David Cameron attacks BBC over ‘stupid’ Eastleigh by-election coverage

David Cameron has attacked the BBC over its coverage of the Eastleigh by-election, accusing the corporation of acting “stupidly” following claims that the Tories have attempted to “hide away” their candidate.

Any chance the BBC took the opportunity to game the Tories and make the most of a chance to make their candidate look either evasive or uncaring?

If such a ploy could be proven it would be hugely damaging to the BBC if found guilty of interfering in an election by attempting to alter people’s perceptions of a candidate for the worse.

Maria Hutchings ‘famously’  made comments about state schools and said she would send her son to a private school to ensure he got the best education.

Nothing wrong with that.

Unless you are on the Left such as Brian Reade in the Mirror:

School snob Maria Hutchings shows the Tories just will not learn

My god-daughter Ellen will soon qualify to be an ­orthopaedic surgeon.

Ellen’s dad is an electrician, she went to a Liverpool state secondary and Leeds University.

Just one example of many who didn’t need a public school and Oxbridge ­education to become an expert clinician.

Why point that out?  At any other time the Left, with the BBC providing the platform more often than not, berates private schools and the ‘unfair advantages’ they give to pupils educated there.

But now they are telling us how fantastic State schools are….educating children to become surgeons no less.

He wasn’t so pleased with State schools not so long ago:

Eastender Tony and charity school boarder Paul, drifted into typical working-class jobs of taxi driving and bricklaying.

Although both are happy and fulfilled, compare their fate to Kensington prep-school boys Andrew and John, who predicted when they were seven, that they would go to a top public school, then Oxbridge, then into law.

Every prediction came true to the letter, with one becoming a wealthy law firm partner, the other an even wealthier QC.

Andrew’s kids went to public school, two of John’s oldest friends became Cabinet ministers. The cycle of privilege continues.

I suppose the Left are right…just look at the BBC this week, R4 is plastered with the works of George Orwell…an Old Etonian.  Clearly he only managed that sort of pre-eminence because of the school he went to and the fawning deference paid to him by the BBC lickspittles.

The day started with a surprise...the BBC giving plenty of coverage to the suggestion by what started off as the ‘independent think tank’ Reform that prisons are being run better by private companies than the public sector.

Presumably the ‘Reform’ policy institute caught the BBC napping….because it was only later in the day that ‘Reform’ suddenly became a ‘centre right think tank’…meaning everyone can relax….you can ignore this research…the Public Sector is Great.

Private companies are better at running prisons than the public sector, a study by a centre-right think tank says.

I was on the BBC this morning discussing what is termed the call “from MP’s” to “name and shame” those companies who are not paying the requisite amount of tax. I HAD wanted to bring up Margaret Hodge’s personal experience of minimising her tax affairs via the Stemcor company in which she has a “tiny” amount of shares (£1.8m) but was warned off the issue as the famously litigious Hodge might have chosen to take action against the BBC.  I respected the wish of the BBC on this occasion but it annoys me that they treat Hodge as some sort of crusader (Oops, that might offend a particular group) for fairness and “justice” when in fact she is a bully and a hypocrite and they KNOW it. I was not going to attack Hodge for tax avoidance but rather congratulate her since we should all be making every effort to starve the beast –  the State – of OUR cash.

Wednesday arrives and so does a new Open Thread. Over to you folks…

This item by Mark Easton has got the attention of quite a few readers I can see. This is quite a neat dissection of it by a B-BBC reader…

“An article on the BBC website today by Mark Easton entitled ‘Why have the white British left London?’. Few of the glaringly obvious reasons are discussed; rather, it is all presented as something normal and natural. In fact, it’s largely down to those cheeky Cockney types having bettered themselves and retired to Southend and Clacton. Or as Easton summarises it: “It is a story of aspiration. It is a story of success.”

Occasionally, though, the truth seeps through and has to be managed. He states: “Some white British may have moved because their neighbourhood has been culturally transformed, the tea rooms and restaurants replaced by takeaway chicken shops and halal supermarkets serving the new arrivals.” Interesting use of the phrase ‘culturally transformed’ – or what other people might call ethnic cleansing. Ethnic cleansing does not just mean men turning up with guns to force people out of the homes; it also means cultural transformation of neighbourhoods, as well as economic transformation as governments bring in low paid workers from overseas to make the place not viable for the locals.

