As mentioned on another thread, BBC’s “Today” will have a new presenter in the autumn. Her name is Mishal Husain. Who is she? Well, last November, she was the one implying that not enough Israelis had been killed by “home-made contraptions” I am sure she will fit in so well. BBC Watch has the goodies here.
I’m puzzled as to why Mishal Husain is being described as ‘new’ in several places on this site.
She might be ‘new’ to Radio 4 but she is a well know newsreader/presenter on BBC TV. Maybe she has become lost in the forest of female asian presenters that are over-represented on UK TV. Pretty much in the same way that one could be led to believe that Sport is now an exclusive female activity judging by the proportion of ‘on screen’ reporters.
“Pretty much in the same way that one could be led to believe that Sport is now an exclusive female activity judging by the proportion of ‘on screen’ reporters.”
How can you say that?
Match of the Day. The Football League Show. Final Score (Gabby Logan has now left, replaced by Jason Mohammad). Football Focus. Fighting Talk. Kicking Off. Test Match Special. All overwhelmingly male.
Wimbledon’s coverage is fronted by Sue Barker, which is perfectly reasonable in a tournament in which the male and female competitions are given about equal prominence. Clare Balding is a very good broadcaster, ditto Ellie Oldroyd.
Or are women not supposed to present sports shows?
She ticks all of the politically correct ethnic diversity boxes at BBC HQ. The BBC seem incapable of appointing people solely on merit: there always has to be the ethnic minority agenda. This really is the crux of the problem. The BBC claims to be an impartial news corporation but, in reality, it’s one of the most ideologically-infused, politically motivated machines in the world. Most worrying of all, though, is its revolting sycophancy towards Islam.
The BBC seem incapable of appointing people solely on merit: there always has to be the ethnic minority agenda.
No evidence that that’s actually what happened here, of course. She’s not white and male, so of course there’s another agenda at work. Anybody’d think you believed that women and/or ethnic minority people can’t advance on their own merit.
It’s that sort of blinkered thinking – well, thinking is probably giving it too much credit – that’s easy to label as sexist, misogynistic racism. But then, if it walks like a duck…
There’s a massive difference between discrimination and criticisms of a contrived agenda to engineer a reality that is not representative of this nation’s demographic. Now, do you believe that the BBC doesn’t have a ideological agenda to promote more ethnic minorities, women and gay candidates?
‘Persona non grata’ – where have you been for the last fifteen years? Please, ply us not, man, with your cries of ignorance over the Left’s equality, diversity and multiculturalist agenda to undermine this nation’s identity. Pray, don’t set such an affront to my intelligence.
Except the BBC have made her being a woman and a muslim an issue themselves.
‘Good news all round’ apparently
“Anybody’d think you believed that women and/or ethnic minority people can’t advance on their own merit”
Well clearly bourgeois liberals don’t think so (if the think at all) or they wouldn’t, like the BBC, promote ‘affirmative action’ would they?
‘Tears of the white man’ and all that
Persona non grata, I’d actually say that, having seen Husain occasionally on BBC World News and on some other show (which I forget at the moment), there is some merit to her elevation to Today. From what I’ve seen, although I admit it’s not a lot, she’s not your average dope who can’t work without a teleprompter or producer feeding questions and responses in her ear. Much better than Stage Performer Maitlis, for example.
However, when the announcement of her promotion focuses on her Identity Trumps characteristics, anybody’d think we were meant to understand that’s what’s most important. If they just announced her promotion, explained her merits, and didn’t say a single word about anything else (mentioning the historic diversity triumph at all can seem like shoving the ticked boxes in everyone’s face), you’d have much more of a case to dismiss the concerns expressed here.
The announcement of her new role did not focus on her “identity trumps” characteristics as you put it. It concentrates on her journalistic career. Tony Hall’s statement adds that he’s glad there’s another female voice within the Today presenting team, but it’s clear that’s seen as an ancillary benefit.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/mediacentre/latestnews/2013/mishal-husain-today.html
But hey. It’s not as if the white male underachievers – the ones who instinctively jerk their knees as soon as a woman or a non-white person achieves some success – need any excuse to stamp their foot and proclaim it’s not fair.
BBC Director-General Tony Hall said: “It is such great news that Mishal will be joining the Today programme. She is a first rate journalist who will be an excellent addition to what is already a very strong team. I am also particularly pleased that her appointment means there will be another female voice on the programme, which I believe is extremely important.”
