Things you wish you’d never asked.

Mishal Husain on the Today programme took a direct hit this morning that seemed to put her completely off her stroke.

Husain was interviewing Sir John Sawers, ex head of MI6. (08:36)

She asked him a question about radicalisation…

There’s a lot been said about how people are radicalised and we hear a lot about the internet.  A lot less is heard about why people are radicalised.  Why do you think young British Muslims appear to be vulnerable in this way?

Interestng word that ‘vulnerable’.  Are the extremist headchoppers sad ‘victims’ in her mind, unable to make informed, conscious decisions?

Sawers’ answer wasn’t what she expected….

There are two main answers.  One, people in this country are not as integrated as we would like them to be.  Other religions, whether Hindu, Sikh or Jewish, are very well integrated into this country.  Muslims are less well integrated and there are a number of social and economic factors related to that.

The second problem relates to Islam itself.  There are many competing branches of Islam, there are schisms, Shia and Sunni, different branches of Sunni Islam, many of these going back to doctrine and interpretations of doctrine in the first century of the religion.

The Islamic religion as a whole is not well geared to reviving and modernising itself so that it meets the values and needs of a 21st century society.

Paradoxically Sawers then swerved in the usual kneejerk genuflection that people make towards political correctness and claimed that Islam was perfectly compatible with other religions.  Note his claim about the lack of integration….due to social and economic factors.  He is contradicting himself there as Hindus, Sikhs and Jews integrate and must have faced the same problems…the defining difference is Islam.  Most Muslim ‘radicals’ are in fact highly educated and from comfortably well-off families…Jihadi John being a computer studies graduate, the pro-ISIS ranter on the internet the other week being a first class honours graduate with a good job at a successful law firm. Again the defining characteristic is that they are believers in the teachings and doctrines of Islam which have very particular commands about Jihad and ‘defending’ other Muslims and Muslim lands. Muslims may be ‘integrated’  in a limited sense in that they have jobs or go to university but Islam teaches them that they are separate…Islam creates the ‘Them and Us’ attitude that is so dangerous….I’m certain you remember Mehdi Hasan preaching about the Kufar, those immoral, ignorant cattle.

Sawers goes on to say that there is a big political challenge that can only really be taken up by leaders in the Muslim world.  Husain then goes off the tracks it seems and makes some confusing points by mentioning the BBC survey that said 20% of Muslims believed Western Liberal Democracy was incompatible with Islam….Husain seemed to suggest that the problem was with the Democracies, that it is up to the liberal Western World to deal with that incompatibility and not Muslims.  In other words the West must adapt to Islam not Islam adapt to the West.  Very Tariq Ramadan.

Husain then wanted to know if the three ISIS recruits were victims or intelligent people making informed decisions.  Sawers again made the swerve and to Husain’s quiet delight proclaimed them ‘victims’.

After the interview, which was quite wideranging and covered more ground than just radicalisation, we had the news bulletins and their take on his words….and note that immediately following the news about Sawers’ comments there came a report on Pegida in Newcastle.

What we were told was that Sawers believed that Russia posed a growing threat to Britain, not a word about his very significant answers to the question about why people are radicalised and no link at all to Pegida and its demonstrations.

That question about radicalisation is after all the one that is on everybodies’ lips…why are Muslims being radicalised?  And yet when the ex-head of MI6 gives us what he believes to be the answer the BBC omits to headline it.

Here is the BBC’s headline for the interview…

Sir John Sawers, ex-MI6 chief, warns of Russia ‘danger’

 

In a long report the overwhelming part of which was spent on discussing Russia they tacked on a small bit at the end that mentioned his comments on Islam in the UK.

Islamist terrorism and efforts to enforce the Islamisation of British Society are clear and present dangers and yet the BBC downplays the problem and doesn’t like the answers that Sawers gave as it put the blame squarely where it should be.

Here is another headline relating to the same interview..

‘Jihadi John’: Ex-MI6 chief defends security services

 

Again nothing about radicalisation and Islam.

And another headline..

Former MI6 chief: ‘Russia always an issue of concern’

 

All Russia and no Islam.  Where is a similar report that singles out his words on Islam?

And then we have then news reports on Pegida using odd language that seemed to celebrate the counter-demonstration…the BBC telling us that Pegida was ‘dwarfed’ by the UAF.

Craig at ‘Is the BBC biased?’ has noticed the same in the BBC reports of the demonstration.

The BBC’s opening lines tell the tale of the BBC’s preferred narrative…

‘Anti-Islamisation’ group Pegida UK holds Newcastle march

More than 1,500 protesters have demonstrated against the first rally in Britain by a group opposed to what it calls the “Islamisation of Europe”.

