Just as they hid Savile’s abuses to keep a legend going and the whole edifice that was built up around him on the road the BBC does the same for Marx and the Left.
Peter Hitchen’s asks a question that the BBC never does…..
‘Sometimes I see a young person wearing a hammer and sickle badge, or some other trinket of Communist kitsch. And I say to him or her ‘would you wear a swastika? They look at me, baffled. I explain to them that the badge that they are wearing was also worn by guards in terrible, deliberately murderous concentration camps. They look at me blankly, or swear at me. Maybe one day I’ll get through. But I continue to be amazed at the way in which our educated classes – who most certainly know better – excuse the apologists of Stalin when they would never excuse the apologists of Hitler.’
The BBC itself has no such qualms about those who propagate the Communist ideology and the revolutionary imperatives that is their call to arms.
They do however have qualms about the Nazis….so much so that they have gone to the trouble of producing a ‘Warning From History’ that denounces the ‘Right’ for going ‘too far’ and no doubt ‘too fast’.
The title gives away the BBC’s intent….the programme is a highly political polemic with two targets….the Far Right and the Tory’s ‘austerity’ programme…such as that is.
The BBC has been running a narrative in several programmes that ‘austerity’ programmes will see the rise of the Far Right extremists and the imposition of the Fourth Reich.
It’s a consistent theme……one which Flander’s ‘Masters of Money’ continued.
It is worth noting the paradox that on the one hand the BBC are warning us about the Far Right, as said even producing a programme dedicated to saving us from it, but that in Flander’s programmes we have bearded professors allowed to come on and state that we must rise up and attack the Government, overturn the Establishment….they state we need a revolution, a violent revolution.
The BBC stirring up anger and trying to put ideas into people’s heads about ‘Revolution’?
The ‘Warning From History’ might also have another subtext…..
It opened with some of the horrors of Nazi rule, one of which was the ‘mechanical extermination of an entire people’.
However we weren’t actually told who they were. No mention of ‘Jews’….until a later curious exchange with a former Nazi from the era.
When the German troops came home from the Front in WWI on Germany’s surrender, apparently all the blame was heaped upon on Marxists and Jews……then an attempt to take over Germany by the Marxists was a Jewish plot as many of the Marxists were Jewish….cue photos of the ‘Jewish’ culprits…looking very ‘Jewish’.
The Nazi stated that it was only natural that they would be blamed and thereafter feelings run high against them in Germany….and hence the subsequent atrocities.
Just a thought but that was completely unchallenged by the programme and the Nazi’s statement was left hanging…as if, really, you know, it might be true…they brought it on themselves….maybe rumours of a Jewish conspiracy to take over the world are true….who knows..maybe that’s what Christianity is…maybe that’s why the BBC don’t like Christianity…Jesus was a Jew after all.
Not saying any in the BBC would encourage anti-Semitism but it’s just an impression I got….the tone was slightly wrong for me.
Imagine someone saying that about Muslims after 9/11 or 7/7….do you think the BBC would allow that or even allow the slightest possibility that the suggestion might have a grain of truth in it to be aired? Those so-called Muslims were ‘criminals’, ‘madmen’ or ‘perverters of Islam’…they are definitely not trying to take over the world and impose Islam on everyone!
The whole programme was supposed to be an analogy to be superimposed upon today’s politics and events and lessons learned from it.
However Germany was an exception….Austria, despite being in similar dire straits, did not produce its own Reich, nor did an America devastated by the Depression, nor did Britain plunge into a Third Reich type regime in the 30’s….Moseley got nowhere.
Rather than a warning it is no more than a Labour Party propaganda piece that paints a doom laden picture of violence and anarchy as a result of ‘austerity’ and the failure to ‘invest’ purely intended to suggest austerity will ruin us.
Have a look tonight….the BBC has another little prop for Labour’s Plan B.
Evan Davis, of course, is presenting a programme called ‘Built in Britain’ (8pm Tonight BBC2) that explores the lack of infrastructure in this country using an analysis of social and economic background to investigate whether we need more government spending on Infrastructure….or as the BBC puts it…’How we can tackle it.’
