! 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 also be moderated. Any suggestions for stories that you might like covered would be appreciated! It’s your space, use it wisely.
General BBC-related comment thread
Bookmark the permalink.
WoAD: “In answer to your points: Islam is not a race.”
Ermmm….. yes, but what has that to do with a single thing I wrote? You seem to be confusing what I wrote with something else, that perhaps employed the same words but in a different order.
“Modern mathematical and astronomical science owes much to “Arab” civilisation, the influence of Sharia law on “modern” civilisation, by comparison, is non-existent.”
Yes. And?
What exactly do you think I did say? I’m genuinely puzzled.
Disabililty Dolls
The Wright Stuff on channel 5 did a feature on “disability dolls” this morning. Matthew Wright commented that the makers of the dolls didn’t want to send him the downs syndrome doll incase he said something negative about it and the only broadcaster they would send it to was the BBC.
So the makers of the doll were worried that channel 5 would give it balanced coverage, ie point out the negative as well as the positive. The makers of the doll would only send it to the BBC because they knew that the BBC is the only broadcaster that would not give it balanced coverage, ie only mention the positive. They knew that the BBC would be sympathetic to their campaign.
The BBC is supposed to be impartial, it should not be sympathetic to any campaign.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/health/article4206469.ece
http://www.bbc.co.uk/ouch/
OK, here’s something on-topic for a change. Two questions:
1. How come the Today programme managed to ignore entirely the fact that Ed Balls and wife Yvette Cooper are being investigated by Parliamentary standards for what seems a fairly obvious/simple expenses scam? This is, after all, the same BBC that not a month ago led an entire Newsnight on what may or may not have been a problem with Caroline Spelman’s nanny which was settled 10 years ago? Nothing, incidentally, on Wendy Alexander’s financial shenanigans either.
Why not?
2. The lead story of Newsnight last night seemed to me an utter disgrace. Their entire main package was devoted to publicising claims of racial discrimination in the Met against a particular senior Asian officer. And the key point to realize is that (sorry about the shouting to follow) THE OFFICER IN QUESTION HASN’T EVEN FILED A COMPLAINT. The entire package was, in other words, based on nothing. So what on earth is it doing even being broadcast.
But of course it gets worse. If the officer does file a complaint, then of course the whole issue goes sub judice. Which means that the BBC would not legally be able to run the hit-job on the Met it ran last night. Whilst there’s no complaint, there’s no restraint. But if there’s no complaint, there’s also no story.
This was so trashy, so egregiously dedicated to a single agenda (“The Met’s institutionally racist”), that it amounted to nothing less than an unprovoked, and unanswered, slur on an institution. That this amounted, possibly, to simply furthering the (presumed) agenda of the officer involved, is collateral damage, but it is also important, since, let’s face it, the Newsnight broadcast would also have deeply prejudiced any possible future case against the Met.
I think this was a deeply deeply disgraceful abuse of editorial power, and I’d like to know:
1. How Newsnight ‘got the story’ (always assuming there was any story to get).
2. Which editor/producer decided to run with the story, and did they consider the likely legal implications.
Personal view – a deep disgrace for which heads should roll.
THIS is what the BBC should be doing:
http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/2008/06/caught-red-handed.html
Think it will ever happen? No, me neither!
Michael Taylor- and it got worse. The report you mention was followed by a piece by Susan Watts (speaking in hushed tones, appearing suddenly from around corners and generally playing the role of investigative reporter hot on the trail of a story to the hilt…)in which she mused that the US might finally be provoked into action on global warming as a result of a report by the security services on the subject. Watts went on to opine that the US faced losing super power status if it didn’t act. From the blog (my how hip those beeboids are…blogs for everything):
CLIMATE CHANGE
Ever thought of global warming as a threat to national security? If the answer’s no, think again. Our science editor Susan Watts has the inside track on how America’s intelligence agencies view the implications of global climate change. They’ve looked ahead to 2030 and present the coming US administration with a choice – wake up to the climate-changed world, and help it to adapt – or lose status as a superpower.