Supporters of the UK branch of German group Pegida gathered at Newcastle city centre’s Bigg Market.

Critics claimed they were anti-Muslim and had come to “promote expression of hatred”, which they denied.

 

“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

 Net foreign immigration is 352,000.

The borders remain open to one and all and the massed hordes of immigrants are still ‘flocking’ to Britain.

The BBC told us today that immigration made the economy successful and it is this economic success that brings the immigrants. I’m certain you could all pick holes in the BBC’s pro-immigration propaganda.

Net immigration is stated as 298,000.

But that doesn’t give the true picture, nor the true scale of problems to come.

The truly interesting number is one that tells us how many non-British citizens come here net of British citizens’ movements in and out of the country.  This would reveal the disturbing fact that non-British citizen immigration is huge and means that the native British population is gradually being thinned down as the ratio of foreign immigrants grows in comparison.

The net migration figure for non-British citizens entering this country was 352,000, around 140,000 Brits left and 88,000 returned.

The ratio of Brits to foreigners is gradually being eroded and you have to ask how long before Britons are strangers in their own land?

Such a question is important for many reasons.  Diversity does not bring stability, trust nor peace and mass immigration and open borders will bring about the end of the ‘Welfare State’….for example the NHS is already heading towards crisis point as the population grows beyond capacity with the potential that the NHS becomes insurance based and not free at the point of delivery.

The BBC is always telling us that faith in politics has been eroded and no one trusts politicians.  The reason for that is down to two policies in  the main…immigration and Europe…whilst the majority of the population want to limit both, the political and media class have sought to suppress and ignore such concerns as Peter Hitchens tells us…

‘As diversity increases, democracy weakens. Faith in democracy declines when people see they cannot make a difference., and mass immigration, a policy clearly and consistently opposed by most people and yet which no mainstream politician will speak against, has shaken the public’s trust in politics. Since politicians will not listen to people’s concerns, they come to the conclusion that politics is pointless’.

‘All the arguments for multiculturalism- that people feel safer, more comfortable among people of the same group, and that they need their own cultural identity – are arguments against immigration, since English people must also feel the same. If people categorised as “White Britons” are not afforded that indulgence because they are a majority, do they attain it when they become a minority?’.

Immigration and Europe…..any wonder UKIP gets so many votes?

The reality is that ‘politics’ isn’t broken, in the main things trundle along reasonably well except for these two major issues which could change the game radically this election.

I did enjoy listening to a BBC interview with Yvette Cooper when she was allowed to get away with this:

“[Home Secretary] Theresa May’s obsession with the target has led her to target valuable university students, who bring billions into Britain whilst doing nothing to make the labour market fairer for local workers, preventing undercutting by exploitative employers or putting in place proper border controls so we can count people in and out to enforce the rules,” she said.

 

You probably already know that Labour aide Andrew Neather long ago revealed that Labour introduced its mass immigration plot with complete disregard for the effect it would have on the working classes’ lives…

He acknowledged that “nervous” ministers made no mention of the policy at the time for fear of alienating Labour voters.

“Part by accident, part by design, the Government had created its longed-for immigration boom.

“But ministers wouldn’t talk about it. In part they probably realised the conservatism of their core voters: while ministers might have been passionately in favour of a more diverse society, it wasn’t necessarily a debate they wanted to have in working men’s clubs in Sheffield or Sunderland.”

Sir Andrew Green, chairman of the Migrationwatch think tank, said: “Now at least the truth is out, and it’s dynamite.

 

Labour lied and the BBC still doesn’t like to raise that revelation and crucify Labour for its policies.

Enjoy…..by John Ware in Standpoint

Jihad Central

The number of British jihadis far exceeds the total for the rest of Europe. Yet still we puzzle over why Britain became the jihadi capital of  Europe.

One man who thinks he does is the American political scientist and historian, Robert Leiken, a director of the immigration and national security program at the Nixon Centre in Washington. His latest book, Europe’s Angry Muslims, finds the main ingredient is Britain’s approach to immigration ……..Above all, the underlying explanation for so many British Muslims falling under the spell of jihadists like Omar Bakri (twice granted asylum) was Britain’s desire to grant Muslims autonomy in the name of “diversity”.

Time to Wise Up to the Muslim Brotherhood

Steven Merley, a former financial trader turned investigator of extremist movements, has probed the Brotherhood for over a decade. It is particularly active in Britain and according to Merley, its strategy is to “create mischief” with a heavy emphasis on Muslim victimhood including the charge that the West has been waging a war on Islam. This has been a powerful radicalising factor in young Muslims. 

