Category Archives: BBC bias

Jeremy Paxman had some negative things to say about the EU in an article in the Radio Times…he has been forced to withdraw it in light of the BBC’s determination to remain absolutely neutral in the EU referendum debate, no, really.

Never mind that Nick Robinson recruited Churchill for the Remain campaign and was allowed to falsely claim that Churchill was the father of the EU or that we have been relentlessly drip fed pro-EU material by the BBC.  Do they really think an article by Paxo in the Radio Times will swing the vote? They obviously have little faith in their own arguments.

Jeremy Paxman WITHDRAWS article critical of European Union from next issue of Radio Times ‘after pressure from BBC’

Jeremy Paxman has withdrawn an article criticising the EU from the next issue of the Radio Times under pressure from the BBC, it has been claimed.

It is understood the outspoken journalist and presenter’s views raised concerns with broadcast bosses ahead of a documentary set to air later this month.

He will appear on Paxman in Brussels on May 19, described by the BBC as ‘an impartial look at the fundamentals of what actually goes on between the UK and the EU’.

Although the article is not thought to have called for Britain to leave Brussels, the organisation fears his words will damage his neutrality, according to The Sunday Times.

The paper claims the article sees the former Newsnight presenter ‘express doubts’ about the EU, its procedures and the loss of British sovereignty, and that the 65-year-old was ‘unhappy’ with proposed changes to his work asked for by a senior BBC executive.

The BBC said….

‘Our coverage of the EU referendum is fair and balanced so that across the campaign period audiences are given clear and impartial information about both sides of the argument.’

But that’s just not true…from very inaccurate reports of what Cameron ‘achieved’ in his negotiations with the EU to highly misleading reports on trade and tariffs in coutnires such as Norway, Canada and Switzerland…and we are constantly treated to little snippets of pro-EU comment casually slipped into the mix…such as Brexit being risky for the economy…but no similar comments at all about the risk of staying inside the EU.

Sadiq Khan is ‘Looking forward to being a mayor of the great city of London’….His priority he says, as that Muslim Mayor of London, will be to take on the Islamist extremists.  He staged his coronation in the Christian Southwark Cathedral….the BBC interpets that as a show of unity and tolerance…you could also interpret it as a display of Muslim dominance … ala Hagia Sofia or Temple Mount.

The BBC thinks that asking questions about Khan’s promise to tackle extremism in light of his close associations with said extremists is racist.

The BBC is uncritically peddling Labour’s, and the Emir of London’s, narrative…..Labour was caught being anti-Semitic so now they try to paint the Tories as Islamophobic…and the BBC is there to put the smear in for them.

Just one suggested topic for the open thread…I’m sure there are many, many more….the floor is yours…..

Trumpy McTrumpface…The man who gets so many of the public’s votes and yet the Establishment won’t let him win…they hope.  The BBC certainly does its level best to undermine him in the eyes of whom-ever reads or watches their schmutter.

On Wednesday we had Peter Allen leading the anti-Trump mocking and jeering, lots of laughter and eye-rolling all round at the mention of his name.  Just odd how Trump gets castigated for his policy of controlling US borders and ‘torturing’ terrorists for information and yet someone like Corbyn with his cabal of fellow plotters and schemers can hold extremely toxic and violent views and associate with people who fully intend to kill every Jew they can lay their hands on and yet not just be almost ignored by the BBC but actively defended by them, and the terrorists who the BBC doesn’t want to see tortured, are also defended and excused despite wanting to murder as many people as possible to further their polictical aims….Ken Livingstone has only recently defended the 7/7 terrorists and ISIS as merely ‘angry’ young men pushed to fight the hated Western enemy.

Trump is the problem for the BBC.  Trump is the enemy not the anti-Semitic Marxists in league with the Islamists and terrorists.

Here Mark Mardell, in his measured show of BBC impartiality, thinks Trump might have a chance of winning..or does he really?  Is this not just another chance to sneer and libel Trump?  Mardell starts his piece with a tale of Trump’s ‘racism’ and stupidity as Trump dared to question the sainted Obama’s birthplace…as Obama refused to reveal his birth certificate for a long time and much of his past is so murky perhaps it is only natural to question such things….you can’t get into the US now if you don’t have a biometric passport even of your own passport is otherwise entirely legal….and yet Mardell thinks no one should question whether Obama fulfills the strict criteria to be President of the US itself?  Marell’s conclusion?..