Compare the above to the report from CNN, which manages to both refrain from editorial speculation and present an alternative viewpoint:
http://edition.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/06/25/climate.change.security/index.html
For a critique of UK wind-power advocacy, and a corrective to BBC approach, suggest see:
“Wind is not the Answer”
(Centre for Policy Studies).
http://www.cps.org.uk/newsarchive/news/?pressreleaseid=92
The ‘Daily Mail” provides a further summary of the CPS critique:
“Wind turbines are ‘unreliable and will cost each home £4,000’, claims think-tank”
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1029143/Wind-turbines-unreliable-cost-home-4-000-claims-think-tank.html
‘EU Referendum’ has many critiques of wind power, which can be founf here:
“Madness grips the Land”
http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/2008/06/when-madness-grips-land.html
Arab civilisation?! Define ‘Arab’. Do you mean the modern(erroneous) defintion, which includes virtually anyone who happens to come from the Middle East?
This chap disagrees:
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID=E2F416C9-2309-43FF-9584-0F9E1D83A58C
“The fundamental basis of modern mathematics had been laid down not hundreds but thousands of years before by Assyrians and Babylonians, who already knew of the concept of zero, of the Pythagorean Theorem, and of many, many other developments expropriated by Arabs/Muslims (see HISTORY OF BABYLONIAN MATHEMATICS by Otto E. Neugebauer).”
“…the astronomers you refer to were not Arabs but Chaldeans and Babylonians (of present day south-Iraq), who for millennia were known as astronomers and astrologers, and who were forcibly Arabized and Islamized – so rapidly that by 750 A.D. they had disappeared completely.”
Michael Tay;or
But of course it gets worse. If the officer does file a complaint, then of course the whole issue goes sub judice. Which means that the BBC would not legally be able to run the hit-job on the Met it ran last night
I’m no lawyer, but I think you’re probably wrong here. I don’t think the contempt of court stuff applies to civil actions and non-jury trials…. on the grounds that judges are too wise to be prejudiced by journalism.
George R,
The BBC’s moronic blindness to the rather obvious problems involved in windpower is not universal. The Radio 4 programme ‘Costing the Earth’ did an absolutely superb analysis of the difficulties of wind-power a couple of months ago. It was one of the most effective demolition jobs I’ve heard on the radio – the more so in that it was coming from a green/environmental standpoint. I can only suppose that the TV colleagues don’t listen to the radio, or if they do, that they’re too stupid/tired&emotional to follow a properly detailed argument. Shame that.
Tomtom
I’m not a lawyer either, but I’m pretty sure contempt of court does apply to civil actions. Any lawyer out there?
How much of a look-in will Centre for Public Studies critique of wind power get tonight on BBC 2 ‘Newsnight’?:
[Extract from BBC ‘Newsnight’ site] –
“It’s been called a ‘Green Revolution’ but will it work? Gordon Brown has announced his plans to hugely increase the amount of renewable energy in the UK. He has to meet tough EU targets on the use of wind, solar and other renewable sources of energy and it could all cost £100bn. Apart from the cost, there are other huge practical obstacles in the way…”
George R writes: “How much of a look-in will Centre for Public Studies critique of wind power get tonight on BBC 2 ‘Newsnight’?:”
I’ve complained for so long about Newsnight and its complete abandonment of objectivity on ‘Green’ issues that that I’ve almost given up in despair.
The Susan Watts piece last night was poor, even by her awful standards, so I’ve little expectation that absolute con-trick of wind power will receive the sort of detailed scrutiny it so richly deserves.
If I didn’t know better, I’d say that the lovely Kate Silverton was under the influence of an internal vibratory device, which seemed to operate sporadically and erotically – sorry, erratically throught the 1 o’clock news today. She kept erupting into a flushed smile, accompanied by barely suppressed giggles, no matter what the story was.
I must go and have a cold shower.
THIS is what the BBC should be doing:
http://eureferendum.blogspot.com…red- handed.html
Think it will ever happen? No, me neither!
