Category Archives: BBC bias

Today we hear from the BBC that ‘Terror ‘apologists’ must share blame – Hammond’ and that ‘

“Apologists” for those who commit acts of terrorism are partly responsible for the violence, Philip Hammond will say.

Security services have been criticised over their handling of Mohammed Emwazi – known as “Jihadi John”.

With a total brassnecked arrogance and disregard for Hammond’s words and the damning truth about the Islamist group Cage the BBC goes on to say this…

BBC security correspondent Gordon Corera said critics of the security services said they “could have done more” to prevent Emwazi travelling to the Middle East.

Cage, an advocacy group for those “impacted by the War on Terror”, has said MI5 played a role in the radicalisation of Emwazi.

Its research director Asim Qureshi told the BBC “harassment” by intelligence officers did not make Emwazi into a killer, but he said it was a factor in making him feel he “didn’t belong in the UK anymore”.

 

The BBC doesn’t even have the decency to call Cage ‘controversial’.

The BBC must be sailing close to the wind and many people will believe that its reporting does exactly what Philip Hammond wants to stop….acting as an apologist for both terror and its accompanying extremist rhetoric that brings in the terror recruits….the BBC of course thinks that ‘terrorism’ is too loaded a word…..unless it is British ‘terror’..

The BBC’s Gabriel Gatehouse talking to one of the, as he calls them, Mau Mau veterans:

‘I must say sir you sound very magnaminous considering what you went through.’

…the ferocity and barbarity of what went on at that time has left deep scars…on the victims of torture.’

Not the ferocity and barbarity of the Mau Mau but of the Brits.

 

The Terrorism Act 2006 surely suggests that the BBC’s pro-Islamist narrative could be construed as encouraging, indirectly or recklessly, the recruitment of Muslims to the Islamist cause:

Encouragement of terrorism

(1)This section applies to a statement that is likely to be understood by some or all of the members of the public to whom it is published as a direct or indirect encouragement or other inducement to them to the commission, preparation or instigation of acts of terrorism or Convention offences.

(2)A person commits an offence if—

(a)he publishes a statement to which this section applies or causes another to publish such a statement; and

(b)at the time he publishes it or causes it to be published, he—

(i)intends members of the public to be directly or indirectly encouraged or otherwise induced by the statement to commit, prepare or instigate acts of terrorism or Convention offences; or

(ii)is reckless as to whether members of the public will be directly or indirectly encouraged or otherwise induced by the statement to commit, prepare or instigate such acts or offences.

The BBC’s continued support for groups like Cage, giving them the credibility and authority that comes with BBC sanction, and its repeated portrayal of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan as illegal or immoral, its regular condemnation of Israel whilst turning a blind eye to Muslim terror, as well as its campaign to close down Guantanamo Bay all point to an organisation that has lost its moral compass and finds itself unable to see the difference between terrorism and justified military or police action…as evidenced by its naive reporting of the comments of ex-Chief Superintendent Dal Babu about the Prevent Programme.  All of which is the staple diet fed to the Muslim community by people who wish them to see themselves as besieged and demonised by the ‘West’ and thereby be more open to recruitment for the Jihadi cause.

The BBC knows this and yet recklessly continues to peddle that narrative, a narrative which is demonstrably false but we hear day in day out on the BBC.

Maybe about time someone from the police started taking more interest in Lord Hall’s organisation and its ‘encouragement of terror’.

After all, as Philip Hammond says...’Apologists for terror must take some blame’.

H/T  Pounce……

HSBC hearing – Summary

• Margaret Hodge told Rona Fairhead that her peformance as an HSBC director meant she was no longer fit to lead the BBC Trust. She told her:

I don’t think that the record that you have shown in your performance here as a guardian of HSBC gives me the confidence that you should be the guardian of the BBC licence fee payers’ money. I reallly do think that you should consider your position and you should think about resigning and if not, I think the government should sack you.

 

Can’t see how Rona Fairhead can survive this…especially after all the flak the BBC sent towards the Tories for giving HSBC boss, Stephen Green, a peerage and a job…..the whole intent of the BBC’s ‘HSBC tax evasion’ story wasn’t to tackle HSBC itself but to take down the Tories….and yet they are ‘guilty’ of exactly the same sin…more so in fact as Fairhead is still employed by HSBC earning megabucks.

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

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

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

British state spies on Muslims

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

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

Babu’s personnel file stated that..

“This officer is over-racially sensitive”.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Then there’s stuff like this…

Working with faith communities

A guide for neighbourhood policing teams and partners

 

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

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

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

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

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

All of which suits the radicals.

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

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

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

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

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

A fresh week and election fever is in the air. Can we rely on the BBC to provide the Nation with a balanced coverage of this most important of campaigns? Or might their left wing bias shine through? The floor is yours!

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

Margaret Thatcher ‘told of Cyril Smith abuse claims’

 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

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

The BBC would be glad to let you think that.

But Lord Shackleton was a Labour peer.

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

Juast another day at the biased BBC.

From the washington Post…

Justice Department clears Ferguson police officer in civil rights probe

 

From the BBC…

Ferguson police racially biased says US Justice Department

 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

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

Jeremy Vine’s brother Tim tells us…

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

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

 

Bet he’s got a few up his sleeve now!

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

Learn how to count properly and you’ll be fine #EncourageEveryoneIn4Words

0 replies . 170 retweets 203 favourites

And oh yes…

Does money make you happy?

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

 

 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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