Please use this thread for comments about the BBC’s current programming and activities. This post will remain at or near the top of the blog – scroll down for new topic-specific posts. N.B. this is not an invitation for general off-topic comments, rants or chit-chat. Thoughtful comments are encouraged. Comments may be moderated. Any suggestions for stories that you might like covered would be appreciated!
General BBC-related comment thread:
Bookmark the permalink.
Sorry for repetition but I put this on the tail end of the last open thread:
I mean you don’t make a pretence not to be BioD so a ban is.. somewhat academic.
Academic perhaps for you but a real bloody hassle for me if I want to comment.
When I was first banned Andrew started banning each proxy as I used it so I had to continually find another.
There’s been no sign of Andrew here for quite some time. I know he was suffering from ill health, I sincerely hope he gets over it.
Biodegradable’s Ghost | 20.02.08 – 5:26 pm |
My goodness • The first time I’ve been back here for donkey’s and the usual rabble (not you BioD) are in still full flow trying to justify the unjustifiable.
I got banned for stating that I had ceased to post because of the censorship that was taking place and suggesting (politely) that I found it somewhat obsessive.
When told by Bowman that a suggestion of obsessive censorship was personal abuse I told him to grow up. Till today I haven’t been back to this site, however I didn’t realise he was ill.
Have I missed anything?
I mean where I am there is no compulsory television tax. All the scary stories put about by the BBC about the parlous state of TV in North America are just that • scary stories.
Sure there’s dross (I had to pay for that on the BBC • anyone for My Hero) and wall to wall adverts. But guess what? They have real political debates on TV on both sides of the border here (We get US stations as well) involving all shades of opinion. None of your Dateline London twaddle hosted by a far-leftie, with a panel of far-lefties and not so far-lefties, pumped out purely for the benefit of far-lefties and funded by the unwilling.
Of course, if you are of that bent, then you can still see it on BBC World (Is that their plan • world domination, well as a start they are being bunged by the EU) but few here are even aware of it and those that are don’t really bothers with it. They prefer to go online and scan the Brit press.
Will I be back here? I’m not sure as the BBC is losing any relevance for me personally.
TPO
Sorry for the repetition but I posted this on the tail end of the last open thread:
I mean you don’t make a pretence not to be BioD so a ban is.. somewhat academic.
Academic perhaps for you but a real bloody hassle for me if I want to comment.
When I was first banned Andrew started banning each proxy as I used it so I had to continually find another.
There’s been no sign of Andrew here for quite some time. I know he was suffering from ill health, I sincerely hope he gets over it.
Biodegradable’s Ghost | 20.02.08 – 5:26 pm |
My goodness • The first time I’ve been back here for donkey’s and the usual rabble (not you BioD) are in still full flow trying to justify the unjustifiable.
I got banned for stating that I had ceased to post because of the censorship that was taking place and suggesting (politely) that I found it somewhat obsessive.
When told by Bowman that a suggestion of obsessive censorship was personal abuse I told him to grow up. Till today I haven’t been back to this site, however I didn’t realise he was ill.
Have I missed anything?
I mean where I am there is no compulsory television tax. All the scary stories put about by the BBC about the parlous state of TV in North America are just that • scary stories.
Sure there’s dross (I had to pay for that on the BBC • anyone for My Hero) and wall to wall adverts. But guess what? They have real political debates on TV on both sides of the border here (We get US stations as well) involving all shades of opinion. None of your Dateline London twaddle hosted by a far-leftie, with a panel of far-lefties and not so far-lefties, pumped out purely for the benefit of far-lefties and funded by the unwilling.
Of course, if you are of that bent, then you can still see it on BBC World (Is that their plan • world domination, well as a start they are being bunged by the EU) but few here are even aware of it and those that are don’t really bothers with it. They prefer to go online and scan the Brit press.
Will I be back here? I’m not sure as the BBC is losing any relevance for me personally.
TPO
As the end of the financial year approaches, 1700 Beeboids are meant to be getting laid off by command of DG Mark Thompson, has anyone any up to date information on this?