I wonder what his answer will be…and whether he will mention mass immigration as the main cause of the failure of infrastructure from roads, to schools, to hospitals, water and power shortages, and the public transport system….without the qualification of saying ‘immigration of course benefits us all enormously’?
I wonder what else the BBC is hiding to keep the show on the road, to keep their own pet political narratives running their way?
Is there a whole row of political ‘Savile’ cover ups just waiting to be brought to light?
The BBC’s coverage, or lack of, on Europe, immigration and Israel might be a start.
Why has the BBC not had its broadcasting license withdrawn over the Jimmy Saville affair?
It is a clear and organized cover up.
Are you aware, Alan, that ‘The Nazis: A Warning from History’ is a repeat of a series originally broadcast in 1997? It was written by Laurence Rees and Prof. Ian Kershaw and was considered a landmark series at the time.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Nazis:_A_Warning_from_History
“The Tory’s ‘austerity’ programme” was most definitely not one of their targets back in 1997.
You might want to seriously reconsider this post.
Curious that it should be repeated now.
Perhaps, as the program was produced to coincide with the Labour victory, it was designed to show how only ZaNuLieBor and Tony Bliar could be trusted to save the country from the evil Tories. What Alan obviously meant was that the BBC thought Thatcher was Hitler and Bliar was Churchill — or something like that.
Whatever it was, it was as clear a case of BBC bias as you could want — and certainly as compelling as anything else Alan’s unique view of the world bring us.
Confirmation bias any one?
I don’t know about that programming decision, but the halls of Broadcasting House were filled with empty champagne bottles after Blair’s victory. Evidence of an institutional bias, perhaps? Or do we pretend that was a magical one-off, illustrative of nothing?
1997? Wasn’t there an election then? Right v Left?
And why repeat it now?
and Marx wrote the Communist Manifesto in 1848 and yet…..
…but not 2012, and not made to attack the Tories over their austerity measures.
‘The Nazis: A Warning from History’ was a major series. Digital history channels have been repeating it for years. You were obviously unaware of it.
“A man must be big enough to admit his mistakes, smart enough to profit from them, and strong enough to correct them.”
(John C. Maxwell)
No…no election…but what was going on?
Oh yes…Labour’s Party Conference.
Just a coincidence of timing I’m sure.
Pedrhaps you should be big enough to reconsider and realise that not everyone is as honest and forthright as yourself and perhaps very little the BBC puts on air is done without a reason and a political spin.
Bravo Alan
Never, ever, ever let the facts get in the way. I salute your indefatigability (as someone once said).
Never mind that your post is complete nonsense and you obviously had no idea the programme was a repeat. Never mind all that, keep ploughing on.
Dear Mr Dandy;
Thank you for taking the time to post on this issue. I gather you are unhappy with Alan’s blog post ‘Savile Row’ and his subsequent attempts to deal with your dissatisfaction.
Impartiality is the cornerstone of our entire website and we ensure all people who post on here are aware of this to help us deliver fair and balanced coverage of all the themes and issues we address.
I can assure you, Alan is committed to honest unbiased blogging, and he and we would never knowingly mislead readers; accuracy and impartiality are extremely important to us and we don’t have anything to gain by weighting our coverage in a certain direction.
It remains that case that not all our readers look at events in the same way and there’s no one universal news agenda that applies to all.
Having considered your comments I think you will find that Alan’s post is actually far more nuanced that you appear to suggest and that your allegation that Alan “obviously had no idea the programme was a repeat” cannot be substantiated.
However, we are guided by feedback such as yours and your post will remain up here for others to consider. Once again thank you for taking the time to contact us on this matter.
Lol
Alan,
“If you are in a hole, stop digging”.
(Mole, ‘The Wind in the Willows’)
🙂
This series has been repeated several times on the channels dedicated to disinterring old programmes, and is a very good one.
However, if they are choosing to repeat this on the main channels of BBC, ie BBC 1 or 2, then I think Alan’s observations on its timing are probably pertinent.
Here’s a big however though: where is the even longer series – “Socialists, a warning from history”? I don’t recall the BBC making that one but surely for balance they must have done. Surely!
