FERAL CITIES

 

Paul Weston in the comments on a previous post claims that ‘The idea that Britain could erupt into tribal/religious bloodshed and carnage is simply not accepted by these ignorant children within the BBC who know nothing of history.’

 

Some readers might be thinking that is over the top, there is absolutely no danger of that happening here.

Very recent history says different…just think of the Balkans….or Northern Ireland…if it hadn’t been for 30,000 security personnel keeping a lid on things just how bad would that have got?

 

But the BBC itself has broadcast a ‘warning from history’…..

David Kilcullen: Feral Cities

In this programme Kilcullen describes what happened to Somalia…why it collapsed into a war torn ‘Mad Max’ country.

Immigration happened to Somalia…massive, uncontrolled immigration from the rural areas into Mogadishu which led to infrastructure and system collapse…warlords and power brokers built competing fiefdoms that tore the city apart and ultimately brought down the whole State.

The city went feral..and this is happening now to cities across the world…and what happened in one place in our interconnected world affects us here….as we know when ”foreign’ battles are imported and  erupt on the streets of Britain.

 

Urban overstretch as he called it leads to frightening consequences.

In this programme he limits himself to coastal cities in the developing world but there is absolutely no reason why such a scenario isn’t credible for any city in the World.

London must be a prime example with that potential as it turns into a foreign land with a population that owes its loyalty more often to the countries they have fled from, perhaps ironically…bringing with them the same religions, the same cultural baggage and the same social problems that they were apparently trying to escape. 

 Crazy?  Mad and improbable? 

In 2009 Labour MP David Lammy didn’t think so:

LARGE parts of London are controlled by armed gangsters and not the police, a Government minister said yesterday.

Education minister David Lammy claimed a drug war had led to Turkish and Kurdish thugs grabbing control in some areas.

He said: “The system of justice that governs the rest of our city has been replaced by one overseen by gang bosses, enforced by the gun and knife.”

The Tottenham MP warned the situation would get worse without urgent police action.

He added: “If we turn away now, abandoning communities to be torn apart by a lawless minority, we will all come to regret it.”

His controversial remarks were last night backed by one of the capital’s top cops who described violence in parts of North London as shocking.

 

 

Kilcullen tells us that Somalia is now stable….but that stability was achieved by a newly formed Somalian Army (with the help of Ethiopia and the African Union troops) which pushed out the Islamists and warlords.

But in his summing up he claims that the only way to solve things is not helicopter gunships blazing away but civilian negotiators…..the usual wilful blindness of commentators when it comes to the necessity for military action to deal with a situation…..the BBC et al will always tell us that war never achieves anything and ‘insurgencies’ cannot be beaten by force of arms….it’s good to talk.

History unfortunately for them, proves again and again different….as indeed does this programme about Somalia…despite the strange conclusion.

 

The BBC supports mass immigration and repeatedly tells us that it is beneficial for the country.

It refuses to acknowledge the serious and possibly fatal consequences of this uncontrolled immigration and the subsequent harsh measures that would be needed to bring the situation back under control should things eventually go ‘feral’.

The multi cultural hotch potch of competing ethnic/religious groups that the BBC and fellow travellers believe is the best way forward is merely setting the scene for large scale conflict and a break down in central control and the ending of a national identity.

Either that is sorted now…by limiting immigration and integrating those here already or the effort later will be of a different and deeply unpleasant nature.

 

There are consequences to the BBC’s failure to cover events impartially where they seek to prevent certain truths from becoming well known….and by seeking to hide the problem they of course allow politicians to duck the issue and avoid setting in motion solutions that they don’t wish to be associated with on ‘their watch’ when history calls to account….but that is a very short term strategy….history will eventually catch up with them and point out their ‘appeasement’.

Those consequences may well include Paul Weston’s very uncivil civil war with all its ‘bloodshed and carnage’.

 

 

 

Passing The Buck

 

The BBC has decided it should take lobbying of politicians seriously…not in this country where Unite can rig elections and ‘swamp’ the Labour candidate list for MEPs….and all with Miliband’s approval (ignored by the BBC)……and not in the case of conflicts of interest such as when the BBC ignored completely the revelations about Tim Yeo and his massive green industry financial interests whilst at the same time being chairman of the Energy and Climate Change Committee.

 So where does the BBC cast its investigative eye when it feels the onset of a particular bad bout of indignation?

How Buck McKeon created a global drone enterprise

To America…onto a politician, a politician no one here has ever heard of…a Republican…a Republican who supports the drone industry…you know those drones which the nasty Americans use to kill lovable Al Qaeda chappies….roguish mis-interpreters of the Koran that they are.

We are told that Obama has massively increased the use of these drones..but its OK because…..

The increase in the use of drones came partly because technology improved over the years, making the strikes more efficient, and also because Obama adopted a more focused campaign against al-Qaeda commanders and other militants in Pakistan.

 

Efficiency and focus….sounds very Republican and right wing to me.

An enormous, very lengthy article……all very well and good (I’ll leave it for David P to analyse the truth of the article)….but why no such diligence and journalistic endeavour at home in regard to Labour Party affairs or Green politics?

 

Here we have two of the BBC’s  bete noires…a Republican and Drones…..what’s not to like from a lefty perspective….I can see this filling the pages of the Guardian quite happily.

That’s the problem…when it comes to subjects the BBC favours it hides the ‘evil’ parts…what you don’t see can’t hurt you…or the Labour Party etc…and can’t effect the way you might vote.

Cynical?  No less than the BBC’s blatantly cynical manipulation of our political views.

