The tragedy in Tuscon has given BBC North America editor Mark Mardell the opportunity to bang on and on and on about the “harsh rhetoric” of the American Right.
Mr Mardell should take a look at this BBC report from October last year. He may find it familiar.
Michelle Malkin has well and truly nailed down the utter hypocrisy in this link below, which lists countless examples over 10 years of true hate-driven rhetoric by those on the Left in either advocating or actioning violence:
http://michellemalkin.com/2011/01/10/the-progressive-climate-of-hate-an-illustrated-primer-2000-2010/
The first Mardell piece you linked to I found more or less palatable, the second piece showed he is garbage on legs, the third piece was a half-hearted attempt not to appear complete garbage on legs that fizzled out. The essence of his last two pieces was basically ‘OK, so the killer wasn’t influenced by Palin, but so what, he could have been, so its right to blame her’.
Noone is expecting you to change your tune Mardell. You are free to be biased with impunity. I dont think the stench he left behind in his house in Brussels was anything to do with the pets he keeps, it was the stench of his journalism.
In fact I think by the time he leaves his house in the US, the stench he leaves behind will be so bad it’ll be harder to rent out than the Amytiville Horror.
He may need a winch to extract him from his pit.
Interviewed by Bill O’Reilly, veteran journalist Bernie Goldberg reckons the left-wing media have sunk lower than he ever remembers :
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2011/01/10/bernie_goldberg_to_sheriff_dupnik_keep_your_mouth_shut.html
And Mardell and most of the BBC have been right down there, in the gutter. Failing to report the facts, just pushing the left-wing smear attacks.
A CBS poll in the US is showing that nearly 60% of Americans reject the idea that the gunman was driven to his action by right-wing rhetoric.
But here, the BBC has such dominance of the airwaves that the facts and wider American opinion are ignored, buried.
Mardell is either off his trolley or a piss-poor journalist rushing to invalid conclusions.
that’s wonderful
I don’t seem to remember these types had any problems with comparing GW Bush with Hitler when he was president, in fact Bush=Hitler seemed to be de rigueur at the BBC with a Bush-as-Hitler poster up in the newsroom.
With regard to the last 2 Mardell pieces DB links to, I get the sense that Mardell is worried that the President’s conduct has been so exemplary up till now. If he doesn’t sink into the gutter with him and his ilk then the contrast with how they’ve covered these killings may well lead to a reckoning for them. And President Barack ‘bring a gun to a knife fight’ Obama may well consider he’s got too many hostages to fortune to wallow in the gutter with the scumbag left like Mardell.
Personally, I’m hoping that Sarah Palin puts up a roll of dishonour of the top ten worst examples of hatemongering on her website. There really need to be widespread calls upon the President and Democratic Party leaders to denounce and disown the hatemongers in their midst who have marred the tragedy in such a despicable way.
I’ve never really liked Palin, she’s a very odd character, however I would so back her if she went for the Presidency, just to rub it in the faces of all the left toss pots.
I agree, I disagree with a lot of what Sarah Palin says, but those are policies and ideas that should be debated, but the left don’t want to do that, they want to destory her by a torrent of abuse and lies.
If Palin were a democrat and she were attacked by the right wing the media would be up in arms.
Sres, if you think Sarah Palin is “odd” what adjectives would you use to describe Sarah Bernhardt and Nancy Pelosi?
Small typo……SANDRA not Sara. Sandra is not worthy to lick the sole of Sara’s dog-walking chausettes!
Oops….thanks for the correction.
I deeply admire the woman, but I think she’s far too weak on foreign policy to be President. She should definitely have a top place in an administration though. Who knows, with that level of experience, 2-3 elections later she could be really good for America. That said, I’m not sure who really would be good for 2012. I like Fred Thompson a lot. Guiliani would be great if what I understand to be his health problems permit (was amazed how badly he fluffed things tactically in his last run!).
Well, my second comment was thrown out by the moderators:
Mark, your relentless pushing of this line of attack on the Right is getting beyond a joke. You must know it’s grossly unbalanced reporting. You are giving the impression of being partisan. The enthusiastic support you are receiving on these threads from partisans of the Left side of American politics should be raising alarm bells with you.
The ‘climate of hate’ is not new – and it certainly doesn’t come just from the Right. Or even mostly from the Right. The Left are at least as bad. And the hate being poured out over the last few days against Sarah Palin and the Tea Party has been extraordinary proof of that.
