So the BBC is focusing on right-wing terrorism Today. That’s nice. ( link )
Dr. Matthew Goodwin has created a nice politically correct name for Islamic inspired terrorism. “A.Q. terrorism.” Doesn’t that sound nice and respectful? A.Q. stands for Al Qaeda, the distorted version of Islam.
In the unfortunate event that we must mention such a thing on the BBC, say, when a bomb goes off somewhere, for balance we must also mention its equivalent. Right wing terrorism. We haven’t created a cute name for that yet.
We know there are:
“47 international (Islamic inspired) terrorist organisations are proscribed under the Terrorism Act 2000.
Of these, two organisations are proscribed under powers introduced in
the Terrorism Act 2006, as glorifying terrorism.
14 organisations in Northern Ireland are proscribed under previous
Typical of the right wing are….. Anders Breivik, Oslo and Timothy McVeigh, Oklahoma?
Oh well. There’s the EDL. And the BNP. We realise they’re not proscribed (yet) but we’re working on it.
We insist that the underpants bomber wasn’t influenced at UCL,(very much) but people are being radicalised by right wing websites.
“Large numbers of citizens remain deeply concerned about immigration, feel anxious about the cultural compatibility of Muslims, and are threatened by rising diversity. In fact, in recent years the Brits have become equally if not more concerned about these issues than many of their European neighbours. These voters are also extremely dissatisfied with the response of the main parties to such trends”
So, because immigration is the game and multiculturalism is the aim, we must find a way of dealing with these pesky citizens who are ‘more concerned’.
“The key issue is how to respond to voters’ profound anxiety about this issue.”
We’ll ban the lot of it! Shut down The Gates of Vienna! Internet Service Providers must consider removing right wing websites!!
We must make sure that people don’t “get their news from JUST ONE source.” No, not the BBC. We meant the internet.
So if a threat doesn’t exist, make one up. This has two advantages – it waters down the Muslim terrorist threat by implying some sort of equivalence with the mythical paramilitary wing of the EDL/BNP/Daily Mail/RBS/whatever takes your fancy and, if some lone right wing nutter does pop out of the woodwork (like David Copeland for instance), the BBC can say “we told you so”.
Yes, I caught this as well and I would invite readers to contrast the BBC treatment of the issue with that in The Telegraph here.
I notice they don’t so far as to allow comments though.
Seems to be a DT trend.
Agreed. Im on the DT daily and have saw them ramp up the no comments allowed on many stories over the past few months.
It has been pointed out to me that this is often in response to legal contraints.
I would accept that, but it has happened after a batch of comments have been made. Hence… why open that option?
But further, what makes our glorious MSM so permitted to pontificate but the public… not so much.
The DT now joins CiF and BBC… not in a good way.
A couple of months ago I spoke to a retired Christian prison Chaplain. He had been working in prison reform and prisoner rehabilitation and was involved in the implementation of restorative justice.
Unfortunately he had been bullied, physically as well as mentally, by prison-service Imams and Muslim inmates. He was appalled at the way the Muslims took over the multi-faith prayer rooms, and at the way Muslims were allowed to rule the roost throughout the prisons he visited.
He took his problem to John Reid, the reformed drinker who liked punching people in the face, who happened to be a particularly uncouth Labour Home Secretary at the time.
Reid told him in no uncertain terms go away, in the form of a couple of very rude words.
Victims nearly always pass their experience on, thus creating another victim further down the chain, and Reid might have been keen to recycle the aftermath of his intrusion into one of the no-go Muslim areas his party created.
I’m afraid this might sound like Martin Linton and Jenny Tonge, but there are long tentacles of Islam in our prisons.
BBC bigots in action yet again?
The EDL is a wholly peaceful and legal protest movement, it condemns all violence and its charter forbids violence of any kind and yet the BBC feels able to smear the EDL live on air with no right of reply given to the EDL. The BBC allowed a guest to tell outright lies about the EDL and allowed him to conflate a proven mentally ill serial fantasist and loner with a wholly legal and peaceful protest movement.
