Great insight from our Laura…

Elections matter because they determine all our futures based on the decisions made by millions of people in the privacy of the polling booth.

Kuenssberg’s movable feast of a conclusion about who will win the election plumps reluctantly for the Tories but get how she speaks about Corbyn…the excited tone, enthusiastic about Corbyn breaking the mould of the dull, staid old politics….as always with the BBC, hoping ‘the young’ will have believed all those tall tales of them being victims of Tory austerity and Brexit and thus vote for Corbyn….

Just as when he won the leadership of the Labour Party, his candidacy, and his promises have excited voters for whom the standard political offer of recent years has come up woefully short. For Labour candidates who see this election and its expected result as an opportunity to end his control of the party that enthusiasm is a genie that may be extremely hard to wrangle back into the bottle.

Remember that, as with Mr Corbyn’s election to the Labour leadership first time round, and the European referendum, we are living through times where traditional political rules are certainly frayed. And if young people defy expectation and turn out to vote in unprecedented numbers any result is possible.

One cabinet minister told me today that if the Tories don’t win, the polls are “bonkers” and voters on the doorsteps have been “deceitful” when reporting, whether enthusiastically or grudgingly, that they will put their cross in their box.

Yet perhaps either way, the events of this campaign will be felt across the spectrum for years to come.

Astonishing when you consider how they treat Trump for his sins of wanting to control immigration and Islamic terrorism….here we have a man who has been a die-hard-Marxist all his life, a terrorist supporter, a supporter of Muslim extremists at a time when we are under attack by them, a man whose reign as Party leader has seen a rapid rise in anti-Semitism as well as political hate campaigns against his opponents, not just within the Party but in the Media as well [including Kuenssberg herself]…and the BBC cheerleads for him.  Astounding…but not surprising.

Touched by all the messages of support. Still standing! Will rejoin the fray soon. Vote Labour!

— Diane Abbott (@HackneyAbbott) June 7, 2017

And look…here I am, back again….new hair …new skin colour…new eye colour…new political views…but the same old Diane…..

 

 

Letter by Emir Feisal to Felix Frankfurter, President of the Zionist Organisation of America 1919

We feel that the Arabs and Jews are cousins in race, having suffered similar oppressions at the hands of powers stronger than themselves, and by a happy coincidence have been able to take the first step towards the attainment of their national ideals together.

The Arabs, especially the educated among us, look with the deepest sympathy on the Zionist movement. Our deputation here in Paris is fully acquainted with the proposals submitted yesterday by the Zionist Organization to the Peace Conference, and we regard them as moderate and proper. We will do our best, in so far as we are concerned, to help them through: we will wish the Jews a most hearty welcome home.

 

 

A map marked with crude chinagraph-pencil in the second decade of the 20th Century shows the ambition – and folly – of the 100-year old British-French plan that helped create the modern-day Middle East.  Courtesy of the BBC

Really?

‘None of the most notorious post-Ottoman borders were drawn by Sykes and Picot…even the ones they did sketch out were jettisoned after the war.’

Jeremy Bowen, the BBC’s Middle East editor and master story-teller. Who would have thought that this somewhat short tempered, tubby, egotistical Napoleon of TV and Radio could produce such sublime, experimental and artistic narratives to inform and entertain us?   Who knew that he was capable of such avant-garde productions, new and original thinking, cutting edge experimental techniques and ideas that probed the world and over-turned stale truths in the search for a genuine understanding of the underlying facts that shaped the Middle East?  Who knew?

Nothing is written…that can’t be rewritten… the Bowen mantra.

This was posted on this site in January 2016….

History…simply Bunk.

The BBC narrative on events in the Middle East has always been that Britain, and actions Britain has taken over the last century, has been to blame for events today….this narrative takes on more urgency for the BBC as the refugees flee the Middle East and head for Europe…the BBC needs to pin the blame for the war in Syria on Britain in order to induce guilt about the plight of the refugees and make them our responsibility…after all we ‘carved up the Middle East’ in a secret agreement with the French, didn’t we?  We’ve looked at this several times on this site, here for example, and the BBC’s remarkable ability to ignore the actual facts and make up their own account of history to suit their own agenda.

