Whenever there is a terrorist attack, the BBC default mode is to assume it is “far right” – obviously years of Islamic terrorism has caused them a few problems in this regard but they keep on trying. This morning, on Today, we were breathlessly informed that one of the Boston bombers, Tamerlan Tsarnaev, “had right wing extremist literature” in his possession.
Tamerlan Tsarnaev subscribed to publications espousing white supremacy and government conspiracy theories. He also had reading material on mass killings. Until now the Tsarnaev brothers were widely perceived as just self-styled radical jihadists.
Bingo! BBC doing its best to undo the simple fact that both these two men were driven by a hatred of America and a love of Islam.
Could the right wing connection be that the brothers couldn’t understand the instructions for improvised bomb making in Arabic?
Samir Khan the well known
islamic fundamentalist“right winger”, provided like minded people with illustrated instructions in English. The fact theislamists“right wing” boston bombers used those instructions is merely a passing coincidence.Or that Islamic extremists and the ultra nationalist left both have issues with Jews, Western culture, and freedom? That typed if you read the bulk of the BBC’s story it is clear having this material was for research not motivation. Not that the headline suggests that.
wanted to die for allah … tick (not far right)
wanted to be islamic martyrs … tick (not far right)
became said “devout muslims” … tick (not far right)
whole islamic pack of “lone wolves” tick (not far right)
wanted to die for jihad … tick (not far right)
inspired by jihadi literature … tick (not far right)
but Hilary andersson has “built a profile” taking months??? … should have been pretty easy?.
and only take five minutes? from verified available evidence?
unless that is, 😀 the aim is to obfuscate the truth
and ingraciate yourselves with those “nosegrowers extraordinaire” – friends, family, and confidentes
who just happen to be from the ideology that doesn t need anymore conspiracy theories
AND lard mardell – gets a re- run
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-22244539 …
yep! … debate ignited?
what by a bbc tenth rate journalistic hack job?
I doubt it
“President Obama’s opponents portray him as reluctant to use the word terrorism, overly sympathetic towards Islam, and insufficiently focused on the dangers of violent expressions of militant Islam. On the fringes, some accuse him of being a willing sympathiser.
But, more generally, there is a feeling on the right that liberals are too willing to bend over backwards to disconnect the religion from the violence”
The online article leads big on “right-wing extremist literature” and follows this with the unchallenged view of someone from Tsarnaev’s mosque that he was only a “Muslim of convenience” (that’s even the subheading, just to drive the point home). The impression the BBC wants to give is that there’s a white right-wing gun nut angle to all this which is at least, if not more, significant than the Islamic angle. The supporting evidence provided so far is very thin, but from it the desired narrative is spun.
The video report from Hilary Andersson shows her looking at some of the literature. Why is it blurred out? (see screencap) What possible purpose is served by hiding the name of the publication? Afraid of what Google might turn up, perhaps? Do the publications have anti-Muslim articles for example?
Andersson produced a very biased report on the Glenn Beck/Tea Party rally in Washington 3 years ago. This latest effort smacks of desperation. As with Tara Mckelvey’s ludicrous article attacking Zimmerman’s lawyer as a race-baiting huckster, this looks like another example of BBC journalists latching on to anything they can to reassure themselves that almost everything that is wrong with America is ultimately the fault of right-wingers. BBC US journalism exists to push that narrative. That agenda is behind which stories are reported and which are not. It’s behind how the chosen stories are spun. And it’s behind this story that seeks to dilute the Islamic motives of a Muslim terrorist with those of white right-wingers, who were the BBC’s preferred choice of bombers all along.
One likely contender for the paper Anderrson is reading is the American Free Press (AFP). It’s a vehemently anti-Semitic publication full of New World Order conspiracies about the Jews running everything (9/11 was a false flag by the Jews, naturally.)
It is anti-Neocon and thinks Gitmo should be closed.
