The Ladies in White are a Cuban dissident group formed in 2013 by the wives of political prisoners.
Odd isn’t it? Odd how Cuba’s political prisoners were for so long forgotten by the BBC as it instead attacked America over Guantanamo Bay….a prison camp based on Cuba. How must the Cuban political prisoners feel to have for so long been ignored in favour of Islamist terrorists despite being just over the fence in effect?
The BBC also ignored the millions who were killed in the Congo in faviour of attacking Israel. Why?
45,000 a month were dying in the Congo, half of them children, 5.4 million since the war started. And yet Israel’s self-defence actions were the BBC’s main concern as it continued to fight off the Muslim attacks that have tried to wipe it off the face of the earth for nearly 70 years.
The BBC, not really bringing you the news, just bringing you what it wants you to hear.
> The BBC also ignored the millions who were killed in the Congo
But they didn’t ignore them. Here’s a BBC news story that’s contemporaneous with the one you cite.
> The BBC, not really bringing you the news, just bringing you what it wants you to hear.
Biased BBC: never really caring how brazenly hypocritical its overgrown adolescents are.
Jerrod, Thank you for sharing an 8 year old piece from an obscure part of the bbc news web site. I dare say you might find other references to the congo too. However to compare that with the incessant anti jewish/israel attacks from the left is ludicrous.
No one pretends Israel is immune from criticisms but how can the BBC ignore the hideous activities of Hamas? They are stomach turning.
If you get your news form the BBC/Guardian then you will be aware of how slow they have been to reveal the anti-Semitism of the left, not least with in the labour party. Though finally there is some reluctant reporting:
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/mar/18/labour-antisemitism-jews-jeremy-corbyn
Oh and where on earth is that nice Tim Wilcox?
Jerrod the left has been anti semitic for years.
> Jerrod, Thank you for sharing an 8 year old piece from an obscure part of the bbc news web site.
I linked to the BBC’s coverage of the same report that Alan linked to. Do keep up.
And as for “an obscure part of the BBC News web site”, it looks like it was in the Africa news section, which is the most appropriate part. If you want to consider that “obscure”, well, that’s your shout.
And thank you for your input Jerrod,
However, you haven’t answered the problem that is the reason for this thread and my reply. I.e. the BBC’s presentation, that troubles so many of us on this site and elsewhere, regarding the reporting of Israel when compared to its enemies along with the anti-Semitism of the left, not least with in the Labour party.
SS – the BBC has also neatly consigned to the Memory Hole the three full-scale wars waged by the Arab nations against Israel, their refusal to accept a two-state solution (on at least three occasions), Hamas’ continuing commitment to the destruction of Israel, the first Jihad which saw the rapid and violent spread of Islam out of Arabia and into the Middle East and subsequently well into Europe and, last but not least (listen up, ‘Horrible Histories’), the fact the Crusades were largely a desperate response to the latter when it looked like Islam was going to conquer all before it (ugh, that sounds depressingly familiar).
Add in the myths peddled about ‘Palestine’ and ‘Palestinians’ by the BBC’s right-on historians and you’re left with the filthiest, stinkiest dung heap of lies and anti-Israel bias this side of Arafat’s grave.
‘Educate and inform’? My arse.
indeed!
History always has a variety of viewpoints and quite rightly so, but on the bbc it is just one, single, relentless view.
So, one story from 2008 on the Bongo, compared to HOW MANY attacking Israel, Jerrod?
Well, Alan provided a single link to a non-BBC site in his frankly preposterous claim that the BBC ignored events in the Congo. He lied.
But if you’re okay with him bullshitting you because you’re happy being fed lies in order to sustain your own prejudice, by all means ignore that Biased BBC’s most prolific poster has an inability to tell the truth.
Or you could encourage him to stop lying. Your call.
“… Biased BBC’s most prolific poster…”
You do,yourself an injustice. Late night? Or early doors?
It would be interesting to collate the relative coverage of the CAR situation whilst all of W1A were chatting to poolside waiters throughout SA during the Mandelathon.
C4 had a few stories, but I think they got away with it.
Maybe your call could be to BBC DPA to see if they have any stats? Tell us how that goes, given the BBC’s commitment to impartiality and transparency.
I’m only joshing with you, Jerrod.
For those wanting the Balen Report to be published, you might want to go and have a word with whoever is responsible for writing the wikipedia page on it. From the introduction:
“Eventually one year later Helen Boaden, Head of BBC News HILARIOUSLY claimed to believe that this was “an editorial misjudgment”. There have been plenty of other similar issues since the report. In 2006 Middle-East correspondent Orla Guerin claimed the Town of Bint Jbeil had been ‘wiped out’ by the Israelis, and showed invalid footage to support this. It had not in fact been wiped out and Channel 4’s Alex Thomson, the same day, reported (from the same street) that the town was “pretty much untouched by the Israeli attack”, showing that Orla Guerin HAS AN AGENDA AGAINST ISRAEL. [4] When the two news reports were compared it became embarrassingly obvious that Guerin had completely misled the public. In 2005 The Israeli government UNDERSTANDABLY accused Ms Guerin of being ‘anti-Semitic’ due to her sympathetic reporting of an Islamic suicide bomber.”
Pathetic and amateurish.
Excellent find, 4D – but I’d prefer ‘sinister and devious’ to ‘pathetic and amateurish’.
That is reported like that so half-wits like Jerrod/Zero/Scotty can go down Trafalgar Square and smash McDonald’s window.
Jerrod.
Have you read the Balen report?
Please let us know if you have, because many people would love to see what it said, but strangely the BBC have moved heaven and earth to prevent its publication.