😉
Why has the BBC been advertising Chris Moyles Radio one programme in cinemas?
I was just wondering, have any fellow Biased-BBCers been to the cinema lately?
The last two times I’ve gone, I have got the most remarkable piece of licence-fee funded BBC promotion I’ve ever seen. The first trailers before the film are a 5-6 minute trailer for Chris Moyles, and then a 2-3 minute trailer for Doctor Who. I saw this in a Cineworld, my brother saw it in an Odeon. Are they everywhere, and just how much are they costing? I bet those 1,700 people being fired would like to know.
I recommend readers of this blog have a look at the EUReferendum blog for an item included today (Friday), where another bit of BBC bias is reported, this time trying to justify an EU retreat over some stupid legislation they were attempting to get thorugh over MRI scans. EUReferendum has reported in the past that the BBC appears to get some funding from our masters in Brussels and in return they have to show a good light on anything that comes out of that ridiculous organisation.
They really need to pull the plug on Matt Frei’s low budget dog and pony show on BBC America. He actually worked on Friday – contrary to our resident Beeboids today – something he hasn’t done in quite some time. And what a joke it was.
He has just done a panel discussion on his favorite topic: how much the world hates Bush and hates America. He spelled it out quite clearly to his guests, a guy from Canadian TV and a guy from Mexican TV. Matty laid out how the world hates Bush, and that pretty much everyone is anti-American these days. Will that change with a new President, he asks them knowingly, wink wink nudge nudge.
The CTV fool began by saying that Canada’s experience with America involves being invaded. Yes, that’s right, this idiot brought out a phony grievance over a war that ended over two centuries ago. He went on to say that more and more these days Canadians primary definition of themselves as Canadians is that…wait for it…they’re not Americans.
The Mexican fool was actually laughing before he got a word out. Unsurprisingly, his first words were something about how Mexico was invaded by the US several times. He did not say that this was as recently as 1848. He did say that they, too, are angry at America. He did not say that under the last Mexican President, Vincente Fox, his government produced DVDs with instructions on how to sneak across the border. I guess they hate America so much that they keep coming here in droves, paying their life savings to the coyotes and risking death by drowning, heatstroke, dehydration, and violence.
I hope nobody will bother pretending that this is completely extemporaneous and that nobody has any idea what questions are going to be asked and what anybody is going to say. I’m sure neither the Canadian or the Mexican were secretly harboring grudges against the US for these historic insults, unbeknownst to BBC America producers. Yet these knuckleheads were all acting as if this sort of Serbian or Muslim Brotherhood-type elephantine grudge-keeping is standard fare for political discourse amongst North American nations.
This is Matt Frei’s version of showing us United Statesians the world’s opinion of us. In the context of a national election of a sovereign state, this mumser is doing no less that stating that the world hates us and we should elect somebody that suits him. This is by no means an isolated incident. It’s almost a pattern with him now.
BBC America may be a subsidiary of the autonomous commercial branch of the BBC mother ship and so not a beneficiary of the license fee, but it is still beholden to the same Charter. This means that any official broadcast of BBC America is supposed to represent the UK to the world at large. In other words, this is how Matt Frei and his boss have decided to represent all of you UK citizens, your interests, and your beliefs.
Just heard yet another ridiculous report on the ever ridiculous TOADY SHOW.
This time its a report about an Antarctic glacier and how it is apparently moving toward the sea at a much faster rate due to “warmer ocean currents(how much warmer?)and IF this continues it COULD raise sea levels by 25cm”
Do these ignorant idiots not realise that for this to happen then the sea must somehow ignore the laws of physics and travel UPHILL under the ice pack for miles!
Do the BBC morons have to be told that there are many reasons why a glacier moves toward the sea? How about gravity? How about geo thermal activity? How about increasing snow/ice mass pushing from the source? How about Earth rotation/precession(gyroscopic forcing)of an unstable ice mass? How about simple under glacier meltwater flow? How about a combination of all of these NATURAL events?