Nothing has changed of course, Bowen is still the puffed up, pompous, self-regarding and economical with the truth story-teller that we know and disdain…so wrapped up in himself and his own self-importance that he has produced a new series on the BBC about the ME…which you may think as being about the Middle East but is in fact about Me, Jeremy Bowen…

Our Man in the Middle East

Over these 25 programmes, Jeremy reflects on the present and the past of the Middle East, after reporting from the region for more than a quarter of a century. He combines first-hand accounts from the front line with an in-depth look into the region’s history.  In that time, the past has always been present, providing motivation and political ammunition . Bowen has made headlines himself and he has paid a personal price, coming under fire and losing a colleague in the course of reporting – on the worst day, he says, in his life.

If the first programme is anything to go by then it will be an incredibly dishonest, misleading and dangerous account of history, Bowen taking us on a journey fraught with historical clichés and false narratives that are so often his stock in trade.  This is history ala Stalin. This is history rewritten to manufacture a narrative, to spread a message, to spin a great big shining lie…..that Britain is to blame for everything that is happening in the Middle East.  This is dangerous stuff from the BBC feeding as it does directly into the Muslim grievance industry, the victim mentality, which provides a conveyor belt of willing recruits to radical and violent Muslim groups who are eager and committed to take on the West not only in the Middle East but in Europe and America as well…..aiming to Islamise both.

Bowen’s history is a flagrant distortion of real events as he bends and twists the facts to make a deadly trap for the less alert, the less aware, the less critical.  Bowen approaches this from only one perspective and even then doesn’t get that right…naturally it is from the ‘Arab’, or Muslim, perspective to whom all the events are a catastrophe…no doubt a word chosen carefully by Bowen knowing full well that the Palestinians use the word to describe what they call their own ‘Holocaust’…ie Israel.

The whole thrust of Bowen’s narrative is that it was the ‘duplicitous British that did not keep their word whilst the Arabs did.‘  Hence all that is happening in the Middle East today is the result of British scheming in World War One…always surprising how the BBC can focus in on exactly one point in time and say...’that’s the one and only cause of this disaster’.…no thought that the invention of Islam and the subsequent conquest and colonisation of so much of the Middle East and North Africa is the real root of the problems today or at least a major contributory factor?

But no, it was the Great Powers who are the problem and especially, as he tells us, ‘two Grandees [Sykes/Picot] who created, and some say cursed, the Middle East today when they carved up the Ottoman Empire’ [again..no thought that the Ottoman Empire might have been the problem…as the Arabs wanted to escape from it and so joined the British war effort?]…and of course the other problem was the Zionists and the British promise to them which was completely at odds with Arab wishes…a deadly contradiction we are told…er…see top of post….‘The Arabs, especially the educated among us, look with the deepest sympathy on the Zionist movement.’

However, Bowen tells us that the Balfour Treaty was apparently a ‘milestone on the road to catastrophe for Palestinians.’  Guess we now know exactly where Bowen is coming from….the Palestinian side of the argument.

That narrative, of the West attacking countries because they are ‘Muslim’ or of Islam under attack is the widespread narrative that Muslims in this country, not just the ‘extremists’ or ISIS followers, but the majority in the community, believe in and this creates the underlying atmospherics, an anger and feelings of hate for the West, that leads to radicalisation and then for some, joining ISIS or carrying out a terror attack in the UK.  The majority may not believe in violence but they certainly believe the narrative, believe Muslims should be angry and should ‘protest’ in some shape or form.

This is the narrative that the BBC pushes, as illustrated perfectly by Bowen.  It is ultimately the terrorist narrative, one that feeds the anger and the Islamist cause.  It is also an entirely false narrative that you would expect a professional journalist, the BBC’s expert on the Middle East, to know is false and to counter given the importance of that narrative to the Islamist cause and its deadly consequences…but instead what we have is a man determined to support, nurture and spread that dangerous narrative giving untold help and encouragement to what are terrorists.

The BBC prefers to lay the blame for the rise of massive unrest in the Middle East, the disaster that is Syria, the rise of ISIS, on the doorstep of the Americans and Blair after Iraq 2003….which is odd really…as the BBC told us this:

“We had a clean revolution [In Tunisia]. The former president turned out to be a coward. He just ran away. Not like the others – like the poor Libyans, or in Syria – but it lit the fuse to all the other revolutions” Wassim Herissi, radio DJ

The downfall of Tunisia’s President Zine al-Abidine Ben Ali inspired pro-democracy activists across the Arab world.

I mean…Bowen should know the truth….he wrote the book on it….‘The People want the fall of the regime‘..not  ‘The British Empire wants the fall of the regime’ then?….remember that time when the BBC were cheerleading the Arab Spring [and the subversive, anti-regime nature of the internet and social media…now hated and blamed for Trump and Brexit]….

