Do have a read of these two reports of the brutal murder of a 25 year old football fan in London at the weekend.
There is this one, the there is this one.
Can you spot the difference? Something seems MISSING from the BBC report, can you guess what it was?Sshhhh…I think the BBC think they got away with it.
Hat-tip to the eagle eyed B-BBC reader who pointed this out to me.
Sometimes Mark Mardell just can’t help but express his opinion on world affairs. This time he’s expressing his disdain for the way US troops will continue to engage in military action in Afghanistan even though a decision has been made by the President to hand full military control over to the Afghan Government in 2014. The fact that he simply doesn’t understand what this means shows just how naive and ideological the man is.
Mission, sort of, accomplished
After the obligatory dig at George Bush, Mardell gives us an analogy to show us what he thinks about the whole state of affairs. He likens the troop draw-down and continued military policing of the country to the pointless butchery in the last few hours of World War I after the armistice had been signed. No, this highly-paid, world-traveled, expert journalist actually doesn’t know the difference between a cease-fire and the gradual handing over of power to a new government after military reconstruction.
I have been asking some of those involved whether the end in Afghanistan amounts to a prolonged version of much the same thing.
For the next two years British and American soldiers will be risking their lives for a war that we know will end in 2014, no matter what.
See what I mean? He really doesn’t get it. And he’s not done expressing his opinion. Of course, being a clever, trained journalist, he uses the rhetorical device of asking a question behind which to hide his opinion.
Has Nato masterfully spun an acceptance of defeat and subsequent retreat into something that looks a bit like victory?
Defeat? Al Qaeda has long been broken into the tiniest of pieces, really no longer existing, the Taliban we’re fighting bears little resemblance to those who ran much of the country 12 years ago. This is obviously a definition of “defeat” I wasn’t previously aware of. It’s not a perfect, obvious victory in that we haven’t created a stable environment like we did in Germany or Japan after WWII. But Mardell doesn’t see any of that. He sees only continued fighting, ergo it’s a defeat.
So outraged and confused is he by the fact that young men will continue to die for what he sees as someone merely hitting the “off” switch, that he goes to Ft. Bragg to question the last batch of US troops preparing for their tour of engagement. Fortunately, most of the soldiers seem to understand what they’re up against, and can grasp the larger picture better than the man the BBC expects not only you to trust about US issues, but expects their own young journalists to trust for lessons on how to be a correspondent.
The soldiers seem to understand that there are larger issues at play in the long term, but also realize that doesn’t discount everything that’s gone on the whole time. To Mardell, though, the fact that there are larger issues at play is proof that this war never should have happened, and needs to be shut down. Of course, it wouldn’t be a Mark Mardell report without the reflexive praising of the President, and he doesn’t disappoint:
It seems obvious to me that Obama has been pretty hard-headed, deciding to end a war when it was clear to him that it couldn’t be “won” in a conventional sense.
This view is supported by an important article by David Sanger in the New York Times.
Here we see the appeal to authority. Because he realizes most of his readers won’t know who Sanger is, he even explains that authority for us.
Sanger’s record is impressive. He gets the inside story more often than any other Washington journalist.
People who do know who Sanger is, though, will know that he mostly just likes hands-on, authoritative Presidential behavior in this matters. He like Clinton’s quasi-personal approach, mocked Bush as “Incurious George”, and expressed his disappointment when the current President dithered on Libya and then led from behind. Funny how Mardell wasn’t appealing to Sanger’s authority then, eh? So now when the President has acted decisively, Sanger is pleased. Mardell is especially pleased because on this occasion his beloved Obamessiah has done something with which he agrees.
Next comes the required “balance”. Mardell quotes John McCain’s disapproval of setting a date for withdrawal. Never mind how so far this piece is really two against one – Mardell and Sanger in support of the President’s decision to withdraw, and McCain against. And it’s about to get much worse. Where does Mardell go for the final say on the matter? Does he seek out a foreign policy expert? A military historian? A seasoned diplomat? No, becaue none of them with any credibility would call this a defeat, which is what Mardell thinks. To find somebody who agrees with him, he asks an Occupier:
The many anti-war protesters who gathered on the streets of Chicago believe the real problem is the exact opposite.
Riot police and protesters clash in Chicago The Nato summit has attracted many anti-war campaigners to ChicagoAmong them is Occupy Washington’s Kevin Zeese. He says soldiers are going on fighting their way towards a deadline for one reason.