But Oh no, that would be too scientific for the imbeciles at TOADY wouldnt it?
Has it occured to the BBC that the ‘scientific’expedition was funded to find an AGW link even if no link exists?
These AGW fanatics keep trying to smash that ‘square peg into the round hole’ why?
Just a quick lesson for the illiterate muppets at the BBC…
Glaciers move downhill toward the sea, its what they do!
Glaciers are and have always been subject to the laws of physics and natural laws!
Just because you WISH for something to be true doesnt MAKE it true!
Dear BBC,
You are turning your organisation into a laughing stock beyond compare and the more you keep trying to push the AGW fantasy in the face of overwhelming scientific(peer reviewed)evidence, the harder it will be to regain any authority you may once have had.
maybe beeboids dont post here on a friday as thats their prayer day
Hilarious!
What else can I say about the News Quiz?
Well, plenty actually, and hilarious is not part of it.
I happened by mischance to listen to about 3 minutes of it last night.
As I turned on the radio the “panel” were panning Israel. Then came Fidel, and as Mark Steel was telling us his favourite story about “Fidel” and “Che” (sic), I just had to turn it off. It almost spoiled my weekend, but I think I hit the off button just in time.
I just can’t understand how
1. The BBC thinks this is funny in the first place.
2. The BBC cannot see that the “humour” is always directed at certain targets, and is approached from the left.
3. In particular, how does Steel get away with it? He is such a second rate comic who would be booed off a school stage, never mind our national broadcaster (whom we fund, never forget – we actually pay for nonentities like Steel – now that is truly astonishing)
PS. I haven’t listened to Today for 3 weeks now, and highly recommend this course of action.
BTW,
My post on the previous thread with regard to the ‘misplaced’ DNA data disk attracted much critcism from Reith/Hillhunt etc. BUT ask yourself why the story has been squashed in the MSM?
All the clearly flawed and kneejerk comments by the BEEBOIDS have done is make the case for me!
It will become clear in the near future that there are a large number of Islamists on that database and the disk was hidden and it was not ‘accidental’.
Hi Cassandra,
Al Beebs news 24 is reporting on its contradictory coverage on climate change / global warming
there are too many different reporters giving their interpretations on the MMGW con so they’re bound to make mistakes. Maybe they should just have a scientist reporting on it rather than ppl with english degrees
yes i think u had a point with the DNA thing. They dont post on a friday…they all praying
😆
I noticed that Reith and the others didn’t comment here on the day of the funeral of Hezbollah terrorist Mughniyeh and the memorial of Rafik Hariri in Lebanon. One has to pay one’s respects, after all. I wonder if a bunch of BBC sympathisers, Reith among them, flew over over to Lebanon and, if so, which event they attended.
Actually, I think I know the answer to that one.
Not TPO’s Ghost | 22.02.08 – 8:16 pm
Good to see you make a non-ghostly appearance here, TPO. Have you missed anything? Probably, but like yourself I’m getting a bit weary of monitoring the BBC’s decline.
In its reporting of the US political campaigns for the next presidency, it seems that much of the BBC comes into the category of ‘European elites’ (below), relating to the Obamas:-
“Why the European elites will love Michelle”
http://www.newcultureforum.org.uk/home/?q=node/233
The BBC cannot be expected therefore to dwell on this comment from Michelle Obama:-
” Michelle Obama’s America – and mine”
http://michellemalkin.com/2008/02/20/michelle-obamas-america-and-mine/
Hi there Mr Annon,
Just heard the ‘report’ again on the TOADY SHOW and it defies belief!
Clearly the ‘reporter’ was on drugs(arent they all?) or is a ‘positive discrimination’ retard?
For any sea level rise to occur the whole glacier must somehow shoot off into the sea at top speed and into the open ocean and melt all at once for it to have any impact on sea levels.
Are these people mental? The whole story is so far fetched and poorly researched that it must be some kind of pisstake?