What is going on in the Middle East and now across the world as Muslims build communities within other countries is that the 1400 year old religion of Islam is having a renaissance, a back to the fundamentals rebirth…it has had several of these over the centuries but this latest incarnation is one that grew out of the deserts of Arabia in the 18th century not the 20th….

The Wahhabis are just a continuation of that Islamic colonisation having joined forces with the Al Saud family to conquer Arabia:

‘This alliance formed in the 18th century provided the ideological impetus to Saudi expansion and remains the basis of Saudi Arabian dynastic rule today.’

It grew from the union of the Sauds and the Wahhabis which intended to create a strict Muslim state, hence they joned forces with the Allies to defeat the Turks and the Ottoman Empire…this was a willing union, one negotiated at length and one in which Sykes-Picot ultimately had little to do with [The Arabs knew of Sykes-Picot before the Soviets ‘exposed’ the deal…they were negotiating around its terms before then as revealed by Lawrence of Arabia in his letters…if only Bowen had read them]…the layout of the Middle East was in the end the result of long negotiations post-war involving all sides including Turkey…Turkey which insisted the Kurdish areas were to be part of Iraq so that no Kurdish state would be created.  The local leaders welcomed the British to maintain an ‘interest’ in their countries, helping to keep order and build infrastructure, knowing that the agreement was the Brits would leave in several years time.  This was not an ‘occupation’ nor a tyrannical imposition by a colonialist master of borders ‘crudely drawn with chinagraph pencils’ that ‘carved up the Middle East’.

Lawrence thought that the outcome was the best that could be achieved and thought it, in the end, quite good all things considered…

In March 1921, Lawrence travelled to Cairo with Churchill, to create a new settlement. With the Arabs they created a new order. Feisal, recently banished from Syria, received the throne of Iraq and British troops were removed.

Feisal’s brother, Abdullah, received the throne of Transjordan. Lawrence was convinced this settlement gave the Arabs all Britain had ever promised.

Finally, his long war was over. ‘

Lawrence himself said in letters to trusted friends…..

‘The settlement which Winston (mainly because my advocacy supplied him with all the technical advice and arguments necessary) put through in 1921 and 1922 was, I think, the best possible settlement which Great Britain, alone, could achieve at the time.’

‘As I get further and further away from things the more completely do I feel that our efforts during the war have justified themselves and are proving happier and better than I’d ever hoped.’

The Sunday Telegraph had a book review of ‘Baghdad’ by Justin Marozzi…it tells a much more rounded tale of the history of the Middle East….

Baghdad, long portrayed as the centre of the Muslim ‘golden age of science’ had, of course, a much more chequered history, most of it soaked in blood…and much of that ‘science’ being inherited by the Muslim conquerors fom the previous civilisations and kept alive by Christian and Jewish scientists and scholars….‘much of this was in spite of Islam, not because of it.’

What it also says, which is of interest here, is that after WWI the British took over and ‘busily set about improving things, from sanitation, bridge building and road repairs to irrigation, constitutions and government’….also stopping cruelty to animals and abolishing slavery that was still rampant there.

History is not what the BBC so often likes to portray.  Which brings us onto Mardell’s Britain ‘greedy for oil’ comment with which he pins the blame for the Middle East’s troubles on.

Oil played little part in the thinking. The only known oil was in Iran at the time.  Iraq was suspected to have oil…only found in 1927, and the Brits, so greedy for oil, gave Iraq independence in 1932.

The Arabian peninsular was also known to have areas where oil was seeping from the ground and yet was not added to the Imperial ‘want list’, being allowed to form its own government.

Another book, this time in the Sunday Times, reveals the BBC’s anti-British narrative…..here’s what the Times said about that ‘infamous carving up of the Middle East’ narrative  favoured by terrorists and the BBC….

ISIS proclaimed itself as the Islamic State caliphate with two propaganda videos, one of which was entitled ‘The End of Sykes-Picot’.….a gunman in  the video said ‘This is the so-called border of Sykes-Picot.  We don’t recognise it, and we will never recognise it……Inshallah we break other borders also but we start with this one Inshallah.’

The Sykes-Picot agreement is thus an integral part of ISIS’s philosophy of hatred and resentment…..‘feeding people’s own narratives of themselves as playthings of outsiders.’