“That’s what happens when you lose a war. It is like Iraq. This is how you get out when you lose.
Mark Mardell: BBC anti-war correspondent, and dishonest Beeboid. Why am I calling him dishonest this time? Because Kevin Zeese isn’t just an Occupier or merely one of a number of anti-war protesters: he’s also executive director of the anti-war activist group, “Come Home America“, and co-founder of “Voters for Peace”. The man the BBC expects you to trust most on US issues doesn’t want you to know that, because it would detract from the credibility of his piece, so he left that out. Neither he nor his editor want you to know the truth, because it’s with Zeese that Mardell agrees most of all.
Biased BBC contributor Alan writes…
“Pro Europeans fighting back…..Ball’s answer to massive debt is more debt, the BBC answer to Euro implosion is more Europe.
Enoch Powell has for the BBC been a scurrilous, dangerous race baiter whose views on immigration were an outrage to a civilised nation…his warning that mass immigration could result in a rise in race attacks and xenophobia and conflict between communities were evidence of almost criminally racist tendencies. How different the world is today when the BBC sees its European empire dreams go up in smoke and any radical expression of distress and dismay are acceptable in its defence and its frontpage headline is…….
Clegg warns of Europe ‘extremism’
A collapse in the eurozone would create the “ideal recipe for an increase in extremism and xenophobia”, the UK deputy PM says.
And Here’s a glimpse of the BBC mindset concerning the European Project as set out by Will Self…’enthusiastic pro-European’…….
‘I viewed an increasingly united Europe as a necessary counterweight to US world hegemony and Russian idiocy, while also being a handy cosmopolitan stick with which to beat the backs of uptight Little Englanders.’
Isn’t that interesting? The BBC are enthusiastically anti-nation and embrace the no-borders internationalism of a European identity but Self’s statement shows that the European Project wasn’t about getting rid of nations to stop war, it was a plan to make an even bigger nation, an Empire, to compete with the US and the USSR, and now China.
Far from a peaceful project it was all about power and sabre rattling in one form or another….having ‘peacefully’ subjugated its own new ‘Euro’ citizen first of course.
And how neat that Self also propounds the ideas that such internationalism, cosmopolitanism, is a useful device to ‘rub the Right’s nose in diversity’……wasn’t that exactly Labour’s policy when they opened the floodgates?
Who can doubt that this is the authentic, approved voice of the BBC metropolitian ‘elite’ as well?
It’s Monday and a new week and so time for the BBC to try and open up a new schism in the Coalition if at all possible! This time, it’s Saint Vince Cable who calls sacking plans in Beecroft report ‘the wrong approach.’ That’s the headline the BBC chose. But then if you read the article you find Cable also says when asked whether there was a difference of view between himself and Downing street, he said: “I think we’re all on the same page.” Funny which quote they stuck in the headline, eh? Almost as if they want to create trouble and will use the babble from Cable for their own political ends….
The only sort of hunting the BBC seems to delight in is that of Conservative MP Jeremy Hunt. I see they are now flogging this story as if it were the single most important issue in the UK. The origin of this latest nonsense lies – if you notice – in the complaint of a single Labour MP. That’s good enough for the BBC to instantly escalate this to MAJOR news status and the scent of conservative blood is in the air. Tally-ho…..
This is interesting. Terry Smith on his blog Straight Talking has engaged with someone posting a comment on how the BBC in the interests of “balance” is not helping provide a serious forum to discuss the issue of austerity and cuts. Give it a read!
“Where does Ann Pettifor come from? The information I can find online suggest she has never held a job in the real world by which I mean working in a for profit organisation, and lists amongst her accomplishments being a former advisor to Ken Livingston. Birds of a feather do flock together. She is well known to the BBC staff which is a telling sign, and we are dealing with the full blown champagne socialist with the apartment in W1 and cottage in the country. How convenient to get the BBC car to pick her up from W1, take her to the Newsnight studio and waft her back after she has dispensed wisdom to us about how to solve the debt crisis with such gems as having discovered this new source of money which the rest of us had overlooked-the Bank of England can just lend to the government. Utter buffoonery-you are right, my face does tend to betray my views.