The high roller, the booster, the snake oil salesman is the trickster of US national myth and there is a not-so-sneaking admiration for a flash clever clown who pulls down the establishment’s pants.

It was the sort of toxic stew of conspiracy theory and casual racism of which any sensible politician would steer well clear.

Trump, by his first political act, declared himself not a sensible politician, deliberately courting controversy by staging a hit-and-run on the facts.

Or it could have been a legitimate question that you can be sure Mardell would be asking about Trump if the same circumstances arose.

Mardell coninues his drawn out sneer..

The high roller, the booster, the snake oil salesman is the trickster of US national myth and there is a not-so-sneaking admiration for a flash clever clown who pulls down the establishment’s pants.

Fairly obvious what the Obama poodle Mardell thinks of Trump….which he repeats to be sure you get the message….odd how the BBC though is otherwise pretty unconcerned about Clinton who gets a pass from Mardell….

The assumption is that, faced with a clear choice, the US people will plump for one who is not a clown.

That may be the case. But Hillary Clinton has a battle on her hands, not against a man, but a mood.

It’s not just Mardell muck-spreading the anti-Trump poison….no prizes for guessing who another offender is….Justin Webb, who slips the leash and takes the hated Mail’s tainted gold ala Mehdi Hasan, in order to be able to say what he likes about Trump without let or hindrance from the BBC’s rather loose rules on impartiality…loose unless you are doing a programme on the Met. Office.

Webb tells us that it looks like Clinton has sealed the deal…

Come the November presidential poll, she will face a man so barmy, so extreme, so utterly unpresidential, that she can’t lose. A dunce who is not even amiable. Donald Trump is going to gift Hillary Clinton the White House.

Of course the whole premise of the piece is supposedly to run by us the possibility that Trump might over-turn the political wisdom and the Liberal’s deepest wishes and win the Presidency…but Webb manages to slot in a good number of insults on route…which you might suspect was the real reason to do the piece.

Webb tells us…

Let’s be blunt about the task Trump faces. He is massively unpopular. A Washington Post/ABC News poll last month found 67 per cent of likely voters had an unfavourable opinion of him.

What he doesn’t say is that Clinton is nearly as unpopular…he does say…

And in certain key groups, Hispanics, women, the young, he is off the scale — properly detested, even feared.

Again that is somewhat exaggerated…Trump won a resounding victory in Nevada despite it having a high percentage of Latinos…many who voted for Trump…the Left of course hated that victory and have spent much time and effort to try and explain that away.  Webb just ignores it.  As for women and the young….Clinton is ahead with women but they are neck and neck with the young….so not sure how Webb comes up with this final effort to do down Trump…the same casual and blatantly false smear they used against UKIP…

Perhaps the greatest oddness of Trump is that his core supporters are a fading and old-fashioned constituency — angry white people — but his politics are uber-modern.

Webb slips in Cameron’s insult…

David Cameron will have to work hard to patch things up with Trump after saying the tycoon’s suggested ban on Muslims was ‘divisive, stupid and wrong’ — and that if Trump ‘came to visit our country he’d unite us all against him’.

Webb also comes up with this..

And Trump, with his hugely resourced campaign and outrageous populist pledges, could swing them his way.

‘Hugely resourced campaign’?  Trump funds his own campaign at the moment with added small donations from supporters not other billionaires…he has, and these are BBC figures, so Webb should know, $25 million, whilst Clinton has $125 million.  Spot the difference? And yet Webb is suggesting Trump is buying the election with a river of money and oh yes, those ‘outrageous popular pledges’....outrageous?  To Webb and his ilk maybe.

How about this ‘outrageous’ smear?…

Add a dash of Trump’s xenophobia and he’s in business.

Trump isn’t racist….he hasn’t based his policies upon race but on numbers and security.

And if he won?

But if he won, what then?

Again, the conventional wisdom might well be wrong. He is portrayed as a dictator. A megalomaniac. A man who has taken over a political party for his own crazed purposes.

All of which might be true.

Ah yes…all those insults might be true suggests Webb….but where is his, or Mardell’s, similar character assassination of Clintn?  Conspicuous by its abscence.