Seems pretty high up the list of reasons to me.
As I said, it’s clear that it’s seen as an ancillary benefit that Today will have more than just one female presenter. But the emphasis has been on her experience as a journalist.
Whereas the kneejerk complainers seem to assume that a woman and/or a person from an ethnic minority (or a gay man, as happened – continues to happen – on this site wrt Evan Davies) must have been appointed for that reason, and that alone. And then get all huffy if people dare to suggest they’re projecting their own prejudices onto situations.
And her desire to see a few more Israelis murdered before she thinks they have grounds to complain about Hamas’ ‘home made rockets’? BBC partiality in no danger with Mishal.
“It’s not as if the white male underachievers – the ones who instinctively jerk their knees as soon as a woman or a non-white person achieves some success – need any excuse to stamp their foot and proclaim it’s not fair.” –
What a smug and supercilious comment that is. If you really accept that there is not a minority ethnic or gender agenda going on – not just in the BBC – but in many facets of modern life, then I’m afraid you’re not worth debating with. For goodness sakes, the former DG and many, many others who’ve worked at the BBC (not including the many independent reports) have all admitted that a huge Left-wing cultural bias pervades its walls, a bias that promotes feminism, lesbian, gay and transgender rights and those of ethnic minorities.
Now, I have zero problem with anyone getting to where they should be on merit alone – you could be a one legged ethnic minority Muslim for all I care – BUT I do have a problem with social engineering and subliminal indoctrination aimed at portraying a utopian reality which is incongruous with reality.
….and which sustains a certain agenda.
Persona non grata, ad hominem attacks add nothing to your argument, and indeed betray its weakness.
“Particularly pleased”….”extremely important”. You will recall I said that there should be zero mention of her diversity cred. Here the DG is making it more substantial than your belittling “ancillary” description. We can play games if you like and pretend you meant that it was mentioned after, in addition to Husain’s actual merits, but then you’ll have to write to the sub editor who seemed to agree with people here and not you that that “ancillary” bit was important enough to include in the featured quote on the side, and inform him/her of the error.
The blurb for the segment of the Media Show celebrating Husain’s promotion seems to be focused on gender as well. You should inform them of the error. Sure, it’s a very minor program, preaching to the choir and not meant to convince or even be heard by the majority of the public. But it’s a full segment on an “ancillary” factor. If this is meant to pander to the women’s-issues audience, to give women a chance for some pride that one of their own is achieving great heights, put it on Women’s Hour. Nobody will care, and it won’t give the appearance of celebrating a characteristic other than merit.
It also gives the unsightly appearance of the BBC patting itself on the back for doing this. If merit is the only reason for Husain’s promotion, this detracts from it. It’s not fully meritocratic so long as other characteristics are brought into the equation. If you want people to think it’s based on merit alone, don’t say that gender is extremely important. It does seem as if the BBC thinks it’s important, and wants everyone else to think so as well.
Now, let me repeat: they shouldn’t mention gender or race or religion at all. At all. If people like you are so convinced that the unwashed masses out there are going to react this way, why give them fodder? It’s foolish, unless the Beeboids do feel it’s important to parade the ticked boxes around.
I believe it’s fair to say, based on your sneer and attitude, that you believe people here are bigots, so let’s continue with that in mind. You don’t educate people about “the other” by telling them that “the otherness” is important or beneficial. Let merit speak for itself. If she does a decent job, most people will forget all about what you describe as their initial knee-jerk reaction.
If she does a decent job, most people will forget all about what you describe as their initial knee-jerk reaction.
Biased BBC is (fortunately, in the main) far from being “most people”. Most people won’t assume she’s been recruited solely because of anything other than her ability as an interviewer and presenter. That doesn’t stop Biased BBC bemoaning her appointment without anything to back that up other than pompous supposition.
Mishal Husain has been working as a journalist since 1996, and still you get the same old clichés about her ethinicity and her gender in the most disparaging and insulting tones from this site. How long will she have to work on the Today programme for you and your kind to stop making such assumptions?
The quick answer is never. Leopards don’t change their spots.
Maybe if the BBC didn’t make such a fuss about gender and ethnicity, people would be less inclined to think it was important.
Your smear of the many readers and commenters of this blog based on a handful of comments is noted. No prejudice on your end or anything, right?
Still, at least it keeps you from having to address the issue of that anti-Israel interview, eh? Your moral superiority is more important than real issues of biased journalism.