So whats the compelling evidence supplied that so called far right terror groups are active and a direct threat in the UK? The BBC or their single guest failed to supply any evidence at all did they? There have been NO bomb attacks by far right groups, there have been NO murders by far right groups, there have been NO attacks on innocent civilians by far right groups in the UK at all.
Eh? No evidence you say? And yet the BBC feels able to invite just one guest to smear a wholly peaceful non political protest group and a non political blog called ‘gates of Vienna’ whose only crime is to investigate and report on islamofasicm and islamic terror groups in the UK. There are now hundreds of islamofascist terrorist in UK jails and thousands are being monitered and closely watched and there are how many far right terrorists in UK jails?
The BBC website has the follwing headline and at the side a picture of a convicted and jailed islamifascist terrorist. The report could have and probably was written by a UAF member, we are meant to believe that far right groups pose the same threat to the UK as Abu Hamza or Al Queda? That they are the same, that they are equal threats? The BBC of course supplies no evidence at all in both the toady and the website reports, offers the victims of their smears no opportunity to defend themselves from what is an obvious libel.
I have seen some one sided and dishonest reports from the BBC over the years but this one takes the crown for the very worst sort of smear attack. And to attempt to link a mentally ill and serial fantasist loner Ander Brehvik to both the blog and the EDL is sick beyond belief
“Home Affairs Committee warns of far-right terror threat”
In effect the BBC have made up a threat in order to dilute the real and most pressing threat of islamofascism and islamist terror groups operating in the UK right now. But to allow a single guest to smear the EDL and the ‘gates of Vienna’ blog without allowing them an opportunity to defend themselves in quite frankly criminal. I hope both launch complaints against the BBC, in fact if any groups is a threat to the UK it is the BBC and its islamosfascist/UAF friends.
Like Hippiepooter I have my reservations about the true motive/intent of the EDL. However, I do enjoy it when Tommy Robinson is allowed on the BBC and runs rings round the extremist presenters like Paxman. But I have to agree with you Cassandra in the fact that there are no, repeat NO, right-wing terrorists in British gaols, and many Muslim terrorists. It was Muslim terrorists who created the carnage of 7/7, it was Muslim terrorists who were responsible for Lockerbie etc.
The BBC don’t want to admit the truth, but there it is. It wasn’t a right-wing terrorist who shot the US Senator and murdered a few other people including a Congressman, despite the lies the BBC were spinning at the time. He was a sicko who was more interested in Karl Marx and others of that ilk. The Norwegian sicko was no more right-wing than John Prescot either to be honest.
We have more to worry about in this country from the likes of the UAF (vilent thugs) and the Occupy Movement (anti-semitic thugs) and the summer rioters who will start again when the weather gets warmer. All these are fully supported and encouraged by the BBC. Innocent people were murdered during those riots but the BBC obviously thinks there’s nothing wrong with that.
“I have my reservations about the true motive/intent of the EDL”
Well it might be justified, it might not. Can we afford to be so picky when faced with this new form of fascism? When you have cancer, hair loss is the least of your problems.
“new form of fascism”
Only new to us. Didn’t the Foreign Office, presumably full of “experts”, advise successive governments on what we were letting ourselves in for?
“Can we afford to be so picky when faced with this new form of fascism?”
The EDL is a crypto-fascist organisation seeking to take in the desperate and gullible just like the RESPECT Party is a crypto-fascist alliance of the Marxist Left and jihadists.
Somehow though, the BBC dont treat the two the same. Somehow, as far as I’m aware, the BBC dont do any uncritical interviews with people exposing the propaganda alliance between jihadists and the Marxist Left. Probably because a lot of that alliance is evident in a lot of BBC output.
If anyone thinks the BNP are right wing, then they haven’t read a BNP manifesto and they must only get their news from the BBC.
The BNP are a nationalist socialist party who advocate the renationalisation of many industries, including water, energy and railways.
They are a far left party which is why they have many former hard-left labour members and why the BNP won more votes from labour supporters than they did from tory supporters.