It has old-school Nazi sympathy for Islam. One article, which blames Israeli propaganda for inciting Anders Breivik, says Europeans should fear Jews, not Muslims: “These Europeans ignore the fact that the Muslims they proclaim to be enemies of Christianity actually revere Jesus Christ as a beloved prophet, as did Mohammad himself. At the same time, they ignore the ugly hostility toward Christianity that is an article of faith in Israel…”
AFP contributors such as Mark Dankof appear on Iran’s Press TV. From Wikipedia:
In a May 2011 article Dankof protested the British government attempting to shut down Press TV, blaming it on “media outlets and correspondents with provable connections to the American Jewish lobby; Israeli intelligence; and Neo-Conservatives thirsting for a War of Civilizations with Iran specifically, and the Islamic world generally.” In a May 2011 article, Dankof also quoted from and wrote that the Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion accurately reflect the state of the world. He lauded PressTV as one of the few exceptions to the Jewish control of the media.
I imagine quite a few young Muslims read it.
Unsurprisingly, the paper thinks the Tsarnaevs were framed.
Now pretty much convinced it’s the American Free Press she’s looking at.
What hypocrisy – Israel is the one middle eastern country where Christians are safe (not including the occupied territories).
Funny that islam’s supposed reverence of Jesus doesn’t extend to his blood-relatives……
Muslims assure us that they respect Jesus but only as a prophet. Fair enough. But that does not stop them from killing as many Christians they can, raping and forcibly marrying off Christian girls, and of course burning churches, while they maintain everyone respects the sanctity of mosques(forts).
‘Conspiracy theories’, huh?
Like making a documentary about July 7 truther nuts?
Making constant sinister allusions to the ‘Jewish Lobby’ and ‘Big Oil’?
Running dramas about secret societies of Christian fundamentalists planning to decapitate Muslims?
Those sorts of conspiracy theories, or something else?
Don’t forget the Freemasons – all those middle-aged shop keepers performing silly rituals in their private bars! The most ineffective of secret societies known to man.
Should I be worried?
Hi just interested in what Freemasons actually do behind closed doors… Is it some type of mystical club where one where’s a loin cloth and dances around de congo drum while howling at the moon or is it simply a gentlemen’s social club? Have always been curious 🙂
Sorry for spelling: that’s ‘wears’!
No, we watch old tapes of It Ain’t Half Hot Mum and The Black and White Minstrel Show whilst eating foie gras.
No matter how tenuous the link the BBC will always try to pass off an attack as ‘Far-right’ even though, if I recall correctly, the Far-right have never carried off a collectively organized attack of any sort; Brevik was a lunatic acting by his self, but of course, this didn’t stop the BBC from blaming the acts of this lone madman on extremist Christianity. It’s simply pathetic Islamic groveling and brainwashing and I’m afraid even those guilty of concocting this tomfoolery know that we know that they know.
Sorry, if I could qualify the above claim to: the Far-right haven’t carried out a collectively organized attack for several decades in the West.
No, but they’ve been responsible for some very harshly worded graffiti.
This sort of thing must be stamped out.
EDL woz ere….insurance jobs probably.
Not totally relevant, but brilliant: http://bogpaper.com/2013/08/05/marx-on-monday-israel/
glorious !
Some very good comments. The BBC article looks very poor. probably not deliberately misleading just the usual crass ill informed rubbish.
Welly well well-well. Panorama obviously thought it worth spending time money and effort on this one.
Fine, as long as their time, money and effort is also spent – in far larger amounts because the situations are far more serious – on persecution/murder/slaughter/cleansing of Christian communities across the world and UK child grooming gangs.
In other words, it’s all about balance and proportion.
well if this is the case that these islamic terrorists are insprired by far right nazi rhetoric,does that not prove for once and all that the edl are as far away from being far right as there enemys try to portray and smear them as because if the edl was far right would they not have sympathys for these islamists instead of protesting against the rise of islamist extremism,i have for years suspected that the far right nazi extremists and the muslim islamist hard line radical extremists share the same ideology and theorys,islamism and nazism are 2 cheeks of the same backside,simple as that.
BBC = Boston Bombing Confuscation
Why the sneer and inverted commas around far right. Aren’t you just that and do you perhaps offer a platform for FR morons. Can you wash your hands of it?