Armed police have seized four men in a series of dawn raids to break up a suspected Christmas terrorist bomb plot.
Police raided four addresses in South Yorkshire and Derbyshire after intelligence suggested the men were planning to build or acquire a bomb in an Islamist plot to strike a target in the UK.
Oh the irony as the BBC promotes #MuslimChristmas.
The BBC is pushing hard the narrative that Muslims love Christmas and are just like ‘us’ and Islam is completely harmless and essentially an exotic version of Christianity. Shame one on Adrian Chiles[11:50] suddenly burst out into a rant about Muslims not being able to become students [lol…so many Muslim extremists are in fact students…it’s a well known recruiting arena] and then went off on one about Britain having a lot to anwer for due to its foreign policy ruining the world. Hmmmm…might suggest it was Muhammed in the 7th century who has had the most baleful and damaging effect on world history turning the Middle East and so many countries into cultural, scientific, industrial and artistic deserts….not to mention what is basically an Islamically inspired terrorist world war against non-Muslims now in progress.
And why is the BBC promoting #Muslimchristmas?…as if Christians don’t mind Muslims hijacking their major religious festival and trying to make it all about Muslims as they do with everything else. Then again what’s new…The warlord Muhammed hijacked Christianity claiming Moses and Jesus were Muslim prophets……and that everyone is Muslim except they just don’t know it…hence any ‘converts’ are called ‘reverts’. He did this of course to make his ‘religion’ sound familiar and attractive to Christians so that they would join him and his war machine as it plundered and conquered the Middle East.
Maybe about time Christians hijacked Islam…#ChristianEid….let’s take over the Koran and rewrite it so that all the violence, misogyny, anti-semitism, homophobia, Kufar hating, slavery promoting bits are removed…..not much would be left….lol.
Would the BBC promote that? or #SikhChristmas, or #BuddhistChristmas or #HinduChristmas or #Jewish Christmas or #JediknightChristmas? Doubt it somehow.
To hear that the BBC will be sending teams of their own journalists into schools to teach children how to spot fake news is somewhat amusing if not just a little terrifying…it’s like sending Jimmy Savile into schools to teach the children how to spot a paedophile.
It’s not difficult kids…if it has ‘BBC’ on it then it’s a good chance of being fake news.
The BBC is launching a new scheme to help young people identify real news and filter out fake or false information.
The project is targeted at secondary schools and sixth forms across the UK.
From March, up to 1,000 schools will be offered mentoring in class and online to help them spot so-called fake news.
Ironically the BBC uses its announcement to spread fake, anti-Trump, news…
The term “fake news” was popularised by Donald Trump during his presidential election campaign last year.
He used the term to denigrate the output of the traditional news media, although it is also used to describe news stories that achieve significant traction despite being palpably false.
5 Live decided to explore the issue today and we had the intelligent, impartial, even-tempered Nihal to guide through the process. LOL. A man so unsuited to the job it is laughable. For instance when a listener texted in that the BBC was as guilty of spreading fake news as anyone Nihal responded with derision and mockery in an aggressive and rude manner…he shouted out ‘bingo!’ as he received the message clearly indicating his attitude to criticism of the BBC. The texter said the BBC was the last place he would look for the truth and always used other media sources for his news. Nihal snapped at him and told him ‘good luck with that…see how you get on’ as if no one can survive without the BBC feeding them its lies.
An irony that on a programme about fake news and echo chambers Nihal is unprepared to listen to other views and will only hear what he wants to hear. But then that is Nihal, bigoted, racist and aggressively unpleasant….he likes to announce that Britain is a nastier and more racist place since Brexit….just one of the BBC’s favourite lies, along with ‘Islam is the religion of peace’, that they use to attack their opponents. Nihal went on to tell us that ‘truth’ and ‘facts’ are not the same…there is a problem with ‘truth’. No there is a problem with the BBC and its alternate facts.
Trump in no way invented nor popularised the term fake news…..it has been around for over a hundred years and the left-wing media used it extensively to attack Trump…Trump was not ‘denigrating’ news media but accurately describing their output. The BBC et al actually created the biggest bit of fake news….the myth of the ‘post-truth era’. This is a deliberate attempt to shape the narrative in their own interest by claiming that only since Trump and Brexit has news become fake….see the title to the BBC video above….’Fake news and post-truth: How th eworld changed in 2016′. Except of course it didn’t change…or not at least in how it is reported….the media has always been completely untrustworthy. What did change was Brexit and Trump….and the BBC hates that and shapes its news to paint both in as damaging a light as possible….ie fake news.