But if the BBC had to accept that, it would really upset the applecart, wouldn’t it? After all, everybody knows that all nasty types are right wing.
Stalin and Pol Pot present a bit of a problem, so we just don’t talk about them.
I recall a few years ago following a BBC programme that consistently called the BNP a far-right organisation. Somebody wrote in to them to complain along similar lines that you describe Geyza, that the BNP were in fact LEFT-WING.
The response from the BBC was to say that while it was true that they were left wing – but they were so far left that this made them appear on the right.
I guess it’s the same logic that makes wind-farms cost effective, the previous government a success, or Islam the religion of peace.
Back when Nick Griffin and that scary-looking guy (Brons?) won MEP spots, Dimbleby heard the other guy say the BNP was Nationalist as well as Socialist, and tried to get him to say the BNP were Nationalist-Socialist. He made a couple of attempts at this before realizing the man wasn’t as stupid as he looked.
The BBC knows perfectly well what’s Left and what’s not, but they’re intellectualy incapable of admitting that Nazis and the BNP are Left-wing, because that would mean Leftoids can be racist. The Narrative is threatened, and the cognitive dissonance shuts down their brains.
The claim that the Nazi Party were Right-Wing conservatives is probably the single greatest lie of the C20th.
It is up there with, it was the CIA who killed President Kennedy, the Rosenbergs were innocent (I distinctly recall seeing a programme saying that on the BBC), that the USSR was a land of freedom (he got the Pulitzer Prize for that one) that the Cultural Revolution in China was a step forward for humanity, that Islam is a religion of peace, that the Common Market has nothing to do with a European Super-State, that …I could go on…….
Also, that Margaret Thatcher organised the Falklands War just to win the next election. Again that she was responsible for the mess that she inherited in 1979, and that she destroyed British industry and the Coalmines in particular. That the 9/11 attacks were not a work of Muslim terrorists but were planned and carried out by the American Government themselves. That the BBC is politically neutral. That the plight of the Cuban people is caused by the American boycott rather than Castro’s deliberate policies. That Che Guavara was a freedom fighter, rather than an opportunistic, murdering racist.
Do the left tell the truth on anything????
The BNP, like all Nazis, are extreme right wing socialists.
Not a proposition enjoying an uncritical interview near a BBC microphone soon.
Only got the last couple of lines of this bit before the news.
When I heard the words “Brevik”, and “right wing sites such as Gates of Vienna”…I knew then that it had to be Sarah Montagues “Thought for the Day”…
Matthew Goodwin thank you very much…respectful sign off and no interruptions…got to be a BeebDweeb!
Now have renewed respect for Gates of Vienna, and glad that the BBC is “on meme”…for its remaining days as The Guardian for those who`ll not buy it.
F666 the BBC!
The BBC report on the website and on the toady perfectly highlights BBC bias, its corporate narrative and its political agenda.
Nothing about the close links between the UAF and islamofascist groups, no actual evidence to back up their smears and just one look at the EDL website shows them to be opposed to violence. As long as the BBC can get away with this kind of blatant smear atacks on law abiding people or groups with no evidence with which to back it up they will expand their smear attacks to include more of their political and ideological enemies.
Underneath it all is fear. The liberal elite are afraid. Afraid of Islamic fundamentalism because of it’s ruthlessness and afraid of what is called ” the right” because the elite fears that it’s disastrous attempt to re engineer Western society is going to fail when it comes up against the innate conservatism of the ordinary indiginous people.
Never confuse liberalism with reality or with courage. It is as unreal as fairyland and is underpinned by fear.
These people , the worst generation in European history, and in particular English history, have no real idea what to do and how to cope with the reality coming to our world.
In the end their only resource will be to tyranny. The last refuge of a modern Western liberal.
Aaah it becomes clearer now, it is in fact another example of how the left wing MSM like the BBC and its print arm the guardian choose to peddle identical stories at the same time with the same political aims. Both the guardian and the BBC reports are identical and must have been worked on and devised from a single source and then aired in both organs. Both far left MSM and both requiring public subsidies to survive, both peddling the same made up smear attacks and trash hack gutter journalism, both eager to launch unfounded smear attacks against their ideological enemies.