The Brotherhood’s tactic to advance this strategy, says Merley, has been to establish a dizzying number of organisations and initiatives which create the impression of broad-based support. In reality, the sponsors are the same individuals and groups whose leaders have not changed over decades. 

The Plot to Islamise Birmingham’s Schools

The roots of the Trojan Horse agenda predate Gove by at least a generation. They go back to the creation of the main umbrella for Muslim schools, the Association of Muslim Schools UK (AMS UK), the International Board of Educational Research and Resources (IBERR), and the MCB. Tahir Alam and some of the Park View Brothers have been associated with or held positions in these bodies, which have been inspired by a broad global Islamist movement that has morphed from the original Cairo-based Muslim Brotherhood. That movement sees no distinction between Islam as a spiritual faith, a way of life and a political ideology. Some say that following the collapse of Communism, Islamism is history’s next big idea.

Inside The World Of ‘Non-Violent’ Islamism

The Muslim Council of Britain’s secretary-general, Dr Shuja Shafi: He has said he has “no idea” why young people become radicalised.

With Islamist terrorist plots now running at more than one a month, the UK counter-terrorism effort can deal only with the crocodiles that are bumping against the boat. So the Home Office is setting up a special unit that will analyse the effectiveness of government measures aimed at “draining the swamp” as the Prime Minister has put it.

The Extremism Analysis Unit (EAU) will be the first of its kind in government to gather empirical evidence about the behaviour and ideologies of extremists.

It will also explore the relationship between integration and extremism. 

Many Muslims in Birmingham, Luton, parts of London and the old northern mill towns seem resistant to integrating into the liberal mainstream. More British Muslims have gone to Syria and Iraq than there are Muslims in the British army. I understand that officials have been unable to demonstrate that any initiatives by this government or the last to promote integration have had any beneficial impact.

The EAU will attract controversy because while it will, of course, analyse all sources of extremism, its principal focus will inevitably be on Islamist extremism, because this will pose the greatest threat to national security for the foreseeable future.

 

Culture, Media and Sport – Fourth Report
Future of the BBC

 

 

No long-term future for BBC licence fee, MPs say

 

The TV licence does not have a long-term future and is likely to be replaced by a new levy within the next 15 years, a group of MPs has said.

The fee is “becoming harder and harder to justify” given changes in the media, according to the House of Commons Culture, Media and Sport Committee.

The MPs suggested every household could pay a new compulsory levy instead.

The BBC does not agree that the fee will have to be replaced, but accepts it will probably have to be modernised.

Committee chairman John Whittingdale said: “In the short term, there appears to be no realistic alternative to the licence fee, but that model is becoming harder and harder to justify and sustain.”

In light of changing technology and audience habits, the committee said “we do not see a long-term future for the licence fee in its current form”.

Any “profound changes” – such as abolishing the licence fee – should not be rushed, the report said. But it did say the BBC “must prepare for the possibility of a change in the 2020s.

The best alternative to the licence fee, the report concluded, would be a compulsory broadcasting levy paid by all households, regardless of whether they watch TV, or how they watch.

Such a system was introduced in Germany in 2013 and would do away with the need to detect and prosecute those who avoid buying a TV licence, the committee said.

“We recommend that as a minimum the licence fee must be amended to cover catch-up television as soon as possible.”

It should also no longer be a criminal offence to avoid paying the licence fee, the report said.

Other proposals made by the committee include:

• The BBC Trust should be abolished because it has mishandled crises like the Jimmy Savile scandal and is too close to the BBC management
• Instead, a new Public Service Broadcasting Commission should monitor the corporation’s performance, with an ultimate sanction of being able to withhold some funding from the BBC
• Media regulator Ofcom – not the BBC Trust – should be the final arbiter of complaints about the corporation’s impartiality and accuracy
• Part of the licence fee (or future broadcasting levy) should be used to support non-BBC public service broadcasting, such as local news and children’s programmes
• The planned BBC One +1 channel does not represent “public service value”, and the airwaves should be used for something else
• The BBC should no longer attempt to offer “something for everyone” and should not stray into areas that are well catered for by commercial broadcasters
• The BBC World Service must remain strong to ensure the UK does not lose ground to countries like China and Russia in the “global information war”

You have to understand what the root cause of radicalisation is in the Muslim community. Here’s the maths….

British Society is increasingly intolerant of Islam, that intolerance is being fostered by a sensationalist media that fuels prejudice, the intolerance and attacks on Muslims leads them to become angry, alienated and marginalised,  under such a siege they understandably feel the need to fight back and defend their prophet and their religion against these Islamophobic attacks.

 

Only its not true.  It’s the BBC narrative.  It’s the Muslim community’s narrative, it’s the radical’s narrative.

