Babu’s Babble


As David has noted the BBC has leapt upon the words of ex-chief Superintendent Dal Babu as he tries to discredit the ‘Prevent’ programme….and there is remarkably little comment on the BBC from people who would say otherwise.

Discrediting the ‘Prevent’programme is the Holy Grail for Islamic extremists, amongst others, and Babu’s words align neatly with their own rhetoric about the programme and do great damage as they give authority and credibility to those extremists.

Here is an example of how such reckless statements can be exploited by those who wish to stir up conflict to ‘divide and rule’….from the Iranian ‘Press TV’….

British state spies on Muslims


I’m uncertain why the thoughts of a copper who retired 2 years ago are so significant.  The fact he is a Muslim should raise a few sceptical eyebrows about his motives, ala Baroness Warsi, but the BBC has swallowed his line completely.

Babu’s personnel file stated that..

“This officer is over-racially sensitive”.

And indeed he has almost made a career out of complaining about the alleged lack of diversity in the Police service including the founding of the National Association of Muslim Police.

A classic example of his thinking as to why we need more diversity…

“It’s about having that cultural understanding when you’re planning the firearms operation – do you understand the cultural aspects that might be misinterpreted as being aggression within a particular community?”

“Do you understand when communities are praying on a particular day?”


Who cares?  Blow someone up and you’re nicked son!  Allah might forgive you but the Met. won’t…however much you pray.


Babu claims that ‘Prevent’ hasn’t prevented Muslims from being radicalised…but how does he know that?  It’s difficult to prove a negative and very easy to see the Muslims who do go to the Dark Side, especially when the BBC gives them blanket coverage.

How many people who go to AA or drug rehabilitation come out cured?  I’m betting a good many fail to clean up their act whilst many others succeed…would those programmes be judged to have failed because of the few backsliders?

Apart from that Babu’s very own NAMP set up their own mentoring programme for young Muslims, the NAMP Youth Mentoring Scheme….

The project was initially launched in 2007 in Brick Lane and, following its success in this predominantly Bangladeshi community, it was extended in 2008 to the London boroughs of Harrow and Tower Hamlets. The scheme is specifically aimed at engaging with groups of Muslim youths who have been identified for specific reasons such as truancy or behavioural issues.


Has that scheme prevented any Muslim youths from being radicalised?  Obviously not judging by his own criteria for ‘Prevent’…..

Mr Babu, who retired from the Metropolitan Police two years ago, said cases like those of the three London schoolgirls who have gone to Syria had caught the authorities unaware.

Why did his own mentoring scheme not prevent those three girls from joining the Jihad?  After all he is a Muslim, the NAMP is Muslim and therefore, by his own criteria, with their indepth cultural knowledge and sensitivities, have been able to stop those girls.  But they didn’t.  The NAMP mentoring scheme failed…is it a ‘Toxic Brand’?

As for Police officers not understanding Islam….you must be kidding…with all the diversity training they get…and fair do’s, they get their training about radicalisation from the very people that would know…..

U.K. Police Trained at Islamic School at Center of Terror Probe

Then there’s stuff like this…

Working with faith communities

A guide for neighbourhood policing teams and partners


Shame the BBC doesn’t look a bit deeper…but then Babu’s narrative is one that fits neatly with their own….Muslims under siege and radicalised because of it.

But then again the BBC has always told us that Islam has no part to play in the radicalisation and motivation for the various jihadis….

Why then is it relevant for police officers to need to know anything about Islam?  Surely it is a straight forward matter of good old fashioned police work to find the bad guys.

Muslims have long been in denial about any link between their religion and what is going on…not all Muslims are terrorists, but most terrorists are Muslim these days.

We are told that we shouldn’t be asking Muslims to explain, apologise or otherwise intervene in radicalisation because Islam has nothing to do with events but now we are told that non-Muslims shouldn’t intervene because they don’t know anything about Islam…which kind of leaves no one in charge of tackling the issues if Muslims themselves refuse to accept responsibility and non-Muslims aren’t allowed to.

All of which suits the radicals.

Why isn’t the BBC delving deeper into the issues?  Its Rochdale, Rotherham, Derby, Oxford all over again….this time though its the much cherished liberal democracy that’s getting shafted as the BBC looks away due to ‘race sensitivities’…not that Islam is a race…it’s an ideology the same as Fascism, Communism or whatever we get shoved through our doors from the Political Parties in the next month or so.







Outrage at the BBC this morning. Guess what? Yes, SOME senior police officers do NOT know the difference between Sunni and Shia Muslims! OMG. So says a former senior Muslim police officer

Dal Babu said some officers involved in the programme lacked basic knowledge of race and faith issues. Most Muslims did not trust the programme and many saw it as a form of spying, he said.  He said because police counter-terrorism units were mainly white, with few Muslim officers, they did not fully understand issues of race, Islam and gender. Mr Babu said one senior police officer he had spoken to did not know the difference between Sunni and Shia Muslims.

Now, let’s leave Babu’s allegations to one side for a moment. The salient point here is how the BBC chooses to report these views and than provide balance. An uncredited Home office spokesman gets two sentences worth of response. Mr Babu gets ten times this. Fair?