All the ‘scientists’ had to do was to take samples of the ground level melt water(ALL glaciers do this) at various distances back to the glacial source and taste it! If it tastes fresh(which it would) then it is clearly NOT saltwater defying the laws of gravity by running UPHILL!
These BBC retards are either running a very sophisticated counter propaganda campaign OR they are just so desperate to run the daily AGW scare story(any story)that they will destroy whats left of their reputation to service the vested interests of venal scum like Al(dont confuse me with the facts)Gore.
FYI Im going for a hot bath and a lie down! Its all too much for me.
Said before but worth repeating
Week in pictures 16-22 February
The US and other embassies in Serbia’s capital are attacked by hundreds of protesters angry at the declaration of independence by Kosovo’s ethnic Albanian leaders.
You would think that the attack on the British embassy would lead in British Broadcasting Commission reports not be relegated to the BTW’s :o(
The lead picture is notable for not being notable. Given that it is an AP picture I find it hard to accept that ‘this one’ in particular, of all the thousands available, was a picture of the week.
Palestinians walk through the Hawara checkpoint near the West Bank city of Nablus. Last week, a group of former Israeli generals called for many checkpoints to be demolished.
Yes, thousands of Palestinians walk through checkpoints, daily.
Who were these generals? Why did I miss the BBC report? What is the connection (pictorially between the AP picture and the ‘Generals’?
(I would have posted a screen grab but thumbsnap is acting up. Just me?)
TPO’s Ghost:
Bryan:
I posted this in the same older thread also as response to yours, so thought I’d regurgitate it here also.
PO, I was banned around that same time under a different user name for also disagreeing with the censorship. I remember Andrew’s response being “You can all go away and take your fellow ship jumpers with you.” Or something along those lines.
Considering this site is a lot of people uniting against a common cause – a common cause being the BBCs threat to our future – I thought it was a bit parochial of him to behave in that way.
But coming back here I marvel at how many people there are with the same opinion of the BBC, but how nothing is being done.
And in all the years this site has been active, has there been even the remotest change at the BBC?
I don’t understand why the moderators don’t organize a protest point for examples of BBC bias. E-mail addresses of the producers or editors concerned would be a good start. Or better still any outside governing body that could also address the concerns.
A template e-mail to send would also be a good start. This is the very least I would expect from a site like this. Forget organizing protest meetings, or a class action lawsuit – as someone suggested – or disseminating information about the BBC to a wider audience, really putting it in the laps of those who don’t full understand what the BBC are up to. I guess that would be TOO MUCH to ask.
No, it seems most people here would rather just piss in the wind by moaning to each other like old dear’s in a bus queue.
I’m starting to wonder what the point is of coming here, because it’s not going to have any result, except to annoy me.
The People’s Front of Judea | 23.02.08 – 9:37 am |
The People’s Front of Judea
If you want to do something, and are fed up with moaning on this blog without anything seeming to change, then I suggest there is something you could do. You could start raising shed loads of money and finding 650 odd intelligent articulate individuals. Then form a political party, and use the money raised to fund an assault on the 2010 general election. With enough money, and some inspirational speakers, you could show Labour in their worst light, and have a real shot at winning. And should you return a majority, then a simple vote on the licence fee would be game over for the BBC forever.
Raising money is the hard part. Basically we need to find a rich chap fed up with all the main parties and is a natural centre right voter. A couple million would be a good start. Then see if Sky, ITV, Channel 4, 5 and Virgin Media are willing to chip in with a million or two each. Then the ball will be rolling. See if the Church is willing to stump up some cash, after all, we’d support it in our policies.
That’s the way to beat the BBC legally.
There are of course a multitude of illegal ways to beat the BBC. I’m sure you could think of many. Your call.
I don’t think the reason the Beeboids are not here on a Friday is because it’s prayer day.
More like they are all out cottaging on Hampstead Heath.