Your smear of the many readers and commenters of this blog based on a handful of comments is noted
It’s not just today, though, is it? It’s not a “handful of comments”. It’s consistent, persistent, day in, day out. It’s what Biased BBC thrives on.
Back in May, ‘Deborah’ said that she wanted people to be judged on merit – but didn’t extend that courtesy to Mishal Husain:
I too am fed up for calls on the BBC for more women, older women, muslim women (I think that is how we got Mishel Hussein as a newsreader)
So that’s the viewpoint on display in a nutshell. Well say that everyone should earn their role on merit. But if you’re a woman or belong to an ethnic minority, we’ll just assume you didn’t.
Yeah, the BBC’s constant trumpeting that they do it has no bearing on any of this.
Persona non grata – I prefer my name not to be taken in vain.
Evidence in the paper of choice for the majority of Beeboids in this article
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2013/jul/16/mishal-husain-bbc-radio-4-today
paragraph 2 – now why do we need comment that Mishal is female and that she is the first Asian presenter – if she was chosen on merit neither her sex or her origin needed to be commented on; ‘the new voice on the Today programme’ would have sufficed.
Persona non grata – I prefer my name not to be taken in vain.
I prefer people to be consistent and honest. You want people to be taken on merit, but your assumptions spoke otherwise. Just as, in that same post, you questioned whether someone should have been interviewed in a gardening programme because they were black. You questioned their inclusion only on their skin colour.
now why do we need comment that Mishal is female and that she is the first Asian presenter – if she was chosen on merit neither her sex or her origin needed to be commented on;
It appears that some people just have to have basic concepts spelled out for them.
Commentary on what Husain’s appointment means for the overall make-up of the presenting team is not the same as evidence that she was chosen for that basis. It’d be like saying Margaret Thatcher only got where she was through positive discrimination, purely because people had talked about how she became the country’s first female PM.
Nobody who claims Husain was chosen for reasons other than her presenting and journalistic experience has proved a shred of evidence any stronger than “because I said so”.
‘Biased BBC is (fortunately, in the main) far from being “most people”. ‘
On the contrary – Biased BBC seems to reflect the views of most people when it comes to the EU, immigration, climate change, welfare, energy, the economy and, well, just about any other major issue you can think of.
Obviously Persona non Grata has never heard of “Affirmative Action” and “Positive Discrimination” devised by the Left. An racially insulting concept which infers that black or brown skinned people cannot achieve anything on their own merits without the help of white guilt-ridden liberals. So PnG, what are your thoughts on the pressure on organisations to lower entry standards and educational qualifications for black or Asian candidates to enable them to qualify for a job or post? Isn’t that the Left presuming that black candidates have lower intellectual abilities? Sounds a bit racialist to me.
There’s a splendid phrase for this:
“The Racism of Low Expectation”
Do you have any evidence that affirmative action in any form was used here?
An racially insulting concept which infers that black or brown skinned people cannot achieve anything on their own merits without the help of white guilt-ridden liberals.
A typically fictional description. Do you actually know anything about this topic, or are you just repeating the same old mantras that people who should know better use to provoke a Pavlovian response in not-very-bright white men with chips on their shoulder?
PnG, do keep up! I never alleged Affirmative Action was used in this case. Try not to deflect my question.
I’ll ask again – what are your thoughts about the pressure put on organisations and other employers to lower entry standards for prospective black andother ethnic minorities in order to give them a better chance of employment? Doesn’t that pressure have an insulting built-in presumption that said black and other ethnic minorities are educationally and intellectually deficient? That presumption by the left smacks of racialism.
Now answer the question!
Well put Alex
Who cares. I never listen to Today. A morning should be a quiet time not a time to listen to propaganda.
I still listen to the Today program – but I keep my high blood pressure pills close to hand.
I used to listen to it for fair and balanced analysis of world news events – but they don’t do that these days.
Ever since they were hauled over the coals for the “David Kelley” incident they have become unapologetic labour lickspittles.
If there were an alternative voice on terrestrial radio I would listen to that – but the BBC has a monopoly on the airwaves.
Neither do I, but we all have to pay for it anyhow whether we watch BBC or not.
I see no reason why we cant pay for the channels we watch. Modern TVs have several USB sockets, so a dongle can be inserted, and they also have ethernet and WiFI, so one can pay for the channels online.
At least Evan Davies will no longer be the most feminine one on there.