The BBC and the Guardian et al have rather short memories.  They have smeared Zac Goldsmith as having run a racist campaign, never mind that his complaint was addressing Khan’s association with extremists, nowt to do with ‘race’, and yet as soon as Khan is elected the first thing the BBC tells us that is noteworthy about Khan’s new found elevation is that…

Mr Khan is the city’s first Muslim mayor

Why is that now so important and yet just hours before they were attacking Goldsmith for being ‘racist’ for questioning Khan’s links to Islamist extremists?  As always the Muslim extremist gets a bye from the BBC in the alleged interests of community cohesion.

Khan himself thought his religion was an important factor that needed to be addressed….

Electing Muslim mayor would ‘say something about our confidence as a city’, says prospective Labour candidate Sadiq Khan

Alibhai Brown laughably has the same opinion..

The very fact of a Muslim being in this high office could do more to combat radicalisation than any number of government strategies

Experience tells us the opposite and when Khan has demonstrated a pattern of behaviour that links him inextricably to people who have views that are dangerously close to the Islamist and terrorist narrative you have to ask questions…unfortunately the BBC and Guardian think not and would prefer to brush it all under the carpet and play the race card to silence the critics and win the election for a ‘Muslim’.

Harry’s Place suggests it is entirely legitimate to ask those questions…

In short, Sadiq Khan’s extravagant recent claim that “I have spent my whole life fighting extremism” is entirely false. On the contrary, he has supported extremists, he has aligned with extremists, he has shared their platforms, he has circulated petitions advancing their arguments and interests, he has euphemised their blood-curdling incitement as mere “flowery words”, and he has repeatedly used his position as a human rights advocate and an MP to lend extremists’ arguments a spurious legitimacy.

I assume Khan and Brown are racists for having raised the matter of his religion as a factor in this election?

What else has the good Muslim Mr Khan said that might be of interest to the BBC’s ever-vigilant thought police?

The BBC somehow managed to avoid altogether Khan’s labelling of Muslims who don’t adhere to the terrorist narrative about foreign policy and Western culture as ‘uncle toms’….imagine if that had been a UKIP potential Mayor of London…or even a complete unknown Ukipper from some backwater who said the word ‘negro’…..well you don’t have to imagine because we know exactly what the BBC would do…hang them out to dry and set them up for a campaign of vitriloic smears and insults for months on end.  If you’re the Labour, Muslim, candidate to be mayor of London though, you get a free pass on highly offensive, toxic, racist and dangerous language.

Whilst the BBC failed to hold Khan to account for calling moderate Muslims ‘uncle toms’ LBC tackled the problem…or did they?…

Yes. its Newsnight’s appendage, James O’Brien, he of the kangaroo court and Nigel Farage, not so much a journalist as a lying, sensationalist spinner of smears and malevolent mischief.  Note how he doesn’t actually take Khan to task about his hate speech but instead sympathises and suggests this is an attack on Khan just like all those other dog-whistle racist attacks on Khan that highlight his association with people with very unpleasant views and ideas.

O’Brien, as good a journalist as ever, the honesty, integrity and professionalism shines through.  Just what is it that attracts the Guardian’s Katz to this piece of work?

And what of Mr Suliman Ghani, one of Khan’s platform sharing Islamist cronies?  The man the BBC and the Guardian insist is a Tory?

Seems someone was lying…

• Suliman Gani ‏@sulimangani 12 Sep 2015

  Congratulations to newly elected leader of Labour Party, Jeremy Corbyn. Brilliant victory * “Things can and will change”

A ‘brilliant victory’ for one Jeremy Corbyn?  Not the words of a Tory voter I might suggest, though the BBC has been convinced, quite easily I imagine, by his lies…

London mayor row: Cleric feels ‘betrayed’ by Conservatives

As has the Guardian…

London mayor: Goldsmith embarrassed as ‘repellent’ imam’s Tory links emerge

Those ‘links’ are entirely spurious and inconsequential.  The photo with Goldsmith is obviously a meeting in the street and not evidence of indepth collaboration between the two…unlike with Khan who repeatedly joined forces with Ghani on the same campaigns.

Ghani claims he was invited to be a Tory councillor…but again that is a lie…he turned up at a open event that was intended to increase Muslim participation in politics…he claims he was personally invited but provides no evidence and indeed there is no photo of him as a guest at the event which was one for all and sundry in the Muslim community to turn up to with no regard to political afffiliation.

Ghani puts this forward as evidence of his association with the Tories and that he supposedly campaigned for Dan Watkins in the general election….unfortunately the event was in November 2015 and Ghani, as noted above, had already expressed his admiration for Jeremy Corbyn in September….and of course the election was in May.  I guess he is lying about his ‘Tory’ proclivities.