Allan@Oslo | 26.06.08 – 1:00 pm | #
For some reason (??), the video which showed several MEPs signing in at 7 a.m. to claim a full day’s wage before going home is unavailable. It is an excellent summary of the rapacious greed of the ruling clique (including a ‘Green’ MEP who tried to hide herself in the lift when she spotted the camera crew). Very strange…..or is it?
Michael Taylor | 26.06.08 – 2:57 pm |
I can only suppose that the TV colleagues don’t listen to the radio, or if they do, that they’re too stupid/tired&emotional to follow a properly detailed argument. Shame that.
That’s the BBC office culture. Different departments almost never talk to each other, even about important things they really ought to get straight. I’ve had business dealings in the past with a couple different divisions at the BBC, and they’re almost like independently operating fiefdoms. There may be a competent person at a given job, but they don’t share information properly, if at all, and that competence is not spread from cubicle to cubicle, or office to office. Asking someone from another division – or even down the hall in the same one – just doesn’t occur to them. That’s not how it’s done, and they’ll just stare at you blankly if you ask why.
Chuffer | 26.06.08 – 5:36 pm |
So the thought of that arouses you?
The bBC defending Islamic terrorists and half the story.
Former soldiers fight to stay in Bosnia
Bosnia-Hercegovina is preparing to expel hundreds of Muslim former soldiers who went to the country in the early 1990s to fight for Bosnian government forces during the conflict. “I came to help the people here,” says Aiman Awad, who could now be facing deportation. “I am very sorry because this country is violating our human rights and breaking all the rules.” When he took up arms in 1992, Mr Awad says he was promised citizenship. But a clause in the 1995 US-sponsored peace agreement stipulated that all “foreign fighters” – as they are known – must leave the country. Sitting on the steps of their local mosque, they deny any connection to any terror group. “No, we haven’t,” says Imad al-Husin. “But trouble is that the American president says you are either with him or against him. And I am certainly not with Bush.”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/7474794.stm
The bBC posts an article about how poor Islamic gunmen (soldiers indeed) who after the war ended in Bosnia in 1995 took no notice of the Dayton accord. Which had at Annex 1-A this;
Annex 1-A: Military Aspects
The cease-fire that began with the agreement of October 5, 1995 will continue.
Foreign combatant forces currently in Bosnia are to be withdrawn within 30 days.
Instead of telling it how it is the bBc instead pushes this story of human rights and how these so called poor former gunmen are been persecuted by President Bush. Actually BBc the reason these men are getting kicked out is because it has been found they gained citizenship by false means.
But there’s more, something the bBC doesn’t bother mentioning. You see the vast majority of those foreign fighters who stayed behind in Bosnia follow the Wahhabis way of life and in Bosnia they are referred to as ‘Vehabi’. These ‘Vehabi ‘ have found that instead of flocking to their way of life. The local Muslim population want to carry on with how they have followed Islam since the turks came a knocking hundreds of years ago.
So Bosnian Muslims drink alcohol, they eat pork ,they have no problem marrying outside of the faith and that Muslim women in Bosnia actually have equality with their men folk. In reply the ‘Vehabi’ have taken to throwing abuse at the locals calling them ‘Communist muslims’ and in general look down at their fellow religious cohorts.
So what have the Bosnians done about their fair weather friends? Well they have started clamping down on them. For example anybody who wants to become a Mullah has to have 2 degrees in the Subject. (Unlike the UK where anybody can become a mullah) one of which must have been earned in Bosnia. In otherwords the Bosnians unlike the Europeans stamp down hard on those idiots who preach war and hatred and then hide behind the Human rights act.
http://www.qantara.de/webcom/show_article.php/_c-476/_nr-847/i.html
Oh and the story behind ‘Aiman Awad’ he left Croatia to go and fight in Bosnia and ended up joining the infamous Al Mujahadin Unit. (Which operated outside the remit of Bosnian army)
“Awad also spoke about the military action conducted in September 1995, which is mentioned in the indictment against Delic. The ICTY’s indictment alleges that, in mid September in the Vozuca area, “about 60 people, mainly VRS members, were captured, together with a few civilians, including three women”. These people were detained, held and maltreated in an improvised prison in Zavidovici municipality area. The indictment further alleges that, between September 11 and 17, members of the “Al Mujahadin” unit killed most of the prisoners.”
http://www.bim.ba/en/101/10/7794/
With all the above which took me minutes to find out. (Kind of helped that I was in Bosnia at the time of the fighting) The bBC insists on trying to reinvent Awad as an innocent man who came to help.