Why aren’t you reminding your readers about the image on Getty of a man holding a shotgun to Sarah Palin’s head, those ‘ABORT Sarah Palin’ stickers, the anti-Palin protester who said “Let’s stone her, old school”, the M.I.L.P. (Mother I’d Like to Punch) artwork, Madonna shouting “I will kick her ass”, Sandra Bernhard’s “(Sarah Palin) will be gang-raped by my big black brothers (if she visits New York)”?
Why aren’t you reminding people of all those many and various images (doing the rounds during the last presidency) of George W. Bush with a gun pointed at his head, of ‘Kill Bush’ t-shirts and countless posters of the “Bush, the only dope worth shooting” kind?
And if we’re talking incendiary uses of ‘Nazi’, ‘Hitler’ and ‘communist’ by Tea Party people, how amnesiac can people be in forgeting all the ‘Bushitler’ posters that were held up across the country during his presidency? One, for God’s sake, notoriously hung in the BBC’s own Washington office (before Mark’s time).
What about Sarah Spitz, producer of the KCRW public radio program ‘Left, Right and Center,’ saying that if she witnessed Limbaugh dying of a heart attack, she would ‘laugh loudly like a maniac and watch his eyes bug out.’”? Or syndicated host Mike Malloy who hoped Limbaugh would “choke to death” and who said of Glenn Beck “I have a good news to report; Glenn Beck appears closer to suicide – I’m hoping that he does it on camera”? Or Montel Williams saying about Michele Bachmann, “Michele, slit your wrist. Go ahead… or, do us all a better thing. Move that knife up about two feet. Start right at the collarbone.”
Whole reams of this vicious stuff are detailed by Michelle Malkin:
http://michellemalkin.com/2011/01/10/the-progressive-climate-of-hate-an-illustrated-primer-2000-2010/
It’s no use holier-than-thou, partisan commenters on these threads denying this. The ‘febrile politics’ and ‘harsh language’ of contempory American politics is at least as much the responsibility of the Left as it is of the Right.
And why isn’t Mark reminding us that President Obama is hardly a paragon of virtue here either. Are these ‘healing’ words?:
** Obama: “They Bring a Knife…We Bring a Gun”
** Obama to his followers: “Get in Their Faces!”
** Obama to this supporters:: “I don’t want to quell anger. I think people are right to be angry! I’m angry!”
** Obama to his supporters: “Hit Back Twice As Hard”
** Obama to voters: Republican victory would mean “hand to hand combat”
** Obama to supporters: “It’s time to Fight for it.”
** Obama to Latino supporters: “Punish your enemies.”
** Obama to Democrats: “I’m itching for a fight.”’
Obama’s violent language, like Palin’s, was meant figuratively. Obviously. (Well, you’d think ‘obviously’, but from some of the comments here and on previous posts obviously not.) Does it not add though to the ‘febrile’, ‘harsh’ mood of American politics, like Sarah Palin’s is said to have done? Or is that – somehow – different?
Why isn’t Mark Mardell writing and talking about any of this? Is he biased?
The BBC couldn’t possibly allow that through.!
You just tried to lift the stone they live under to the fresh air of impartiality…and they do not like it one little bit.
I can just imagine the l beeboid gatekeeper reading that one and pressing the not on your nellie, you don’t ****** ****** button. You see the lefties don’t really like discussions, unfortunately fo the BBC they have to let a few through the net. Good post Craig.
Disagreeing with them is what the call ‘hate speech’, especially if you’re disagreeing with their hate.
You hit the nail on the head hippiepooter with the left don’t like discussion, any attempt at discussion results in them verbally abusing you, or in the event of something being typed that they can control they moderate it with impunity.
This is the reason people like Guido & Oldholborn serve up good blogs and information, they allow everyone to say what they want and be damned.
It’s something the left have never understood, the truth is always greater than the lie.
Craig – It may be possible that the comment is scanned electronically first and if offensive words are detected the whole post is rejected. Not long ago the word “dhimmi” would never get through the censor.
I am thinking of the word “gang-raped” which appears in the post. You may like to try and repost without that word and see what happens.
JHT,
Good point.
Craig,
If you have the time , it may be worth trying. Even if it gets through next time, I bet it will be removed at a later date !
JHT, good idea. I’ll try again.
Craig, that really needs to be a post here, with the simple lead ‘censored on BBC comments’.
There should be a section on here where we can post moderated or deleted posts that the bBC didn’t want to display.
Craig,
The BBC don’t let it through because they don’t like it.