However…we can see what many would describe as evidence of his anti-Semitism…….

Middle East Eye ‏@MiddleEastEye May 4

Is it anti-Semitic to ask whether Israel has the right to exist? http://ow.ly/4np4Fm

Why would  a Pakistani Muslim be against Jewish Israel and yet have no similar thoughts about the legitimacy of a Muslim state built on land stolen from India by Muslims after having driven out millions of Sikhs and Hindus from their land?  Right of return anyone?

He is in very good company in the Labour Party just now.

Shame the BBC doesn’t do its job and rather than exposing people with dangerous and unpleasant naratives that have a damaging influence on society the BBC covers up for them and instead attacks those who would dare to expose them such as Goldsmith.

As suggested many times on this site it is the BBC that is one of the great dangers to democracy and civil society, it is the BBC that is extremist…the BBC that advocates open borders and the destruction of the nation state, the BBC that cheerleads mass, uncontrolled immigration regardless of the real consequences, the BBC that supports and excuses terrorism and cheers on ISIS as they destroy the national borders, the BBC that excuses and hides sexual abuse and rape by Muslims, the BBC that excuses and hides Muslim attempts to subvert society and impose their religion upon it as with the MCB’s Trojan Horse plot, the BBC that works to delegitimise Israel and helps to spread anti-Semitism around the world and even excuses murder of Jews because of what Israel did in Gaza.

The BBC is unfit for purpose, a law unto itself with no-one able to control its extremist impulses.  It does more harm than good spreading division, hatred and war in its wake.

Here you go, a new Open Thread for you to detail the bias!

It’s amazing, or not…..Labour’s mayoral candidate for London, Sadiq Khan, has called Muslims who don’t agree with conservative or extremist Muslim views ‘Uncle Toms’….and the BBC has ignored this massive ‘racist’ insult that Khan seems to think that ‘moderate Muslims’ are more like hated native informers than anything else….though the BBC does spend a good deal of time not only defending Khan but also his less than moderate sidekick...Suliman Ghani…..in light of the recent murder of an Ahmadi shopkeeper this might be of  interest…

Ahmadi shopkeepers face financial ruin after clerics demanded a boycott of their shops.

Imam Suliman Gani, of the TIC, admitted he personally pleaded with the owner of the Lahore Halal Meat in Tooting not to sell his business to an Ahmadi man.

He said: “Since the Qadianis are routinely deceptive about their religion, there was a potential risk of Muslims being offered meat that wasn’t necessarily halal.

Ironically...from 2010…

In his first interview about the hate campaign being waged against the Ahmadiyya community in south London, Tooting MP and shadow Justice Secretary, Sadiq Khan, talks to Omar Oakes about what has happened and what he is doing to stop it escalating.

Is there a hate campaign going on against the Ahmadiyya community?

“If you read the [Ahmadiyya’s allegations of hate crime] dossier, it’s not just in Wandsworth, but in Walsall, in Birmingham, in other parts of the country, there is clearly a campaign to incite hatred against this group of people. Whether that crosses the criminal threshold, that is for the police.”

That’s why Khan is so happy to share a platform so many times with Suliman Ghani?!!??

Khan….a two-faced, lying, dishonest little weasel?…..does seem so.

Khan is in good company though as he peddles the same line that the nasty little outfit MPACUK do...

‘Uncle Tom’ and ‘House Muslim’ are not racist labels – they are political ones. Only an Uncle Tom would say otherwise.

Not a word from the BBC about a senior Labour politician attacking Muslims who may want to support the government in their fight against radicalisation and terrorism.  Kind of raises a few questions about Mr Khan, his loyalties and what he really believes doesn’t it?  Then again it was the same with Warsi…at least she had the grace to resign….ironically Khan thought she was right to resign….so very principled…Sayeeda Warsi was right to resign over Gaza.…which again must raise a few questions, this time about his position on Israel, Jews and anti-Semitism….even more ironically in the first part of the video interview above he tells us of his concern that extremists will exploit the war in Gaza and use it to say there is a war on Muslims…..and then he goes on to do just that himself in his support for Warsi…..’ David Cameron has been silent while the Israeli government’s actions in Gaza have led to death, suffering and hardship. His and other ministers’ failure to criticise Israel directly is startling.’