In what way is Evan Davies feminine
I think there might be something wrong with this site. If I post under my name, posts are accepted but don’t appear. If I become just the one Stable they appear. How very odd…
I certainly welcome your posts, James. I welcome the proof that Lefties are just as bigoted in their views as they accuse “right-wingers” of being.
Thank you – glad to be of service. Maybe you could explain in what way Evan Davies is feminine
I didn’t make that statement about Davies, James, and I can’t speak on behalf of the poster who made it. I’m sure he had his reasons.
Evan is good with colours and light on his feet.
I think it might be something to with the fact that Evan is gay. Nothing libellous here. Just stating fact.
He is, but in what way does that make him feminine? I don’t think the poster understands the concepts of either homosexuality or femininity.
And it is no libel to say someone is gay, especially when it is true.
“He is, but in what way does that make him feminine?”
Yes, where an earth did the stereotype that gay men can be effeminate come from?
‘Maybe you could explain in what way Evan Davies is feminine’.
He giggles like a giddy schoolgirl – is that enough? Personally I have no problem with that, it can be quite disarming, but in the middle of a serious interview it’s annoyingly unprofessional and, on most occasions, used in a biased way.
Look at the video, her eyes are a flame with the hate of Jihad.
‘Well that’s your view… but we’re trying to bring this story to our audiences around the world….’
Says it all really. No matter what the facts the BBC’s Arab audiences want an anti-Israel narrative and the Licence Fee funded broadcaster is most keen to let them have it.
how many Israellis have died … that is important?
read … to those jordanian arabs martyrs count, body count matter, without mass murder failure … absurd
i m trying to give homemade contraptions (rockets) a break here, i m going to smirk about people running for their lives, it is important that i convey the (propaganda narrative) information to our viewers worldwide.
ooohhh! yes! … she ll fit right in.
It’s important to the BBC and to Israel-haters. The ghoulish Body Count Narrative is extremely important, and Husain’s anger shows it. She’s just acting like every other Beeboid on this issue, her religion aside.
We’ve been hearing this for years and years. The idea is that X-amount of Jews need to die before Israel is permitted to retaliate. Nobody ever has the balls to tell me exactly how many need to die first, but the bottom line is that any retaliation is wrong until Jews die.
As you can know see Hamas now has it’s own spokesperson safely embedded at the bBBC. And you f*****G pay.
If this site is accusing a member of staff of the BBC of being a member of a terrorist organisation it had better either have proof, or else a good legal team. This is a libel. Since this board is moderated (ie posts are deleted or edited) then it has assumed responsibility for content of posts.
Baloney. It’s clearly meant as an angry joke.
You think! In the context of the lead post and many of the subsequent comments I do not consider that it is an “angry joke”.
According to the BBC Hamas isn’t a terrorist organisation but the democratically elected government of Gaza.
Or is Hamas only a terrorist organisation when it suits Albaman and Mr. Stables?
Profile: Hamas Palestinian movement
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-13331522
Well under libel law it is what is written, not what is intended, that matters. That is an accusation that a member of the BBC is part of a terrorist organisation.
Other posts have been deleted so you can’t use a common carrier argument.
If I were you I would take it down.
Nonsense. You really need to spend your righteous energy on larger, more important sites with much more traffic.
Good that an American, living in America, is such an expert on defamation.
Accusing her of being a member of a terrorist organisation is likely to cause serious harm to her reputation, that is a defamation.
I am not the one who is going to be sued, nor indeed are you.
Harm her reputation…her reputation as what exactly? Yet another lefty ethnic woman batting for The Left? She does have a reputation but its not one of being “fair and balanced”
James, why spend the righteous effort here and not on Guido’s blog, for example? Surely that has a much larger readership and can really harm her reputation. Or is there some particular reason this obscure little site deserves special scrutiny?
You are more in need of it
Not from the likes of you, James – go clean out your own stable.
Is Steve Cooke’s post at 11.02 pm on July 17th on the Open Post also an “angry joke”?
No, don’t be a smart ass. But as you can see others have already called him on it, and now everyone knows for the next time he makes a comment.
Albaman , how come you didn’t call “Steve Cooke” out on his original post? You just used your post as an excuse to attack this site. No mention of the dubious content of Cooke’s post.
Does your mouth have enough room to contain both your feet?
Who said “member”. Supporter, chearleader, fan, apologist. If the cap/hijab/niquab fits, wear it.
Given Ms Husains’s own words in the above video –
“Well that’s your view… but we’re trying to bring this story to our audiences around the world….”
