It seems the BBC really are entirely unaccountable…even when caught red handed they scheme to rewrite the history books and portray themselves as the wronged innocents.
The BBC has taken the opportunity of the 10th anniversary of the invasion of Iraq to settle old scores.
Con Coughlin in the Telegraph spells out the BBC’s problem with the truth:
The BBC just cannot accept that Iraq is a better place without Saddam Hussein
As is the case with the BBC’s institutional support for the global warming lobby, don’t expect it to provide anything approaching balanced coverage of the Iraq issue.
The organisation simply cannot accept the inconvenient truths about the real causes of the Iraq war.
The BBC lied about the 45 minute claim in the Iraq Dossier and was caught out and paid the price.
Ever since it has worked relentlessly to discredit as much as possible the intelligence that led to the war and the politicians who made the decisions.
This latest effort by Peter Taylor, the man who would like to negotiate with the Taliban, is more of the same…self serving ancient history rehashed and served up overheated and over excited:
Panorama: The Spies Who Fooled The World
Taylor says the Panorama team carried out a six month forensic investigation into the intelligence…..well there’s nothing new…..most was known by 2004 if not before.
The language Taylor uses is carefully chosen to ‘interpret’ the information in a way that is designed to portray events in a particulary bad light.
Look at this little gem:
Six months before the invasion, the then Prime Minister Tony Blair warned the country about the threat posed by Saddam Hussein’s weapons of mass destruction (WMD).
“The programme is not shut down,” he said. “It is up and running now.” Mr Blair used the intelligence on WMD to justify the war.
Taylor tells us that intelligence was all based on lies and fabrications by Iraqi defectors…however he is quite happy to accept the word of two of Saddam’s closest henchmen:
But not all the intelligence was wrong. Information from two highly-placed sources close to Saddam Hussein was correct.….oth said Iraq did not have any active WMD.
A BBC report liberally sprinkled with wishful thinking dust…what a surprise.
The premise for the war was always that Saddam had small stocks of WMD of some kind…and that given the chance he would definitely try to obtain more…and it was highly likely he would carry on as before attacking his own people or invading neighbouring countries….this is what the intelligence said and what the experts believed…and what they told the politicians.
The BBC can’t accept that firstly the intelligence community were actually right and that Saddam would be a major threat given a free hand.
The war was never about large scale stocks of WMD parked under a tarpaulin in the Iraqi desert somewhere…it was about future intentions, active programmes of research and development, and regime change.
This article from the Guardian in 2004 illustrates why Taylor and Co have wasted 6 months and a large amount of license fee money in a self indulgent attempt to blacken everyone else’s name and proclaim the BBC innocent:
‘….the government and intelligence services had essentially the same mindset on Iraq. That mindset was exemplified by Dr David Kelly himself, as the former UN inspector Scott Ritter wrote in these pages yesterday. Dr Kelly was a veteran, and indeed a hero, of the intelligence war against Saddam, and his view seems to have been the same as that of most such veterans: that Saddam almost certainly had some limited stocks of chemical and biological weapons, some capacity to restart production, some very limited means of delivery, and some hidden but very scaled down research programmes. The importance of these supposed stocks and programmes was not that they were that dangerous in themselves but that they were evidence of Saddam’s long term intentions. What most worried Dr Kelly was what Saddam might develop in the future.
This is the critical point: the intelligence assessment of Iraq was fundamentally on an assessment of Saddam’s character. In a sense he himself was the weapon of mass destruction, so obdurate was his will to possess such weapons assumed to be.
Much that Saddam did could have been expressly designed to produce the impression that he wished to preserve his programmes so that he could restart them on a full-scale basis as soon as he had the resources to do so.
We knew then and we know now that they believed he had some minor WMD holdings and expected to find them, or encounter them in battle. They were not lying when they said this, yet it was not the reason they went to war. If that reason was principally to do with weapons, it was to do with weapons not yet made, whose connection with the present was established only on the basis of an assumption about what was in Saddam’s mind.’