The bBC defending Islamic terrorists and half the story.
If Colombia is so isolated and bad and the kidnap capital of the world how is it that Mr Mcdermott doesn’t base himself in Caracas or Quito not Bogota?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/7474652.stm
Could it be that Colombia is the proper democracy and not the socialist paradises of Ecuador or Venezuela.
And there seems to be a misprint in the final sentance of the article, surely an accurate sentance would read ‘Mr McDermott’ or even ‘The BBC’ rather than ‘Mr Correa’.
pounce,
Excellent fisking. Wow, this one is pretty disgustingly bad. They even throw in a Gitmo reference, just to twist the knife a little:
A further six, all originally from Algeria, have been in Guantanamo Bay since 2002.
Why, BBC? Just thrown in here out of its proper context, the reader will easily assume they got thrown in there just because they were supposed to withdraw. No other reason, I’m sure. And naturally, a BBC favorite tactic, the Featured Quote, twists the knife a little more:
“It’s very difficult to be a Muslim nowadays. The whole world is anti-Islamic”
Nada Dizolaravic
Wife of Guantanamo detainee
And the caption the the bottom photo:
Imad al-Husin faces deportation, though he has been in Bosnia for years
What, the BBC supports squatters’ rights for citizenship now?
Wow.
Chuffer | 26.06.08 – 5:36 pm |
Dispel it from your mind. A few years ago she was a regular on the Matthew Wright show where she showed a complete and utter lack of any grasp of modern issues.
All she could do was parrot psuedo-left wing bullshit, which she clearly didn’t understand or believe. I always wondered why she did it. And then I saw her present News 24 and the penny dropped – she was auditioning …
So Bosnian Muslims drink alcohol, they eat pork ,they have no problem marrying outside of the faith
Oh, and about 100,000 of them were co-opted by Hitler’s friend, and Arafat’s great uncle…
That would be the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, who led them in fighting on behalf of Adolf and the Nazis, and exterminating Bosnian Jews.
on a lighter note, but also a good example of the beebs tut tutting and making sure the nations morals are kept firmly in check (checked in Labours back pocket)this little gem caught my eye:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7475764.stm
its the story of that annoying Gaelic twat Sarkozy giving all his MP’s (even the ladies, shock horror!?!?) a neck tie as a pressie to ‘celebrate’ the upcomming French presidency of the EU… apprently certain female members werent very happy, but what caught my eye even more was the niased beeb view that this was a gaffe quote;
“Junior minister Nadine Morano – one of Mr Sarkozy’s most loyal staffers – defended her boss’s blunder by saying that “even for a woman, wearing a tie can be nice,” the Guardian reports.”
so there you have it, we can rest easily now we know the beeb has it moral fingers on the pulse…
wouldnt ya just love to see the face on Harrietta Har-persons if Gordo gave her a tie??? 😆
Just to add a response to the responses to my complaint over David Vance’s recent crazy posts.
Firstly I was aware it was not David Vance’s quotation, however posting it to this site as something worth reading (rather than a lamentably wacko opinion) is his failure (and reflects badly on his attitude, imo).
Secondly, while Judea and Samaria may be one of many names which were at some point historically accurate (Canaan, Philistinia, Assyria being some others), it is not CURRENTLY accurate. At the same time as the state of Israel was established, that area became the state of Palestine, and so is the correct term (for those without an ideological axe to grind).
WoAD:
Chuffer | 26.06.08 – 5:36 pm |
So the thought of that arouses you?
WoAD | 26.06.08 – 6:04 pm | #
Does it show? [If you’ll excuse the phrase]
CertainlydoesNotCompute | 26.06.08 – 7:34 pm
There has been a Palestinian state all along?
Don’t keep this news to yourself. Email Mahmoud Abbas straight away.