Look at the BBC video above when the BBC’s Allan Little claims there are now two Britains each with their own parallel truths as he shows the Boris Bus on screen and tells us that Leave promised us £350 million per week for the NHS. This is post-truth politics he ridiculously claims…..however even if the bus did say what he claims, and it didn’t, politicians have been lying to us for, well, for ever. That claim of a post-truth politics is fake news itself, an invented phantom bogeyman to scare people into doubting Brexit and Trump’s victorys were legitimate. The BBC claims that this new ‘post-truth’ era is a danger to democracy…..the only danger to democracy is a massively powerful media organisation that is out of control and which is spreading misleading and false information about people and events it does not like. Here you can see the BBC attacking Breitbart with false claims that it used a term, ‘Luegenpresse’ [lying press], that the BBC says was first used by the Nazis….unfortunately the term was coined long before the Nazis and is still in use in Germany today by the media there….including the left-wing media. Just another classic attempt by the BBC to smear a political opponent with the ‘Nazi’ or Far-Right tag.
And the BBC can’t really claim that the term is not very apt in relation to its own output…Allan Little’s video above just one example of the lies and attempts to create the narrative that no one can be trusted except the BBC.
Lord Hall Hall says…
“By sharing our journalistic expertise, we want to give young people the skills and awareness they need to be confident about identifying the real news stories, and calling out the fakes.”
Get ’em young. That’s the BBC plan…a somewhat sinister one that aims to position the BBC as the arbiter of truth and, in the eyes of a future generation, as the only trusted voice which they can rely upon for their news about the world. This is not unlike the Nazis and Communists who always aimed to recruit and indoctrinate, brainwash, the young so that they would grow up into obedient and unthinking drones.
It is surprising that the government should allow the BBC to do this. It is clearly an exercise in extending the BBC’s own influence and grip on the national consciousness and on the political discourse allowing it in future to have a powerful and dominant impact on what people see and hear in the news and thus potentially controlling how they perceive the world and then their reactions…such as how they vote. This is a power grab by the BBC in a most sinister way, training, grooming, children to believe only one way of thinking is correct.
Here’s an interesting slip of the tongue from Buzzfeed: Those Labour supporting media cheerleaders…like the BBC…
In short, Corbyn – like Donald Trump – needed his own media cheerleaders. Their rise has also resulted in a deep-seated distrust of supposedly Labour-supporting organisations such as the New Statesman – which was recently picketed over its anti-Corbyn stance – and the BBC, which until relatively recently was used to being under fire from the likes of the Daily Mail for being too left-wing.
No coincidence the NUJ was briefing Labour that the BBC needed its protection:
NUJ submission to the Labour Party consultation on fake news February 2017
Establish funding arrangements to ensure the future of the BBC as one of the world’s most respected and comprehensive news organisations
The role of the BBC as the bulwark that supports the UK’s broadcast media cannot be overstated. It is training academy, standard setter and commissioning hub for the industry, as well as being among the world’s most important media organisations and public service broadcasters. Tempting as many find it to find fault with aspects of its output, this should never detract from its importance, nor the need to ensure that it retains this vital role.
The BBC is also the UK’s most-trusted source of newsiv and is considered fair and impartial by the overwhelming majority of people in the UK. As such it is an exemplar of fair and balanced journalism (periodic issues notwithstanding).
James O’Brien spreading ‘fake news’ via the BBC is a must-watch
The row about ‘fake news’ and the ‘crooked media’ appears to be ongoing. And every time the BBC and other mainstream media mention it they present themselves solely as the victims of such phenomena.
The BBC has stated in its news bulletins that the Manchester bomb attack could have been stopped. In the web report they quote from a report saying that the attack coud have been stopped if… “the cards fallen differently.”
A major review of whether MI5 could have stopped any of 2017’s terrorism attacks has revealed details of opportunities that, had they been followed through, might have stopped two of them.
“MI5 … came by intelligence [on Abedi] in the months before the attack which, had its true significance been properly understood, would have caused an investigation into him to be opened.”
Those two pieces of undisclosed intelligence were thought to relate to crime, rather than terrorism.
Was this a missed opportunity? MI5 concluded that the intelligence was insufficient. But Mr Anderson’s review states: “It is conceivable that the Manchester attack… might have been averted had the cards fallen differently.”
Firstly that’s a totally meaningless statement…’if’ I had a time machine I could go back in time and fix everything with the knowledge I have now….if the cards had fallen differently is a nonsense statement…of course if things had been different…but they weren’t. Second the BBC misses out what was said before and after that claim.