Also notice how he refers to halal supermarkets for the new arrivals. What can he mean? Are Hindus from India, Catholics from Poland, Buddhists from Sri Lanka etc all clamouring for halal supermarkets? What Easton is basically saying is that when it comes to replacing a population, one type of migrant is preferred to all others. Just setting your expectations, you see!”

Think it might have been more apt had he signed off Allahu Akhbar, me old china.

A peaceful UAF protest

A lot of people don’t like the French National Party leader, Marine Le Pen and her policies.  They would like to prevent any of her policies being heard in public.  Perhaps some like the BBC’s Jeremy Hardy would take the extreme position of advocating shooting BNP members and their ilk in the back of the neck.

Who is the extremist?

Le Pen is speaking today at the Cambridge Union debating society about the future of the European Union and French politics.

Nicky Campbell has decided that this is an opportune moment to run a phone-in asking ‘Do extremists deserve free speech?’

Odd what gets the BBC fella’s excited.   Harry’s Place has been having a long running commentary on the speakers that grace the hallowed portals of the East London Mosque but the BBC has not shown the slightest interest.  In fact the BBC thinks the ELM is a fine, upstanding and moderate example of Islamic tolerance and inter faith dialogue.

By coincidence the top story today on Harry’s Place is from another student union:

“Homosexuals would be executed”

Lucy Lips, February 19th 2013, 2:45 pm

Student Rights has obtained a video showing a speaker at the Manchester University “Global Aspirations of Women Society” endorsing the execution of gay people:

Student Colin Cortbus attended a meeting at the Students’ Union last Wednesday 13th February organised by the Global Aspi­rations of Women society. He asked the chairperson of the meeting if “in the Islamic society in which you strive for” they would “feel comfortable, personally and morally, to kill a gay man?”

“Absolutely” came the response. The speakers added later that homosexuality was an “atrocity, because it goes against what God says”.

That’s of particular interest…Campbell did raise the subject of Qaradawi and his attitude towards Jewish people……but he made no mention of his attitude towards gay people…that being…the only question to be asked is not whether to kill them, but how to kill them…..‘While such punishments may seem cruel, they have been suggested to maintain the purity of the Islamic society and to keep it clean of perverted elements.’

Qaradawi is one of Islam’s moderate and highly respected scholars: “He is a moderate scholar who contributed to combating extremism in Islamic thoughts.”

Interesting that Peter Tatchell has a definition of Qaradawi’s views:

‘Qaradawi preaches a right-wing agenda of misogyny, anti-Semitism and homophobia.’

Many would say that such views were in fact from mainstream Islam…and we need to talk….‘What is going on in these mosques and madrasas? When is someone going to get 18th century on Islam’s mediaeval ass?‘

And yet the Unite Against Fascism spokesman on Campbell’s show had no problem with Qaradawi.….saying he was only interested in combating Fascists…extremist (not Fascist) Muslims were OK by him.

Campbell made no mention of Islam in relation to Qaradawi…it was as if these were purely Qaradawi’s own beliefs, dreamt up in  a cave somewhere after years communing with the voices in his head.

Campbell made no mention of the death threats to MP Sadiq Khan for voting in favour of gay marriage….an odd omission as it is so high profile and of relevance surely?

He did however speak with undue deference to someone named ‘Ali’.

Vive La Deference!  They make a desert and call it peace.

What did Campbell say?

He did in fact make one allusion to Muslims…he said Muslim extremists were only ‘people who call themselves Muslims’.….no Muslim can be ‘extreme’ in the BBC ‘style guide’…..’The styleguide for the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) represents wisdom surrounding the use of English in written and spoken communication.’

What other ‘wisdom’ did Campbell’s bright little brain come up with?  Always thinking that boy!

Oh yes……UKIP…aren’t they just the same as Le Pen’s National Front…after all they want to ban Halal meat and the Burkha just as they do?

Never mind that the Burkha has already been banned in France by, presumably, the non-extremist French government.

And the RSPCA in this country, amongst others, want to ban Halal meat.   Are they classed by Campbell alongside a ‘Nationalist’ party?

Any other BBC targets that Campbell could  traduce?

One more…..

Campbell asks should climate change deniers be given the right of free speech.

Funnily enough we already know the BBC’s answer to that one.

So that’s a fair old list….Qaradawi, who wants to kill Jews and homosexuals, is put into the same category as Marine Le Pen, UKIP, Climate sceptics…and the RSPCA.