The BBC programme essentially blamed everyone involved with the deception except Blair and Straw. Their lack of curiosity and failure to properly assess the information must seem familiar to BBC types who demonstrated the same traits over Savile. Believe what you want to believe and hang the consequences, eh?
Let me get this straight. Are they saying that Saddam did not use chemical weapons on the Kurds ? Were all those dead bodies fake? They looked real to me, especially the mothers that were trying to cover the mouths of the babies to stop them inhailing.
I had a recent conversation with an Iraqi Kurd, working in a non-essential service job in one of the North-West Mill Towns, he told me that things had improved so much that life in the area he left is now better than where he is now and he would be returning soon.
“The BBC just cannot accept that Iraq is a better place without Saddam Hussein”
Is it? How many died in this better page yesterday?
The West replaced one hell with another. Hardly incorrect in pointing that out.
A stopped clock is right twice a day. And Colditz once a Blue Moon.
Blue Moon alert – I agree with you on this one Colditz in as much as one gang of psychpathic murderers is about the same as another gang of psychopathic murderers. And most of the regimes in that area, and their opponents (e.g. in Syria) could be described as such. However, Saddam Hussain did look to be a threat to the West and World Peace at the time (at least according to certain “impartial” organisations) so the war looked potentially justified.
The problem wasn’t the war and the toppling of Saddam, but the fact the military authorities were ham-strung by what to replace him with, after the war, by the same politicians who called for the war (e.g. Blair).
hey dirtbag coldtitz
what consequences would fit the bill for you for wrongly accusing someone of advocating the beheading of beeboids?
care to back up your shit by posting your name and address for delivery of the solicitor’s letter?
in fact
if the site team could forward me his IP address,I’ll look into contacting his provider with a view to taking legal action against him
I have a scrapbook that contains pictures of my grandfather when he was part of the British occupation authorities in late 1940s Germany. Rubble is a common background in these photos. Food shortages, a chronic lack of housing, millions of displaced people, the ethnic cleansing of German populations outside Germany, and yet things were better than under who had previously been in charge.
Complaints about violence in post-Saddam Iraq would work better if the BBC hadn’t just spent two weeks claiming that the epic murder rate in Uncle ‘Ugo Chavez’s socialist paradise was just proof that Caracas was lifey and vibrant.
And as for the Rainbow Nation…..
All I know is that Sonny and Cher are now free to kill each other, but before that, they both feared Saddam who killed in secret. But the main problem is that there are still to many Islamic people in Iraq.
The hell of Iraq today is the vile internicine warfare between Sunni and Shai. Of dear. We didn’t manage to stop it. We failed.
Coldtits, your mind holds quite a lot of empty space – a prime candidate for the bedroom tax I suspect.
BBC needs a Leveson type Royal Charter to stop abusing its power.
A Hannibal Lecter mask might be more appropriate…then let the giant pigs into the studio…
I really wish people would stop being drawn in to a false perspective by the left wing media and mindset about conclusions related to the Iraq war.
We have an attempt by tyrants and despots to use Islam as the excuse to attack and dominate the West and ultimately the whole world. We see the deadly attacks on a daily basis, over 20,550 since 9/11. Bill Clinton knew of this intent and threat while he was holding the reins and chose to ignore it, which ultimately led to 9/11. Saddam was a key player in wanting to be the leader of the Islamic world in this bid.
So considering this menace what would be a good way to tackle it? Appease and look the other way, or confront it?
Bush’s plan was first to take out Saddam, somebody who had it coming for a variety of reasons, and to send a message to the rest of the tyrants out there, that this is what’s coming to you if you keep messing with us.
[IMG]http://i49.tinypic.com/mqyrp.jpg[/IMG]
I’m a Celebrity, Get Me Out Of Here
Immediately the Islamic world began to back off. Most will remember Gaddafi who suddenly became ‘a good boy’ following the deposition of Saddam.
The only thing was to allow the rest of the despots to back off, without them needing to lose public face, Bush decided not to voice this intention out loud. That it would be clearly understood however, and save an all out attack on Islam.