Before we get to that let’s quote some more from the report, something of interest to do with the British people’s response….
The public response – like that of the police who reacted promptly to each attack – was impressive. Manchester came together in a moving demonstration of solidarity. The international headline which described London as “reeling” missed the mark: resilient, or resolute, would have been closer. Rather than divide the country, these shocking crimes united decent people of all races and religions in sympathy for the victims and condemnation for the attackers. Post-attack hate crimes, unacceptable though they are, cannot obscure this greater truth.
The BBC prefers to say that the British response was a wave of anti-Muslim hatred and a rising tide of ‘Islamophobic’ attacks. I might suggest the people of this country have been incredibly tolerant and patient with the Muslim community considering what has happened over the last 25 years.
But back to ‘they could have stopped it’……
The report says…‘in a free society and against a worsening threat background, it is not realistic to expect everything to be stopped.’
And in relation to the Manchester attack in particular….
Salman Abedi (Manchester) Abedi: summary Like Khalid Masood (but 30 years younger), Salman Abedi was a closed SOI at the time of his attack, and so not under active investigation. MI5 nonetheless came by intelligence in the months before the attack which, had its true significance been properly understood, would have caused an investigation into him to be opened. It is unknowable whether such an investigation would have allowed Abedi’s plans to be pre-empted and thwarted: MI5 assesses that it would not.
So completely unknowable if the attack could have been stopped….if only things had been different…well yes.
That phrase ‘had the cards fallen differently‘ was in fact part of a paragraph praising MI5 and the police whose systems were working well….and is a rather strange and casual line as it suggests a perfect knowledge of things they didn’t know and is a throwaway comment based more on hope than fact….
Nor could it be said of the attacks under review, save in the case of Finsbury Park, that MI5 and the police were entirely blindsided. Khalid Masood (Westminster) and Salman Abedi (Manchester) had both been subjects of interest, and Khuram Butt (London Bridge) remained under active investigation. Substantial and appropriate coverage was in place around key individuals, and mechanisms designed to assess risk were working as intended. MI5 and CT Policing got a great deal right: particularly in the case of Manchester, they could have succeeded had the cards fallen differently.
The report goes on to admit that this is purely the opinion of one man using knowledge gained after the event against the judgement of MI5’s professional opinion….The author claims he ‘offers no view’ but then strangely suggests it is possible MI5 could have stopped the atatck but we can’t know because that is pure speculation based upon a high degree of inherent uncertainty…in other words he doesn’t have a clue but is hedging his bets with some mealy mouthed words…
In relation to the question of whether the Manchester attack could or should have been stopped (2.37 and 3.15 above), I offer no view on whether the re-opening of an investigation into Salman Abedi in early 2017 would, as MI5 concludes “on the clear balance of professional opinion”, have been unlikely to result in the pre-emption of the gathering plot. While that may be right, I prefer to emphasise my agreement with the other point made in this connection: that “there is a high degree of inherent uncertainty in speculating as to what might or might not have been discovered”.
We are also told how difficult MI5’s job is…and yet the report can claim maybe, possibly, if only, had things been different….the attack could have been stopped….
The Director General of MI5 recently described the work of his staff in the following terms: “They are constantly making tough professional judgments based on fragments of intelligence: pin pricks of light against a dark and shifting canvas.”
After immersing myself in the minutiae of these investigations, that strikes me as an accurate description of MI5’s counter-terrorism work. The reason why the judgements can be “tough” is that they are made against a background of imperfect information, and yet frequently require staff to choose which of a number of current and potentially deadly threats is most deserving of scarce investigative resource.
So pretty much nonsense to suggest the Manchester attack could have been stopped. The BBC of course grabs the headline that makes the most sensation…entirely irresponsible as it creates anger amongst victims and their families and expectations that can never be fulfilled…..as the report says…
‘in a free society and against a worsening threat background, it is not realistic to expect everything to be stopped.’
Hitler could have been stopped ‘had the cards fallen differently’.…but they didn’t. And of course the BBC played its part in that banning Churchill and his anti-Hitler speeches from the airwaves in case he ‘offended’ the Germans. Sounds very familiar today.
‘Out thought and undereducated. We have lost the ability to think, to acquire knowledge, to advance intellectually and then we wonder why our community is in such decay.’
‘Islam choked in the vicelike grip of orthodoxy….It was the end of tolerance, intellect, and science in the Muslim world. The last great Muslim thinker, Abd- al Rahman ibn Khaldun, belonged to the 14th century.’