I’m not sure if our senior Policing ranks need to also have a deep understanding of the Koran to be able to deal with Islamic terrorism. As for the theological distinction between Sunni and Shia that so concerns Babu one could suggest that this is measured in corpses wherever they come into conflict. One could also suggest to Mr Babu that it for Sunni and Shia muslims to adhere to the laws of the UK first and foremost and trying to divert attention from this and place it on imagined failings in the Police is rather shameful. However, since the BBC won’t allow this alternative view to be posited we shall never know, I guess.


Thatcher And Cyril Smith


The BBC are taking the chance to try and smear Thatcher by association…

Margaret Thatcher ‘told of Cyril Smith abuse claims’


Oddly they refrain from revealing an essential fact, should you be looking to ‘politicise’ Cyril Smith’s abuse.  Here the BBC reports that….

The dossier on the decision to confer a knighthood on Smith, a former Rochdale MP for both for the Liberal Party and the Liberal Democrats who died in 2010, runs to 19 pages.

It includes one undated letter marked secret, from Lord Shackleton, a member of the Political Honours Scrutiny Committee.

This was sent to Mrs Thatcher – who died in 2013 – and included a warning of “the risk that such an award could give rise to adverse criticism”.

Lord Shackleton wrote that police had investigated Smith in 1970 for “indecent assault against teenage boys” between 1961 and 1966, but the director of public prosecutions (DPP) had decided “there was no reasonable prospect of conviction”.

He went on to say that the case was reported in the Rochdale Alternative Press and Private Eye.

“One may regret this kind of press reporting but it could be revived if an award to Mr Smith were made,” he added.

Lord Shackleton said it would be “slightly unfortunate” if this “episode” stopped Smith receiving the honour.

However, he added: “We felt it right to warn the honours system would be at some risk if the award were to be made and announced.”


‘Lord Shackleton’?  That’ll be the ‘Tory’ Lord Shackleton you’d probably assume.

The BBC would be glad to let you think that.

But Lord Shackleton was a Labour peer.

Why would the BBC let you think he was a Tory?  Could it be that it wants to imply that Thatcher was involved in some sort of cover up conspiracy but not the awkward fact that the man advising her was a Labour peer?

Juast another day at the biased BBC.



The BBC’s Omerta


It once again looks like the BBC is reluctant to shine a light upon its own dark corners.  We know of the puzzling expenditure of £300,000 to cover up the Balen Report and what is presumably its excoriating criticism of the BBC’s anti-Israel reporting but what else lies hidden in the shadows at Aunty Beeb?

The Mail reports that the BBC has shelved a interview critical of the BBC Trust’s Chair, Rona Fairhead…

Anger after BBC scraps interview that called for its chief to quit over her £513,000 second job with scandal-hit HSBC 

The BBC was last night accused of suppressing an interview that called for corporation boss Rona Fairhead to resign over her £10,000-a-day second job at scandal-hit HSBC bank.

It’s a new blow to Mrs Fairhead, chairman of the BBC Trust and a non-executive director of HSBC, who is facing growing calls to quit one of her high-profile jobs over claims of a conflict of interest.

She is due to be questioned by MPs tomorrow after The Mail on Sunday revealed that she was paid £513,000 for just 50 days work at the troubled bank last year, vastly exceeding her £110,000 salary for what is supposed to be her main job overseeing the BBC.

You may also remember that the BBC tried to cover up the Savile affair and the fallout from that and the subsequent exposure is apparently that the open and accountable BBC is demoting or effectively sacking its own journalists who dared to rock the boat as Nick Cohen in the Guardian reports (H/T Guest Who)

The sinister treatment of dissent at the BBC

Nobody from John Humphrys in the morning to Evan Davis at night dares mention a scandal at the BBC. It undermines their reporting of every abuse whistleblowers reveal. It reinforces the dirty common sense of British life that you must keep your head down if you want to keep your job.

The scandal is simply this: the BBC is forcing out or demoting the journalists who exposed Jimmy Savile as a voracious abuser of girls. As Meirion Jones put it to me: “There is a small group of powerful people at the BBC who think it would have been better if the truth about Savile had never come out. And they aim to punish the reporters who revealed it.”

The best aspect of modern culture is that it revolts against such hierarchical control. The computer revolution makes information sharing and cooperative ways of working easy to achieve. But hierarchies have men and women at their summits who will fight as ferociously as BBC executives to protect their position, and prevent democratic change.

The power of hierarchies is hard to break. But if you want to fight fraud in the City or the rape of children, it has to be broken. A start can be made by insisting that everyone from John Humphrys in the morning to Evan Davis at night tells the truth about the purge of the BBC’s truth tellers.


How the BBC can report with any integrity about ‘whistleblowers’ and their treatment in the NHS or other Public institution is beyond me. The BBC is so compromised by its own politics that the ‘news’ is entirely unreliable from the one news source that is supposed to be the ‘gold standard’ that rises above politics and vested interests.

