“In a very few years, perhaps in a very few months, we shall be confronted with demands with which we shall no doubt be invited to comply. Those demands may affect the surrender of territory or the surrender of liberty. I foresee and foretell that the policy of submission will carry with it restrictions upon the freedom of speech and debate in Parliament, on public platforms, and discussions in the press, for it will be said–indeed, I hear it said sometimes now – that we cannot allow the Nazi system of dictatorship to be criticized by ordinary, common English politicians. Then, with a press under control, in part direct but more potently indirect, with every organ of public opinion doped and chloroformed into acquiescence, we shall be conducted along further stages of our journey.”
— Sir Winston Churchill
Your’re surely not suggesting a parallel with today! Just give me one example of how the BBC smothers and manipulates discussion of current issues.
Important issues like islamic extremism, global warming, immigration, Israel, the NHS, private business and the public sector are all treated with meticuluos honesty and impartiality by the BBC.
Surely no one at the BBC would ever allow their left of centre, politically correct bias to conceal facts from us and distort what they tell us so that we’re led into thinking what they want us to think?
They wouldn’t do that, would they?
“Important issues like islamic extremism, global warming, immigration, Israel, the NHS, private business and the public sector are all treated with meticuluos honesty and impartiality by the BBC”
Which would be why the BBC fawned over the Jihadi from CAGE until it was discovered that he is an extremist who supports Jihad. Nor is there any mention of this to be found on the BBC.
Not to mention this. That 3/4 of British Muslims don’t think it’s fine to murder cartoonists is great news for the BBC. That one in four DO is not mentioned….
http://archbishopcranmer.com/bbc-spins-disaffected-muslims-to-deflect-from-emerging-islamists/
Speaking of ‘submission,’ it’s easy to envisage INBBC becoming more ideologically like its fellow global broadcaster, Islamic Al Jazeera.
Will the two organisations formally merge their global output in the future,
or simply remain ideologically close?
Links between Islam Not BBC (INBBC) and Emirate of Qatar’s Islamic Al Jazeera:
1.) When Al Jazeera was set up:-
” Al-Jazeera brought around seventeen ex-BBC staff to Doha to help build the channel.
“We built Al-Jazeera up on the Western experience we had,” says Helal, of his own move from London to Qatar. “From day one most of our editorial staff were from this BBC environment—assignment editors, interview producers, newsgathering editors, even picture editors.” (Page 3, link below.)
http://tbsjournal.arabmediasociety.com/Archives/Fall01/Jazeera_sjs3.html
2.) “BBC signs news exchange agreement with al-Jazeera” (2003).
http://www.bbc.co.uk/pressoffice/pressreleases/stories/2003/01_january/15/al-jazeera.shtml
3.) Many ex-Beeboids are still employed at Islamic Al Jazeera. E.g, Salah Negm, Director of News, at Islamic Al Jazeera, is ex-News Editor, INBBC Arabic Television.
4.) Note case of Rageh Omaar, who was employed at INBBC to make pro-Islamic programmes, he then became employed by Islamic Al Jazeera, but was still commissioned to make more pro-Islam INBBC TV series, by INBBC’s Head of Religion, Aaqil Ahmed.
4.) There has been a BBC-NUJ walk out in worktime at W1A recently, in support of Islamic Al Jazeera’s staff arrested in Egypt, regarding Muslim Brotherhood.
5.) Editorially, INBBC adopts a similar ideological policy towards Islam as Islamic Al Jazeera- one of avoidance of criticism of Islam. And, in effect INBBC, although claiming to support free speech, appears to implicitly adopt the political line of the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC ): a policy of global non-criticism of Islam.
6.) given the ideological news output similarity of the two broadcasters, it would not be difficult to see the merging of INBBC Arabic Television service with Islamic Al Jazeera, rather than being run in parallel, globally.
Yes, good point. Lots of BBC staff have friends, or partners, who work at Al jaz and it’s regarded as just another news channel. Like Sky or ITN.
When you talk to these people, there’s never any recognition of the fact that it’s owned and funded by Qatar which also funds jihadists and terror groups such as Hamas and Islamic State.
Ex BBC journos are happy to be take well paid jobs at Al Jaz and work for the largest financiers of terrorism in the world spreading propaganda. They kid themselves that they’re editorially independant.
Qatar is the richest country on Earth per capita. The Qataris have oil, money, power and influence, and they have an abiding love of fundamentalist Islam.
For INBBC:
-on point 4.) above-
“Jailed journalists in Egypt:
“Did Al Jazeera help them or use them?
“Current and former Al Jazeera employees accuse the network of a cavalier attitude toward their safety amid political tensions between Egypt and Qatar, whose royal family bankrolls the network.”
http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Middle-East/2015/0227/Jailed-journalists-in-Egypt-Did-Al-Jazeera-help-them-or-use-them?
http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Middle-East/2015/0227/Jailed-journalists-in-Egypt-Did-Al-Jazeera-help-them-or-use-them?