Khan though really is in good company, not just with Warsi but with the Guardian as well, as today it has set out deliberately and with determination to undermine the Government’s anti-terrorist/radicalisation programme and conversely aims to incite Muslims to become radicalised and join the ranks of the terrorists.  Not sure how the editor of the Guardian stays out of prison.

Government hid fact it paid for 2012 Olympics film aimed at Muslims

Look who has already picked up on this story…

Suliman Gani Retweeted

• 1. Interfaith Matters ‏@__Interfaith__ May 2

     Revealed: UK’s covert propaganda bid to stop Muslims joining Isis http://gu.com/p/4t9te/stw  @QuilliamF @MuslimCouncil @ImranELSS #prevent

The Guardian reports with great excitement and indignation that the government produced films and material to counter radical Muslims’ propaganda that the Olympic Games in 2012 were unIslamic because they occurred during Ramadan.  You might think that was a sensible proactive measure to counter the terrorists’ message that was intended to drive a wedge between Muslims and the UK but the Guardian thinks otherwise and its use of language, imagery and provocative tone and narrative is intended to not only draw attention to, but to counter the government’s message, a message that the Guardian labels as sinsiter ‘black propaganda’, butthe Guardian also intends to create anger and dissent amongst Muslims who read the story…and then of course pass it on to other Muslims.

The Guardian has not one, but three reports on this….here’s another two..

The British government has already forgotten the great dangers of propaganda

As titles go, the Research Information and Communication Unit (Ricu) seems bland enough to go unnoticed and innocuous not to raise alarm should it come to attention. The truth, however, seems less benign.

Revelations by the Guardian indicate that the Ricu, the Home Office’s “strategic communications” agency, has been involved in covertly supporting grassroots Muslim organisations in order to propagate “counter-narratives” designed to combat extremism.

So ‘less benign’……just sinister then?

The Guardian adopts the Muslism extremist narrative to counter Prevent and all it entails…

Revelations that the British government has been engaging in a substantial propaganda campaign aimed at influencing the “hearts and minds” of British Muslims and the wider public is of serious concern, as is the disturbing news that deception is involved. The unit’s covert support of ostensibly independent grassroots Muslim organisations and information campaigns is a classic example of so-called black propaganda, whereby greater persuasiveness is sought by disguising the source of a message which, if known, may damage its credibility.

And the Guardian continues down that route pushing the usual terrorist narrative, as does the BBC, about foreign affairs, the Jews, Iraq being the caue of radicalisation…no mention of the real cause….Muslims wanting to impose Islam upon the world….

The entire emphasis on countering narratives and extremism eclipses the myriad reasons why so many Muslims are deeply critical of the government. The problem is defined solely in terms of “extremist narratives” and prevents critical reflection on what “we” might be doing and the political context. Anger over western foreign policy and recent wars, plus the ongoing Israel-Palestinian conflict, are major sources of discontent and dissent, and not only among British Muslims. Here, those involved in government strategy must consider whether they have sufficiently come to terms with the political context, and its role in creating the extremism and radicalisation now being targeted by the government.

Then this as well…

Revealed: UK’s covert propaganda bid to stop Muslims joining Isis

The UK government has embarked on a series of clandestine propaganda campaigns intended to bring about “attitudinal and behavioural change” among young British Muslims as part of a counter-radicalisation programme.

In a sign of mounting anxiety across Whitehall over the persuasiveness of Islamic State’s online propaganda, a secretive Home Office unit has developed a discreet multimillion pound counter-messaging operation that it says privately is running at “industrial pace and scale”.

[This] will dismay some Muslims and may undermine confidence in the Prevent counter-radicalisation programme, which already faces widespread criticism.

You have to ask why a government message that counters the propaganda put out by extremist Muslims should be ‘“ highly unlikely to have any credibility among these [Muslim] audiences” and that disclosure of the government’s role would have a “negative impact on the narrative.”

Why would young Muslims be opposed to a message that preaches non-violence and cohesion?

Why is it that any Muslim group that joins in with the government is seen as Khan’s ‘Uncle Toms’…

The programme risked undermining, rather than amplifying, the work of Muslim civil society if it appeared that groups had been co-opted to a government agenda.

She said: “The community groups are in a double bind; if they don’t disclose government support and it’s revealed, they lose trust. If they do disclose it, they lose trust.

I’m sorry…we have to rely on the ‘work of Muslim civil society’ to counter Islamic extremism on its own!  Total rubbish…..That’ll be the mainstream Muslim community that reinforces the radicals’ message about Muslims under siege, marginalised and discriminated against…as of course does the BBC.  How on earth are they in any shape or form countering, or even showing the slightest interest in countering, the ‘extremists’ message?

