
Israel is also calling for international forces to take up positions on Gaza’s borders to prevent arms supplies reaching Hamas.
And, coincidentally, UN secretary-general Ban Ki Moon discussed the possible deployment of a multinational force in Gaza with the security council on Wednesday.
This reflects the international community’s ongoing failure to identify the real source of instability and violence in the region – namely, Israel’s 40-year illegal occupation and colonisation of Palestinian land.
This failure encourages those in Palestinian society who are cynical about democracy, negotiations and a two-state solution, based on the ceasefire borders prior to the 1967 six-day war.
The West must end its contempt for Palestinian democracy and its instigation of President Abbas’s attempts to subvert it.
The international community must foster Palestinian unity by identifying the root problem as Israeli colonialism and proposing ways of bringing it to an end.”
Morning Star 15/6/07
Oscar | 15.06.07 – 11:14 am
Are you saying that analysis you describe is the only point of view being aired on the BBC?
You may want to check out the BBC’s Q&A on Chaos in Gaza.
Under the section Who’s Doing the Fighting and Why?
I find no mention of the boycott, occupation or any of the other lines you cite.
Instead, we get this:
Gaza has become the scene of a battle for supremacy between Fatah, a secular nationalist group that has monopolised power since the 1960s, and Hamas, a radical Islamist group which entered electoral politics for the first time in the January 2005, when it won parliamentary polls.
Since the election, the official Palestinian Authority security forces, who are mainly pro-Fatah, and Fatah-affiliated militants, have been in a power struggle with armed Hamas supporters, some of whom were deployed as a Hamas “executive force” to police Gaza.
Despite attempts to negotiate a solution, the rivalry has become increasingly violent, vengeful and destructive. This is especially true between the Hamas executive force and Fatah strongman Muhammad Dahlan’s Preventive Security force.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6754387.stm
That is quite different from the ‘line’ you attribute to the BBC.
I should not need to tell you this – but you really ought to start getting your head around the distinction between things that are said by people interviewed by the BBC and the BBC itself.
Are you saying that analysis you describe is the only point of view being aired on the BBC?
John Reith
No – of course not. The BBC is not quite that unsubtle – although it WAS the only view aired on R4s News at 10 for two days in a row. I’m saying it’s the dominant one – and the one overwhelmingly favoured by Jeremy Bowen – your head honcho in the ME.
I should not need to tell you this – but you really ought to start getting your head around the distinction between things that are said by people interviewed by the BBC and the BBC itself.
John Reith | 15.06.07 – 11:53 am
Jeremy Bowen does work for the BBC doesn’t he?
Oscar | 15.06.07 – 12:30 pm
But Oscar, you are misrepresenting Bowen.
He has said that the boycott policy ‘helped fuel’ the violence in Gaza by making people more desperate. That’s quite a different thing from saying this is a tragedy ‘authored in the West’.
John Reith,
It is customary in polite circles to acknowledge an apology, especially an unqualified one:
http://www.haloscan.com/comments/patrickcrozier/2399095767444739877/#358882
David Gregory did:
http://www.haloscan.com/comments/patrickcrozier/2399095767444739877/#358925
“UK al-Qaeda cell members jailed”
Under this heading Al-BBC devote several hundred words to the jailing of yet more UK muslim terrorists. And guess which words Al-Beeb manage to avoid in discussing these islamofascists ? That’s right …”Islam” and “muslim” are strangely missing from Al-BBC’s article. We have all come to realise that , to all intents and purposes, the goons at Al-Beeb see islam as their state religion but must we, the TV tax payers, always get just half the story from our state broadcaster ???
I noticed the comments on the BBC website today about the US having caused the situation in Gaza. No explanation of cause and effect was given. Bowen says:
“The financial sanctions they imposed, which caused severe hardship and helped fuel the violence in Gaza by making people even more desperate,”
Why would the sanctions cause Hamas to take to shooting at Fatah when Hamas had already agreed to a unity government with Fatah to try and get around the sanctions? Why is Fatah seen as part of the problem by Hamas when previously they were seen as part of the solution?
No explanation given by Bowen at all for his peculiar take on events – he just seems to have assumed that if something bad is happening to the Palestinians then the US MUST be to blame somehow.
But don’t just blame Bowen for this tripe. They have news editors at the BBC who were obviously happy to allow this unnecessary demonisation of the US go ahead unchallenged.
Getting back to the story that originally started this thread, it is clearly appalling that the BBC reported on a murder without detailing the motivation for the murder. That has little to do with bias.
I have some sympathy with the need to avoid unnecessary demonisation of minority groups (like, um, Americans – see above), but in this case the BBC were quite simply failing in their duty to inform the public (including those that might conceivably be future victims of honour killings).
It is not a question of bias in this case. It is a question of the public broadcaster’s duty to inform the public.
By refusing to give the full details of the killing the BBC have treated their audience like imbeciles. They have patronised them. If the BBC has a liberal left bias as Andrew Marr has claimed – then this, it seems, is what the Liberal Left thinks of ordinary people. We are stupid and cannot be trusted with the truth.