It always encourages me when I see other people picking up on the blatant bias of the State Broadcaster. So hat-tip to Butterflies and Wheels (by no means an anti-BBC blog) for this excellent catch. I know that Susanna Reid is cute but the programme she presents is really ugly.
“The BBC has outdone itself this time.
BBC1′s Sunday Live did a programme on whether it is right to condemn the Iranian regime for the stoning of Ashtiani. Maryam Namazie was supposed to take part (and it is not difficult to guess what she would have said, and how firmly she would have said it), but somehow the programme never got around to her. It did get around to two people who said the other thing, but it did not get around to Maryam. Yes that’s right. It found the time to talk to two apologists for the fascist reactionary mullahs’ regime in Iran but it could not find the time to talk to a secular feminist who thinks women shouldn’t be buried up to their necks and stoned to death for anything and especially not for “adultery.”
The BBC gives a voice to fascist reactionary mullahs and denies a voice to secular feminists who defend human rights.
In the live debate, they managed to interview Suhaib Hassan from the Islamic Sharia Council defending stoning and someone from Tehran saying she faces execution for murdering her husband but somehow there was no time in the debate for me.
Even the presenter, Susanna Reid, said stonings were rare and that none had taken place since the 2002 moratorium! In fact 17 people have been stoned since the moratorium; also there are court documents provided by her lawyer specifying her stoning sentence for adultery. BBC had all this information. Without providing evidence to the contrary, BBC Sunday Live took as fact the regime’s pronouncements on her case. They failed to mention that the man charged with her husband’s murder is not being executed and that the trumped up murder charges are an attempt by the regime to silence the public outcry and kill Sakineh. As Sakineh herself has said: “they think they can do anything to women.”
The Iranian regime is not keen on the USA or Israel so in BBC land it is obvious that there must be something admirable about it.
Nice one David – thanks for bringing this to my attention
I saw a bit of this and it was horrendous to listen to some of what was being said. There was some bearded religious fellow rabbiting on at length without interruption and I thought, “Hm…David Vance wasn’t allowed to go on as long as that without interruption when he was on”.
I happened to come across that yesterday morning.
2 men 1 white and 1 black (who happened to be gay) both defended Iran, with whitey proclaiming that Iranians love children that in the Uk we used to mistreat women by ducking them and accusing them of being witches. Of course when the sole voice against Iran spoke out she was quickly silenced by the chair.
The thing is, as soon as I realized that this was a bBC program I turned over in which to view something less biased. Lucky for me Horrible Histories was on telling me how Mr Hitler was really a nice man because he was a veggie . Nah only joking I went and fed the cat.
The BBC have give Iran a pass on this but so has the feminist left. Where is Polly Toynbee, Yasmin alibi Brown, Julie Bindel, Liberty etc etc? Normally these dykes are never off the BBC spouting shit, but when one of their own is to face a rather sad end, they are silent, just as they’ve been silent over the treatment of women in Afghanistan.
It’s why I want our soldiers out, I see no reason why young men should die supposedly so women can have some half reasonable human rights when fat idle leftie bitches can’t even be bothered to speak out. Eff the lot of them.
Where are the rage mobs and rent a rabble leftists when women are abused to the point of sadistic terrorism?
The filth at the BBC couldnt give a flying f*ck about the plight of women, its about attack politics against their ideological enemies on the right. The rent a rabble scum will come onto the streets for certain events as they wear their fascist hearts on their grubby sleeves but real eauality and real human rights are simply not interesting to them.
Where are the intrpepid BBC reporters while girl children are being traded to old men as sex slaves for money and passports, where are the beeboids while young girls are traded for money by Roma gangs to be used for sex and in begging gangs?
Millions of women are being tortured and traded and used and abused and killed and raped and beaten, where are the BBC reporters and where are the leftist rage mobs and rent a rabble? Millions of women live lives of sheer misery in places like Gaza and all over the Arb world and where are the BBC reports?
Fat ugly(inside and out) scumbags like Brand can attack white people for daring to criticise the third world treatment of women but fatty Brand is silent on the real tragedies.
Well said.
@Cassandra:
Don’t you get it yet?
Communism is the ideology of ATHEIST tramps who seek to enact “class war” upon us all, out of nothing else than spite and envy.