I see the BBC are back on the Spelman case again.
Now Yvette Cooper is supposed to be on Questiotime tonight, so will Dimblebum actually allow her to get a grilling?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7476527.stm
Martin, just came to post on exactly that story. That last paragraph in particular is disgusting. I also love the way they mention Conservative MPs in the headline, but can only come up with a Baroness for a quotation. Idiots.
Yes, BBC and Crick are big on Spelman.
Strange how Sky are leading with PC Plod handing over its Dodgy Dossier file to the CPS – that’s where Abrahams and Labour are implicated.
The same story on al-Beeb is tucked away on the sidebar of its Politics page.
It’s “move along please, nothing to see here.”
Anybody see the BBC ten o’clock news just now.
Surprisingly they covered tomorrow’s Telegraph poll giving a 18% conservative lead over labour.
The backdrop however was two huge pix of Cameron and Brown – boldly captioned with the figures 46% on Brown pic and 28% on Cameron.
Freudian slip or subliminal message?
Anyone else notice or am I finally going mad?
Yep, noticed that.
And how the Spelman story (10 years old) was rolled out again.
The Spelman story with oooh dramatic new ‘BBC has revealed’ twist!!
Funny, still no mention of Ed balls and his missis, though.
I spotted the careful reversal of poll figures too – and I’m glad it wasn’t just me.
I was off to bed, but I’m going to have to spend half an hour calming down after that vintage BBc display.
…and Newsnight’s big story tonight, more on Caroline Spelman. Not a word about Balls and Cooper, the bias is unreal. Yes, it’s Michael Crick again. I note that there is not a word about Michael Crick’s links to the Labour party on his Wikipedia page.
How do we go about finding out what Michael Prick spends on expenses? After all we do pay his wages.
How come the BBC didn’t mention Wendy Alexander at all? Or Peter Hain or Ed Balls and his dippy bint?
What about all the other Labour Slease? Mandelson, Formula 1 and so on?
Pricks Wiki entry had recently been edited I believe.
BBC Questiontime
**********************************
WTF!!!!! What is THAT sitting next to Ann Leslie? It it a woman or a typical rabid homosexual beeboid?
OMG!!!! I think QT has just jumped the shark. Couldn’t take any more.
At the same time as the state of Israel was established, that area became the state of Palestine, and so is the correct term (for those without an ideological axe to grind).
doesNotCompute | 26.06.08 – 7:34 pm
The “state of Palestine” has never existed.
You seem to forget that the League of Nations amd later the UN mandated a “Jewish homeland” (Israel) and an Arab state that is now called JORDAN.
No “state” called “Palestine” exists, has ever existed and at this rate will never exist. There are areas known as “Palestinian Administered territories”, administered by the “Palestinian Authority”, or PA, which was set up with Israel’s help as part of the Oslo accords as a first step in encouraging “Palestinian” self-government.
The area known as The West Bank is “disputed territory”, not “occupied Palestinian territory” – it was never “Palestinian”. Prior to Israel taking it after being attacked by Jordan it was under Jordanian control for many years. Jordan at no time offered it to the mythical “Palestinian people”.
The same goes for “east Jerusalem”. It was under Jordanian control until Israel reunified it in 1967. Until that time Jordan’s occupation of Jerusalem was not recognized internationally, and Jordan certainly made no efforts to instal a “Palestinian” capital in east Jerusalem or anywhere else.
Equally Gaza, now completely occupied by “Palestinans” and under complete Hamas control, was previously (pre-1967) under Egyptian control – the Egyptians never offered it to the “Palestinians” as part of their “state” either and Israel remained in control of the Gaza Strip until 2005 only because when peace was made between Egypt and Israel Egypt refused to take Gaza back.
I suggest you brush up on your history of the region.
http://www.mythsandfacts.com/Conflict/mandate_for_palestine/
Look at the maps and you will see that, without an ideological axe to grind, Judea and Samaria are in fact illegally occupied, by Arabs!