However, ISIS’s Sykes-Picot narrative is a myth, as the historian Sean McMeekein has persuasively argued in his book, The Ottoman Endgame.

ISIS’s propaganda ‘bears little resemblance to the history on which it is ostensibly based.  The partition of the Ottoman empire was not settled bilaterally by Britain and France in 1916 but rather at a multinational conference in Lausanne, Switzerland, in 1923’.  Neither Sykes nor Picot played a significant role at Lausanne where the dominant figure was Kemal Attaturk, the Turkish nationalist leader.

‘Even in 1916,’ McMeekin points out, ‘Sykes and Picot played second and third fiddle to Russian foreign minister Sergei Sazonov who was the real driving force.’

‘None of the most notorious post-Ottoman borders were drawn by Sykes and Picot…even the ones they did sketch out were jettisoned after the war.’

In short, the ISIS myth about the Sykes-Picot agreement might animate its followers profoundly, but historically it is simply bunk.

Simply bunk….the ISIS/BBC/Bowen narrative,  simply bunk.  Dangerous bunk but bunk.

The BBC encouraging and feeding the Jihadist line….more recruits…terror in Syria, terror on the streets of Britain.

Hilariously the BBC told us that…

The creation of the Middle East editor’s job in 2005 had “significantly improved the BBC’s coverage of the ‘Arab world’.”

Here you go, a new Open Thread as we approach Election Day! Detail the bias here!

The last post mentioned a few of Corbyn’s past guilty ‘secrets’…..it seems the BBC wants them to remain a secret judging by this complete whitewash of his political career from Newsnight….produced by Stephen Bush…a left-winger from the New Statesman.  The ‘in-depth’ film skirts rapidly around Corbyn’s support for the IRA proclaiming he was right to do so, it dodges completely his support for Islamist terrorists which in light of recent events must be somewhat less than honest.  It doesn’t mention his cheerleading for the failed socialist paradise that is Venezuela, nor the fact he was under surveillance by the security services for 20 years….Marxism wasn’t mentioned once, the unions weren’t mentioned, no mention that he wanted to disband NATO, disband MI5, disband the Army.  Incredible when he is now essentially basing his election campaign on being the man who will make us safe from terrorism.  Nearly all the speakers are pro-Corbyn and are there to defend him or themselves.

Anti-Semitism flourishing under his rule?  Never happened did it?  Can’t have because it’s not in the film.

This film is an astonishingly dishonest hagiography that is fully intended to deceive anyone watching into thinking Corbyn is harmless, principled and intent solely on reforming Parliament so that ‘the people’ regain control….the film concentrates almost totally on internal politics of the Labour Party rather than what Corbyn intends for the country.

Just bias or political corruption by the BBC, an attempt to swing the election by painting a completely false picture of one candidate?

Lord Hall Hall should be sacked and jailed for rigging an election.

Note the film has disabled the comments…no surprise there….I doubt the reaction would be good.

This video is no better…What do you want to vote for…Tory insincerity or Labour incompetence?  So the Tories are dishonest and untrustworthy…Labour may, that’s may, be incompetent…but you know what….they may muddle through…as in Venezuela?….good old labour supporitng Evan Davis….no doubt ex-Newsnight Corbyn supporter Paul Mason has been bending a few ears of his old chums…..

This morning on the Today show we had Labour’s shadow justice secretary given an unopposed platform to make specious claims about police numbers and terrorism..perhaps Webb should have asked him about his support for Venezuela and it’s ‘alternative’ to austerity……

This is what Corbyn’s style of socialism brought to Venezuela….

“Malnourished children who faint in class. Children who, in the worst cases, die from hunger, their bodies nothing but skin and bones, the outlines of their ribs visible.

Images like those have become common in Venezuela, where critical food shortages are pushing hundreds of thousands of children under a blanket of misery and hunger more often seen in the poorest countries in Africa.”

Hunger haunts Venezuela, especially its children, Miami Herald, August 5, 2016.

Corbyn thought it was the way ahead in 2015…

Curiously Corbyn, and his cronies, have gone completely silent about the glories of a socialist paradise like Venezuela…Corbyn is also quite shy about much more of his past…

Jeremy Corbyn accused of ‘rewriting history’ after deleting hundreds of articles and speeches from his website

Jeremy Corbyn has been accused of “rewriting history” after deleting hundreds of outspoken articles and speeches from his website including a number of pieces critical of the EU.