“The Two Faces of Al Jazeera”
by Oren Kessler,
Middle East Quarterly
(2012).
http://www.meforum.org/3147/al-jazeera
Was that said by Churchill in the years when the Beeb banned him ?
ibor, the quote is from the Parliamentary debate on the Munich agreement, given in the House of Commons on 5th October 1938.
The agreement itself was signed on 30th September.
Churchill is on record as still complaining about being denied access to the BBC on 31st September, when the BBC sent a journalist to “reassure” him.
In one of history’s wonderful ironies, the man the BBC sent to reassure Churchill was Guy Burgess, later exposed as one of the most damaging Communist spies in British history.
Amazing to think the BBC was harbouring Britain’s enemies and preventing British patriots from speaking, in late 1938 with Europe on the brink of war.
Can’t see any modern day parallels there……..
Expat John “31st September”. Should that be 1st October?
Oops, mea culpa… too much of the red stuff.
Almost 5 years of Cameron being PM and he has done nothing to curb the blatant bias of the BBC. It will almost certainly cost him the Election but more importantly it is denying the British public their right to honest impartial reporting.
The dead weight of the LibDumbs in the Coalition doesn’t help either.
Alan, you can add to your quote the closing words of Churchill in the parliamentary debate on the Munich agreeement :
“This is only the beginning of the reckoning. This is only the first sip, the first foretaste of a bitter cup which will be proffered to us year by year unless by a supreme recovery of moral health and martial vigour, we arise again and take our stand for freedom as in the olden time.”
Then he was referring to the surrender to Hitler at Munich and our sell-out of the Czechs. His words are just as appropriate today, over 75 years later, except that today it’s not German fascism which is the enemy. Today we face another creed, just as vile and just as violent. And this time the people being sold out are not – to adapt Chamberlain – in a far away land of which we know little: this time it’s us.
It is now only the ordinary men and women who have an abiding love of freedom. It is so much part of being English that it does nor need to be stated openly or analysed. Churchill understood this and that the self hating English intellectuals were the enemies of freedom.
There will be no help for us from the media and political class. They have forgotten what the word freedom means. It is not the same as liberty.
Freedom is an old English word and describes something that is part of us like our hands and is not negotiable. Liberty is something else and is granted to us as a favour by a state or a king or a religion. Understand this and you understand why we can never be part of Europe or any other system that qualifies our inalienable freedom with the modern tyranny of political correctness. I loathe liberalism and I loathe the BBC.
The Churchillian quote is so apposite to today’s situation it is uncanny. With the BBC in the lead and only a few dissenters the media has been taking us on an undemocratic multiculti journey for the last 30 years with the connivance of craven politicians. The people have been lied to , the news distorted or suppressed, state sponsored witch hunts mounted against dissenters , laws which criminalise dissent enacted, the criminal justice system subverted, freedom of speech suspended, PC behaviour elevated to the state religion, minorities appeased at every turn even though they are hostile to our values, democracy undermined and trampled on, our liberty chipped away at.
This lamentable pattern has been repeated in a host of European countries as well as the UK. European culture and civilisation is being destroyed by the very people who were supposed to uphold it. Why has this been done to us?!
It says it all about the BBC:
HEAD OF RELIGIOUS AFFAIRS of our state broadcaster of our Christian country is a practicing Muslim, chosen by our State Broadcaster without the Government at the time, (LABOUR of course), stopping it .
What?
You really could not make that up anywhere else in the world. No where!
http://www.broadcastnow.co.uk/aaqil-ahmed-bbc-head-of-religion-and-ethics/5008566.article
Except that unlike in the ’30s when the enemy was a foreign power that could be defined geographically, this time the enemies soldiers have been invited in.
The BBC constantly describes such individuals as British, regardless of their birthplace, merely because they have spent some portion of their llives in the UK.
Perhaps it is time to remind the BBC that a British citizen waging war against the British state from within Britain used to be considered guilty of treason.
It occurs to me that should any such person be charged with treason, the BBC would be amongst the first to question the legitimacy of such a charge on the grounds that the person concerned wasn’t born in the UK.
What, I wonder, is the appropriate punishment for those who wilfully aid and abet murderous traitors?
INBBC: Islamophobia and Islamofascism.
Islam Not BBC (INBBC)’s politbureau endorses use of the neologism, ‘Islamophobia,’ but censors out the use of the neologism, ‘Islamofascism.’
The case for using the word ‘Islamofascism’ is significant-
“ISLAMO-FASCISM”
http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/guideDesc.asp?catid=183&type=issue
“Individual Moslems may show splendid qualities, but the influence of the religion paralyzes the social development of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith. It has already spread throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at every step, and were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science, the science against which it (Islam) has vainly struggled, the civilization of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilization of ancient Rome.”
Winston Churchill, 1899 (The River War)
“BBC SPINS DISAFFECTED MUSLIMS TO DEFLECT FROM EMERGING ISLAMISTS”
http://archbishopcranmer.com/bbc-spins-disaffected-muslims-to-deflect-from-emerging-islamists/