Martin:
BBC Questiontime
WTF!!!!! What is THAT sitting next to Ann Leslie? It it a woman or a typical rabid homosexual beeboid?
i think its Harriets new ‘Trans gender’ officer… covers all bases i spose….
the lib dem guy looks a bit bemused, got that impression that hes just walked into a party and realised that it was fancy dress and he didnt read the invite properly
doesNotCompute:
Just to add a response to the responses to my complaint over David Vance’s recent crazy posts.
By the way, we don’t do complaints here, we send them to the BBC.
We have discussions here, but if you want to join in you’ll have to do better than spout the kind of nonsense you’ve posted up to now.
Yvette Cooper = punching above her wieght…. by quite a few belts….
doesNotCompute,
It also helps if you continue the discussion on the correct thread, something else you still don’t seem to have grasped:
http://www.haloscan.com/comments/patrickcrozier/1035276887682841625/#406108
http://www.haloscan.com/comments/patrickcrozier/1896757145064731508/#406106
Following BBC 2 ‘Newsnight’ bias bit on Spelman tonight, but with barely even a mention of Labour’s Wendy Alexander or Ed Balls, it was straight on to Guantanamo and the usual, predictable anti- US bias.
I was wondering how many reports ‘Newsnight’ alone has run on Guantanamo, often with a certain Ms. S.Chakrabarti in tow, but tonight with a different ‘human rights’ lobbyist? It’s a lot. And it’s all on the same political propaganda note: the wrongs of the US government, and the rights of the Islamic jihad suspects.
In contrast, in the same period, how many reports has ‘Newsnight’ run on the wrongs of Islamic governments in their treatment of e.g. Christian minorities around the world? Very, very few.
This typical contrast in coverage and bias of ‘Newsnight’ indicates, in a microcosm of BBC current affairs output, its deep-seated pro-Islamic, anti-West, anti-Christian priorities.
“Anyone else notice or am I finally going mad?”
I saw it. The BBC must be going mad.
Why have liberals become so irrational?
Because Liberalism is at heart an existential malaise.
Existentialist’s deny there is a structure to reality, for that reason the individual existence’s must be made free from anybody who says there is a structure to reality – and finally reality itself as the moral insanity candidly described by Nick Cohen in “What’s Left” makes very clear.
Egalitarianism is end result of this denial of order and structure; the denial of order is inherent to Liberalism. Egalitarians are unsure if anything truly exists, or if anything has an existence that is legitimate and not reducible to the desire’s other existence’s (other people).
i.e. something is true because it is true, not because it is a weapon of collectivism, sexism, or class rule etc etc
If one believes in a transcendent order one is probably not a liberal.
-=[ John 14:6 ]=-
Even though it’s hard to cover all the important stories, what with remarkable comebacks in Africa and last century nanny scandals and Obamessiah prayer time, but surely the BBC hasn’t forgotten the reason they were blocked for nearly 48 hours in China – Tibet.
In between the two weeks of China arts programmes invading Radio 3, China encomiums spread across various parts of the World Service, and carrying China’s water, maybe the BBC could have found time to report on at least some of this:
Karze (Ch: Ganzi) County, Karze “TAP”, Kham (incorporated into Chinese province of Sichuan) – Villages people are being intimidated against staging any protest.
“Work teams” from the county government office have been visiting the villages, including Me-nyenda village near Bheri monastery, in Karze county on and around June 23. People are being threatened with their lives against staging any protest.
Karze (Ch: Ganzi) County, Karze “TAP”, Kham (incorporated into Chinese province of Sichuan) – Four monks from Khangmar monastery severely beaten and arrested for staging a peaceful protest
Jamgha Phuntsok (an 18-year), Yeshi Dorjee (a 32-year), Jampa Dorjee (an 18-year), and Solu, all four monks from Khangmar (or Khanang) monastery in Karze county, carried out a peaceful protest while flying the Tibetan flag and scattering many leaflets in front of county government office on June 9. They were severely beaten and arrested by the Public Security Burean (PSB).
Ngaba (Ch: Aba) County, Ngaba “TAP”, Amdo (incorporated into Chinese province of Sichuan) – Se monastery in a critical situation
A huge contingent of PAP and others arrived at Se monastery in Ngaba county on June 10 and arrested a group of monks. They also thoroughly raided the monastery and confiscated the photos and portraits of His Holiness the Dalai Lama.