One of the articles sets out the Labour leader’s true feelings on the European Union in a damning attack about the influence the bloc has over the British Government.

Mr Corbyn has wiped his entire archive of writing from his personal blog meaning that none of the articles can be accessed.

So let’s recap….Corbyn has u-turned on decades of support for terrorists and is now a committed anti-terror politician who will do anything to stop the barbarism, never mind having boasted of his efforts to stop every piece of anti-terror legislation; he has u-turned on shoot-to-kill which he now apparently supports….never mind his lie to Peston that he did not oppose it; he has gone silent on the wonders of Venezuela as his brand of Socialism drags its population into disastrous and deadly poverty and misery; he has done a huge u-turn on the EU which he now suggests we will, by stealth, ie keeping us in the single market, remain in after years of denouncing it.

A man who packs his cabinet, and is advised by, radical extremists who are incompetent, so incompetent one of them has to be kept off the air and when she does appear cocks it up so badly she then has to ‘disappear’ again…due to ‘sickness’.

This is a man who has been a cheerleader for terrorists and as we can see is not averse to shilling for the extremist group Cage….one of the BBC’s favourite, goto, Muslim groups…

Trust Corbyn to fight terrorism when he is a mainstream supporter of it?

Trust Corbyn on the economy when every policy he espouses will drag us into the 1970’s ruin and disorder.

Trust Corbyn on the EU when he is totally dishonest about his intentions and has attempted to rewrite history on his record?

Trust Corbyn?  Not on your nelly.

Strange though…you’d hardly know any of this stuff if it was left to the BBC which barely if ever mentions on its mainstream, everyday programming.

The police and intelligence services know the identities of a vast number of potential extremists in Britain…at least 23,000 of them ‘of interest’.

The last three terror attacks were all executed by people ‘on the radar’ in some shape or form…

Perpetrators in all three of the terrorist outrages to hit Britain this year had at some point appeared on the radar of authorities.

The most recent in London was carried out by people on the radar.

And yet the BBC is cheerleading Labour’s claim that cuts to the police meant these people were unknown to the police almost without challenge when it is quite clear the security services had come across them in the past and subsequently considered them not to be a current or immediate threat.  So the police knew…#despitethecuts.

The Today show peddled Labour’s line and then almost immediately flipped the narrative in a second report to one complaining that the police knew about the attackers but downgraded their inquiry into one of them….allowing him to commit a terrorist act.  Why was this point not made to the Labour spokesman….undermining his line completely?

Will the BBC make up its mind…..are cuts to police numbers causing terrorism due to lack of information from ‘the community’ or is it police failures in acting upon the reams of information the BBC tells us they receive ‘from the community’?  The BBC can’t have it both ways.  Facts and alternate facts…both have a place on the BBC…co-existing at the same time on the same subject.

The Lord Harris review commends London’s emergency services for their improved major incident readiness, with responses now substantially faster and more effective than five years ago. The quality and effectiveness of the work done by the intelligence agencies and the counter-terrorist police here is, he says, amongst the best in the world.   London Mayor’s Office

Labour is saying the terror attack in London was due to insufficient resources and thus police and security failures are the result.  Funny how they ignore a report, commissioned by Sadiq Khan, Labour Mayor of London, that said

It is now nearly five years since I was last heavily immersed

in the policy and practice involved in protecting us all from

terrorism. The headline conclusion of this review is that the

response by the emergency services would now be substantially

faster and more effective than it could have been then.

However, it is important to be clear. The quality and

effectiveness of the work done by the intelligence agencies and

the counter-terrorist police is amongst the best in the world.

Funny how the BBC ignores that.

Funny how the BBC ignores this car crash interview with Abbott, our potential Home Secretary in charge of police and security….

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Aq8Dd5Sa7fI

Abbott is quizzed by Sky’s Murnaghan on the above Harris report…he asks her about its contents….she doesn’t know…he asks her specifically about one recommendation, the first one in the report…about barriers being put up…

Lord Harris goes on to make 127 recommendations for the Mayor, the Government and other agencies to consider, including:

• The Metropolitan Police to further explore the use of temporary barriers to protect against a Nice style attack in London.

That of course might well be the Mayor of London’s remit to check if such measures were being taken.  Barriers are now being put up on bridges in London…..why not before?  Maybe the BBC will be doorstepping Khan instead of just hyping his claims that the Tories are going to slash Met. Police numbers.