MarkyMark in the comments draws our attention to this in the Guardian which illustrates why the BBC peddles the ‘glorious history’ of Islam in order to persuade us that the realities of Islam within our society today are not the real Islam…Islam is peaceful religion that embraces human rights, women’s liberation and forward thinking on many issues from the economy to science and philosophy…in essence Islam, the BBC insinuates, is not a threat to you or your culture and society…..
The scale of hostility in Britain towards Islam and Arabs is revealed in a YouGov survey showing most UK voters believe Arabs have failed to integrate themselves into British society, and their presence has not been beneficial.
The three characteristics most closely associated with the Arab world by British people are gender segregation, wealth and Islam, with extremism and a rich history the next two identified characteristics. The degree of association with innovation or forward thinking is miniscule.
In a survey that also reveals widespread self-confessed ignorance about the Arab world, a total of 63% say they believe Arabs have failed to integrate themselves into western society and live in isolated communities.
Faisal J Abbas, editor in chief of Arab News, said the poll showed on the one hand a shocking lack of knowledge of the Arab world.
“What is concerning is that these opinions are based on very limited knowledge about the region. The Arab world is home to some of the poorest countries in the world.
So we have have a shocking lack of knowledge about the Arab world. Really?
Even Arabs admit there is a problem with ‘Arab’ countries:
An unsparing new report by Arab scholars explains why their region lags behind so much of the world
The barrier to better Arab performance is not a lack of resources, concludes the report, but the lamentable shortage of three essentials: freedom, knowledge and womanpower. Not having enough of these amounts to what the authors call the region’s three “deficits”. It is these deficits, they argue, that hold the frustrated Arabs back from reaching their potential—and allow the rest of the world both to despise and to fear a deadly combination of wealth and backwardness.
The most delicate issue of all, again carefully skirted by the authors of the report, is the part that Islam plays in delaying and impeding the Arab world’s advance towards the ever-receding renaissance that its intellectuals crave. One of the report’s signed articles explains Islam’s support for justice, peace, tolerance, equilibrium and all good things besides. But most secularists believe that the pervasive Islamisation of society, which in several Arab countries has largely replaced the frightening militancy of the 1980s and early 1990s, has played a significant part in stifling constructive Arab thought.
[Islam]….discouraging critical thought and innovation and helping to produce a great army of young Arabs, jobless, unskilled and embittered, cut off from changing their own societies by democratic means. Islam at least offers them a little self-respect. With so many paths closed to them, some are now turning their dangerous anger on the western world.
So Islam creates Jihadis not just by virtue of its teachings but because it also destroys the innovative and creative thinking that produces jobs and a civil, employed society…thus we get angry young men who ironically fight to defend the Islam that is the source of their problems.
We are told by the Guardian that…’The emerging picture – fear, ignorance and hostility – underlines the tensions in UK society about attitudes to Islam and the Arab world in the UK’….Well there’s fear and hostility…but based on knowledge not ignorance. People look around and see what Muslims do and say, they look at the Muslim world and what Islam has done for those countries, they look at countries where Islam has infiltrated and they look at the result…they also look at countries where there is little to no Islam and look at the result…and they choose which one they like…No Islam.
The Jews, in 70 years, have turned the desert into a highly productive, innovative, forward looking democracy…and that’s just Israel never minds Jews around the world…despite Israel being under attack for all of that time by Muslims who have produced what? They have oil, but they didn’t find or develop that…the West did…and what do they do with the revenues? Playboys and funding Islamists in the West….mostly.
The we have this from the Guardian…
The degree of association [of Islam] with innovation or forward thinking is miniscule.
That’s because Islam crushed innovation and forward thinking…don’t take my word for it, take a Muslim’s……
He states that there are 1.2 billion Muslims in the world….and between them they have a total of 10 Nobel prizes. The Jews, with a population of 12 million have 150 Nobel prizes. All 6 Jewish Universities are in the top 20 in a world ranking. There are no Muslim universities in the top 200.
He goes on to say:
We wonder why we are losing battles, we are not being out fought, we are being out thought.
We are not under armed, we are undereducated.
We have lost the ability to think, to acquire knowledge, to advance intellectually and then we wonder why our community is in such decay.
In the twelfth century Muslim orthodoxy reawakened, spearheaded by the cleric Imam Al-Ghazali. Al-Ghazali championed revelation over reason, predestination over free will. He refuted the possibility of relating cause to effect, teaching that man cannot know or predict what will happen; God alone can. He damned mathematics as against Islam, an intoxicant of the mind that weakened faith.
Islam choked in the vicelike grip of orthodoxy.