However, our left wing idiot mindset decided to focus on the WMD and started to further empower Islamists who now used the ‘unjust’ attack on them to justify their ‘retaliation’.
So now we have a situation that an all out war is inevitable, at a cost of far greater lives than would have been if they had just been smart enough to keep their idiot mouths SHUT.
The BBC still hasn’t got the message.
They are too stupid, immoral, unethical, and crass to be allowed to continue.
they never did find saddams stockpile of wmd..i wonder where he hid them,,,in the desert…not in iran because he hated them,,,my guess is this,,,sadamm and president assad of syria were great buddies by all accounts,,, funny how the west are terrified of president assad using wmds against the fake syrian army of al qaeda and other assorted islamic extremists scumbags,,my guess is assad has got saddams wmd,,,,,iam sure of that
Remember hearing american military floating this at the time(of iraq war).Of course dismissed by BBC at time and did’nt put too much stead in it myself.But the panick over assads chemical stockpile brought it back to mind.
I have seen it dismissed again recently on basis that despite them both being ‘ba’athists’ they pesonaly disliked each other but I’m guessing sadam disliked bush more.I’m not likely to here anymore about this possibilty on BBC so further reading appreciated
Sorry didn’t see this thread hope you don’t I posted this on the main board:
So how many people have been following the bBC’s 10 year contrast of life in Iraq before and after Saddam. They bring a lot of interesting figures to the table which if looked at in the 2 dimensional snapshot the bBC offers you can only feel that Iraq is a right mess and that life would be a lot better if Saddam was still alive.
Iraq 10 years on: In numbers
Ten years after the US-led invasion of Iraq – how much has changed? We look at the numbers behind the country that is still emerging from conflict.
Please allow me to contrast what the bBC offers you with a few facts they somewhat left out:
ECONOMY
Iraq is the world’s third largest oil exporter, behind Saudi Arabia and Russia, and is expected to produce 3.6 million barrels of oil per day during 2013. Output before the US-led invasion was about 2.8 million barrels a day. The country stands to earn almost $5 trillion in revenues from oil export by 2035, an average of $200bn a year, according to the International Energy Agency (IEA).
So according to the bBc, Iraq is producing more Oil today than it did under Saddam in 2003. Yet for all that wealth the graph the bBC shows a steep fall in 2011 The graph they use is from the Brooking institute so being the anal bastard I am I popped over to their website and guess what I can find that graph, but I did find the figures they build that graph from and in 2003, Iraq earned $5 billion from Oil sales in 2012 they earned $45 billion and that peek in 2011 that earned them a one off $85 billion. Have a look yourself its on Page 9 I don’t know why the bBC have included nominal GDP seeing as it doesn’t mean sweet FA other than giving the impression that Iraq isn’t doing as good as it should be Brookings have a graph of sorts but they keeps theirs direct to the point.
Click to access index201207.pdf
Electricity
Before 2003, Baghdad is reported to have enjoyed 16-24 hours of electricity per day, while the rest of the country had about four to eight hours. The average household now receives just eight hours of electricity through the public network,/i>
So according to the bBc, the poor Iraqi people had a better electricity supply when Saddam was in power. But Brookings say different (Page 10)Prewar (2003)Baghdad received 16-24 hours and Nationwide districts received 4-8 hours. The last figures that Brookings have is for March 2010 and there they quote 19.5 hours a day for Baghdad and 18.4 Nationwide. Not only that but a check on wiki informs me that demand in June 2003 was 6400 MW in 2010 the demand was 14,000MW. Another check tells me that the problem in Iraq isn’t down to power production, but rather down to the very poor state of the distribution network. Finally as of April 2013, Iraq will have 24 hours a day electricity.
Cars
Private car ownership has fallen while the number of people with bikes or motorbikes has increased.