BBC World Service this morning trotted out the ‘fact’ that Chernobyl has caused thousands of deaths. It might indeed cause thousands of deaths, but it hasn’t yet. Trust the BBC to err in such a manner on such a subject.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2005/sep/06/energy.ukraine
King Henry II:
If you seriously think that’s the only way you can defeat the BBC then I pity you.
If enough license fee payers protested to the BBC, refused to pay the license and demanded change THEN the BBC would be defeated.
And it wouldn’t cost a penny.
Quite frankly, nay saying excuses like yours is what I would expect from the “It’s all too much bother” generation that has enabled the BBC to get the grip it has in the first place.
Dear PFJ,
Spot on as usual! Remember the old saying…
All evil needs to triumph is for good men to do nothing.
Of course we must carry on highlighting BBC lies and manipulation even if we think that nobody is hearing us! The historical record WILL show that some people did fight back and some did speak the truth.
One tiny grain of truth is worth a ton of lies?
Nothing in this ole world that is worth having comes easy, nothing!
Ask yourself this, at the dying of the light would you rage against the darkness or cower before it?
Cassatta:
Ask yourself this, at the dying of the light would you rage against the darkness or cower before it?
If it was me, I’d check the fuse.
But each to his own…..
Biased BBC: Bombast Lite
BBC America may be a subsidiary of the autonomous commercial branch of the BBC mother ship and so not a beneficiary of the license fee, but it is still beholden to the same Charter. David Preiser (USA) | 23.02.08 – 4:07 am | #
David, BBC America is owned by BBC Worldwide which in turn is a wholly owned subsidiary of the BBC proper.
BBC like to pretend that Worlwide is autonomous, or at least “arms length” – but it just ain’t so.
The two are so linked commercially by opaque intertrading and financing, as well as having board directors in common, that no corporate lawyer would ever pretend Worlwide was autonomous.
Be in no doubt, your country is being undermined and impugned with money confiscated directly from UK citizens – which is mortifying for those of us who have close links and good friends in the US.
Maybe George Bush could include in his swansong some direct legal, diplomatic or financial pressure on our government to get the BBC under control.
The BBC is so closely enmeshed in the lives of political/media players here that I don’t believe it will ever happen from within the UK – even under the next Conservative government.
Sorry – last post was me.
Hillhunt,
Very funny Ha Ha Ha!
Wot, no deep south lynch mob analogy this time? tut tut.
A one trick pony to be sure but why bother posting here as you are despised for your oral trash by most here!
Shouldnt you be in some mosque plotting our downfall? But then again if your vermin chums get their way there will be no web.
Cassatta:
Shouldnt you be in some mosque plotting our downfall?
They’re not very big on unbelievers.
So, no…
And not telling at all that you assume those who see things differently must be
1. A Muslim
2. A Jihadi, to boot.
Here’s a tip – trying getting out more. The world is a sunnier place when you’re not locked away swapping stories with your Rambo chums and raging against broken light-bulbs.
.
Cassandra:
Ignore the troll, and it will return to the bridge it crawled from under. Your intellect is wasted on him.
Bryan:
I took a good look at the “Honest Reporting” web site. Thanks for suggesting it. What impressed me the most is how pro-active it is. I see that it’s aim is to highlight the bias against Israel and encourage it’s subscribers to peacefully protest against those who skew their reporting. And clearly it’s successes have been many.
What we need is a similar approach, and I feel that too many efforts here are wasted on moaning to each other when we should be moaning at the BBC.
If it’s too much to expect more pro-activity, then I guess I’m in the wrong place.
I just read that Nick Reynold’s job at the BBC is to man the web blogs full time.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/bbcinternet/2008/02/how_do_you_do_it.html
They actually employ this guy to encourage all the other dictators at the BBC to contribute to blogs, no doubt so they don’t lose a grip on that particular avenue of dis-information.
Talk about a waste of resources. But hey, it’s the BBC. Any excess goes.
Ooh wait, it gets better. It looks like he has a crew of 3 people to assist him. His executive producer is called Jem Stone – which is an identical name to a UK porn star – but happens to be a man.