Although claiming the nazis policies are of the right is also bollocks as anone with a modicum of understanding coud work out for themselves.
alan what is this ? LOL
sounds like ….
a little bit of “hard cop – soft cop”
from a couple of kids sharing a computer. 😀 …
seeing as they re first to post, could it be 😀 awaiting the slightest opportunity
“Is there a whole row of political ‘Savile’ cover ups just waiting to be brought to light?”
I sincerely believe so and hope that Mr Savile’s depredations will be the flame that ignites the whole edifice that is the bbc. In my opinion, the organisation has a lot to answer for, though we don’t know what because they have been so sedulous in keeping it from our view. I believe it stinks from top to bottom and pray to my Christian God that the truth will be revealed for all to see and this vile construct is brought crashing to earth as Samson destroyed the temple.
Certainly the line of BBC employees appearing from the woodwork suggests the culture of ‘nothing to see here, moving on…’/’no one complained…’ / ‘no one noticed anything’ is easy to impose and/or hide behind when you are one of the most unaccountable organisations on the planet, ready to whip out a cabal of FoI exclusion lawyers at the drop of a question on what they actually get up to. Quite unique given who is tasked by compulsion with funding them.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/9591317/Jimmy-Saviles-toxic-legacy.html
I repeat my observation that all subjected to ‘expedited complaints procedures’ for raising concerns will be well versed in every response and technique the BBC is wheeling out, dropping and moving on to as their house of cards continues to collapse in the face of pure and simple fact and on record testimony, vs. arrogant ‘beliefs’ and the citing of ‘sources who say’, whilst briefing attack dogs to undermine any who pose a threat.
Trouble is, they appear to be needing to hire a few thousand more to handle the workload.
” ready to whip out a cabal of FoI exclusion lawyers at the drop of a question on what they actually get up to.”
I don’t understand why the INBBC didn’t immediately rush to Macaulay Culkins Legal team and get a super-injunction just like he did. I’m sure they had the brass neck to attempt to hide everything.
I’m sure there would be plenty of heart-rending, spine-chilling newsreel and interview material, backed by intensely emotional music (say,some Shostakovich) to make a series called ‘The Communists: a warning from history’.
When the Savile story first broke I recall the TV reporter, whose name I can’t recall, making much of the BBC’s statement that there was insufficient evidence, and ‘no records’, and thus it was not possible to call in the police. Even if you believe this, clearly this acknowledges they knew that something was going on.
The question has to be asked of the many who knew, ‘why did you do nothing’? Why did you collude? Why did you allow it?
All of us know that if someone is thought to be ‘up to no good’ in an organisation, and there were rumours, those ‘in charge’, would be duty bound to have a word, informally at first, with the person concerned. Surely criminal charges must be brought against individuals and the BBC itself. Savile’s relative ‘importance’ is no defence.
If there were only one paedophile who didn`t pay his taxes as he should have done, well that would keep the BBC in archive material for quite some time yet.
That the BBC is one corporate entity with the same rationale as our paedophile condoner, with a similarly lax approach to what is on his hard drive seems not to bother the BBC apologists above.
That we pay for its pornography seems not to bother them either-did Jacqui Smiffs husband pleasure himself in vain with our money then?
This programme may or may not have been repeated with cause, may or may not be good .
But this is an aimless controversy-our BBC apologists above need to keep their kindling dry for the firestorm that hopefully is coming the BBCs way.
1. It covered up for Savile.
2. It berated those tax scammers in the City, but created similar dodges for the likes of Toynbee, Monbiot…in much the same way as the Guardian does and did.
Answer THOSE charges out there in the critics section-THEN we`ll debate whether Kershaw gives us a better view that St Eric Hobsbawm or not.
You shaft the Catholic Church or Israel at your peril…or so I hope anyway…and though I despise the bankers who screwed us over, they don`t swill me in their lardarsed, smugfest of “morality” from their queasy pulpits like the f***in BBC…and its geldings,quislings and toadies.
Guardian subscribers and in good public funded jobs with an education…very cheaply bought, given their lazy reflex compliance.
‘However Germany was an exception….’
Between the wars there were other fascist (or similar) regimes in Austria, Spain, and Portugal. Most other European countries had a fascist parties of varying strength.
Alan watch the follow up ‘World War II Behind Closed Doors’ and tell me if you think Stalin is portrayed as anything other than a monster.