The BBC ignores that interview…despite Abbott now pulling out of an interview on the BBC’s own Woman’s Hour.

This is the person, as said, who will be in charge of our security and the anti-terror programme…not only does history prove she is ideologically unsuited to the job but intellectually incapable of doing it….what’s scary is not that she hasn’t read the report…but that she has read it and doesn’t understand it.

How come the BBC is not headlining with such a news report?  This is going to be one of the most powerful and important polticians in Britain and yet she is completely unfit and unsuited to the role.

A change in the #WHdebate line-up this morning: @HackneyAbbott taken ill. @UKLabour say finding a replacement. Tune in at 9am.

— BBC Woman's Hour (@BBCWomansHour) June 6, 2017

From the Mail:

No one at the BBC cares when we’re accused of bias, says Evan Davis: Newsnight presenter reveals corporation receives constant complaints without taking any action

No one at the BBC takes account of accusations of bias, according to the presenter of Newsnight.

Evan Davis said the BBC is constantly getting emails from licence fee payers accusing them of pandering to certain political parties.

But he claimed that ‘no one at the BBC takes those kinds of things into account’ because it is ‘very rare’ for the issue to be brought up.

His remarks at the Hay Festival come days after the corporation was accused of Left-wing bias in its Election Debate programme.

Speaking at the festival in Wales, Mr Davis said: ‘All the time we get those emails. And honestly, no one at the BBC takes those kinds of things into account.

‘Maybe people at the very top of the BBC do, I don’t know. Maybe they do. But none of the people who are making programmes do.’

Mr Davis, who replaced Jeremy Paxman as presenter of Newsnight in September 2014, was at the festival to promote his book Post-Truth: Why We Have Reached Peak B******t and What We Can Do About It.’

Father brazenly parading ISIS flags with his toddler outside Parliament is stopped by police… but is allowed to walk free after officers say he is NOT breaking the law

 

The BBC are attacking the government for cutting the police and suggest this has meant the police do not have the resources to gather intelligence from the community about those individuals who may be going down the road of extremism…the above report illustrates that is nonsense…the police know but cannot touch many of these individuals…the BBC is peddling Labour propaganda days before an election on a major, major issue.  The BBC attacks the police for failing to stop attacks when they already knew of these people and their views and then the BBC attacks the government by saying cuts meant the police don’t know who the attackers might be…despite 23,000 being ‘on the radar’…guess the police must be doing some work.

In a previous post I did suggest that the BBC may well be tempted to throw caution to the wind and go all out to get Labour into power.  They may gamble that becoming a blatant propaganda mouthpiece for Labour is worth the risk…Labour wins and Corbyn will reward them rather than take them to task, Labour loses and the BBC knows the Tories don’t have the guts to tackle the BBC and its dangerous bias.  Win win for the BBC and Labour….a Labour Party whose leader has been a very vocal supporter of terrorist groups and who boasts of having voted to block every piece of anti-terror legislation put forward in Parliament….not to mention Abbott and McDonnell who have both followed similar paths to Corbyn.

Why does the BBC not highlight this very, very pertinent accusation….

CORBYN BLOCKED TERROR LAWS

Jeremy Corbyn ‘bragged about blocking terror laws’ during Stop the War speech

Have to say that subsequent developments have confirmed that the BBC going all out to promote Labour is a distinct possibility as the BBC pushes Labour’s line about cuts to the police being responsible for the terror attacks because ‘community police officers’ would have provided a link to communities who would then report their concerns about individuals to the police and security services and we would then know who these people were.

Except that is obvious rubbish…very, very obvious rubbish….here’s the top, headline story on the BBC frontpage….note the police officer talking to the extremist….the police already know who most ‘extremists’ are but  their hands are tied…often because legislation to allow them to deal with the extremists has been blocked…by the likes of Corbyn…..

Met defends dropping inquiry into attacker

We’ve already noted that Labour proposed cutting the police budget by an extra 10% in 2015 and said that doing so would not harm policing…and that the Tories have in fcat protected the police budget since 2015 and indeed increased massively spending on the intelligence and security services.

The BBC does not remind any Labour spokeman of that awkward fact.

In fact the BBC does very little to challenge Labour’s attack on May as it claims cuts in the police have led to the terror attacks.