But it’s not true.

The BBC is charged with ‘sustaining citizenship and civil society’ by its Charter and it has decided that in order to do that it must lie to its audience.  Not just turn a blind eye to the truth about Islamic radicalisation but to actively work to suppress the truth, to maintain a fiction that Islam is the religion of peace, love and tolerance. They do this because they have a belief that to allow the truth to be told would see the Muslim community and Islam come under such extreme scrutiny that it would expose it irrefutably as an ideology that is incompatible with a Western, secular, liberal, democratic and humane society.

And then what?

So instead the BBC has decided that a bit of ‘collateral damage’ is acceptable…the BBC has decided that in order to maintain that fiction about Islam it is willing to sacrifice, not just that very precious liberal, free, democratic society that is increasingly the victim of creeping Islamisation, but it is also prepared to see dead bodies, non-Muslim ones, in the streets as the necessary murders that are the price to be paid for ‘peace’.

Dramatic stuff, but true.

There is a war being fought and it’s not just with guns, bullets and bombs.  The Media, far from being prejudiced against Muslims, is the weapon of choice for those who seek to make Islam the dominant religion and political force in Britain, and the BBC is at the forefront of the charge.  And, this is the important thing to note, those who are ‘fighting’ this media war are not the obvious ‘radicals like Anjem Choudray, they come dressed in western suits and talk of reform and tolerance but always blame Muslim ‘anger’ on British society on that phantom menace, ‘Islamophobia’.  Of course what is even more frighetening is that these men have not just managed to position themselves as authorities on questions of Islam, its place in Western Society and ‘radicalisation’, as Media spokesmen of choice but have also inveigled their way into the heart of Government advising it on matters of religion and radicalisation.

For instance Islamist Tariq Ramadan sits on the Foreign Office Advisory Group on freedom of religion or belief which is intended to ‘advise FCO Ministers and staff on how to build on the active approach they already take to promoting and protecting the right to freedom of religion or belief worldwide.’

Ramadan’s boss was Baroness Warsi whose credentials are also highly questionable in that nearly everything she does and says seems to support the Islamist outlook….the most obvious of which was her belief that Israel should be disarmed and terrorist group Hamas armed.

Warsi is well known….just days ago Andrew Gilligan in the Telegraph wrote this article denouncing her and the government’s foolish policies, Islamic ‘radicals’ at the heart of Whitehall, and in which he noted that ‘Baroness Warsi gave official roles to people with links to Islamist groups’.  She was also an outspoken critic of the anti-radicalisation ‘Prevent’ project and supporter of the Islamist student organisation Fosis.

Gilligan says..

Baroness Warsi then, a very controversial person with a highly dubious reputation, and yet another ‘goto’ spokesperson for the BBC on issues of Islam in the UK. An example of the dangers in employing these ‘radicals’ as government advisers is this from Jihadwatch…Sweden’s “Islamophobia” expert joins the Islamic State.

Despite Gilligan’s article just a few days ago the BBC chose to ask Warsi for her opinions  (08:10) about how the Muslim community in Britain feel about their place in Society based on a BBC poll which, part of its on ‘war on Public (false) perceptions about Islam’, which the BBC trumpeted as a glowing testimony for Muslim attitudes in Britain claiming…Most British Muslims ‘oppose Muhammad cartoons reprisals’

At no time was she asked about the allegations made by Gilligan which you might think the BBC’s premier current affairs programme, with its elite interviewers in the saddle, might have broached.  Instead we had Justin Webb doing an imitation of an over-ebullient Spaniel about to go out on a walk…Warsi threw him a few balls which he eagerly chased, enjoying the game immensely, rushing back to the mistress for her to throw him some more. Webb failed to challenge Warsi at all on her claims and bought into her narrative so much that he even started to add his own derogatory comments about other faiths being as bad as Islam in their extremism.  Even Warsi had to bring him to heel on that one.

Before she came on we heard a report from one Muslim community that in essence, as laid out above, blamed the rise of radicalisation on British, non-Muslim society, which we are assured, has attacked and marginalised Muslims egged on by an Islamophobic Press.

However one message to take away was that, yes they were extremists, extreme in their love for their prophet and for their religion.  Curiously the BBC didn’t think that an important factor in any Islamist radicalisation…because of course, as we heard, the ‘radicals’ weren’t real Muslims.