When you complain to the BBC you should keep a record of all your communications, because the bulletin of the BBC Trust Editorial Standards Committee’s findings will not be anything like your communications with the BBC. This is how you get the true background to BBC complaints in Mensa special interest group publications.
The real significance of the Saville thing is that it proves everything critics have ever said about the BBC:
“It lives in cultural bubble cut off from real life”: hey, when people in your organisation excuse child rape, you might want to think about breaking off the Domestos
“It’s too big and powerful”: plenty of people outside the organisation knew about Saville, but the BBC was able to smother them.
“There’s a culture of unaccountability”: Even know they’re bang to rights, they’re still coming out with Brownesq
Cut off in my prime! That should be Brownesque excuses about how society made them do it, it started in America and the dog ate their morals
Oh Lordy Alan you’ve reached new heights here. Jimmy Saville, through Marx to Stephanie Flanders and the Nazis.
“Just an impression I got …”
Sums the whole pointless blustering edifice of Biased bbc upperfectly.
Oi, Dim, mate, while you’re on…
got any pearls on the whole pointless blustering edifice that is the BBC?
Let me guess
Envy of the world
Radio 4 worth the licence fee alone
and…er… not the broadcasting arm of the One Naythun Labour Par’y
Mr Dandy, I have to thank my God that people like you exist. You are the unbelievers who populate the earth and will inhabit the fires of Hell. Me, I don’t care too much if you believe in Jesus Christ or if you don’t. Because we can only tell you what is in store for you and it’s for you to listen or not. Of course, you can always follow the satanic religion of islam and perhaps be spared a barbarous slaughter. But in the end you can’t evade God. Am I bothered? Well, yes because I want you to be saved; I don’t know you but I’d like to believe that you are a mortal being who is struggling to find the truth.
Because we can only tell you what is in store for you and it’s for you to listen or not.
Oh my god there is another one. Listening to the BBC means you are going to hell? WHo knew? Anyway thank you for sharing that utterly sane-sounding analysis. I am sure we all the more informed for it. Of course Earls Court already knows all that. You two should tour together.
It is worth pondering on that word “pointless” for a moment.
It is — but alas as per normal Wild went pinging off in a series of ever more feeble straw man arguments, none of which are based on what was said.
Apart from providing David Vance with a nice stream of income (he is on the radio more often than Giles Fraser — and that is saying something) what is the point of this site?
In a decade of tilting at windmills what has it achieved (apart from being an outlet for splenetic and impotent rage — oh and that bonkers fire and brimstone nonsense)?
Nothing. Not a thing. A decade of bilious rage and nothing to show for it. I would say that was pointless.
What is interesting is that Alan doesn’t have the integrity to admit he made a mistake. Says a lot about him and his moral courage.
PS. Bravo to RCE for the spoof reply. That was well done.
Nicked emus come judgement day you will have to answer to Jehovah god for what you have done.
If your name is not in the book of life you will suffer eternal damnation in the lake of fire.
‘Nothing. Not a thing.’
Odd. Because, at the very least this site seems to be on the watch list of those lovely folk at BBC complaints, to the extent they seemed upset enough at one of their quaint attempted blow-offs to write and get high-handed that their ‘secret’ exchanges were being shared here and lampooned.
I’d therefore classify that as ‘a thing’.
Which in flock-speak counts as a gotcha of epic proportion already.
So you are already sounding a bit like wee Dougie on Daily Politics with the only Tory in the village trying to get him to admit the inadmissable.
How’s that petard of yours feel flapping next to you? Again.
Oh, and if swooping in for a drive-by snark on anything but the topic at hand, maybe best not to make it rather clear that you could give a flying fig still for the possibility that some kids were abused and your heroic corporation did sod all about it except also go into crisis management self-protection mode, when the likes of this site failed to let it rest with worse dripping out daily under the pressure.
So your attempt not only has failed, but comes across as more than a little.. tacky.
And puts relative possessions of integrity well in context.
So, again, thank you for taking the hole those you would defend, and digging deeper. That would deserve a bravo too if it were not so sad.