The Guardian has set out to not only sabotage the government programme but to create anger, dissent and radicalisation as a counter to it.

The Guardian is fueling the fire and doing what it can to recruit Muslims to the Islamist terrorist cause.

I would suggest lifting Rusbridger [who started all this] and Viner, stick them in the back of a Chinook and drop them off in the Syrian desert from where they can make their own way home with the help of their many friends out there.  Maybe that will open their eyes and make them realise this isn’t a fun little game.

John McDonnell having a nice chat with now infamously immoderate Suliman Ghani…boasting how he, McDonnell, set up mosques and a campaign to boycott Israeli goods…..amused to hear from him that local Muslim councillors represent everybody.  LOL…via Guido…..Suspended Labour councillor Shah Hussain has been on the Daily Politics to defend comparing a Jewish footballer to Hitler. Apparently he is the victim of a “witch-hunt”: “I’m a Muslim councillor and therefore my comments have been taken out of context”.

Livingstone and Khan in very good company…will McDonnell out, out, out himself from the Party?

The BBC seems determined to play down the role Corbyn has in the entry of people with extreme views into positions of power in the Labour Party and his lack of enthusiasm for tackling the anti-Semites.

The BBC has finally caught up with events as Labour suspends various members, all Muslim, for their views about Israel but although finally printing the story it gives excuse upon excuse for Corbyn.

The first line in this report is this quote from an MP which is interpreted as evidence of a plot against Corbyn…. the headline of the report gives away the BBC’s approach...’Anti-Semitism row bolsters Jeremy Corbyn’s Labour foes’.…

“There is a lot more in this anti-Semitism issue – a lot more. And the people we will take out are all close to Corbyn.”

Is that a plot or the justified reaction of Labour MPs to people making extremely racist comments with the expectation that they will be removed from the Party…given that Corbyn himself, and McDonnell, have said as much?

The BBC confirm’s their interpretation of this as a plot to get rid of Corbyn..

There is no suggestion that this particular MP was involved – and equally no suggestion that the shock felt by long standing Labour Party members at anti-Semitic comments by newer recruits is synthetic.

But for those opposed to Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership, the week could hardly have gone better.

No suggestion this MP was involved?  Involved in what?  Clearly the BBC is suggesting a coup is under way…exploiting anti-Semitism as a lever.

The BBC continues its defence of Corbyn telling us it’s not really much of a problem and that’s why Corbyn is just a bit slow to react…..

There is a consensus that anti-Semitism in the Labour Party is not widespread.

That contributed to Jeremy Corbyn’s unfortunate “crisis? What crisis?,” comments which suggested to some that he wasn’t serious enough about tackling a small but highly toxic problem before it became a big and highly toxic problem.

Ken Livingstone’s remarks on Hitler and Zionism were a bonus.

So much like Islamic terrorism…the beliefs and values that drive anti-Semitism are just held by a tiny minority of people who pervert the real ideology…trouble is that’s not true…as Nick Cohen points out…

The Labour party does not have a “problem with antisemitism” it can isolate and treat, like a patient asking a doctor for a course of antibiotics. The party and much of the wider liberal-left have a chronic condition.

It just appears to me that they face interlocking difficulties that are close to insoluble.

They must first pay the political price of confronting supporters from immigrant communities, which Labour MPs from all wings of the party have failed to do for decades.

While Ken Livingstone was forcing startled historians to explain that Adolf Hitler was not a Zionist, I was in Naz Shah’s Bradford. A politician who wants to win there cannot afford to be reasonable, I discovered. He or she cannot deplore the Israeli occupation of the West Bank and say that the Israelis and Palestinians should have their own states. They have to engage in extremist rhetoric of the “sweep all the Jews out” variety or risk their opponents denouncing them as “Zionists”.

The BBC astonishingly but not unusually prints this nonsense…

‘Not about religion’

Mr Aziz said politicians needed to be careful when commenting on the Middle East, but added: “The thing you have got to try and appreciate is that if a particular government – whether it’s the Israeli government, whether it’s the British government – if the government is actually doing something wrong they should be criticised.

“But not the population itself, it’s got nothing to do with them, it’s got nothing to do with the religion.”