Islam Not BBC (INBBC) is on the same political agenda as CNN:
CNN: Europe provokes Clash of Civilisations by condemning Turkish genocide and not buying Iranian oil
Does right wing terrorism actually exist? If not, then I’m sure the BBC will be more than happy to fabricate a threat so as to ‘balance’ the debate a little bit. Pathetic!
For INBBC: ‘A.Q. terrorism’?
Left and Right Wing are fairly meaningless labels usually employed as abuse. A.Q. Terrorism is even more meaningless. Many terrorist groups, particularly the Shiite ones, would reject that label out of hand.
surprise surprise! 😀
K. vaseline Vaz, crawls from under his stone, & pops out (just like a bad smell), on el beeb 5live just after 2pm, spouting the same deceitful b/s on “right wing” terrorism.,
why doesn t one of these concerned parties? … give us the stats percentage wise … as an issue of ahem “clarity” … compared to
the percentage for ISLAMIC TERRORISM 😀 , not too much to ask
Islam Not BBC (INBBC) now has article campaigning for release of Islamic jihad supporter, Abu Qatada!:
“Radical preacher Abu Qatada ‘should be freed'”
London’s Finsbury Park mosque a “a key transit facility,” and “an attack planning and propaganda production base”
“Osama Bin Laden’s ‘right-hand man in Europe’ Abu Qatada could walk from prison today despite being ‘extraordinarily dangerous'”
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2097108/Osama-Bin-Ladens-right-hand-man-Europe-Abu-Qatada-walk-prison-today-despite-extraordinarily-dangerous.html#ixzz1lbzfQpqr
The BBC article isn’t campaigning for Abu Qatada’s release, but they should have mentioned what the danger of setting him free would be. They twice quote his lawyer as saying that he should be set free regardless of any danger because he’s been held too long without charge, so at least one of those should have been “balanced” with some gesture towards a reason why he’s being held. Merely providing a link to Dominic Casciani’s profile of him – which is weighted a bit towards the “no longer dangerous” angle – isn’t enough. Again the BBC requires extra effort for the reader to get proper context, leaving most people with an inaccurate impression.
And he’s not an “alleged” extremist, as the BBC has it. He’s an acknowledged extremist. He’s being held because of his actions, not a label, so there’s no legal requirement for that squeamish modifier.
expect AQ terrorism to be all over el beeb from now on ;-D
they seem to be so keen on emphasising the term ….
just what they ve been looking for eh!
Imagine now that Al Qatada will now be trailed as a “Government Adviser”, now that Vaz and pals have been visiting him to “get the experience of a vulnerable young man wrongly accused of wanting the rest of us dead”.
Got a nice ring to it…consultant/expert to the Home Office.
‘QA Terrorism’. Could be a good description of TODAY interviews of solid conservatives: ‘Questions and Answers Terrorism’.
I’ve missed all this coverage today, so somebody help me out here: did any of it ask about the need to understand the root causes of right-wing terrorism, talk about the vast majority of peaceful right-wing extremists or emphasise the importance of reaching out to right-wing community leaders?
Hey, with charmers like Sayeeda ‘freedom fighters’ Warsi and Martin McGuiness in government, I say we shouldn’t settle for anything less than Lord Vance being appointed Chairmen of the BBC.
Britain has walked this road before in the 1930’s. Its called appeasement. Fear of confronting evil by giving more and more ground out of fear of being attacked.
How many times do we hear the mantra; “don’t antagonise them because it will promote more violent attacks”. Don’t refer to the faith or group radicals with the faith because it will only push more into the radical camp.
Well like Hitler they have seen this as a weakness and will continue using these appeasers to seek victory. The only savior is that at some point we have a Churchill who will say enough of this pandering this has to stop. The longer this state of affairs persists the greater the threat of violent retaliation.
just like the old story,
wanting to choose dishonour(appeasement) over war
& it will end the same way choosing dishonour and getting war.
who will change that scenario … bit of the dunkirk spirit, bit of backbone.
soundbite dave?,(with warsi/pickled), william vague?, god forbid clegg?? how about
“wallace” millibland …. sheesh!, not a vertebrae between them.