I assume, knowing the thoroughness of your research from this, and your own, sadly defunct, website , that your statements can be independently verified. They seem also to me not to be defamatory.
I would love Dez or Scotty or Gregory or any Beeboid to post on this thread defending the BBC’s decision to suppress your comments.
Of course, it was probably some spotty, teenage Beeboid who has no concept of freedom of speech and has been brainwashed by the BBC to filter out any comments critical of that loathesome organisation.
But, great post , anyway !
Well, it’s got by the moderators this time! It could have been the quoting of ‘gang-raped’ last time, as JHT suspected. The test now, as Grant says, is whether it stays up.
Craig,
As the actress said to the Bishop !
OK Craig, seems we might need to give the BBC the benefit of the doubt as to why it didn’t go up. All the same, it’s such a classic comment it still deserves a post on its own. It’s real J’accuse stuff. Have you thought maybe of sending it to feedback as well? I place little store in that programme with its current presenter, but it might be interesting to see if you get a response. It well deserves its place there.
Great comment, Craig. People would ever know any of the facts you stated if their only sources for new were mainstream media. I was shocked at Mardell’s postings and came across this site doing a search about it. He never once mentioned that the Democrat Leadership Conference used an identical target-themed map. That this man is paid by tax payers is a disgrace. The BBC just posted Richard Bacon interviewing former Sunday Times editor Andrew Neil. Neil used every smear of Fox News and said British broadcasting was unbiased. Bacon, of course, agreed with Neil’s every statement and didn’t offer one counterpoint. Truly nauseating. Thanks for your post!
I feel sorry for Mudle because he and his chattering lefty mates may really have helped to provoke some future nasty liberal/socialist violence monger to do some thing stupid !.
Marky it only takes a few minutes on some of the hilarious left thinking blogs to see the utter hatred anger and repressed [for now!] violence , and as most of the worlds worst atrocities have been perpetrated by those of a delusional liberal/socialist persuasion I think it’s only fair that you should stop firing your school boy politics with such nasty matches!!
Whilst wisely leaving the parapet to ‘expert’ colleagues elsewhere, One wonders if, now, some Beeboids are feeling that it was wise to associate themselves with Mr. Mardell’s impartial professional expertise…
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/newsnight/paulmason/2011/01/giffords_assassination_attempt.html
And as we are into matters of rhetoric, inflammatory actions and t’internet, as most of Newsnight was on twitter during the riots either egging on or coordinating actions, might be a hoot to level the charge at the BBC of inciting that young loon Wurzel to lob a fire extinguisher off the roof… if, of course, carefully aimed to miss all below, one is sure.
Palin has now made a full statement and commentary on it all.
I bet the BBC plays it in full, to counter all the crap it has been coming out with this week NOT.
http://hotair.com/archives/2011/01/12/video-journalists-and-pundits-should-not-manufacture-a-blood-libel/
I happened to just switch to the BBC News channel as they played a snippet, or maybe the end, of Palin’s messsage. They feigned confusion as to why Palin would use the expression “Blood Libel” particuarly as the congresswoman is Jewish. It is a valid expression as the Tea Party have been falsely accused of being involved with murder in the same way that Jews have over the centuries (ijncluding by the BBC often enough with regards to Israel).
They then were mightily sniffy about the fact that Palin chose today to make her speech, which is the same day as He is due to address the nation. They then went on to say that it is the harsh rhetoric that has led to this tragedy and “seen by many people as mostly coming from the right wing”. I turned off at that point.
Does anyone else agree that the BBC and their fellow left-wing nutjob channels don’t see this shooting as the tragedy it is, but something wonderful that happened with which they could attack the right. And to hell with the truth, just so long as Palin is stopped in her tracks, Giffords can become a martyr to the extremist cause of the MSM. Some of them probably, secretly, hope she dies so they can call Palin a murderer. Nothing would now seem low enough for these monsters to sink to.
I broadly agree. I’ve read Mardell’s piece on what Palin has said. That guy is getting creepier by the moment.
As for objections to the blood libel phrase, these creeps will grab at anything to avoid the issue Palin was raising. Hey, BBC! She’s saying you’re a bunch of psychos for exploiting the killings of innocent people to smear you opponents. Capiche?
Mardell STILL fixating on Palin again, today!
He can’t help it: he’s politically obsessed with her.
He deliberately obscures the story, which is about murders in Tucson, isnt it?
“For Sarah Palin, best defence is attack”
Sarah Palin video:
http://www.breitbart.tv/palin-responds-to-media-onslaught-with-facebook-video-blood-libel/