A good example of such a compromised position is its reporting on the vital subject of Islamic radicalisation and terrorism which is wholly undermined by its collaboration with Islamist organisations like Cage which peddle a similar narrative to the BBC which has consistently opposed the Wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and Guantanamo Bay.  The BBC in its desire to denounce these events has jumped into bed with Islamist extremists who work to undermine and discredit the ‘War on Terror’ and whose long term aim is to Islamise Britain and do away with the liberal, secular democracy that the BBC is supposed to encourage and nurture.


Family Fortunes


‘Turns out my brother’s accountant is a bit of a travel agent on the side….he sent my brother and his family on holiday to a nice little island off the shore of Switzerland….I asked ‘Tax Haven?’…He said ‘SSSSHHHH!!!’


How Jeremy Vine’s 10-year-old daughter helps him avoid tax payments


Jeremy Vine’s brother Tim tells us…

As king of the one-liners, does money make a rich seam of material?

I haven’t got a lot of money jokes if I’m honest, but any topic can be good because you can write a joke about anything.


Bet he’s got a few up his sleeve now!

Some fine advice for his brother on Twitter?…..

Learn how to count properly and you’ll be fine

0 replies . 170 retweets 203 favourites

And oh yes…

Does money make you happy?

If you have a basic amount of money, heaping more on top doesn’t make the slightest bit of difference to anyone’s happiness. For people who have real poverty, it’s very sad – and money can solve that – but the idea that money is like some sort of happiness drug isn’t true.



Emwazi Waterboarded With Beer and Whiskey By MI6


Poor old Mohammed Emwazi, there he was off to enjoy a bit of sun and safari in Tanzania when he was rudely renditioned by Daniel Craig who force fed him alcoholic beverages and savoury pork scratchings in the aircraft toilets to discredit him in the eyes of his fellow Muslims and then shipped him home to a secret location where MI5 tortured him with rolled up copies of the Magna Carta.

No Muslim should have to suffer such persecution and stigmatization…he was instantly radicalised and transformed into Muslim superhero ‘Jihadi Junkie’ by his immense suffering and immediately told all to the important human rights group ‘Cagegoogoo’ who wrote a protest song about it…top of the pops in Pakistan apparently.

The lesson we learn from all this is that this is how hideously Muslims are treated in the UK by the security services who quite unfairly pick on the Muslim community (which exists when it suits and doesn’t exist when it doesn’t suit) making them feel under siege as they are persecuted and demonised whilst ‘Fascists’ roam the streets untouched…..well apart from the fact that the government wrote to Muslim groups telling them how they intended to destroy the EDL, not forgetting Spencer and Geller banned from the UK and Wilders similarly restricted for a time and so on.


The BBC lapped up every detail of Emwazi’s life and reported it all with relish…especially when Cage revealed a recording of the Jihadi Junkie claiming harrassment by MI5 had radicalised him….of course a cynic might ask why MI5 already had an interest in him…or were they just ‘profiling’  a poor old innocent Muslim lad?

Curiously the BBC isn’t in the slightest bit interested that the revelation that Emwazi’s claim that MI5 practically renditioned him from Tanzania and this led to him being radicalised is bunk….he was drunk on the flight to Tanzania and was deported by Tanzanian authorities.

Why the lack of BBC interest all of a sudden?  It obviously does not suit their narrative about persecuted Muslims and it reveals the BBC’s anti-‘War on Terror’ collaborators, Cage, to be an unreliable witness….making the BBC’s stance on the Wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and Guantanamo Bay, very questionable.

Craig at ‘Is the BBC biased?’ has done a tremendous job transcribing a Newswatch exchange where the BBC’s news editor Paul Royall explains the reasons for the BBC’s intense interest in the Jihadi Junkie…

I think what was happening over the past week is finding out the background and the details and the causes behind Mohammed Enwazi. And I actually think what happened in terms of naming Mohammed Enwazi is actually a demystifying of the story and actually helps us and the audience understand why people end up doing these horrific things and helps our understanding of so-called Islamic State, and what is actually a really difficult, hard story and thing that is going on around the whole at the moment.

…it’s important to understand the background to Mohammed Enwazi, to understand how he became radicalised and the story behind him.


Does he not think that explaining that Cage and the Jihadi Junkie are absolute liars engaged in a war of words against democracy would help to demystify things a bit?




Don’t know if you watched the Andrew Neil hosted This Week last night? Mr Neil continues to be the exception that proves the rule regarding BBC bias. He is scrupulously even handed and should be what all BBC journalism aspires to. Instead, he is the aberration but nonetheless always worth watching. Last evening he interviewed Asim Qureshi, the “research director” at “human rights” organisation CAGE. Asim is a vile piece of work, in the view of many, and Neil allowed him to dig a grave for himself with consummate ease. However what struck me as the MOST telling comment was when Michael Portillo wondered out loud WHY the BBC had allowed Qureshi show a free reign across its airwaves for the past week? In the case of This Week it is clear he was there to be dissected – and a good thing – but on the majority of BBC programmes he has been able to get away with his deplorable and appalling excuse making for Jihad. Thoughts?