This morning Justin Webb gave a platform to Labour’s shadow justice secretary, Richard Burgon, to peddle his propaganda almost without any questioning at all…there was no depth, no context, no intelligent counter-arguments to Labour’s case.  The only point put was that Lord Carlile, the former independent reviewer of terrorism legislation,  said cuts in community policing were “nothing to do with terrorism”, saying “nobody in the security services is complaining about their funding”.

Burgon dismissed this out of hand preferring the politicised police union, the Police Federation’s, version of events and insisting cuts to community officers allowed these terror attacks to happen because we don’t get information from the community that brings the extremists to police attention.

Why did Webb not mention Corbyn’s career long attempts to block anti-terror legislation?  Why did Webb not raise the issue of Corbyn’s opposition to ‘shoot to kill’?  Why did Webb not raise the obvious point that nearly all these terrorists were already on the radar…3,000 who are labelled as of significant interest and another 20,000 of interest but on the fringes.  That the ‘community’ does rpeort these people… hypocritically the BBC attacks the police for not following up on these reports…so do the police know or not know?  Arrests are made everyday and many terror plots disrupted.  Indeed many of these extremists appear on televison, not just C4, but the BBC itself…the BBC famously refused to report suspicions about one participant in a BBC paintballing programme…

BBC ‘funded paintballing trip for Islamic terrorists and didn’t pass on information about 21/7 bombers’

The BBC also gave a platform to not just one extremist but two in its series called ‘Muslims like us’……one even wore a sweatshirt with the logo of the extremist group ‘Cage’ on it…

When C4’s Dispatches produced a programme called ‘Undercover Mosque’ that exposed militant extremism in Mosques the BBC completely ignored the information and the police even tried to prosecute C4 for incitement.  What were the BBC interested in on C4 that same week?  Jade Goody, labelled ‘white trash’ by the BBC, who said something ‘racist’ on Big Brother during an argument…the BBC spent the week trashing Goody, programme after programme discussed and attacked her….but ignored the Muslim extremists spouting racism and religiously inspired bigotry on the other C4 programme.

The BBC in fact were accused of lazy journalism by C4 after the BBC’s only report into the Dispatches programme slated it …the BBC accusing C4 of producing fake TV [in 2007?  Surley that’s pre-the post truth era?]

C4 calls BBC ‘lazy’ in Mosque row

The Channel 4 deputy head of news and current affairs, Kevin Sutcliffe, has criticised BBC News 24 for its “lazy” coverage of the Dispatches Undercover Mosque row – as a leading lawyer claimed the broadcaster has grounds to sue for libel.

The story was picked up by rolling news channels and press agencies. However, the police and CPS refused to issue a further statement – leading to Channel 4 having to defend itself against allegations of TV fakery.

Speaking today at a packed forum organised by think tank Policy Exchange in London, Mr Sutcliffe said he was “disappointed” by how some rival broadcasters had not checked the story.

“Particularly BBC News 24 which really just ran it as a TV fakery story. They framed the debate early on and that was lazy.”

So the BBC completely uninterested in exposing radical Muslim preachers…no surprise there.  The BBC’s own Phil Mackie in fact reports from the same msoque in Birmingham telling us how moderate it is and how it is fighting the extremists’ narrative….but then again he did think the Trojan Horse Plot was fake too.

So Webb completely ignored the one fact that completely undermines Labour’s attack…that nearly all these terrorists are already known to the police…they’re on the radar.

What appeared next on the Today programme just confirms the thought that not only did Webb deliberately dance aorund the inconvenient facts but that the BBC has an agenda.

Fifteen or so minutes after Webb’s ‘interview’ with Burgon Mishal Husain attacked the government for ending an inquiry into one of the attackers…

Scotland Yard says one of the men named as an attacker was known to police and MI5 but there was no intelligence to suggest an attack. Does that suggest a failure by the security agencies? Lord Ricketts is former national security adviser under Cameron.

So not a few minutes earlier Webb allowed Labour to say police failed to stop the attackers because thy didn’t know who they were…then instantly we have a complete turn around and the BBC is complaing that the police did know but did nothing.

As said this is the BBC’s top story now…and yet Webb made absolutely no reference to it when talking about intelligence and the police being able to identify potential extremists….the police know who nearly all these people are…

The Metropolitan Police have defended a decision to downgrade an inquiry into one of the men who carried out Saturday night’s terror attack.

They said Pakistan-born Khuram Butt, 27, of Barking, London, was known to police and MI5 in 2015, but there had been no evidence of a plot.

The police know who most extremists are but Labour says they don’t…the BBC pushes the Labour line.