Peter Hitchens had an excellent article HERE the other day reflecting my own views on the BBC’s cheer-leading for Islamic supremacy aka Arab Spring…
“But isn’t it strange that the BBC, crammed as it with people who regard me as a monster for favouring capital punishment for the guilty, has become a roaring propaganda machine for liberal intervention in Arab countries, which will lead – has already led – to many innocents dying?
Even the BBC has now admitted it got ‘carried away’ over the ‘Arab Spring’, an event viewed here on this weblog with what seems to me to have been prescient doubt. And a few brave reporters are now bringing back news of just what a mess our exultant support of a rabble of fanatical Islamists and gangsters (who later showed their gratitude by wrecking a British war cemetery, devoting special attention to desecrating the graves of Jewish soldiers) has led to in poor Libya.
But do they learn? They do not. Now we are cranking up for intervention in Syria, too, somehow steering round the UN which is prevented by Russia and China from endorsing this. And anyone watching or listening to BBC outlets on Wednesday must surely have been struck by the coverage of the terrorist murder of several leading Syrian government figures in Damascus that morning. I think I am right in saying that the BBC generally disapproves of terrorist murder, and it puts on a long face to report it ( as it should). But on this occasion I sensed no moral disapproval at all. Indeed, I noticed an exultant tone, and something similar in the responses of politicians quoted, who more or less stated that this sort of thing would keep on happening until the Assad ‘regime’ ‘stepped down’. How do they know, by the way? Does this tell us anything about the relations of ‘The West’ with the Syrian Islamist rebels who we are misguidedly supporting, and who some Sunni Arab states are arming? This came a few days after the BBC had excitedly carried unconfirmed reports of a ‘massacre’ in Syria which as far as I know has not been shown to have taken place. It was a battle between rebels and government in which some people died, a wholly different thing.”
When he’s on it, he’s one of the only straight talking ones worth watching QuestionableTime for.
The BBC has been hysterically calling for holy Jihad since day one in this ‘Arab spring’; most probably because it sympathizes with Muslim extremists and wishes to see some type of ‘progressive’ Islam spread throughout the Western world.
I haven’t heard one, not one, expression of concern by the BBC for the large Christian community that resides (in genuine fear of their lives) within war-torn Syria… oh that’s right, I forgot… apart from Songs of Praise and gay/lesbian priests the BBC doesn’t care about traditional Christian values; it’s uncool and not progressive to do so within trendy metro-cool circles.
In this country, it’s OK for the Bible to be defaced as ‘art’ and for Jesus to be made fun of on ‘edgy’ comedy programs but one must never, EVER, criticize Muslims or holy Jihad.
This morning on Radio 4 just after 9am four journalists gave their ‘objective’ accounts of the turning moments in the attempt to liberate Syria. All reported atrocities from the Government with several reports from ‘on the spot’ Ahmed the Activist. Does anyone else share my belief that Ahmed the Activist is an actor regularly employed by the BBC to read his lines about governments in various Arab countries showing disregard for human life against a background of tape-recorded gunfire?
“But isn’t it strange..’
I think they prefer the term ‘unique’.