– the claim that she’s acted as a ‘spokesperson’ for a given political body is entirely fair and thus not actionable under UK libel law.
An attempt at a response.
To be clear – are you saying (on the basis of this video) that Husain wants more Israelis to die?
Forgive me, I’m no expert on this issue.
What else do you expect from a Muslim
If she is a Muslim she’s not a very strict or a practicing one! She can’t even be bothered to cover her hair!
Don’t forget that there is an ocean of difference between Islam and Muslims, who seem to believe it’s a pick and choose religion. They follow some parts but ignore others.
A good example is the Muslim off licence owner, where I often ask what a bottle of wine tastes like. The reply is always the same, that he is a Muslim & doesn’t drink, But say I selling alcohol is twice as bad as drinking it, so you might as well drink it as well!
Some Muslims might have been brought up in a Muslim home and believe non of it, but the penalty for saying or acting on this is clear, apostasy means death, and a third of British Muslims believe this should be carried out.
I don’t know her background, but it is clear that she does not like Israelis, has no sympathy for people described as living in fear during rocket attacks. She is an appalling interviewer, just repeating the same question and ignoring the points raised by the person she is interviewing. How can she possibly be allowed to conduct interviews on sensitive and complex matters of foreign policy?
Tis Taqiya.
The BBC seems to think that diversity means having more women, Asians, Muslims, gays and people with disability. This is ok, to an extent, but it focuses on the medium (presenters, interviewers, newsreaders, etc) as you might expect from a rather self-absorbed broadcaster. What about the diversity of the actual message?
What the BBC needs to do is to make the message more diverse, and not just the medium. So, for example, by all means attack Mr Osborne but do this from the other side of the debate sometimes, e.g. ask him why he is not cutting far enough and fast enough. On man-made global warming, ask why the increased CO2 emissions of China alone are not causing the supposed phenomenon to accelerate. The BBC does seem to be giving more weight to Euro-sceptic views and we need more of this.
Diversity means we all look different but we all think the same.
there seems to alot of swapping about betreen the bbc,channel 4 and itv presenters just lately,mishal husseins appointment reeks of tokenism in the quest for diversity down at bbc hq.cant wait till mishal hussein interviews nigel farage.
Presenter Mishal Husain is to join BBC Radio 4’s flagship news and current affairs programme Today, director general Tony Hall has <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-23326495"announced.
Lord Hall said having another woman on the line-up was “extremely important”. OTOH It was announced in the entertainment section, so often the BBC’s way to say, Not very important
Lord Hall said having another woman on the line-up was “extremely important”.
Because the studios getting in a right mess, and there’s no one to make the coffee for the boys!
You could argue her sex and ethnic background are irrelevant. If she was a fifty-something, white male her reports and biases would be exactly the same to warrant a position on Today.
She used to call herself Mishal Husen when first on the World service but strangely changed the pronunciation to Mishal Husain when she became better known.
I disliked her from the first time I saw her – arrogant, sneering, superciliou – and running her own agenda. And I have seen more than one appalling interview where she seemed to be displaying a kneejerk hatred of Israel and apologism for terrorism.
She will fit in well at the Today programme.
Less of the unctious James Naughtie is good – but this woman clearly represents a tiny minority of the UK population and her sneaky agenda should not be given such prominence. Ideally she should be debarred as parti pris from any interviews that concern the existential jihadism we face from he co-religionists. But no doubt the BBC will take the opposite view.
But I need not get steamed up too much. Like many others – I avoid most of the Today programme most days, it is now irredeemably just the broadcast version of the Guardian.
I seem to recall her being in a BBC programme where “celebrities” were given a rescue dog to train to run on an agility course. They had a panel of experts in canine behaviour who judged the celebs on how successful they’d been dandling the dogs.
I always thought Muslims were taught that dogs were “unclean” and should be avoided at all costs.
So she obviously picks and chooses which bits of Islam she wants to adhere to. Mind you, a hatred of Israel seems to be almost universal among Muslims of whatever sect they belong to.
You mean someone who isn’t a fundamentalist, Sharia-demanding, Mohammedan? Imagine that. One might be tempted to think not all of them were religious extremists. I hope nobody thinks that there might some Jews who pick and choose how observant they are, and that not all of them are beardy black hats, with the women wearing wigs and/or headscarves. Who knows where that train of thought might lead?
Poor Mishal, a classic example of beauty being only skin deep.