Warsi was able to articulate the same old prejudices and blame anyone but Muslims and their religion for the dangerous situation we find ourselves in.  She claims there is no evidence that can indicate why Muslims become radicalised and that of course 27% of Muslims may support killing people for drawing Muhammed but she explained, you have to look at their reasoning behind such decisions before you denounce them.  In other words she too thinks the Charlie Hebdo killings were justifiable….and an interesting turn of phrase from her…that it was unfortunate that Charlie Hebdo led to the death of ‘civilians’…..is she saying other, non-civilian, targets would have been acceptable?  And again Warsi blamed the Media for whipping up anti-Islam prejudices.

The BBC is not alone in excusing Muslim terrorism, the Guardian here giving a perfect example of the thinking that ‘understands’, and thereby justifies, murder….

Charlie Hebdo attackers: born, raised and radicalised in Paris

The Guardian tries to erase Islam from the picture and chooses to look for other causes for radicalisation saying..

What the three had in common was growing up on the margins of French society

The article is a very long one, nearly the whole body of the text builds on the narrative of the alientated, disenfranchised and marginalised young men driven to radicalisation by such factors.  Only at the very last paragraph do we get a clue that that is rubbish…

“People say simply discrimination plus social malaise equals terrorism, that’s not true.”

Of the families she had recently spoken to she had seen children of educated parents, including doctors, or youngsters leaving medical school, and many from non-Muslim backgrounds. The profiles of jihadis radicalised and self-radicalised in France were increasingly complex and nuanced.

 

But even that is not true…for it has long been known that the majority of those radicalised came from the ranks of the educated and well-to-do….not marginalised, not ignorant and not poor….what they do all have in common is being Muslim.

Dan Hodges in the Telegraph has a completely different take on the BBC poll….

Over a quarter of British Muslims have sympathy for the Charlie Hebdo terrorists. That is far too many

This morning the BBC published details of a major poll of the attitudes of Britain’s Muslims. The headline on the front of the BBC website linking to the research states: “Muslims ‘oppose cartoon reprisals’”. This of course relates to attitudes within the Muslim community towards the recent Charlie Hebdo attacks.

It’s a reassuring headline. It’s also wrong.

Below the report is an article by BBC Today program reporter Sima Kotecha. It begins: “Islam is a religion of peace and love – not violence.”

That statement – and those sentiments – are simply not compatible with the BBC’s own research.

We are going to have to start to reassess what we mean by “moderate Islam”.

The BBC is wrong. Many Muslims have sympathy with the Charlie Hebdo killings. Far too many.

 

This is the Telegraph’s report on the OECD’s conclusions about the UK economy…

OECD head: Britain’s economic recovery ‘a text book example’

George Osborne’s handling of the economic recovery has been “remarkable” and Britain must now stick to his plans and “finish the job”, the head of the OECD has said.

Angel Gurria, General Secretary of the international economic forecaster, congratulated George Osborne on the success of his policies as he hailed Britain as a “text book” example for other nations.

He said that while further cuts are needed, Britain has already done much of the “heavy lifting” and future austerity measures will not need to be as deep.

He said that Britain’s economy is now out-performing the US, adding that his main message to the Chancellor is “well done” and that Britain deserves a “pat on the back”

His comments represent a significant boost to the Conservatives, who have repeatedly warned that Labour could threaten Britain’s recovery.

Mr Gurria said the performance of the labour market had been “remarkable”, with three million jobs created over the past five years. Relative to the size of the UK population, the figures were even better than those recorded in the US over the period, he said.

“Even as unemployment has fallen, inflationary pressures have vanished … real wages are on the rise,” Mr Gurria told a press conference in the Treasury.

“We are predicting this economic expansion will continue this year and next. What a difference effective economic policies can make.”

He added that there are strong signals that wages are starting to rise, but warned that the economic recovery could be in jeopardy unless there are further cuts.

“My main message to you today is well done. Well done so far, Chancellor. But finish the job. Britain has a long term economic plan, but it needs to stick with it.

But he insisted the “biggest single challenge” for the UK – and much of the West – was to improve productivity in the labour force.

“Labour productivity has been weak, even compared to other countries which have also enjoyed solid job creation since 2010, such as Canada and the US,” Mr Gurria said.

“Reviving productivity is thus vital to maintain high growth and boost competitiveness. But it is also essential to boost real wages and purchasing power.”

 

The BBC doesn’t like criticism, it likes to hand it out but doesn’t like it when the tables are turned.

Last year it started to operate a new policy of attempting to charge down any criticism it received in the Press…

Contact right! BBC’s rapid rebuttal unit goes into action against the Sun

 

The Guardian told us to…

Dig your foxholes good and deep, people – it’s going to be a long war …

 

And so it seems…the BBC has once again struck out at the Sun for their report on payments to MPs who appear on the BBC…as ‘Retweeted’ by the Mail (It’s free!)..