I did a little math here, you see in 2004 the Iraqi population was just under 27 Million and in 2011 it was just under 33 Million Now using the percentages the bBC quotes for Car ownership (taking into account there are 6 million extra people who cannot drive) and while the bBC is correct the actual figure is 33 thousand less. The really interesting thing about the bBC’s article is it uses 2004 and 2002 as its datum. When I say intresting is that the bBC knocked out something similar in 2010 about Iraq and here is what it had to say about Car ownership then:
“The UN reported in 2004 that car ownership had doubled since 2003,
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-11095920
Part 2
REFUGEES AND DISPLACED
Almost 2.7 million Iraqis have been forced from their homes by the turmoil and violence – half becoming refugees outside Iraq, while others have fled their homes but stayed in the country. The conflict in neighbouring Syria has forced thousands of Iraqis to return home alongside thousands of Syrians fleeing the fighting. Many are living in camps and settlements, and relying on humanitarian aid.Iraqis are still seeking asylum in their tens of thousands – with 23,743 applying in 2011, mainly to European countries.
Wow, the refugee problem was really made worse by the invasion and the bBC gives you figures from 2006 onwards for asylum applications worldwide. Why in 2006 22 thousand people left Iraq seeking a better life elsewhere. Here is a UN document which lists how many Iraqi people sought asylum in only the worlds industrialised nations (37 countries) from 1991 to 2002. In the 3 years before the invasion 47K in 2000,50k in 2001,51k in 2002. Makes you wonder why the bBC started at 2006.
Click to access 3e79b00b9.pdf
HUMAN DEVELOPMENT
Iraq ranks lower than comparable Arab states of its size and population in a number of areas, according to the UN’s latest Human Development Report… In terms of gender equality, Iraq ranks 120 out of 148 countries. In Iraq, 25.2% of parliamentary seats are held by women
Did you know if you type in Iraqi Population into google it brings up a graph. Also to the left of that is an index of many subjects one of which is:
Proportion of seats held by women in national parliaments
And you know, the bBC is right only 25.2% of seats in national parliament are held by women. However when compared to the rest of the Middle East, Iraq is somewhat a leader.
Egypt with a much larger population has 2%, Iran has 3.1 %, Israel has 20%,Jordon has 10.8%,Kuwait has 6.3%,Lebanon has3.1%, Libya has 16%,Morroco has 17%, in fact only 2 countries have a higher proportion of women than Iraq, Algeria at 31.6% and Tunisia at26.7%.
I’m not saying life for women is great for women in Iraq, but the picture the bBC gives you is somewhat incorrect
The bBC, the Traitors within our midst
I remember at the time of the invasion, the only positive scene the BBC showed intentionally, was when the Iraqis were pulling down Saddam’s statue. One of the men said joyfully how much he thanked the Western forces for ‘opening their eyes’.
From the little I saw of yesterday’s programme, but knowing what I do of the BBC, I doubt they decided to show that scene again
As the EU is one of the BBC’s paymasters, and as the EU is run by France and Germany, it doesn’t surprise me that the BBC have always opposed Iraqi regime change.
When Saddam fell, his government’s procurement contracts were cancelled. France and Germany had been the main beneficiaries of these deals (in fact he had even bought poison gas from Hitler’s old supplier).
And on top of that Chirac had been bought with oil-for-food money, adding to EU/BBC vitriol.
But it’s a pity that the corporation wasn’t brave enough to expose BP, who had earlier funded Azerbaijan’s oil war against Armenia over the Nagorno-Karabakh enclave.
Could this be because Lord Simon of Highbury, BP’s then chief, is a big cheese in the Labour Party? Under Blair the company and Number 10 were always swapping staff – and I don’t just mean his old squeeze, Anji Hunter.
BP is big enough to own both Number 10 and the White House, itself being 40% UK and 40% US owned. It’s done very well out of Iraqi regime change, and I suspect put in a good word for Blair when JP Morgan-Chase were looking for an Iraq advisor.
For INBBC to continually censor:-
“UK police foil major jihad terror attack on the scale of 7/7 every year”
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2013/03/uk-police-foil-major-jihad-terror-attack-on-the-scale-of-77-every-year.html