I think they’ll be after a refund for that one. Mistakes have been made, but as we all await your next, we can be sure no lessons ever get learned when the system is so arrogantly unaccountable.
Well, as long as it remains so. I’d start shredding some files and deleting some hard drives in case things continue to unfold not necessarily to your advantage.
At least your fellow flockers had the sense to steer clear of this one.
Guest Who, you are truly the gift that keeps on giving.
This is a post written by Alan in which he tries to claim that a programme made in 1997 is somehow a subliminal attack on 2012 Tory policy. It has nothing to do with Jimmy Savile so try a bit harder and disentangle that confused muddle in your head, you will find it a lot easier.
It is notable that Alan has still not had the balls to admit he was wrong. I think we know the kind of person he is. (Actually we knew that anyway, this merely confirms his lack of integrity).
And for the umpteenth time I do not work for the BBC. I realise that boring things like facts normally get in the way — except on this site where they are of passing relevance — but once again try to hold that concept in your head at least until you get to the end of your post.
The only person round here being paid by the BBC is David Vance (and I am *sure* he has declared all of his income — failure to do so would be rank hypocrisy). And they say irony is dead.
I hope you are not a smoker. You build so many straw men that there is a serious risk of conflagration.
So in summary to help you out:
1. I do not, nor have I ever, been employed by the BBC.
2. This post is not about Jimmy Savile.
Got that?
Good.
Now run along.
‘Now run along’
What people choose to say can often prove the most damning.
That one will do nicely.
Oh… and, ‘Nuts’.
So I take it you have now worked out that I don’t work for the BBC? Can we be clear on that one at the very least?
If so then progress has been made.
But nice attempt at deflecting the post by concentrating on one tiny sentence. You are, of course, an expert at that. It is a “gift” shared by many on this site.
I suspect you take whatever you feel you can, where you can, as it suits.
But for sure, it is clear you don’t work for the BBC.
If perhaps not in the way you wish it to mean.
The tiny sentence quoted was yours in conclusion.
Not being able to deal with the consequences of your own creations appears more to be the gift possessed by you and those you have chosen to align with, so ably shared again.
Thank you.
And completely failing to grasp the point, constructing a millefeuille of strawmen, lack of discipline, confirmation bias, complete lack of understanding of the media, observation bias, non-sequiturs, unsubstantiated assetoric statements, and pure conjecture appear “more to be the gift possessed by you and those you have chosen to align with, so ably shared again.” Shared, I might add, on a daily basis for the last 10 years during which time you and this merry little band of malcontents have achieved exactly nothing except to line David Vance’s pocket with some holiday money.
But keep up the good work. I am sure it makes you all feel better and at least it keeps you off the streets.
Now run along.
‘Now run along.’
Again?
Repetition for effect?
Odd given you seemed unhappy to have your last attempt replayed.
And what’s defined by repeating the same thing over and over hoping for a different result?
Certainly coming back to a site you deem without point and which has no effect obsessively does seem to qualify.
And while saying something may make it real in the world of the BBC bubble, outside the gilded echo chamber a bit more than arrogance and entitlement are required to prevail.
Go on… 3rd time lucky? You know you want to.
You are kidding. I love this site. This is my favourite site. I use it in case studies too so maybe I have pushed a bit of traffic your way. Long may it go on — another decade at least I hope. This is like Nick Griffin appearing on Question TIme, the more he went on, the more and more damage he did. This site is the same (I wonder how many on here are BNP members?)
I don’t hope for a different result, I want more of the same. It is pure comedy gold.
But please carry on — in fact post more, especially Alan’s posts, those are the best. This one is priceless. And I hope Earls Court and his touring partner John in Cheshire can up the “fire and brimstone” stuff. That is always good for a laugh. More eternal lakes of fire I say.
The fact is that this site is a joke. But please change nothing about it and carry on as you are. It is a great joke — and the best part of it is that you don’t realise.
And so as not to disappoint:
Now run along.
Hmm… I might adopt that as my sign off.
Well, nothing if not predictable.
‘I love this site. This is my favourite site.’
So masochism can be added to the tally then?
‘The fact is that this site is a joke.