More for Islam Not BBC (INBBC) to celebrate?:
U.K.: “Shoebomb” jihadist to be released hours before opening ceremony for Olympics
“The release date is described as an unfortunate coincidence, but it underscores massive task ahead of authorities to secure the London Olympics from Islamic supremacist disruption in any number of forms. ‘Shoe-bomb’ terrorist to be released from jail on opening day of the Olympic Games,” by Emma Reynolds for the Daily Mail.”
Ah bless…Al Qatada is coming back to lay in the mulitkulti sandpit with the BBC sandboys.
Fear not-he`ll get terrible body language should he break the terms of his release( mobile phone?…old friends?…none of that Mosque nonsense, you scamp you!…and only the slowest broadband width for YOU, my lad!)
Does he count as a cyanide pill or only assisted dying means for a society that lets his like fester and infect the host?
If Brussels worries about him-why the hell isn`t he hogging one of their copious and well appointed suites at the Commission, with his families and friends…poppies in a basket and a rather large letter opener!
Talk about the death wish/Thanatos culture that we live in!
Only hope Bowen etc are on Qutadas list of ” unwelcome contacts”…can`t imagine Shami, Inayat, Anjem, Medhi would be…that would be racist maan!
That clip is unbelievable. he states clear as day that the EDL are a diversification of right wing extremists. EDL are a single issue group that openly encourage all members of society and is overtly non racist: it may pick up a few thugs but even these are discouraged if they show ny sort of violent intent etc.
I strongly recommend Gates of Vienna (don’t be afraid!), I have followed it for years (well, 2005 ish) and also Fjordman since he began writing 6 or 7 years ago: read the archives, also read Paul Weston’s archives (http://paulweston101.blogspot.com/) There are no lies, everything they say is easily verificable at other sources…it is also bloody scary, not just what is going on but what the MSM are not reporting.
Laughably at the end of that radio interview the idiot says the problem is people getting a wrong world view by not using enough of a variety of news sources (I bet it doesn’t occur to them that this is excatly the problem with the BBC! If you used it and no other source you wouldn’t have a clue about so many issues.)
“Laughably at the end of that radio interview the idiot says the problem is people getting a wrong world view by not using enough of a variety of news sources (I bet it doesn’t occur to them that this is excatly the problem with the BBC!”
In fact the perverted degenerates at the BBC would dearly love to be the single source of public information news, the first aim of the far left and Marxist regimes is to take control of the MSM and strictly control access to news and to close down any contrary or anti regime outlets. Its what every far left regime has done.
I also ocasionally read GOV and its a good site for info on the state of things re Islamification in Europe and the politically correct morons in various Governments. I certainly don’t find it extremist
Its not Quatada we have to be fearful of, now it’s “The Welsh”
My wife’s Welsh! I’d better watch her carefully from now on…
What the BBC does not report.
Increasing numbers of white recidivists upon re-entering jail when asked about their religion answer Muslim / Islam.
Why the BBC wont report it.
The perks are better. Much nicer food, time off for prayer, treat with forced reverence by the Screws.
Now I know the feckless left-wingers at the BBC could not possibly imagine that criminals could take the piss in this manner, but it makes my blood boil.
also prison gang issue, the largest network, surprise surprise
muslims using the “religion” scam, minority rights etc to cover for covert activity …
hmm just like being back in the mosque eh! 😀 …
oh & right wing “terrorists”? … tsk tsk …
surely deserving freedom fighters “celebrating” spring, with a wave of optimism, after not having their important relevant issues dealt with by an agended government
“Right wing terrorists”?
I thought the BBC didn’t want to stigmatise by using the T-word. Surely, they are just “militants” or “radicals”?
But are they practicing True Rightism?