Best bit:
“Senior BBC executives are busy people. Asking them to put aside time to blog as well as everything else they do is sometimes tricky.”
Really? He should come up here every once in a while if he wants to find some sponging BBC executives with lots of time on their hands.
“I think this criticism is taking things too far.” This is the voice of Adrian Van-Klaveren who is the new controller at BBC Five Live, it was announced today.
So what was ruffling his feathers?
Was he talking about B-BBC? No he was addressing the criticism that the beeb recruits its editorial honchos from a narrow privately educated elite.
“There is always a decision about how much monitoring to do. Our recruitment process is actually pretty closely monitored – for example we look carefully at issues of gender, disability and the progress of ethnic minority candidates. We have never felt it appropriate to monitor specifically for educational background and, given we recruit several hundred people a year, it would be a significant undertaking.”
He wrote this on the Editor blog which he pioneered.
Interstingly, in came a reply from the definitely non-privately educated Paul Mason, a TV news bod.
“Agreed but is it not the case that we are hideously white, male and middle class as an organisation and that our recruitment methods favour that status quo? The biggest difference between the BBC and a lot of print newsrooms is the low proportion of people who have blagged and battled their way in through doing journalism at the bottom, rather than getting a triple tripos or whatever (I didn’t go).
You could do a lot of things: you could cap the number recruited from Oxbridge at, say 5% of recruits and work for a target of no greater than 5% of the editorial workforce over 10 years (you would have to keep stats though)(my rough reckoning puts the combined Oxbridge undergrad population at about 2% of UK students at college); you could go out into the workforce and actively headhunt the kind of people who end up working for the tabloids; you could pay people decent wages on the same principle that operated when Rugby League was born – people with no family wealth cannot afford to work for the kudos or the love of it.”
The BBC are obviously extremely sensitive and very exposed on this specific point.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/pressoffice/biographies/biogs/news/adrianvanklaveren.shtml
So what is Adrian’s own background. He was born in Bristol in 1961 and educated at Bristol Grammar School and St John’s College, Oxford, where he read Modern History.
One for the BBC and its ideologues to think about (and Kosovo as Islam’s Trojan horse):
” Kosovo and the failure of multiculturalism”
http://kleinverzet.blogspot.com/2008/02/kosovo-and-failure-of-multi-culturalism.html
Really? He should come up here every once in a while if he wants to find some sponging BBC executives with lots of time on their hands.
The People’s Front of Judea | 23.02.08 – 2:35 pm
He did. Nick Reynolds used to hang around here quite a lot till he started his own blog.
And yes, Honest Reporting does really good work. That’s why people like Reith can’t stand them.
In a HARDtalk interview first broadcast on 14 February 2008, Gavin Esler talks to the former Israeli deputy defence minister, Efraim Sneh.
Pity Esler couldn’t come up with any more interesting questions than the standard brainless leftie, “What does a fifteen-year-old kid in Gaza think about the Israelis?” and, “Israel is going to have to talk to Hamas.” It could have been quite an interesting interview. As it is, Sneh was basically talking to himself.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/hardtalk/7244436.stm
Requires Real Player.
Talk about a waste of resources. But hey, it’s the BBC. Any excess goes.
The People’s Front of Judea | 23.02.08 – 2:31 pm | #i
It’s amazing isn’t it.
The most sucessful blogs in the world are one man operations – but the beeb needs a dozen overpaid public servants at three management levels to play at running a crap one.
Your BBC – life on benefits for the thinking classes
As it is, Sneh was basically talking to himself.
Bryan | 23.02.08 – 6:19 pm
Ephraim Sneh is far more interesting than just a former deputy minister of defence – Medical doctor, specialist in internal medicine; brigadier-general, Chief Medical Officer, IDF, Northern Command (1980-1981)
Commander of the Security Zone in South Lebanon (1981-1982)
Head of the Civil Administration of the West Bank (1985-1987); member of Knesset (MP) from 13th Knesset (1992) to 17th Knesset (present).