Take away a few sheiks etc, who struck rich because oil was found on their land, and Islam is the ideology of RELIGIOUS tramps, who seek to take us back to the days of the stone age, out of nothing else but spite and envy.
In other words it’s the lefts new thesis of “Religious Class war”, that seeks to bring everybody down to their own gutter level, through a failed twentieth century and brutal ideology, plus a barbaric stone age cult, from the perverted mind of a psychopathic schizophrenic .
Why would the good Comrades of the BBC have any problems with that? It’s what their left wing pals have been dreaming of since the year f*****g dot.
“Penniless parity for all”, and “enforced indoctrination”.
And of course the BBCs licence fee coincides perfectly with the “enforced indoctrination” feature.
Yet after my semi rant above, I really must stress from every sinew of my worthless being that “Islam is peace”…..Deny that if you will by watching the video below. (sic)
http://indyspareings.blogspot.com/2010/09/barbarians-indeed-cato.html
I certainly get it now my learned friend!
That reminds me that on Sunday morning after the Susanna Reid programme, there was some Beeboid rabbiting on about the BBC’s favourite subject. What is that? you may ask. Why, slavery of course. So I looked at the programme guide to see what the programme was. It was Country Tracks and they were going on about Liverpool and slavery.
Here we go again, I thought. You cannot watch a programme about anything on the BBC, be it gardening, travel, cookery, sport, property, the countryside, geography, history, etc etc, without a Beeboid script about slavery being forced into it.
But of course the only kind of slavery the BBC is remotely interested in is that which affected black men, oh, all of hundreds of years ago. If it is slavery of women, sexual exploitation and domestic servitude of poor people from foreign parts, the BBC is blind, deaf and insensible to it. Why? Because the BBC has no morals or sense. It just has a few special cases about which it is obsessive. Black’n’brown skin is one of them. Outside of that, it doesn’t know and doesn’t care. The actual substance of issues and morality doesn’t exist in the Beeboid mind.
But of course then only kind of slavery the BBC is remotely interested in is that which affected black men, oh, all of hundreds of years ago.
Even within those parameters there’s wriggle room for our morally bankrupt national broadcaster and her fellow travellers.
Famously, when Malcolm X came to Mecca on Hajj during the 1960’s he found that his co-religionists were still operating a thriving slave market which featured black Africans in a starring role.
Don’t suppose that’s ever been mentioned on the Beeb. *Whistles*
Incidentally, since no ‘infidel’ is allowed to set foot in Mecca, and bearing in mind the extreme reluctance of Muslims to squeal on one another, it seems entirely possible that the damn market is thriving to this day, doesn’t it ?
It was the islamic world that created the industrial export of African slaves and it was Arab suppliers driving deep into central Africa from as early as the 8/9th centuries creating slave trade routes that lasted near a thousand years.
The trade built to service a growing Arab world also looked for additional markets to the West and traded ever more slaves until the British in the form of the Royal Navy smashed the routes one by one but the inland routes opperating north stayed in operation until the 20th century.
The actual slave dealers and traders inland were muslims and their trusted ‘catchers’ were African converts who gaurded and obtained and supplied the dealers and traders.
The BBC aint telling us the real truth about the islamic empire they peddle as being enlightened and brilliant and tolerant and benevolent because the truth would smash their fantasy island construct apart.
Far from being some kind of ideal ‘rights of man’ enlightened wonderland the islamic world was a dark nasty and backward place of pain and suffering. Just another historical lie among many the BBC are determined to pimp.
A specific test for DG Mark Thompson on INBBC’s political bias.
Islam Not BBC (INBBC) has published an opinion piece which happens to be propaganda for the Ground Zero Mosque and for Islam. No surprise there:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-11200987
So, Mr Thompson (and DDG Mr. Byford), set an example of fair political debate for once, and allow another guest to present an opposite point of view against the Ground Zero Mosque, and against Islam. Something like the following? (Only kidding. We know your real Islamic propagandist agenda, INBBC.)
“Fitzgerald: What’s not to like about Feisal Abdul Rauf and his mosque of ‘tolerance'”
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2010/06/fitzgerald-whats-not-to-like-about-feisal-abdul-rauf-and-his-mosque-of-tolerance.html
Comments above about lefties giving Iran a pass re rights of women reminds me of something that was said on Any Questions? on 20 August.