Anders Breivig is insane, the Nowegian shrinks decided (though double jeopardy aside they want a second opinion) But to the bBC he a “right wing extremist”, not a mentally ill person, or criminally insane, just holds opinions the bBC don’t like. Right = extreme = terrorist “Goes together like a horse and carriage” the old song went.
Personally I am sick to death of the Liberal Extremists at the bBC.
The police are persecuting children now, who might be at risk from the “right wing extremist” EDL. See this truly disgusting link page –
ian…oh the irony:
“Insp Bilal Mulla, Lancashire’s Channel co-ordinator, said…”
Beautiful irony, Span Ows. As he went on to say about EDL “grooming”, “It is not much different to child sexual exploitation”. Have moslem policemen got one-track minds?
This Lancashire news item is the most shocking, vile, sinister and incredible story I have read in a long time and should be distributed far and wide.
Like the bit where he says that they have “modified the programmes to anticipate vulnerable children at risk”.
This is public sector speak for “replace all references to Muslim with “Daily Mail reader”….for such programmers are lazy smug Guardianistas who will be wanting paper shops closed down for “inciting incorrect thoughts” before too long.
I saw this Goodwin from Trent Poly in the Guardain today.
Talk about “synchronicity” eh?
The Guardian is the house journal for the BBC…and hope it`ll be going the same way as that barrage balloon of wind. It won`t be long for Salford!
Mehdi Hasan, the senior editor of the New Statesman, has written an article. He is strangely excited by Anders Breivik, the jewel in the crown of far right extremists.
Breivik’s atrocity landed at the feet of Mehdi and his pals, like a surprise present. From Norway with love, gift wrapped and tied up with a glittery pink bow. Mehdi and his ilk trot it out, using it as a sledgehammer to drive home a desperate little argument, in which he seeks to convince himself that terrorism by right-wing extremists is just as much of a threat to society as Islamic inspired terrorism.
‘Is it fair that every time an act of terrorism takes place people quickly assume that it has to be by a Muslim,’ he bleats? The fact that it usually does is neither here nor there to Mehdi because in his excitement the logic has escaped him.
Mehdi advises Theresa May to stop being all suspicious about the Muslims and direct her snoopy eyes at the infidels.
Can anyone explain Mehdi? He doesn’t seem all that bright for a great intellectual. Do people really take him seriously, and if so, why?
“Do people really take him seriously”
In a word. No.
Sorry; beg to differ.
BBC producers take him very seriously, at least as a ratings/gold/aganda reliable ‘guest’.
Hence his, and by association that vast ABC public-representative publication the New Statesperson, pervasive presence across every BBC ‘news’ programme.
If that is true they are shooting themself in the foot, because the man is a manifest idiot. If he said the Sun is going to rise tomorrow people would start to wonder.
Which are “right wing”? I see plenty of Islamic ones and communist.
It is in fact a propaganda technique invented by the left known as moral equivalence. It goes like this- Islamist terrorists blow people up. A Norwegian nutter (who is labelled as “far right” even though their is no proof of this) blew people up.
One is just as bad as the other , therefore “the right” is a terrorist threat. That the incidents are very different, one is organized world wide the other, a “lone wolf” is neither here nor there. They are both terrorists. QED.
It is in fact a logical fallacy. We cannot forget the BBC are experts in propaganda.
One is just as bad as the other , therefore “the right” is a terrorist threat.
As is continually pointed out, this skewed equivalence is trotted out ad nauseam by the BBC to show they are, on average, getting it about right.
Have to say, a smattering of lone loons of confused ideology scattered about, vs. highly focussed global movements controlled by bitter old men sending idiot youth out to prosecute their strategic aims seem a smidge different.
The coverage of course, remains ‘unique’.
It doesn’t take much to encourage islamicist terror.
But it took an entire white-hating, atrocity-ignoring Norwegian establishment to push just one white man – Breivik – over the edge.
This says a lot more for Europeans than it does for moslems.
The BBC is as normal focusing on the wrong groups with its reporting on far right extremism.
