As you and I both know the BBC plays an active role in advancing certain political left-wing agendas, rather than just objectively reporting the news, and as such it frequently has to studiously avoid stating unplatable truths. So when we read “news” it’s always important to consider what is left out as much as what is put in. Bias is a subtle beast.
Now then, I was reading this glowing propaganda piece on how the late David Ervine “was an example to us all.” So says US Senator George Mitchell, another much-loved BBC figure. But who was this good man David Ervine? He was a convicted loyalist terrorist, intercepted by the police whilst on a bombing mission. Ervine got out of jail years later and moved into politics. His closest political associates were Gusty Spence (convicted murderer) and Billy Hutchinson (convicted murderer) During his tenURE as leader of the Orwellian-entitled Progressive Unionist Party, he was feted by the BBC as the exciting new face of unionist even as the scent of semtex exuded from him. The PUP were and remain the political apology wing for the murderous UVF terror group, to which Ervine had belonged. The UVF continued to murder and maim even as Ervine preened as a neo-politician. You would not get any of this background from this piece put up by the BBC, and you are not intended to. This is all about the State Broadcaster playing the subtle game, ensuring that government policy of appeasing terrorists and indeed eulogising them is sustained. I imagine that the day terror godfather Martin McGuinness dies the BBC will don black ties and play solemn music – more than his victims ever got.
‘You would not get any of this background from this piece put up by the BBC, and you are not intended to.’
Could this be because it is in the Northern Ireland section and everyone there would know his background anyway????
I am not sure what you are saying here David, or, at least I can’t quite believe what you appear to be saying. Do you really think the BBC loves terrorists no matter which side they are on?
The BBC only likes terrorists that don’t like the UK. So IRA good; UVF bad, in fact very bad.
I agree that they will fawn all over that thug McGuiness’ corpse when he dies and no doubt find a reporterene to shed a tear as he is planted in the earth. But that’s because he’s a Catholic, a rebublican and hates Britain. All things the BBC approves of.
Have you considered that this could be a sign of balance at the BBC? Fawning over both sides is less biased, though equally deplorable, than picking sides surely?
“Ervine got out of jail years later and moved into politics.”
He did his time and when released worked hard for the greater good and to resolve the conflict. He was instrumental and influential in the Good Friday Agreement which has eventually brought peace to NI. He acknowledged his past mistakes.
What a wonderful human story!
Could this be because it is in the Northern Ireland section and everyone there would know his background anyway????
only me | 22.05.08 – 1:53 pm
Hmmm… that sounds like Alex.
Matt,
LOL – yes, he worked so very hard that the UVF held onto their weapons, kept killing and maiming and blighted the community they infested.
David Vance
And the IRA held onto it’s weapons and the British Army kept up it’s covert operations and it is now over.
I’ve said before that I am not particularily enthused by ex-terrorists in Government but I’d rather it than the alternative. The best thing for everyone now is to work together to make NI an even better and safer place than it is now.
I’m afraid that pragmatism is my greatest failing.
Matt,
No – an ability to distinguish between the forces of law and order (The British Army) and evil terrorists (IRA,UVF) is your greatest failing. In that regard you are like the BBC.
Good Friday Agreement – That should really be the Good Friday Appeasement – which is basically what happened. The British Governmnet gave in terrorism.
Good Friday Agreement – That should really be the Good Friday Appeasement – which is basically what happened. The British Governmnet gave in to terrorism.
meggoman | 22.05.08 – 5:22 pm | #
David Vance
The British, and the British Army were/are part of the problem as you well know. Also that other bastion of law & order the RUC. Some of their behavior and actions were appaling.
Unlike you, I can recognise that there was/is good & bad on both sides.
Would you prefer things as they were?
Matt:
David Vance
And………
I’ve said before that I am not particularily enthused by ex-terrorists in Government but I’d rather it than the alternative……….I’m….
Matt | 22.05.08 – 4:32
So you would accept a terrorist sat in parliament making laws rather than the alternative of him being in prison for breaking laws? How odd.
meggoman
Don’t be silly!
Putting bloodthirsty killers in power is ever so natural for those who support peace at any price. The BBC see no harm in it, nothing odd at all in fact.
David Vance
So what is your alternative? Gaza?
The alternative is to put murderers in prison, you silly man.
How typical that you mention Gaza. And we know why you do.
Are you N Irish David Vance? If so, what part did you play in bringing peace? Whatever the case, in this matter you don’t know what you are talking about.