Open Bias

 

 

Is the BBC biased? looks at a suggestion in the Telegraph:

Of course people at the BBC are biased: why not make a virtue of it?

We need the BBC to be more like the newspapers – open about the unavoidably political beliefs of its staff

 

Not sure it would work. 

The point of the BBC is to try, I say try, to provide a gold standard of impartiality and accuracy that people can rely on….they may enjoy the one sided, unchallenging reading of a newspaper that reflects their own views but in the  end they need that fall back of a neutral, outside view of the world that the BBC is supposed to provide.

Clearly the BBC fails on that front, hence the proliferation of blogs and other comment from the MSM about the BBC’s ‘impartiality’…not counting the BBC’s own internal reviews on bias which it studiously ignores  or interprets in a way that is patently biased in its own favour…ironically.

If the BBC were allowed to ‘take sides’, or at least its journalists allowed to shape stories using their own personal views there woud have to be a balance of journalists….of all political, religious or other ideological persuasions….clearly impossible.

The BBC is already, to coin a phrase ‘left leaning’, imagine if allowed free rein to let rip and indulge in propagating their own world vision untrammelled by even idealistic notions of impartiality imposed upon them as now.

The BBC as it is, isn’t perfect, but it at least holds in check the worst excesses of its clearly idealistic and politically committed journalists.

The bias it does portray is bad enough and has serious consequences for society, for the World even, if you value democracy, free speech and thought…..the BBC being a supporter of oppressive ideologies and not embarrassed to practice its own suppression of free speech when it feels the need.

 

The problem with the BBC is that whomever it recruits they are eventually, if they want to succeed and get promotion or the best jobs, absorbed into the ‘left leaning’ culture, the group think.

That means they think twice before reporting or writing something in a way that doesn’t reflect the corporate world view…and the BBC is ‘Institutionally biased’.  If you are the wrong political persuasion, race or religion you will find yourself out in the cold if you don’t realign your thinking and toe the line.

A solution?  Difficult…other than breaking the BBC up into smaller units and moving people around more so that they don’t get set in their ways and are not allowed to develop a culture that becomes ingrained and is then passed on to any new recruit.

 

It would be politically beneficial for the BBC to be seen to be actually doing something proactive to combat bias other than staging these ever more farcial reviews that are no more than clear attempts at damage limitation (at least from the people who commission them), diverting attention from the real problems at the BBC.

As I said more effort to recruit a different class of journalist and presenter and determined efforts to prevent the onset of institutional bias and groupthink would at least give an impression of some recognition that there is a problem.

The problem is they don’t think there is a problem.

Don’t hold your breath.

 

 

 

HEAR NO EVIL SPEAK NO EVIL.

Over here in Northern Ireland, the BBC has been pushing the World Police and Fire Games. Heard of them? No? Me neither until the Stormont Executive got hold of the idea that hosting such a strange event would be a wizard wheeze. Met with almost universal indifference over here, the BBC has been doing its best to hype the event, going so far as to give us recorded highlights of the Opening ceremony which take place last evening. But perhaps MOST sickening was how the BBC zoomed in on IRA godfather Martin McGuinness as he gave a welcoming speech to the competitors. You will remember how MANY Police officers the IRA slaughtered and maimed. All of this is casually forgotten and the BBC plays its designated role as the sanitiser in chief for a political process that places terrorist godfathers as the smiling face of Northern Ireland. Oh, and the BBC does not seem to want to ask why NO national flags can be carried at this event. Heaven forbid mcGuinness should see a Union Flag about the place.

LESS CASH POST RECESSION…

With several shoots of green indicating that the UK economy may be on the recovery, the BBC has had to find new ways to dampen any positivity people might have so today they have been pushing a survey that claims that half of UK adults are struggling to keep up with bills and debt repayments and this number has worsened since….2006. One assumes that the recession created by Labour might have had something to do with this and that the financial situation for some individuals post economic recession would be more precarious. This is no news served up as a gloom and doom and is simply the BBC trying to help the ludicrous Miliband/Balls agenda.

Rottweiller or Lapdog?

 

 

The BBC’s Rottweiller turns out to be a bit of a lapdog.

John Humphrys fresh from his carpeting by the BBC Trust for being too right wing is proving his loyalty to the Corporation by pulling the wool over listener’s ears.

The BBC had steadfastly ignored recent reports of the hacking of phones by private investigators for hundreds of companies, as well as law firms and other organisations…..might that include the BBC?  They also use PIs as Mark Thompson admitted.

But yesterday on the Today programme (08:50) Humphrys ‘investigated’ the BBC’s lack of interest….or not…he said:

‘Some people draw a distinction between the way this story has been covered and the way that newspapers using private investigators were covered…there is a huge disparity,  massive coverage of the newspapers and relatively little for this bunch.’

 

Tom Symonds, BBC home affairs correspondent, plays it all down and blames News International for ramping up the coverage….

‘The coverage was due to the News of The World and News International who admitted phone hacking  themselves and when they closed down the News of The World this ramped up the story to a great degree.’

 

Really?  No coverage before that?  No massive witch hunt against Murdoch?  No massive coverage in the media before that?  It wasn’t that massive coverage, by the Guardian in particular, which lied about the hacking of Milly Dowler’s phone, that caused the closure of the News of The World?

Good old BBC…never let the facts get in the way of a good story especially when trying to cover up your own cover up.

 

Good that the BBC is reporting on the ‘reporting’ of a story…..obviously feeling a little like they were caught out and are trying to cover up their decision not to report this until forced to.

Interesting that they feel the need to comment on the lack of reporting….the complete lack of interest in these big companies and law firms…..with no connections to Murdoch.