Here’s an interesting catch from a Biased BBC reader.

“An excerpt from BBC Radio 4

Norwegian philosopher Lars Gule believes he argued with Anders Breivik on an online forum, and he “did not stand out with a particularly aggressive or violent rhetoric… he was quite mainstream.” ‘”When it comes to opinions and statements, he was not alone… it shows some of the warped sense of reality that is operating,” in certain Norwegian communities, he said.’

The BBC lie about who Gule is. He is not a “Norwegian philosopher” but an Islamic terrorist.

As an Islamic terrorist, Gule naturally views opponents of his Arab/Muslim agenda as “warped”. BBC blatantly pander to Arabs, Muslims, anti-Zionists, anti-Semites, moral and cultural relativists and the left, and use shills like Gule to promote their agenda.”

Bookmark the permalink.


  1. Span Ows says:

    Holy F**K! I wouldn’t mind betting they get a red face or two when they realise this…because they wouldn’t have realised before…oh no.


  2. Steve Weaver says:

    Bit Cautious about this one, I was watching a interview with a guy named Lars Gule on BBC News 24, and it wasn’t that guy for sure.


    • Span Ows says:

      The photo is Andreas Heldal-Lund
      “Norwegian citizen Andreas Heldal-Lund is a key instigator of anti-religious hatred amongst extremists. He does not act purely as an individual, however. Like his fellow hate mongers Tilman Hausherr of Germany and Roger Gonnet of France, Heldal-Lund has links to established organizations that have a specific agenda to discredit religions and bring about their destruction.”


    • Span Ows says:

      The first line of the link reads “An interesting story appeared on Usenet regarding Lars Gule, an associate of Andreas Heldal-Lund.”

      No caution required but you’re right: the photo should be changed.

      (Can someone tell David V?)


  3. Steve Weaver says:

    In fact this was the guy they were interviewing,  looks like the picture on the post is wrong.


  4. Craig says:

    Yes, in a discussion about terrorism, it was surely highly relevant that Gule had once been described as “Norway’s first international terrorist” (as per the link in the post).This surely should have been mentioned – or at least his arrest for providing explosives for the Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine should have been mentioned.

    Indeed, all the Today team needed to do was to look up ‘Lars Gule’ on Wikipedia. It may be a short article but it has a section called ‘Links to terrorism’. The article links to a long Wikipedia article in Norwegian, which has a lot more information on this far-Left radical/philosopher (if you ‘google translate’ it). Gule remains an enemy of Israel, calling it “a racist state”.

    All this relevant background, yet John Humphrys simply introduced him as a professor and an expert on terrorism and multiculturalism. Did they know about this background but chose not to mention it, or did they not bother doing even the most basic bit of research into their guest?


    • deegee says:

      I vote for option #2.


      • London Calling says:

        £3bn national broadcaster has the resources to check. What it tells us is that, when a story or billing fits their own narrative, BBC staffers see no reason to check.


  5. Deborah says:

    Thanks David – this is exactly the bias the BBC excels at – and but for the web would succeed totally – whoever would have questioned the description the BBC gave of Lars Gule?  The trouble is that the silent majority that make up the BBC audience never question anything this respected broadcaster gives out.


  6. J J says:

    Apparently this guy wasn’t involved in Islamic terrorism, but seemingly linked to a group of Palestinian Marxist-Leninists who took part in terrorism. It does seem that he has turned away from his pro-terror beliefs though, according to a google search.


  7. John Anderson says:

    The picture may be wrong – but the fact remains that the BBC chose to interview a known terrorist without describing as such.

    How low can the BBC stoop ?


  8. Biodegradable says:

    There’s no mistake, it’s part of the BBC’s agenda.

    Is the BBC complicit in legitimising hatred?


    • Wally Greeninker says:

      Luckily, as with with Karen Anderson and Barnaby Rogerson, the casual viewer of that ‘documentary’ could tell just by observing his appearance and manner, that he was as batty as a fruitake.


  9. cjhartnett says:

    The BBC are in lockdown now!
    Still high on the Murdoch stuff, they are barefaced in their wish to blend us into a Brussels (lily)liver pate…veggie of course but we`ll still need to get stuffed…as they all too plainly make clear! 
    Why else do we get Campbells, Mandelsons, Blunketts and Presoccts wobbling round in their high boots with liqourice for whips?
    Am I not being an accessory to fraud any time they get a freebie on the licence fee that I`m made to pay?
    Two examples for you
    1. Good programme called the Long View today parallels the BBCs move up north with the Guardians move down to Faringdon St back in the 50/60s.
    The Beeb hack on to defend it spoke of connecting with the little people up north to get an “increased market share”.
    This is a public information service in theory-they are NOT to be seeking markets, just giving us the truth-and boy, have they gone miles away from THAT.
    Still-that foreign exchange with the Guardian says alot..”.two hearts beat as one” and all that.
    2. No open news about that Norwegians views then-BBC seem awful keen to keep the lid on it all. One Tommy Robinson goes throught their lazy, uncritical knee jerk reflexes like a hot knife through butter!
    The BBC have learned nothing as the flames have got that little higher now-stifle, smother, oxygen of publicity(only the third time they`ve qouted a Thatcher line) and all that!
    The lazy feather bedded lotus eaters that run the MSM and political discourse have no arguments to the cultural marxist, EU superstate and rabid anti-Christian agenda of the ruling elite-Norway or here!
    If Islam didn`t threaten them physically they`d be as smeary and sneery to Muslims as they are to the white trash that pay for their musings for now.
    Personally I smell ignorance and fear-reflex prejudices and an unwillingness to “have the conversation”…so le`ts hope we can get funding for the marginalised and self-excluding BBC parasites and poltroons.
    We could find within ourselves to run a Workshop to deprogramme/detoxify the poor Spartists and prep school pillboxes-Coming Porpoise perhaps?