The British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) is the largest broadcasting organization in the world. Its mission is to enrich people’s lives with programmes that inform, educate and entertain.

The BBC continues its barrage of ‘educational’ programmes on global warming for the allegedly hard of thinking among us…. ‘Expedition to the End of the World’

Not much subtlety there…much like the BBC’s title ‘Fighting The War’ for a series on the Iraq War…which had the sole purpose of painting the war in the worst light possible.

Its latest effort is a gloomy, doom laden offering capturing the thoughts and insights of a group of scientists and artists who venture into the frozen wilderness of the fjords of Greenland…or as the BBC puts it:

‘As the boat slips further away civilisation, the crew have a disturbing encounter which underlines the destructive impact of mankind.’

It’s possibly just one of God’s little  jokes that the ship they sail into the fjords on can’t get back out because of an unusually large amount of sea ice.

These two quotes give you a feel for what’s in store:

‘Actually it’s life that controls earth’s geological machinery…when I figured that out I was overwhelmed.  Living organisms are the main machinery in how the earth works and we’re part of the living organism.  We’re the dominant ones right now.’

In other words mankind is in control…and making a bad job of it.

‘Mass extinction has happened before in the earth’s history….it’s frightening that we’re in the midst of mass extinction right now and it’s a shame that we are the ones causing it.’

Having said that, they think we are doomed but are quite  phlegmatic about it…‘We’re doomed…So what?….we adapt or we are extinct…and mankind is only a short blip in the earth’s history anyway’  they suggest.

But then they are Scandanavian.

If only BBC journalists had the same backbone:

For over a decade, the Arab television broadcaster Al-Jazeera was widely respected for providing an independent voice from the Middle East. Recently, however, several top journalists have left, saying the station has developed a clear political agenda.

Doha tries to lead public opinion by the nose.

More than ever before, critics contend that the broadcaster is following a clear political agenda, and not adhering to the principles of journalistic independence.

Al-Jazeera has become a propaganda broadcaster.

According to Al Jazeera’s own description, it once aspired to be “a voice for the voiceless.”

So did the BBC.

For the BBC it is an article of faith that Hamas are full of good intentions and that try as they might they are unable to control other groups within Gaza.

Given the ruthlessness and total grip over Gaza that Hamas has that was always an unlikely scenario.

Hamas in all probability has complete control over every event in Gaza including who launches rockets and when into Israel….and the ‘detainment’ of the BBC’s own Alan Johnston was likely similarly choreographed from Hamas HQ.

The BBC in the shape of  Jon Donnison may have finally woken up to that fact as BBCWatch reveal that  the penny has dropped from his eyes:

From BBC Watch:

BBC CoJ debates the use of the term ‘Islamist’

The College of Journalism’s own article:

‘Islamist’ – acceptable shorthand or dangerously misleading?

BBC Urdu’s Aamer Ahmed Khan gives rise to the suspicion he may not be a reliable witness:

“The confusion is where you use [Islamist] interchangeably with the words ‘militant or extremist’. It’s just plain wrong – as wrong as calling a tortoise a coconut,” he argued colourfully.

Besides, not all militant groups are Islamist. The Taleban in Pakistan? Yes. It would be inaccurate to describe the Taleban as just a militant organisation, Aamer believes. But al-Qaeda? In his opinion it is not necessarily an Islamist militant group because its driving political focus is anti-Americanism.”

Al Qaeda not Islamist?  And the Pope’s not Catholic.

Osama Bin Laden is pretty clear what drove him, he attacks America but only as part of his aim to restore Islam to its rightful place:

‘It is clear to us that the solution lies in adhering to the religion of God…and installing a strong and faithful leadership that applies the Qur’an among us and raises the true banner of jihad.’

Pretty clear….the irony of course is that that was from a BBC report….they just don’t want to admit the truth it seems as seen from this part of the debate:

‘Ian Jolly, the BBC newsroom’s style guide editor, offers this guidance to BBC journalists; he starts by distinguishing between ‘Islamic’ and ‘Islamist’:

“The first simply refers to anything related to the religion. The second is derived from Islamism, defined in the dictionary as ‘Islamic militancy or fundamentalism’.

“Our own view is that an Islamist is someone who derives a political course from Islam. But it’s vital that we make clear what sort of course that is. For instance, there are Islamist political parties in various countries and Egypt has an Islamist president.

That pinpoints exactly the problem with the BBC and its attitude towards Islam:

‘Our own view is that an Islamist is someone who derives a political course from Islam.’