BBC pays out £200,000 of taxpayers’ cash in fees to MPs who appear on shows with Labour’s Diane Abbott and Alan Johnson pocketing the most

The BBC’s reply?….

But is the BBC’s reply the whole truth and nothing but the truth?

The reply in brief, and more readable…

The Head of the IPCC, that highly influential and political climate change propaganda pressure group, has resigned.  It’s on the front page of the BBC’s website but way, way down the page in the Environment section.

UN climate head Rajendra Pachauri resigns

The head of the UN climate change panel (IPCC), Rajendra Pachauri, has resigned amid sexual harassment allegations.

In a letter to UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, Mr Pachauri said he was unable to provide strong leadership.

Indian police are investigating a complaint from a 29-year-old woman working in his office in Delhi.

Lawyers for the woman say the harassment included unwanted emails as well as text and phone messages. Mr Pachauri has denied the allegations.

 

Analysis: Roger Harrabin BBC Environment Analyst

Dr Pachauri’s resignation is a shock

So much of a shock that the BBC don’t make it headline news, preferring to stick with Tory Malcolm Rifkind for their big story.  Funny how Labour’s Straw has been downplayed, Humphry’s interview yesterday wasn’t exactly a feet to the fire job, whilst the Tory boy is up in lights.

Like Harrabin’s narrative…how ‘Patchy’, after seeing the light, converted from sceptic to believer…

Known to friends as “Patchy”, Dr Pachauri’s tenure has been controversial. He was installed after the US said the previous chair was too alarmist. They thought Dr Pachauri, as an Indian transport economist, would take a pro-development line.

After immersion in scientific research he too became persuaded that climate change is a real threat, deserving more action from political leaders – and he said so in outspoken terms.

As far as I can see Pachauri  has always been a believer, an advocate for renewable energy and interested in the social effects of climate change.

Harrabin, just another propagandist.  What did he do with that £15,000 the climate change hypers at the Tyndall Centre gave him to promote climate change ‘communication’?

‘The bad news is that culture and creativity are being erased from the classroom, and that audiences for the arts are substantially white, middle class, affluent and well educated.’

 

Yesterday the BBC launched it’s ‘Get Creative’ campaign to encourage greater participation in the Arts of all kinds and broadcast a programme talking especially about the Arts, or lack of, in schools.

Ostensibly very worthy ideals but is there a very political underlying message to this when you realise the background to the project, what ‘sparked’ it, and who supports it and why?

Is there a message other than ‘Get Creative’ to this campaign launched in the run up to an election?  Are we being peddled a Labour policy from 50 years ago?

The BBC tells us that:

“For those who take part, this activity becomes an essential part of their quality of life. Expressing yourself creatively enhances your skills, understanding, confidence and wellbeing – and taking part in creative activity collectively in a group strengthens communities.”

 

Today the Labour Party says ..

Labour promises more arts in school

Mr Miliband says he wants to put “policy for arts and culture and creativity at the heart of the next Labour government’s mission”.

He warned there was insufficient access to the arts in school, pointing to evidence from last week’s Warwick Commission on the Future of Cultural Values.

The report from Warwick University warned that creative subjects were at risk of being squeezed out of schools.

 

I’m certain it is just a coincidence that Labour launches its Arts policy for schools, usng the WU report as a basis as the BBC launches its ‘get Creative’ campaign…. just as the launch of the BBC/Guardian attack on tax evasion came within days of Miliband’s announcement of Labour’s own attack on tax havens.

However, in this programme at around 09:25 the presenter admits it is the declining number of children in the last five years doing Art at school (so linked to the Coalition’s education policies there)  that ‘sparked a new BBC led Campaign ‘Get Creative’….where lies, he asks, the responsibility for nurturing the Arts? Do we need these top down approaches whether from the BBC or a new education policy from Government?

The programme references the ideas of Labour’s Jennie Lee way back in 1965.  So you might guess where they are going with this.

Tony Hall, BBC Director General and afficonado of the Arts himself, has been instrumental in setting this up in conjunction with Warwick University, amongst others, which produced this report….which we are told…

….gives a clear message to society: that government and the cultural and creative industries need to work together to ensure that everyone has equal access to a rich cultural education and that conditions are in place for culture and creativity to play their part in our economic success.

 

A ‘clear message’….the State must be involved in the Arts and that of course means handing out the money.

Why the need for this campaign by the politically neutral BBC?  It is sending a ‘clear message’ to voters and government….cuts to the Arts are bad, vote for the people who will fund the Arts and enhance your life.

The BBC tells us…

Creativity and the arts are being squeezed out of schools, a major report has said.

 

Squeezed out of schools by the Coalition’s education policies and cuts….or so we are led to believe.