  10. fred bloggs says:

    The Muslim thing is a diversion.  The main attack was against the Norwegian Labour Party about immigration and their overall influence.  The bBC do not want you to start thinking, ah! I have seen that elsewhere, Great Britain for instance.


  11. Future History of Great Britian says:

    I think you will find that Lars is on the BBC pay roll as an expert, someone they can call at the moments notice for comment. Do a little digging and you will find the BBC has a massive list of people who are “experts” in their field who they call for comment, and then pay for that comment.


    • David vance says:

      I am down as such an “expert” – problem is my expertise is attacking the bias of the State Broadcaster  🙂


  12. My Site (click to edit) says:

    The BBC and ‘Ve vill ask ze questions..”

    BBCNewsnight BBC Newsnight English Defence League leader Stephen Lennon – aka Tommy Robinson – denies links to Norwegian gunman Anders

    Can;t say this young man’s outfit is to my taste, but the line, and logic of Mr. Paxman’s  ‘questioning’ was risible.

    If tarring by loose or unproven association is the BBC’s new journalistic thrust, it is stirring up very dubious waters around its own ‘members’ records.

    And if it seeks to set itself apart by its censorship of its blog threads and other social media links, that’s a boat long since sailed, holed, sunk and lying at the bottom of the Marinas Trench where even James Cameron can’t do a nice homage re-edit.


  13. David Preiser (USA) says:

    Good catch by the reader on this one.  Agenda?  What agenda?


  14. John Horne Tooke says:

    “..Norwegian philosopher Lars Gule believes he argued with Anders Breivik”

    So he is not sure then. It may have been somone else.

    “We should normally identify on-air and online sources of information and significant contributors, and provide their credentials, so that our audiences can judge their status.”

    Describing Gule as a philsopher is only half the story. On this information only, the audience cannot possibly “judge his status”


    • The Cattle Prod of Destiny says:

      By the BBCs own standards they have not done anything wrong.  They are within their own guidelines. Gule is an expert on terrorism – because he is a convicted terrorist!

      As for being a philosopher – well aren’t we all?


      • J J says:

        Apparently he has turned his back on his pro-terrorist belief and now speaks out against it. I’m not sure if that makes him acceptable as a guest or not. I suppose it is a matter of opinion.


  15. pounce_uk says:

    More on the bBC choice of philosopher used to combat the far-right:
    Academic former terrorist claims Muslims are the new Jews

    Funny enough he works at the very same uni where this transpired:
    Islamists operate out of University College, rector clueless
    In May 2008 Islamnet invited Zulqarnain Sakandar Madni to speak at the University College of Oslo. Madni told his audience that Bush and the Jews were behind 9/11.

    Funny that?


    • J J says:

      The terrorist group he was involved with was Marxist-Leninist I believe.


      • RGH says:

        Marxist-Leninist is neither here nor there.

        He was smuggling explosives for a PALESTINIAN group to be used in the context of the 10th anniversary of the Six day War.

        His target was the world’s only Jewish state.

        The perverse reasoning of Marxist-Leninist is merely the mileau he inhabited, but saw an opportunity to contribute to the world’s store of suffering by intervening in a conflict which the deeper, older hatreds  expressed themselves in a new intellectualised form.

        The violence of terrorism is always not FOR something. It is against something. It is negative and morally sick.

        His target was Jews. His Marxist.Leninism was a symptom of his moral sickness. A mere vehicle for hate and violence.

        His latest concern is circumcision and the damage it does to children.! Parents have no right to include chidren in their belief system.. It might damage them.

        He knows what he is doing.

        One sick philosopher.


  16. cjhartnett says:

    I`d guess that the words lax and laxative have the same etymology.
    That the BBC have been undoing their top button and slouching round in the metaphorical string vest since 1989 does not excuse their lazy interviews, cliched caricatures of those who disagree with the Common Purpose agenda( we`ve not been asked to agree-not even told about any of it!)…and we reap thw whirlwind today.
    These lotus eaters of liberal poses just have not been thinking or asking anything in recent years. All one world loveliness with Stalins old jackboot if we don`t go along voluntarily!
    Intellectually flaccid and only the one eye-and that has a rose tinted monocle that won`t stay put.
    Unstable. drooling and incompetent..witness NewsCorps…thankfully Dr Rupert will be back to assist-st in the dying of the BBC.
    Lost the will to live has Auntie-but insists on keeping what she stole when she was “compes mentis”


  17. George R says:

    “A wider pathology”

    (by Melanie Phillips)


  18. George R says:


    (by Theodore Dalrymple, psychiatrist)


  19. George R says:

    “MSM Thuggees Run Amok Over Breivik”

    (by Edward Cline)