For the BBC most Muslims are not ‘Islamists’ because they don’t belong to a specific group such as the Muslim Brotherhood or indeed Al Qaeda.  But that is the wrong way of looking at Islam and Muslims…. Islam IS politics….it guides every move a Muslim makes…..the Koran’s essence is political, at its heart the demand on Muslims to make Islam the dominant ideology across the World.  If the BBC cannot define the real meaning of Islam it cannot define what an ‘Islamist’ is.

From ‘Islamic Thought’ by Abdullah Saeed:

‘Islam requires more than a spiritual commitment; Muslims are required to commit to a structure and framework of law and governance that fits within the teachings of the Qur’an  and the Prophet….Therefore it is important to recognize that politics is not subsidiary to Islamic thought and Law; rather it is a central component.’

So every Muslim is  an ‘Islamist’…there should be no separation between State and Religion.

Sayid Mawdudi, the founder of Jamaa’at Islami, a fundamentalist group, said :

‘Islam is a revolutionary ideology which seeks to alter the social order of the entire world.’  

Bertrand Russell believed Islam was more about politics and domination than religion, most like Bolshevism:

‘Mohammedanism and Bolshevism are practical, social, unspiritual, concerned to win the empire of the world’.

Osama Bin Laden himself reminded us that God’s Law is sovereign, man made laws have no significance and Islam should guide a Ruler’s decisions and actions:

‘The gist here is that the absence of a comprehensive understanding of God’s religion as a system for all walks of life, including Islam’s way of holding the Rulers accountable…because if they follow God’s religion things become good for the country and its people…’

and…..‘Many of us understand Islam to mean performing some acts of worship, such as prayer and fasting.

Despite the great importance of these rituals, the religion of Islam encompasses all the affairs of life, including religious and worldly affairs, such as economic, military and political affairs, as well as the scales by which we weigh the actions of men – rulers, ulema and others – and how to deal with the ruler in line with the rules set by God for him and which the ruler should not violate.’

Islam is then more Revolution than Revelation.

As said before if the BBC is unprepared to examine Islam, the Koran, its interpretation and meaning, and what Islam means to Muslims and the effect it has on their decisions how can it possibly define the meaning of ‘Islamist’?

Channel 4  broadcast historian Tom Holland’s research into the origins of Islam as he set out in his book: In the Shadow of the Sword: The Battle for Global Empire and the End of the Ancient World.

‘The themes it explores are currently the focus of intense and escalating academic debate.’

The BBC is as yet to participate in that debate, one which is of ever increasing importance.

And it should be noted that having broadcast the programme C4 is still up and running, no one has been killed and the world keeps turning.  The BBC’s refusal to broadcast similar investigations whilst remorselessly delving into Christianity’s origins and history is a complete failure on its part to fulfill its obligations…either from fear or a misplaced intention to ‘protect’ the Muslim Community from anything ‘adverse’.

The very fact that Mark Thompson gave this as part of the reason for not examining Islam is telling:

“Without question, ‘I complain in the strongest possible terms’, is different from, ‘I complain in the strongest possible terms and I am loading my AK47 as I write’” 

That must raise some questions.

Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn knew how the truth is suppressed. He said:

“Violence can only be concealed by a lie, and the lie can only be maintained by violence.”

The BBC is ‘lying’ to us about Islam if only by omission…it is censoring the debate…..

The New Statesman is braver:

The New Statesman Special Report – The great Koran con trick

‘Censorship that plagues the Middle East seeps into every corner of intellectual life. Nowhere is this more true than in the study of the origins of Islam, where some of the conclusions being drawn are potentially even more explosive than the argument that Israelis and Palestinians have common ancestors.

‘…So why is it that, in the acres of newsprint and during the hours of television time spent discussing Muslim issues since 11 September, there has been no debate on the Koran and the origins of Islam?’

Only when we get what is one of the world’s most powerful and influential broadcasters to join in the debate will a serious and rigorous examination of the consequences of having such large Islamic/Islamist populations growing inside Christian or secular societies be possible….and there are consequences whether you want to admit them or not.  It may also influence the possibility of eventual reform within Islam and a consequent change in the relationship between the Religion and State just as Christianity eventually reached a ‘balance’ in its role within the State in which it was separated from the politics…. a few Bishops in the House of Lords excepted…and the occasional turbulent priest given airtime on the BBC.