They were discussing the mosque proposal for near Ground Zero and the argument was put that even though they had the right, Muslims should be sensitive to other people given how they are always pleading their own sensitivities. The Muslim on the panel said there was no right not to be offended and that he had defended the right to publish the cartoons.
At this point (17.56 on the link below), Ruth Deech, a lawyer and establishment figure in charge of the Bar – and former governor of the BBC – made this extraordinary statement – in bold below:
“Well, I’m very glad to hear that but what has actually happened in practice is that we have refrained from publishing those cartoons; we have refrained from criticising certain things, for example, attitudes to women. …”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/console/b00tdxpr/Any_Questions_20_08_2010
I was flabbergasted at this statement and disclosure but nobody on the panel even seemed to register it, still less that there was anything wrong with it as a public policy stance on human rights and wrongs.
Christian Institute ahead of UK political parties:
“BBC attacked for biased mosque documentary”
http://www.christian.org.uk/news/bbc-attacked-for-biased-mosque-documentary/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+christianinstitute+%28The+Christian+Institute%29
What is instructive is that the BBC considers that stoning an alleged adulteress is a fit subject for debate. It is not. It is so far beyond debate on any possible terms as understood by our culture as to merit only disgust and condemnation. Moral equivallence, that BBC disease of the spirit, will not do. To debate is to collude. To condemn is to make a just stand for reason and civilisation.
Somebody years ago (Rebecca West ?) made the point that everybody had a favoured Balkan race or nation, who were ever on the side of the angels, and who were always the victims of injustices, the massacred not the massacrees.
It’s abundantly apparent that this is the way the Lefty-LibTard mind works with regard to their favoured groups. And extremely worrying that militant Islam is imagined to fit into the ever-harmless victim role.
dave s: What is instructive is that the BBC considers that stoning an alleged adulteress is a fit subject for debate. It is not.
================
Indeed. Can you see the BBC putting on a debate about say, whether black men should be lynched for fornication or drug taking? No, neither can I.
Maryam Namazie’s response:
“I was meant to speak on BBC Sunday Live’s debate today on whether it was right to condemn the regime for Sakineh’s stoning.
In the live debate, they managed to interview Suhaib Hassan from the Islamic Sharia Council defending stoning and someone from Tehran saying she faces execution for murdering her husband but somehow there was no time in the debate for me.”
…
“To see the debate, click here. If you are unhappy at the way the debate went, please contact the programme and ask for a balanced view on the issue:
Sunday Morning Live
Blackstaff,39-43 Bedford Street, Belfast, BT2 7EE
T: 028 9033 8379 M: 07875001606
anna.phipps@bbc.co.uk
lindsey.hammond@bbc.co.uk”
http://maryamnamazie.blogspot.com/2010/09/bbc-sunday-live-needs-balanced-debate.html
Blatant BBC bias and censorship, denying her the right to speak.
Also this:
http://richarddawkins.net/videos/512110-updated-the-bbc-defends-the-mullahs-silences-their-critics
Disgusting – but not suprising.
Sometimes it’s all in the nuance.
Analyse this linking headline France support for Iran ‘adulterer’ and the use of scare quotes. It suggests the issue is whether Sakineh Mohammadi Ashtiani is actually guilty as charged and not that the penalty is barbaric even if she had had an affair while married. Given that she is also accused of complicity in her husband’s murder the headline could just as easily have been France support for Iran ‘murderer’
Ah yes. The BBC will respond that debating an issue is healthy. Stoning after all, is a sharia requirement, and given demographic trends in Europe, it is only right that a rational debate is undertaken on a vital subject of great concern to all EU subjects.
However, we must first wait for an EU directive on the issue.
The EU will look at what type of stones can be used in sharia compliant regions of the EU.
1. Size of stones
2. Hardness of stones
3. Texture and surface roughness
As the death penalty is illegal in the EU, stoning will be limited to a set number of stones or till the defamer/insulter of Islam/sharia is unconscious.
So far the EU has yet to appoint a Stoning/sharia commissioner, so we may have to wait a while.