They continue to harass, on the following days on June 11 and 12, the monks who have been on 3-year retreat, and restricted the monks of minor age from living in the monastery. Se monastery is in danger of having no monks.
The above from:
http://www.tibet.net/en/flash/2008/0608/25A0608.html
Remember when the BBC paid attention to this? They were so concerned about the plight of Tibetans for a few seconds back when they were forced to cover the thugs in the blue track suits. This is the price the BBC is paying for prime access at the Olympics. Massive amounts of China love, and total silence on Chinese oppression of millions of people, like the Mongols.
One would expect from a responsible national broadcaster balanced, honest of coverage of China. If the goal is to really make the public acquainted with China, why total silence on anything except happy thoughts and cultural hugs and kisses?
I bet that Olympic coverage will be just fantastic!
Matt Frei just did a segment on the Supreme Court upholding the 2nd Amendment, allowing citizens to once again own handguns in Washington, DC.
Frei boy had two guests, one more or less against, and one definitely for. Frei, of course, resorted to fear-mongering and that BBC chestnut “the rest of the world thinks…” attack. Once he realized that the woman on the “pro” side was unfortunately not the most articulate or sharp debater, he jumped at an opening and asked if he, as a father of four children living in DC, should go out and buy a handgun to protect his family. That’s fear-mongering and reductio ad absurdum, as this is not directly related to the reason behind the 2nd Amendment, nor the Court’s decision.
The woman just agreed, which was expected as Frei’s producers made sure to get a “pro” advocate who represented the lowest angle of the issue, in order to make sure that the “pro” side looked as foolish as possible.
Just in case I thought I was being overly paranoid about that, seeing bias where there wasn’t any, the boy Frei gave us his closing question, which was more or less that “the world…(he caught himself)…much of the rest of the world” is looking at the US and wondering “what are they thinking?” As if this ruling shows us up as madmen, and the opinion of “much of the rest of the world” on the individual right to bear arms is worth a damn.
How much of the rest of the world, BBC? Which African countries are shaking their collective heads at this decision? Which South American ones? Indonesia? Mexico? Any Middle Eastern countries? Pago Pago, perhaps? Matt Frei lies just to have a reason to condemn the US on an issue about which he disagrees.
Get bent, BBC.
This BBC local report, covered on its South West England page, is apparently accurate:
“Grocer’s anger at small Kiwi rule”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/bristol/7474722.stm
But this example of petty European Union dictatorship does have a political dimension, which the BBC does not emphasise, which is brought out here:
“Banned by the Eurocrats…Kiwi fruit just 1mm too small”
http://www.dailyexpress.co.uk/posts/view/50039/Banned-by-the-Eurocrats-kiwi-fruit-just-1mm-too-small
The BBC ‘Today’ programme seems to be rudderless this morning.
I thought I’d picked up a BBC World Service edition of the programme with the emphasis of the reporting on Zimbabwe, and to crown it all, on Ethiopian music (to please James Naughtie). Not much on UK politics.
Perhaps ‘Today’ doesn’t want to explore too deeply the EU take over of UK political rule as expressed in Harman’s negative discrimination and Brown’s £100bn willmill tilt.
Windmill tilt (last line above).
Would the BBC ever publish an article with the point of view of this Syrian journalist, who writes in “Al Awan”, what is termed a “liberal Syrian daily”? Note how the term “liberal” in the case of Arab countries is the classic definition and is now the inverse of the term as it’s evolved in a country like Britain. What a sad state of affairs that reformers in Arab countries are not supported by the politically correct BBC, which chooses instead to defend Islamists in a misguided interpretation of “tolerance.”