He is also incredibly boring, even in Hebrew, with zero charisma and little aptitude for memorable speeches. All that came over on Hard-Talk.
Well, boring or not, he kept the Israeli end of the wicket up OK – though admittedly the PC Esler with his cracked record questions didn’t give him much of a challenge.
Difficult to be scintillating and entertaining while being moaned at by an ignorant BBC hack for not giving in to radical Islam.
Good to see beeboids come to rescue of blinky balls and his synthetic anger, when the hypocracy of his faux funded Auschwitz trips are revealed.
bbc, spinning for nulab, its what we do !
Barry Wood | 23.02.08 – 3:01 pm
Interstingly, in came a reply from the definitely non-privately educated Paul Mason, a TV news bod.
I guess poor old Paul “Venceremos!” Mason must have a nagging chip-on-shoulder doubt that he only got the Newsnight business correspondent gig because his superiors were filled with Oxbridge liberal guilt.
(For those who don’t get the “Venceremos!” reference click here and scroll down.)
The BBC, its hatred of Israel and half a story.
Israel steps up border security
Israel’s military has strengthened positions along its frontier with Gaza ahead of a demonstration against the months-long blockade of the territory. Three Hamas fighters were killed by Israeli air strikes near Gaza’s border on Sunday, the group said. Tens of thousands of Gazan women and children are expected to form a human chain stretching the length of the coastal enclave in Monday’s protest. Protest organisers say they have no intention of breaching the border. Israel’s Haaretz newspaper reported there are fears of casualties if the troops try to halt the demonstration.
………..
Israeli forces also detained 40 Palestinians and said they had discovered five smuggling tunnels along the territory’s frontier.
……..
Israeli authorities fear a repetition of scenes from last month, when the fence separating Gaza from Egypt was demolished by Palestinian militants in several places near the Rafah crossing point.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/7262089.stm
Nice of the BBC to report the terrorist version of the story in which to report the News.
1) Why in a story about a so-called peaceful protest does the BBC insert the fact that 3 terrorists (According to the BBC Hamas said they were their’s) I mean are they trying to say the Jews are gun happy and the protesters run a risk of getting shot?
2) While the BBC says that Hamas have said that there is no intention to breach the border and then inserted a clip from a Jewish newspaper which they say claims there are fears of causalities if the troops try to halt the demonstration. The real fact is Hamas according to HAarentz tell another story;
“As part of the demonstration, protesters are scheduled to form a human chain the length of the 40 kilometre-long Gaza Strip at 10 A.M. There are conflicting reports that the demonstrators may then attempt to break through the fence and enter Israeli territory. “Our people will not allow the continuation of this situation regardless of the results, and we will work to break the siege by all possible means,” said Hamas official Sami Abu Zuhri, who nonetheless stopped short of threatening to breach the border. “We hold them [Israeli leaders] responsible for any harm to the participants in these peaceful demonstrations”
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/957540.html
3) The story about arresting 40 Palestinians is a perfect example of BBC bias. Why were they arrested? Here is how the rest of the world read that story;
“The IDF discovered five tunnels for smuggling weapons in southern Gaza. The tunnels were found in a combined operation by forces from the Givati Regiment, the Armored Corps and the Engineering Corps near Rafiah and the Dahaniyeh airport. 50 Arab suspects were arrested and taken to initial interrogation.
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/Flash.aspx/142111
In other words they were arrested because of the tunnels.
4) How much so you want to bet the BBC has lots of cameras on scene with obligatory idiot dressed in blue flak jacket and helmet just waiting for the jews to open up. The last I looked storming another country amounts to invasion. But hey the BBC overlooks 6000 rockets attacks from Gaza to Sderot so why should they report the truth for a bunch of terrorists who have no problem hiding behind women and children.
The BBC, its hatred of Israel and half a story.
Yes, interesting how the BBC will always pick at a story like a vulture going for the choice bits in order to show Israel in the worst light and the terrorists in the best light.
Luckily for Hamas terrorists, they have a powerful friend with great influence and reach in the BBC.