No matter haven’t. But I’m sure Alan will be able to fabricate something for you if you like.
“No matter haven’t”.
Late night it is. You may need a Snickers.
Is the same BOT being employed here as used on the Daily comments? 😉
Good point Mallard. Does anyone know why the BBC is suppressing the Balen Report. After all we are paying for it so we should be able to read it. I am almost tempted to think it must be highly critical of the BBC !
“Biased BBC: never really caring how brazenly hypocritical its overgrown adolescents are.”
Oh dear Jerrod, you don’t do yourself any favours. A week ago of so you were complaining at people abusing you, yet you seem incapable of posting anything without being offensive.
Whether the BBC covered the situation in the Congo sufficiently is one thing, but anyone with half a brain could see that the coverage of events in Gaza was wildly disproportionate. The BBC were not alone in this, much of the mainstream media were involved. The non publication of the Balen report is a very serious matter and does not demonstrate any real willingness on behalf of the BBC towards honest reporting.
oldartist, Simple rule, never trust anything the BBC says.
The BBC were not alone in this, much of the mainstream media were involved.
Old Artist – do you mean like this:
Dear Members of the Mainstream Media,
You’ve been awesome! Everyone knows that we start unwinnable wars with Israel because the real victory happens when you predictably side with us each time. And you’ve been so supportive of our strategy that we really want to acknowledge your helpfulness…..
-Never calling us jihadists even though we persecute Christians (like the ISIS, which just compelled Mosul’s Christians to convert to Islam). The forced conversion, expulsion, or murder of Christians and other religious minorities by Islamists has been happening for millennia, as assiduously documented in Crucified Again, but such historical context is thankfully absent from your reporting on our conflict with Israel.
-Downplaying how bad we are for Gazans by not reporting on, for example, our attack on the very Israeli power station that provides electricity to 70,000 Gazans. Thankfully, you also ignored how the Israelis — in their stupid display of goodwill — exposed their workers to the perils of our rockets so that they could restore power to Gaza.
-Minimally reporting on our corruption, unfair wealth, or vast expenditures on tunnels to attack Israel while ordinary Palestinians grew poorer.
-Overlooking how — to maximize Palestinian deaths — we store our missiles in an UNRWA-run school and how, when UNRWA finds out, they just hand us back our missiles……
etc etc etc
http://www.thecommentator.com/article/5114/a_thank_you_letter_from_hamas_to_the_media
Reports of several protestors against Obama being arrested in Cuba
Bbc working out how to spin it against Trump as we speak
“…The BBC, not really bringing you the news, just bringing you what it wants you to hear.”
Or, as I always like to say: ‘The BBC: Some of the news, some of the time’.
The ever impartial Jon Sopel (for it is he) gives us his balanced and totally non-partisan opinion of the hellhole that is communist Cuba, to which his favourite socialist El Presidente is making an ‘historic’ visit:
At the scene: Jon Sopel, BBC North America editor
Cuba is one of the most exotic places I have visited. The mix of crumbling but beautiful Spanish colonial, 1950s Americana, and 1970s Soviet utilitarian, all laced with plentiful mojito cocktails and the sound of salsa, is beguiling. It’s fabulous.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-35856126
That’s all you need to know.
Obi, and no poverty !
James Rubin was the totally-expected Yank of choice to big up Omabas trip to Cuba.
So it turned out-the reliable Democrat shill for Obama duly turned up just before the 8am news on Today.
But-it didn`t go according to plan-and to be fair to Humphrys , he was not the Democrat spongebag that a Webb or Husain would have been.
No-James was not happy…not happy at all.
Obamas last pathetic effort to “make history” with a superannuated high school prom in effect.
Worst and most ineffective US President, who trawled the world making nearly everything worse.
Gold to lead in reverse alchemy-say Libya, Iraq…and a half cocked dupe for North Korea, Burma didn`t need him-and even his “success” with Iran is debatable(I`ll say,James).
Can only assume that Obama had found a new caddy…for James had clearly “not had his snickers”.
Still-more truth on the fatuous and lavender flatus of the Pontius Potus than the BBC would normally allow.
Thankfully Bill Clinton wasn`t able to get over there to try some cigars in their authentic and bronzed setting.
Yes, I have egged Rubins pudding somewhat-but the meaning was similar, and Rubin isn`t quite the rube I`d thought he was.
To me, the Left and Cuba is like New Labour and Pinochet-student fantasies, disguised as politics…but what else from the student rags who find themselves in power, due to indifference from us,and ambition from them?
OK, so we seem to be going back to Israel again. Why?
It is curious how the same nonsense repeats itself over years. Someone complains that the BBC doesn’t report and a Jerrod (or Scott or various previous incarnations of same) points out a handful or less examples the BBC has obscured.
Several techniques employed by the BBC:
1) Regionalise the story: Instead of reporting on the homepage confine it to as small a region as possible where one would not look unless one knew where to look. Granted Africa is a larger region than South West Wales but who, unless they are specifically interested reads the Africa news daily?
2) Disappear the story: Stories in tune with the BBC agenda remain high in the hierarchy of stories for days or months. Stories that don’t are removed and require you to search — but you have to know that it was written in the first place.
3) One of worst search engines, in the world: Does anyone have an explanation?
deegee, Spot on, especially Point 3 . It can either be incompetence or deliberate. With the BBC it is often difficult to know which. But in this case , I suspect they instructed their highly paid website consultants to make the search engine as poor as possible. That might actually be more difficult than making a good search engine. Overall, the BBC’s website is one of the worst I have seen.