Trouble is it’s all about religion.  Why is it that a Pakistani living in the UK is at all concerned about what goes on in the far off Middle East?  The only reason is because he is a Muslim and the people he is criticising are Jews…if they were Muslim he wouldn’t give a damn what they did or why they were there….what are his views on Jordan, or Saudi Arabia or Bahrain, or Qatar or Brunei or Malaysia or even Pakistan?  Curiously he doesn’t seem to have any views.

Shame the BBC continues to hide the truth.  Once again the Guardian asks that difficult question that should be on everyone’s lips…

Hidden among the current controversy on antisemitism is an issue so big and so difficult that it is barely addressed.

How, in diverse societies, is it possible to live peacefully alongside minorities whose views and political commitments we disagree with?

Naturally this being the Guardian the real problem is the Jews, sorry, Zionists…whilst Muslims are ‘too often left to be condemned by prejudiced treatment.’

But this is the big question that needs to be asked.  Just don’t expect the BBC to ask it, it’s what they’ve spent years covering up and trying to avoid talking about..hence we get Muslim driving schools and cake bakers to show just ‘how like us’ they all are when the truth is far, far from that in reality….as Nick Cohen told us.

Here’s the kicker…the BBC knows Corbyn’s a wrong’un and yet continues to smooth things over for him…

Pressure is also likely to mount on Jeremy Corbyn to distance himself not just from Ken Livingstone but from his own views.

The BBC itself is very reluctant to tackle Corbyn of his views and his ‘friendship’s’ with terrorists, his employment by the Isamist Iranian Press TV and his gathering together of all the looney-lefties he can drag out of the gutter to form his own little cabal of like-minded fellow travellers around himself.

Even the Guardian has raised doubts about Corbyn…from last August...Why is no one asking about Jeremy Corbyn’s worrying connections?…

Some of the things Corbyn is accused of are, to paraphrase George Orwell, still concerning even if the Daily Mail says so. For one thing, he is the chair of an organisation which a decade ago effectively supported attacks on British troops…. “by whatever means they find necessary, to secure such ends”.

Then there is Corbyn’s apparent proximity to antisemitism. While I genuinely believe that Corbyn does not have an antisemitic bone in his body, he does have a proclivity for sharing platforms with individuals who do; and his excuses for doing so do not stand up.

I believe [this] shows that the Labour party – and the left more generally – no longer takes antisemitism seriously.

As for the inquiry that the BBC keeps telling us that Corbyn has set up…Shami Chakrabarti is employed at the same firm as one Justine Thornton, otherwise known as Mrs Miliband and oh yes. there’s this about this man…Professor David Feldman, director of the Pears Institute for the Study of Anti-Semitism….

The man helping to lead Labour’s inquiry into antisemitism is a named supporter of a group which has dismissed allegations of Jew-hatred in the party as “baseless and disingenuous”.

Prof Feldman is a signatory to Independent Jewish Voices (IJV), a group of Jewish academics who are critical of British Jewish communal institutions.

On Sunday, IJV released a statement which expressed concern “at the proliferation in recent weeks of sweeping allegations of pervasive antisemitism within the Labour Party.”

It added: “Some of these allegations against individuals are, in our view, baseless and disingenuous; in other cases, ill-chosen language has been employed.”

IJV continued: “We are equally concerned, however, by the way in which such accusations are deployed politically – whether by the press, the Conservative Party, opponents of Corbyn’s leadership within Labour, or by those seeking to counter criticism of the actions of the Israeli government. The current climate is quickly coming to resemble a witch-hunt, in which statements and associations, some going back years, are being put under the microscope.”

IJV went on to express “dismay” that “anti-Arab racism or Islamophobia” were not receiving the same attention.

Doesn’t really fill you with confidence that the inquiry will be at all rigorous in taking Labour to task.  Someone needs to, but it won’t be the BBC until someone like Guido does the spade work and forces the BBC to start reporting the bad news.  Why is it that it is a relatively small blog on the internet that is making the running with the news and not the massively resourced BBC?  Could it be that the BBC just isn’t interested in finding out about what’s in Corbyn’s closet?   This is the BBC that trawls social media to find the ‘dirt’ on Israel or video of racists abusing blacks or Muslims but when it comes to anti-Semites they suddenly are not interested.  How odd.

Wonder did you watch Diane Abbott on with Andrew Marr yesterday? If this was Labour’s idea of damage limitation it didn’t exactly work out and I felt that Marr did a decent job in challenging her evasive answers. Thoughts?