Repeat it often enough and I guess there is comfort to be had. Mind you, the last bloke who adhered to that was disabused eventually too. As a great (What? Who is to know? Could be a trucker called Trev claiming to be a middle aged lady, or a media professional who cites stuff in case histories claiming not to be who they say there are, or are not) person once wrote:
‘If, as you say, your figures are going up, then you are filling a need.’
So… at risk of another wee Dougiesque bout of dissembling, are the figures going up.. or not? And if the former, how ‘about right’ should folk take your latest assertion?
If defence has been the aim, you certainly are doing anything but working for the BBC.
In fact the contrarian parody is now reaching such a pitch I’m wondering if David hasn’t invented you to keep things ‘feisty’ and the numbers bubbling.
If so, given the parrot-like obsession with the income stream trotted out by default, whoever is controlling the Turing Machine is now faced with rather a dilemma. Can’t wait. A bit of ex-pram toy lobbing or robust language is the usual next step. Don’t disappoint.
‘The Nazis a Warning From History’ has not been shown on BBC channels for years – it is regularly on digital channels.
So why did the BBC decide to put it on during the Tory Conference? Why not wait until after the conference season?
Where is the programme on Soviet genocide?
Any ideas?
It is worth pondering on that word “pointless” for a moment.
Expressing an opinion is “pointless” for Jim Dandy.
For Jim Dandy criticism of the BBC is “pointless”.
According to Jim Dandy it is “pointless” to set up a website where people can discuss examples of BBC bias.
He has not the faintest comprehension of a free society – not even the tiniest little fragment of comprehension of how a free society works. If he did he would be against it.
No wonder people here assume he works for the BBC.
‘For Jim Dandy criticism of the BBC is “pointless”.’
Seems like the BBC has their own version of Kevin the Teenager, with about as extensive a repertoire. He’ll be claiming its’ ‘all sooo unfaaaaair’ next.
Meanwhile in other news, is this another right wing rag merely maintaining a fatwa against poor old Aunty?…
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/jimmy-savile-bbc-snub-david-1366691
Or is it a news medium that can see when the story still has a ‘point’, in the face of great efforts to ‘move on’ by powers unsuited to being held themselves to account.
At least actual integrity seems to have overcome any mutual back-scratching for the BBC keeping the calls for inquiries (the kind the BBC likes, anyway) firmly focussed on the NI stable.
The coupling of Savile type indulgences as granted by the BBC,…allied to the similar indulgences granted to the likes of Carr, Rusbridger and the like by selfsame “champeen of moral rectitude”(the BBC) really seems to have drawn the candid friends of this site out hasn`t it?
They continue to play the man and not the ball everytime…look here lads, whether its Ian Kershaw or Andy Kershaw is not the point…much as you`d like it to be!
The point is that the fearless defrocker of priests, the searchlight for Occupy has been doing exactly the same things as the Catholic Church and Stephen Hester might have done…and didn`t they feel the hot air of Beeboid blowhards.
Yet when it comes to themselves?…no thanks, we`d rather NOT have an enquiry if you don`t mind!
And that searchlight of ours turns to blind us all with technical jargon, with excuses and no admission that they`re a steaming pool of hypocrites.
So no matter WHAT the BBC does-or did-it`s little helpers will always come out with excuses or trivia.
Alan is right-this site is right-we concern ourselves with the direction of travel of the BBC…and we know how they`ll play their perversions…same as they always do!
This time though…it could bring the whol rotten edifice down…why should I fund sheltered accomodation for old paedos, or pay for their bent accountants…would we not all guilty of funding child pornography or money laundering?
The case of the BBC is far worse than that of Pete Townsend…sex offenders register for the BBC …NOW!
BBC = paedophiles & communists
“Jimmy Savile still frightens children at the BBC.
“The BBC still has a photograph of Sir Jimmy Savile given pride of place at BBC Television Centre in White City.”
By Tim Walker.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/9592436/Jimmy-Savile-still-frightens-children-at-the-BBC.html
Just like you all to know I’m a muslim in living in northern England and am one of 9 children and have countless cousins 🙂
Fantastic beat ! I wish to apprentice while you amend your site, how could i subscribe for a blog website? The account helped me a acceptable deal. I have been tiny bit familiar of this your broadcast offered shiny transparent concept