Yesterday R4 broadcast this programme which I referenced above:

The Front Row Debate

Are artists owed a living? John Wilson hosts a public debate to mark the launch of the BBC’s Get Creative campaign and to open a national conversation exploring the relationship between the state and the arts.

The programme was supposedly a debate but essentially had one message…we need more Art and more funding from Government…Government cuts are damaging the Arts and without the Arts life is hardly worth a candle.

The pogramme admitted that the ‘get Creative’ campaign was intended to change Government policy on the Arts and that the present Arts’ funding shames the Coalition, it’s a tragedy, the Arts are dying we are told.

As an added extra we had the usual tirade against Middle Class or Upper Class artists…there are just too many of them…too much ‘Oxbridge’ thanks.  Presumably Art is only authentic if ‘Working Class’….and of course it goes without saying, more non-white people needed….more ‘Diversity’.

The programme was highly political on its own without any connection to a BBC campaign launched to undermine and discredit Government Arts’ policy.

As said before the programme referenced the ‘vision’ of Labour’s Jennie Lee in 1965 as a possibly ideal way forward for the Arts and Government…as described by the Guardian..

Jennie Lee’s vision for the arts is as relevant today as it was 50 years ago

Fifty years on, we are still fighting for arts policy changes that Lee considered as crucial to our everyday lives and wellbeing as the NHS.

Last week, the Warwick Commission’s report on The Future of Cultural Value was published. The good news is that the arts are a significant contributor to the economy; the bad is that culture and creativity are being erased from the classroom, and that audiences for the arts are substantially white, middle class, affluent and well educated. Worryingly, there is a downward trend in participation.

Here’s what Tony Hall, director general of the BBC and a PHF trustee, said about Warwick University’s report:

“The Commission’s Report is a blueprint for the continued success of arts and culture in Britain. It’s written for everyone – right across our industry and in every walk of life – and I join with its authors in calling for all of those who have a part to play to give themselves permission to believe in a better future for the arts. Its conclusions will help us all deliver that vision.”

An entirely neutral BBC DG, head of the impartial BBC, just before an election, the day before the Labour Party launches its own promise about support for the Arts in schools, launches a campaign to support the Arts, especially in schools, and to promote the need for more State funding.  Tony Hall was once Chief Executive of the Royal Opera House and someone who had a close working relationship with the Labour government in relation to the Arts….and when you look at who produced the Warwick University report it is just Tony Hall’s old mates….nearly every one from the Arts world.

Not saying this is at all political, or indeed in the BBC’s own interest, but this is what some of the ‘Stars’ who are supporting this BBC campaign said in 2011:

Entertainers warn over arts cuts

The 46 names from British film, TV and the stage say they feel compelled to ”speak out”.

In an open letter, they say that arts and culture across the UK are facing ”the biggest threat” in decades.

The letter states: ”Before the last election the Government promised to usher in a ‘golden age’ for the arts. The reality couldn’t be further from this.

”With the reductions announced in last year’s comprehensive spending review, the withdrawal of huge amounts of local authority support, the abolition of the UK Film Council and the financial pressures faced by the Arts Councils and the BBC, we are currently facing the biggest threat to funding the arts and culture have experienced in decades.”

The Telegraph published this article about so-called cultural appropriation, the adoption of other races’ or culture’s art,  music and style…apparently it’s not allowed…at least for White people to ‘Black up’, metaphorically, culturally, speaking.

Azealia Banks vs Iggy Azalea: ‘Privileged white people shouldn’t steal hip-hop’

 

It’s a minefield out there….cultural theft, cultural smudging, identity theft, reverse racism, bigotry, the ‘angry black woman syndrome’, minstrelsy, fetishized depictions of black people for the entertainment of white audiences…a cheap circus act….and so on.

It’s a whole academic study.  Which I think is the point.  It’s an industry for the ‘professional Black’ and not a few Whites who makes a living out of ‘campaigning’ against alleged racism.

Naturally there is genuine racism lurking out there but these people seek to create and exaggerate it and are intent on fostering anger and feelings of alienation that they leech off…parasites creating dangerous disharmony to fill their own pockets with money.

The BBC are pretty keen to go  down this road and accept that White people should not adopt Black or other races’ cultural heritage.

Alvin Hall perfectly illustrated the mindset a while back in a confused rant about racism and Black music which we looked at previously….

Viva Hate

A narrative that Hall shoehorns in regardless of the facts…..‘cultural theft’, ‘pillaging Black music’, ‘minstrelsy’ are some phrases that give a clue to the line he takes.

The USA was practically an apartheid State right up until the late 60’s, there is no doubt that that held back some musicians and Black music businesses….amongst others.

