Monthly Archives: March 2009

CONSERVATIVE MUSLIMS.

By | | ,
24 Comments

To paraphrase Abba, “tonight the super snooper teams are gonna get you”, if one listens to the new Brown policy of training 60,000 shop and hotel workers “t0 deal” with a terrorist attack. However the thing that struck me – and not for the first time – was how the BBC insists on defining the nature of this terrorist threat; you see it comes from non-violent conservative Muslim groups that teach that Islam is incompatible with Western democracy. Note – not RADICAL Muslim groups, oh no, CONSERVATIVE Muslim groups. Well, here’s the deal then; if these really are conservative groups this implies they teach the essential traditions of Islam which in turn would rather indicate that Islam ITSELF is the threat. Will the BBC run with that idea  or will it instead continue to use the subtlety of language to associate the term conservatism with the worst dregs of radical Islam?

Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.

PotKettleBiased

By | |
36 Comments

That terrible scourge of Israel, human rights spokesperson Richard Falk, has decided that Israel’s war crimes are “not a question of whether Israel used disproportionate force in Gaza, but rather whether Israel acted lawfully in entering Gaza at all.” (The next stage is obviously declaring that the existence of Israel is itself a war crime.)

Today reported this, and ended by stating that by condemning Israel for human rights violations so frequently and so much more harshly than other countries who were equally, if not more, guilty of human rights violations, human rights commissioners or whatever they’re called are beginning to look less than even-handed.

Was the speaker Imogen Foulkes? I don’t know because Today iplayer isn’t working.

Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.

Hague Left Hanging

By | |
11 Comments

I considered posting about Andrew Marr’s interview with William Hague yesterday, where in the final stages he suddenly threw in a question about the “pretty appalling-looking” reports by the IDF.

My impression was that Hague was subtly supportive of Israel, but was almost bullied into reiterating the word ‘appalling,’ knowing it was his only hope of retaining credibility with the audience.

He was supportive of Israel merely by making two points that went against the grain. a) We don’t know the truth, and, b) that Israel has a mechanism for investigating such things, and for bringing to book those found guilty.
Even mentioning these points at all was daringly radical in the circumstances; because, a) such remarks are the very things that Israel’s enemies always scoff at, and b) the subject was slipped in abruptly at the end and left hanging. There wasn’t time to elaborate, and that was what made his points seem unconvincing and far-fetched.

I saw it as bullying and covert bias. I didn’t post yesterday because the thought of the chanting chorus made me weary.

But today Melanie P has gone much further and is less generous with Hague. Her examination of the issues is well worth looking at, as usual.

Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.

TORY WARS

By | |
57 Comments

Isn’t it touching to see the PROMINENCE that the BBC is giving to the pretend Conservative tax wars? This is the real dilemma that Cameron faces – the BBC will seek to set up, inflate and plain invent all kinds of stresses within Conservatism in order to deflect the shambles of Labour.

Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.

THE INCREDIBLE SHRINKING POLAR BEARS.

By | |
29 Comments

Having experienced perhaps the best of the BBC earlier today, I happened to pick up on the worst of it about half an hour ago. I was listening to 5 Live (I know, I deserve all I get) and there was yet another of the interminable “the polar bears are all dying out and it’s all OUR fault” stories. The programme, Weekend News, is presented by John Pienaar and Dalya Raphael and the new angle is that (some) polar bears are shrinking in size. This is proof how perilous their condition has become because of all that missing Arctic ice and it seems that US forecasts that Polar bears may be extinct by 2050 are too…optimistic! No mention of that fact that 11 out of the 13 polar bear populations in Canada are either stable or growing. The trash science and alarmism that 5 Live pumps out is very disappointing. I also see that as further evidence of 5 Live high standards, Vicky Pollard will be interviewing Paul Gascoigne tomorrow. Can’t wait!

Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.

BBC guest selectivity

By | |
31 Comments

: it’s not just David.

“I should point out that Labour’s tax trap soon brought me a phone call from the BBC. Would I like to go on to condemn the 45p? If I said yes, that would make the story “Tory tax wars”, which they would love. Meanwhile yesterday an offer to appear on Newsnight to discuss the debt petered out without any explanation before I had the details of time and place, and an accepted offer to do the Today programme this morning on the same subject was cancelled. Was it something I said, or something I would not say?”

John Redwood reports on the Left’s agenda

Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.

IN THE BELLY OF THE BEAST…

By | |
14 Comments

So, I was on a BBC programme this morning and I thought I would share my experience with you. The programme is called “Sunday Sequence” on BBC Radio Ulster and it is covers a range of topical issues from moral, political, theological points of view. I was on to discuss the issue of how Northern Ireland (and by extension the UK) responds to the recession – is it right to have “British jobs for British workers”. Also on the panel to discuss this was a local economist, John Simpson, and the head of the Equality Commission, Bob Collins. (He was in Dublin, where he lives, natch).

I arrived in time for some green room hospitality. Having checked to ensure Jo Brand was not hiding anywhere – eavesdropping in on me – I had a coffee and chatted with Mr Simpson ( a decent cove who was my Economics lecturer years ago when I was at University). We were called into the studio just after 9.30am and went “live” shortly thereafter. I felt it was a good natured debate and I was allowed to express my anti-EU opinion together with my contention that the State has a duty to ensure the economic well-being of its citizens ahead of foreign nationals. The other two contributors did not really agree with my view but at least I was given the chance to state it, without interruption. Time flew by and after 15 mins that was it. I thanked the host – William Crawley – my fellow studio guest Mr Simpson – and strolled out into a fresh Spring Sunday morning. Was there bias? Not really and indeed I would single this programme out for being true to Reithian values insofar as it is not as rampantly biased as most others!

Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.

General BBC-related comment thread.

By | |
76 Comments

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

Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.

HATE CRIME.

By | |
32 Comments

I was reading this BBC report concerning the decision by the Northern Ireland assembly not to prosecute DUP MLA Iris Robinson over comments she made about homosexuals last year. Robinson, chair of the Stormont health committee, called for homosexuals to seek psychiatric counselling.

Now, a few points; 1. I have no time for Mrs Robinson or her awful party. 2. I passionately believe in free speech. 3.This BBC item presents the issue purely in terms of the militant gay lobby screeching for Robinson to be prosecuted for hate crime versus the DUP chiming Iris is innocent. What about the views of us who are neither gay nor DUP (or even both!!) but who see that there is something inherently wrong in preventing the expression of opinion in the public sphere just because it offends one small but vocal minority. Why do WE not get a say on this? Is it because you can tell that the BBC line is very much in line with the gay lobbyists and whilst they cannot be overt about this, they seek to suggest that only the DUP are in favour of free speech?

Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.