In a previous Newsnight appearance she told us that Keynes’ theories were tried in the Great Depression and so must be employed now, thereby displaying total ignorance of both Keynes and the Great Depression (Keynes’ main works were not published until 1933 and 1936), let alone a total lack of comprehension about what will work now. And described my views that the government is heavily indebted as ‘rubbish’. I can only hope she’s up for round three.
Funnily enough I had a remarkably similar thought about Question Time. The approach seems to be along the lines of saying “Let’s have a vote, who wants more money?” and then when there is a massive majority from the show of hands, or in Question Times’ case the loud applause, assuming that’s the matter resolved. You are right about David Starkey and about Dimbleby-a state broadcaster which was genuinely trying to maintain balance would get rid of him immediately. I watched him in a programme about South America warbling on about how Chile had achieved an economic miracle in spite of the repression of General Pinochet. In reality, Chile owes its economic strength to Pinochet’s reforms, but we’re not allowed to say that as it does not accord with the BBC rewriting of history.
It is essential to see the Augean stables of the BBC cleaned of this bias if viewers are to have any chance of grasping the enormity of the problem we now face. I would be more than willing to take on Balls, Dimbleby and Ann Pettifor together single handed. However, being proved right after the disaster has overwhelmed us will be much less satisfying than getting people to see what’s coming and take some action to prevent or reduce it.”
Morning world. A new week dawns and time for the Monday Open Thread. So, has the BBC been bothering you? If so, let’s be hearing from you….now!
Roger Harrabin is quite the card. Here he is on the BBC this morning warning that “Environmentalists” now fear that the UK government’s draft energy bill to be published on Tuesday will end in a new “dash for gas”.
They want the bill to be guided by the government’s stated wish to almost completely de-carbonise the electricity industry by the 2030s. But there has been no guarantee such a target will be enshrined in the bill.
I’m sure that they do what this – after all their eco-lunacy knows no economic constraints. However my question is why does Harrabin feel the need to virtually cheerlead on behalf of their anxieties? Why do these Green groups matter so much that THEIR concerns come before those of the rest of us who have to cough up increasingly large amounts of money to underwrite the watermelon agenda?
You have to almost admire the brass neck of the BBC. This morning, we were treated to the thoughts of Ed Balls, interviewed by Sarak Montague. on Today @ 7.34am. He was allowed to spout his usual playbook mantra which reduces down to attacking Cameron over and over again for a “lack of leadership” and now condemning Germany for it daring to insist that Greece honours its debts. Just ten minutes later, we had the excremental Thought for the Day with Canon Dr Alan Billings, an Anglican priest. His big idea was…yes, you’ve guessed it, that forgiving Debt is a rather good idea and that if this is true of individuals than it must surely by true of Government. How charming. Listening to these two leftists arguing for the dishonouring of Debt, one can understand why lending dries up – who on Earth would lend to those whose primary motivation lies in finding ways not to repay that which they borrow???? The BBC continues to push the Obama-Hollande line and is keen to give Labour the opportunity to ride on the back of it. It appears that rampant spending by central Government, leading to more borrowing and higher taxes, is the exciting new way forward and the BBC seem to think it is refreshing and worthy of serial advocacy.
It’s time for another one. This one lasts 16:15. I try to keep them down to 15 minutes, but I don’t have the benefit of all those BBC editors and producers.
As always, it’s meant to be a rebuttal to BBC coverage.
Life In These United States – No. 5
(Audio hosted by EyeTube)
SOURCES:
Insurers Must Credit Obamacare When Isuing Rebate Checks
Health insurers to pay $1.3 billion in rebates: study
White House website with Presidents bios
Judge deals setback to state unions on dues withdrawals
BBC US Election section (click on the map for Wisconsin page)
Wisconsin: DCCC Involved In Gubernatorial Recall
Wisconsin GOP Loses Senate Majority, After Recall-Targeted GOPer Resigns
Legislators file to run in new districts
Others won’t seek re-election
Obama Crushes Romney in Ivy League Campaign Donations
Calif. watchdog sees budget gap topping $17 billion
How California Unions Hijacked the Golden State
Has the Golden State gone bust?
California Cities Face Massive Budget Cuts, Default, Bankruptcy
New California Law Will Restrict Cities’ Access To Bankruptcy Under Chapter 9
Untouchable Pensions May Be Tested in California
Losses of factory jobs in California blamed on regulation
California companies fleeing the Golden State
California slipping toward bankruptcy, again (info about Redevelopment Agency fiasco)