The BBC demonized the Protestant population of NI throughout the ‘Troubles’.
As with their anti-Israeli propaganda, the BBC were engaged in empathising with “oppressed” Catholics. They had no interest in the equally ‘oppressed’ Protestant working-class.
David Ervine was a man who learned a hard lesson. He spoke openly of why he did what he did and how education (in prison) changed his perspective. Unlike so many PIRA killers, there was no ‘early’ release. He served the full sentence. In the end, dedication to peace, killed him.
I met David Ervine many times over those terrible years. I was impressed by his knowledge and understanding of the historical complexities and the working-class people he represented. .
Uninformed derogatory comments on one of the many unacknowledged peacemakers serves no purpose. It certainly does NOT illustrate a BBC bias towards ‘loyalists’ or any on their organisations. Perhaps you might consider acquainting yourself with REAL factual information before rushing to print next time. Some hope!
“Uninformed derogatory comments on one of the many unacknowledged peacemakers”
Here we go again. There is no ‘peace’. There is capitulation to mass-murderers.
That ‘Nearly Oxfordian’ is a different debate!
David Ervine was a peacemaker. There is no dichotomy in my statement.
I do not support the Good Friday Agreement. I agree the majority in NI were ‘sold out’ by the British government. However, David Ervine was NOT a murderer. He was caught, as a young man, on a first mission, agreed to after a friend had been murdered by the Provos.
He served his full sentence. He went on to work for peace. He does not deserve for his memory to be used as an illustration of the ‘terrorist’ mindset. Ever heard of repentance? Ever heard of making amends? David Ervine did both. I am privileged to have known such a man.
Nearly Oxfordian
“you silly man”
Oh Dear!
“How typical that you mention Gaza. And we know why you do.”
Yes, I do not agree with a lot of Israel’s actions in defence of It’s existence which I fully support. And?
been there
“Ever heard of repentance?”
Repentance is not done on this blog.
Been there, please read my comment again – carefully this time – and you’ll see that your snide remark about repentance is misdirected. I did not mention Ervine or refer to him as a person, in any way shape or form. You are reading into my comment what you choose to read.
Matt, who called someone ‘silly’ only a few posts above, can’t take it when he is on the receiving end. Like all bullies, really.
Nearly Oxfordian
“can’t take it when he is on the receiving end. Like all bullies, really.”
Pots & kettles!
No, Nearly Oxfordian, sorry – good try but not good enough.
Your point of reference was a statement made by me, and related directly to David Ervine. The natural, and logical, assumption must be – your comments are relevant to that ‘point’ and the thread’s topic i.e. David Ervine.
Blessed are the cheesemakers? Is that what we’re saying?
If this guy was a peacemaker then good for him.
Matt, you are a pathetic ‘me too’ loser.
Been there, you really do need to sue your English teachers. I said quite clearly that there is no peace. That does not imply that person X did not work towards achieving peace, only that in my opinion he was unsuccessful.
I wonder if this eulogising of convicted bomber David Ervine is in any way connected to the event concerned being organised by the David Ervine foundation? Mmmm.
I said quite clearly that there is no peace.
Been to Northern Ireland lately have you?
Good Friday Agreement – That should really be the Good Friday Appeasement – which is basically what happened. The British Governmnet gave in to terrorism.
Some futher reading for you?
http://www.standrewsagreement.org/
Endorsed by all parties.
Let us not forget the electorate who overwhelmingly voted for the GFA in 1998.
And then theres David Vance
1405 votes in 1998???
As you and I both know the BBC plays an active role in advancing certain political left-wing agendas,
Are you trying to say the GFA is a left wing document?
Not the whole truth is the title of this thread.
Indeed!!! This is not BBC bias, this is the bias of writer of the post.
Nearly Oxfordian
“Matt, you are a pathetic ‘me too’ loser.”
Please explain.
Whatever the merits of Ervine’s later life, did anyone notice that the report calls him plainly and without speech marks a *terrorist*?
How did this one slip through the BBC?
And can we expect the BBC now to refer to the IRA commander on Bloody Sunday who was attempting to murder police and soldiers as a *terrorist* as well?
Why is the labels ‘irish terrorism’, was Ervine not a loyalist, and therefore pro-union. Shouldn’t that be ‘British terrorism’?
I do not support the Good Friday Agreement.
‘been there’ what is your alternative?
David Vance what is your alternative?
only me is not alex he is hillhunt
the votes for vance is a dead giveaway
your ban revoked then hillhunt?