Here’s a bit of the article, but click for the whole thing–it is astonishing. Bets on whether anything like it will ever appear on the BBC?
http://www.memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=SD197008
“I Would Like to Ask the 1948 Arabs If They Would Rather Live in Mecca or Qom
“If we landed in Israel, I would definitely try to walk in the streets of its cities and neighborhoods – not with intent to seek out ‘the memory of the vanquished’ and the weary that Faisal Darraj conjured up [in his book by that name]. Rather, I would want to see whether there are, in any of Israel’s cities, neighborhoods like Bulaq or Imbaba in Cairo… I would want to see whether there are Israeli citizens who live in cemeteries, as people do in the Cairo of Muhammad Hosni Mubarak. Researchers put the number of those living in Cairo’s cemeteries at 500,000.
“I don’t know whether I would see in Haifa neighborhoods of misery like those surrounding Damascus, the capital of Syria…
“Yes, I hoped to land in Haifa, to see if I would run up against religious police, like the infamous Saudi Wahhabi-terrorist police that goes by the name of ‘The Authority for the Promotion of Virtue and the Prevention of Vice.’
“How nice it would be to run across a rabbi, so I could ask him if he believes the earth is round – it is well known that to his dying day the late Mufti of Saudi Arabia, ‘Abd Al-‘Aziz bin Baz, declared anyone who says the earth is round an apostate.”
I Would Like to Ask an Israeli Politician How It Is that They Have Free and Fair Elections
“No doubt, it would be tempting to land in Haifa. Perhaps I would run into one of the 1948 Arabs [i.e. Israeli Arabs] – not in order to ask him whether he would prefer to live in the West Bank or Gaza rather than in the state of the artificial ‘entity,’ but to ask him whether he would prefer living in Mecca or Qom to living in Haifa…
“Yes, it would be nice to land in Haifa. Perhaps there I would run across emergency laws like those (permanent) laws that hinder the natural development of human society in most of the Arabic-speaking countries.
“How lucky I would be if I chanced to meet an Israeli politician, so I could ask him the secret of how it is that their country – sorry, I mean their artificial entity – is the only one to hold free and fair elections and to have peaceful handovers of government. Not to mention that any of their officials can be held accountable – and all of that in contrast with their Arab cousins…”
“I Had No Thoughts Whatsoever of Throwing this Neighbor… Into the Sea”
“[I would like to ask a rabbi] if the rabbis there meddle in the compiling of the school curricula, as do the patriarchs of Islam in a not insignificant number of Arab and Islamic countries – where through their meddling in the educational curricula they place an impenetrable barrier between the rational mind and the students – all for nothing, just out of fear of Allah!…
“I wanted to land in Haifa so that I could find out what the Jewish clergy though of the great scientist Einstein’s scorn for the texts of the Torah, and why they don’t stand up as one to curse Einstein from their pulpits, as is the case with us? It would be tempting to hear their views on the Jewish-Israeli archaeologist who stated recently that he thought that Moses was on drugs.
“Lastly, it was truly strange that I was not drawn in by any thoughts on the extinction of the Hebrew state – or the Zionist entity, as some like to call it. I had no thoughts whatsoever of throwing this neighbor, which asks the friendship of the Arabs, in secret and openly, into the sea, as the pan-Arab and Islamist slogans have called for. And I am much amazed that I did not think about any of the proclamations of Iranian President Mahmud Ahmadinejad threatening Israel with extinction!
“I was drawn in by many idle dreams above Haifa. They were interrupted suddenly by the plane’s landing at the Damascus airport. I learned that there are limits to my dreams, even if they are just idle ones.”
Although some of the commenter here are critical of the licence-payer funded, BBC News/Current Affairs bias, the same sort of BBC ‘multicultural’/’political correctness’ also inhabits Channel 4 News and Jon Snow; and it may be that in future, Channel 4 will receive some of the licence-payers’ funds which currently go to the BBC:
“Jon Snow and the Gilded Cage”
(by Nick Cohen).
http://www.standpointmag.co.uk/jon-snow-and-the-gilded-cage
bio –We have discussions here, but if you want to join in you’ll have to do better than spout the kind of nonsense you’ve posted up to now.
Biodegradable | 26.06.08 – 11:21 pm | #
I was going to comment on garage in/garbage out, but I knew you would do a far better job demolished the fool’s fake history on the Jordanian Arabs and the “Palestinian” entity.