Well at least with her it got that far
Beauty comes from within so the skin is the last place it erupts. But then you wouldn’t know that would you?
I think your model is a bit flawed. If it comes from within and in her case it has reached her skin, then unless within means the subcutaneous level, she is beautiful to her core. Unless you are suggesting it started within, and migrated outwards to her skin.
I think you need to think again about your model on the origin of beauty.
But then you wouldn’t know that would you?
Alas not. By no stretch of the imagination could I describe myself as beautiful. What about you? Or do other things erupt on your skin?
“The Rottweiler vs Dishy Mishy. Welcome to Radio 4’s version of
the Rumble in the Jungle…”
By QUENTIN LETTS.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2367568/QUENTIN-LETTS-The-Rottweiler-vs-Dishy-Mishy-Welcome-Radio-4s-version-Rumble-Jungle-.html
Mishal Hussain gets ‘Today’ job:
she’s rated as one of the most powerful Muslim women in UK, as INBBC knows.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/gallery/2009/mar/25/muslim-women-power-list?picture=345016465
Last year, she did the narration to an INBBC programme extolling the (rare) event of three British 19th century converts to Islam. Note the title of programme:-
“Great British Islam”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01l1yl6
There is no indication that Muslim Ms Husain will do follow up programmes on, e.g.:-
1.) the many converts to Islam who have become murdering Islamic jihadists;
See:-
“Converts to Islam”
http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Converts_to_Islam
2.) the Islamic jihadists who invaded Britain to enslave British men, women and children-
“White Gold: The Extraordinary Story of Thomas Pellow and North Africa’s One Million European Slaves”
By Giles Milton.
The continuing Islamisation of INBBC.
“Fun, and indispensable, learning.”
By Hugh Fitzgerald. (2008.)
[Excerpt]:-
“Giles Milton’s book White Gold focuses on one Cornishman, Thomas Pellow, who was seized and brought back to Morocco in the mid-18th century. There the vast palace complex of Moulay Ismail, which Western tourists come to admire, was built on the sites of, and making use of the stone taken from, the prior non-Muslim structures. So many of the so-called ‘wonders of Muslim architecture’ were built in this way, including the celebrated Omayyad Mosque in Damascus, which is on the site of, and makes use of, the St. John the Baptist Church that was previously on the same site. And who do you think built the Taj Mahal? Muslim soldiers, or enslaved Hindus?
“When you begin, as many Infidels have, to study Islam, and then extend your study beyond the texts, and then add the behavior of Muslims today, and then go still further and begin to study the history of Islamic conquest, and the Islamic exaggerated claims to achievement, and the Islamic treatment of all non-Muslims subjugated by Muslims and Muslim rule, all sorts of the dark past become necessarily illuminated.”
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2008/06/fitzgerald-fun-and-indispensable-learning.html#more
Not on the reading list at INBBC’s CoJo-
http://markhumphrys.com/islam.html
For Muslim, Ms Husain:-
“Florida convert to Islam indicted for jihad terror plot”
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2013/07/florida-convert-to-islam-indicted-for-jihad-terror-plot.html
Muslim Ms Husein: purveyor of euphemisms and censorship on Islam.
INBBC’s Islamic propagandist, Ms Husein is currently preparing a ‘PANORAMA’ programme which we can expect will show the Taliban Islamic jihad murderers as an Islamic ‘aberration’, while their young victim, Malala, will be portrayed as the real face of Islam.
We can expect more and more of this on INBBC:-
‘oh, it’s about Islam -defer it to our Muslim, Ms Hussein; she will decide what the unquestionable Islamic answer is to Islamic issues.
She will even interview innumerable Muslims to prove it.
We just leave Islam to her. It’s ideal really.’
The dhimmifying INBBC.
Funny how our pet trolls have turned out in force to defend Michal Hussein.
A bit of wagon circling, perhaps?
The Islam-political left alliance must stick together, apparently.
Strategy meeting taken place at al beeba ?
Party line decided and implemented.
I wonder if she’ll call an elected minister of state a Jeremy Hunt live on air and then make a big joke of it. Ha ha!
Or reveal her political allegiance at the election like her colleague? ‘When we win the election’ – meaning Labour.
Or maybe she’s that elusive ‘Tory in the newsroom’ that Mr. Aitkin said was so hard to find!
Perhaps they’ve taken down the picture of George Bush as Hitler in the newsroom. You know in the interests of impartiality and all that….
Well, I would…