‘the votes for vance is a dead giveaway’
Don’t go applying for MI5 now will you?
Biodegradable:
Could this be because it is in the Northern Ireland section and everyone there would know his background anyway????
only me | 22.05.08 – 1:53 pm
Hmmm… that sounds like Alex.
Biodegradable | 22.05.08 – 2:49 pm | #
Biodegradable, – in posts where he is out of his depth. Quelle surprise!!!
Anything to say on topic biodegradable? No? More surprise.
The more things change the more they stay the same……
Hi libertus
You ask:
“Whatever the merits of Ervine’s later life, did anyone notice that the report calls him plainly and without speech marks a *terrorist*?”
I would assume, because it is a quotation. Here the text again:
“Former loyalist terrorist turned peacemaker David Ervine was an example of the power of redemption, George Mitchell has said.”
In other words, George Mitchell is stating that David Ervine was a terrorist, not the BBC.
gunnar, you need to read carefully. I said there were NO speech marks around *terrorist*, which suggests that the editor agreed with the word – and it is not clear at all that Mitchell called Ervine a terrorist – I very much doubt that he did. Also, the BBC is in the habit of changing ‘terrorist’ in quoted speech into ‘militant’ or such like, especially when Israelis are talking about Hamas etc.
So the BBC can use the word if it wishes ….
libertus,
I read carefully. I suggested that the BBC were quoting Mitchell, hence no quotation marks.
Obviously, I do not know whether Mitchell actually uttered those words or not. I could do some research later if I find some time.
I may easily be wrong, but when the BBC is citing someone directly it does not add quotation marks to a quotation.
“Matt,
LOL – yes, he worked so very hard that the UVF held onto their weapons, kept killing and maiming and blighted the community they infested.”
David.
You obviously know nothing of David Ervine – he is being eulogised in some ways because f the lengths he went to to create conditions for peace within the ranks of the loyalist Paras. i dont know if you have noticed – gerry adams went and paid him tribute – in a loyalist srea – and was not lynched – perhaps these guys deserve at least some credit – or would you rather they be still bombing and murdering?
There are plenty of people out there to take there place when they are banged up/interned – noy so many when there is peace.
use your brains man – no bias here,just a genuine heart warming story.
hillhunt/only me,
your 6 posts on this thread do not address the alleged bias highlighted by David Vance, you merely attack him personally, then you have the cheek to suggest biodegradeable stay on topic, which is something you so rarely do yourself
trolling again
it amazes me you have got round your ban so easily
I always got the impression that David Ervine was genuinely reformed, but then the question always did beg itself, if this was the case, why didn’t he simply join the UUP (or even the DUP)?
“I may easily be wrong, but when the BBC is citing someone directly it does not add quotation marks to a quotation.”
This is incorrect. The BBC even changes the words people say (e.g. to ‘militant’).
Hi libertus,
Interesting. I am not saying that you are wrong, but could you please provide some evidence.
Look it up yourself, gunnar. There are countless examples archived on this site alone.
gunnar | 24.05.08 – 12:28 am,
This is trolling on your part. The whole militant/terrorist question has been exhaustively covered on this blog, including this post by Natalie a month ago which was a response to your own comment – a similar one to the one you have just made:
http://biased-bbc.blogspot.com/2008/04/gunnar-comments-seriously-can-you.html
You commented here
http://www.haloscan.com/comments/patrickcrozier/9138270933166543556/#394599
and elsewhere on the thread.
So please stop this innocent pretense that this is the first you have heard of the terrorist/militant debate on this site. To put it less politely, stop lying. And stop wasting our time.
I imagine that the day terror godfather Martin McGuinness dies the BBC will don black ties and play solemn music – more than his victims ever got.
And hopefully that happens when he accidentally trips and falls feet first into an industrial chipper on slow rotation.
A fitting end for the wee chappie.
Jack Bauer
“And hopefully that happens when he accidentally trips and falls feet first into an industrial chipper on slow rotation.”
A constructive and helpful contribution to the debate.
In a similar vein, BBC headline tells us: IRA leader ‘was pivotal in peace’
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/7418415.stm
Notice how the victims of these murderous “peacemakers” are not worthy of mention?
In the real (non BBC) world this was a murderous IRA terrorist. That terrorists stop stop killing people does not make them peacemakers any more than a rapist who has stopped attacking women is a feminist.
A constructive and helpful contribution to the debate.
This is a blog post, not a debate. But thanks for adding your humorless observations.
And if you want to give the wee torturing chappie mouth to mouth, carry on.