The report that the BBC has managed to take out of context makes the following conclusions:
The Government concluded in its Prevent Review that the Strategy should continue to focus on radicalisation linked to the main terrorist threat facing the UK, from groups that are usually collectively referred to as Islamic fundamentalist, Al Qa’ida-related, or Islamist terrorists
So it seems that it is the Islamic terrorists who we should be concerned about.
Secondly, the Strategy cited extreme right-wing terrorism, which in the UK has been “much less widespread, systematic or organised than terrorism associated with Al Qa’ida”;however, there are 17 people in Britain currently serving prison sentences for terrorism offences who are known to be associated with extreme right-wing groups. Although the last major terrorist attacks by a right-wing extremist in the UK took place in 1999
So here we have the governments opinion on the threat of extreme right-wing terrorism, 17 people and no far-right attack since 1999, which rather begs the question why the BBC is focussing on such a small number of people?
A view was expressed by some of those giving evidence to us, and those to whom we spoke less formally, that the revised Prevent Strategy only pays lip service to the threat from extreme far-right terrorism. We accept that Prevent resources should be allocated proportionately to the terrorist threat, and that to an extent we must rely upon the intelligence and security services to make this judgement. However, we received persuasive evidence about the potential threat from extreme far-right terrorism. The ease of travel and communications between countries in Europe and the growth of far-right organisations, which appear to have good communications with like-minded groups within Europe, suggest that the current lack of firm evidence should not be a reason for neglecting this area of risk.
So again, apart from some views expressed by some people giving evidence it seems that the Intelligence and Security Services do not feel that the UK is in any danger of experiencing any far right extremism, instead the Security Services feel that they should keep concentrating on the 2,000 + individuals who are intent on carrying out terrorist actions in the name of Islam.
Only could the BBC try and spin a report about the threat of terrorism by Islamic groups into a story about the far right!
Keith Vaz (which party, remind me BBC?) pushing his “worry about the “far right” extremism gets lots of airtime, again. Apparently “MPs have warned…”No, Keith Vaz, Labour MP, has warned. Picture of Lone Wolf Anders Breivig supporting the narrative. Not many lone wolf Norwegians here Keith.
Whoever put Vaz in as Chair of this select committee needs their noggin examined. Another political fail from The Boy
BBC gives last word of course to Abu Hamza. Its all the fault of our foreign policy says unelected terrorist Mr Hamza, dummy in the the usual bBC left-knee ventriloquist act. Oh, and guilt at being unable to help our brother. Which brother would that be Abu? Our Home Counties struggling small businessman brother, or our mysoginistic homophobic insurgent brother in Afghanistan?
BBC airbrushing away Islamic terrorism with false worries about “The Right” – meaning people not signed up to world as seen through the Guardian BBC Labour prism
I have had some experience with university “educated” intellectuals of the left. When it comes to force-fitting facts to suit their narrow prejudices they are in a class of their own. This Goodwin character is apparently no exception.
Perhaps others here picked this up, but the BBC interviewer (don’t know who she is though I have an idea I should know) seemed a bit taken aback by the ridiculous premise advanced by Goodwin. By her tone of voice she seemed just a touch put out by the fact that someone could spout such idiocy with a straight face. But of course working for the BBC she can’t articulate her doubts if she values her job.
In these United States the Left has been trying to promote ‘the militia’ movement as a Rightist threat without success since the Clinton administration. British or American they are desperate for threat they can use as opposed to the genuine one which political correctness and fear requires them to downplay.
Dr Goodwins offices are less than 500 metres from where I am writing this.We in the Nottingham BNP have asked Dr Goodwin to attend one of our meetings and see for himself what sort of people we really are,but for some reason he appears not to want to.I mention this because Dr Goodwin constantly talks as if he has some specialist knowledge of the BNP i.e.that we are all terrorists or thugs or dupes,but to my knowledge he knows nothing about us.I checked with the East Mids regional organizer and he has never had contact with the good Dr,nor the national organizer.So what exactly are Dr Goodwins qualifications,well it would seem the following he is just an anti British anti white anti cristian left wing bigot who wraps himself in a quasi academic shawl or do I mean berkah?