But that is not the whole picture, but it is a picture that Hall wants to present, that Blacks were controlled and exploited by Whites, and he does so despite at the same time giving us facts that contradict that narrative.

He blames racism for Blues musicians and singers not getting their rightful dues….but goes onto say that it was the Black middle class that thought Blues was below them and not something they wanted to be associated with.

He tells us that White companies just weren’t interested in Black Music…but then contradicts that….and  tells of Black music companies and radio stations that exploited Blacks.

He tells us that Whitney Houston and Michael Jackson sold out…they were compromised,  ‘whitewashed’….they weren’t authentically ‘Black’…..so highly successful…and yet Hall can’t really accept that.

He tells us that Hip hop was born from the ghetto, the ghetto that the Black Middle class left behind them….and all that was left for the remaining inhabitants was drugs, drink and crime, which they put into their music….Hip hop and Rap.

But then he tells us that it is the White folks buying the records that are  forcing and encouraging Blacks to become ‘Minstrels’, stereotypes of Black people…it is the fault of the Rap record buying public (66% white) who are to blame for ‘Gangsta Rap’…..the Whites enjoying the ‘thrill of the alien culture’.

He puts the case that success comes at a terrible price…selling their soul…and once again it is the whites who are manipulating and controlling Blacks.

Hall doesn’t seem to like success unless it is ‘authentically Black‘……and even when it is ‘Authentically Black‘ as in Rap, he claims that is just an unwelcome stereotype.

The final ironic statement about that very definitely Black music, Rap and Hip Hop, was this….

‘Now this is unacceptable…this is not who we are.’

It bubbled up again recently in this piece about ‘Native American’ art…

#BBCTrending: Fashion Week controversy over Native design

Native American fashion designer Bethany Yellowtail posted a comparison of a dress she had released last year and a design shown this week by London-based KTZ.

“The dress as stated on my website embodies a Crow design from my great great grandmother…funny I didn’t realize @ktz_official knew the Yellowtails or the Crow people,” she writes.

“It’s one thing for designers to be unoriginal and knock off other peoples designs but what happens when you blatantly take cultural valuable designs from Indigenous people? Let’s find out….#CanANativeLive #boycott #KTZ #ktzofficial #boycottKTZ”

Judge for yourself…

Personally I think she is talking out of her papoose.

We also had the subject on Woman’s Hour (10:30) a while back and Jane Garvey was excruciatingly apologetic for being white as she went on to discuss ‘White people stealing Black culture’…..we also hear a lot about those ‘Pale, male and stale’ whites who apparently control everything such as award ceremonies…and are racist…because they are white.  So racist, sexist and dismissive of a culture in one small phrase on Women’s Hour.

On cultural theft (35 mins in)…Garvey wants to know what makes Black people angry….apparently it’s Iggy Azalea who is ‘deeply offensive and racist’ for singing rap in a ‘Black’ style…it’s colonialisation all over again, a sense of entitlement to something she doesn’t have permission to use….even Myley Cyrus using Black backing singers is cultural theft, ‘accessorizing Black’.

We hear that Black cultural styles aren’t attractive on Black people and are only popularised when whites adopt them….that’s bad we learn….er….if it’s not attractive on Black people why then do white people then adopt a style that is so ‘unattractive’?

They talk of Big Butts on White women…But are J-Lo or Kim Kardashian white?  Can’t say Big Butts,  Black or White, get the vote with anyone I know in the real world.

Garvey goes along with the narrative and feeds in her own thoughts to keep it going.

Iggy Azalea is deeply offensive Garvey suggests.

Dreadlocks on White people are also Haram…..Mainstream media can’t stomach dreadlocks on Black people and they only become acceptable when Whites start to use them.

Garvey says ‘No wonder you feel so offended…I totally get that!’

However again…can’t think of anyone who thinks White people look good in Dreads…and indeed just watched ‘The Inbetweeners 2’ andone of the biggest dicks in the film had Dreads…and was, obviously, white.

It could just be that dreadlocks are just weird whatever colour skin you have and very few people can carry them off with any style.

Happily though, the media might be changing we are told.

‘Times are changing and about time too’  Garvey expresses in relief.

The BBC of course never changes its tune.

I would suggest that all this talk about cultural theft and appropriation of Black style is highly divisive and hardly inline with the BBC’s supposed task of ensuring ‘social cohesion’… It looks more like the BBC is intent on sowing discord and disharmony and inciting anger against white people for some imagined racial crime.

I am guessing that a Black person singing an Italian opera, in Italian, is not classed as ‘cultural appropriation’ by the BBC…..and Vincent Osborne is your typical ghetto boy, ain’t he just….