It was the end of tolerance, intellect, and science in the Muslim world. The last great Muslim thinker, Abd- al Rahman ibn Khaldun, belonged to the 14th century.
For Muslims, it is time to stop wallowing in self-pity: Muslims are not helpless victims of conspiracies hatched by an all-powerful, malicious West. The fact is that the decline of Islamic greatness took place long before the age of mercantile imperialism. The causes were essentially internal. Therefore Muslims must introspect, and ask what went wrong.
People can say what they like on stage, but what annoys me is that when comics talk about religion, the writing is often lazy and not very intelligent. Worst of all, it’s not very funny.
Tez Ilyas
Well yes….shame he doesn’t actually listen to his own advice…..read on about the good Muslim Tez Ilyas.
Tez Ilyas, an Asian Muslim comic that the BBC has groomed and radicalised….what he used to look like…
What he looks like now…
His comedy is left-wing and from the point of view of an Asian Muslim with a chip on his shoulder about Empire and the injustices of Muslims being under suspicion for some reason he can’t fathom…it’s so unfair. You might get the impression this is just him regurgitating what is said at the dinner table at home in the ‘community’. He tells us benefits are ‘reparations’ [for empire] and that Lancashire is ‘Allah’s own country’. His show is based upon converting the infidel to Islam…a mock conversion attempt…but not really mock is it? He moans…
Ilyas wonders why he has been made to feel like an outsider in the country he’s called home from day one
Hmmm….maybe because that is what your own community has told you, Islam having ‘apartheid’ tendencies and because members of your community have been bombing, stabbing, running down non-Muslims in order to ensure ‘Islam will reign supreme’…as Muhammed instructed….and oddly enough the non-Muslims don’t like it.
Which brings us onto why we have a post on him.
He appeared on The Now Show to launch an attack on Poppy Day telling us he would not wear the Poppy because it had been hijacked by the Far-Right. I might suggest he won’t wear a Poppy one, because he might get his head kicked in if he walked down his own road…..
And two I just don’t believe he would ever wear one anyway listening to his attitude to Britain and that big chip on his shoulder.
But let’s think about his claimed reasoning…he won’t wear a Poppy because the Far-Right have hijacked it for their own cause…..well OK…..he also tells us ISIS etc aren’t real Muslims and they have hijacked his religion….do I need to go on?
Logically therefore he must also refuse to be a Muslim anymore…Poppies hijacked…not wear Poppy…Islam hijacked…not be a Muslim….yes? No. Don’t be silly…..instead he looks like he is becoming evermore devout and openly religious and vocally ‘Muslim’.
Hypocrite.
He tells us Farage and Katie Hopkins can shove their Poppies up their nationalist arses and that millions of Muslims fought for Britain against Fascist Nazi scum….linking Farage to that….presumably he also includes all those Brexit voters in there as well…he is of course against Brexit.
Er….in reality those Muslims threatened to fight for those Nazi Scum if they didn’t get a promise from the British of their own Muslim nation….let’s remember that as Muslims scream and shout about Balfour…..so maybe he should shove Islam up his nationalist arse? Let’s also remember he’s only Muslim because the Arabs conquered and colonised India and forcibly converted so many Indians to Islam….so if he wants to talk about imperialism and violence let him start with that. Tez Ilyas….a man who grovels on his knee five times a day to an Arab god in the direction of Mecca….the Arab centre of Empire….and he whinges about the British Empire! Shouldn’t the brainwashed Tez break free from his subjugation by this Arab religion and return to his real roots….Hinduism or Buddhism if he is so opposed to Imperialism?
The real shame is that the BBC thinks it is lovely and diverse to nurture and support this man’s anti-British extremism, and perhaps worse that the audience were cheering as he ‘spat’ on the Poppy.
The BBC continues to play its very dangerous game of divisive and toxic racist identity politics the like of which has already led to police officers being murdered on the streets of America because of a narrative that they are killing Black men because of the colour of their skin…a narrative that has been proven to be untrue but which the BBC still peddles even today as it reports on the NFL protests.
Listen to the Afternoon Edition on 5 Live and you may feel sorry for Sarah Brett as she is hung out to dry and left like a rabbit in the headlights by racist anti-racism campaigners who rant on about middle-class white women’s racism because they, apparently, do not include ethnic minorities, including ‘Trans women of colour’, in their considerations in their feminist campaigns. Brett is of course white and middle-class and ironically oh so achingly wannabe friend of the ethnic minorities, as are all her guilty white colleagues at the BBC, and not only curls up into a little ball in a corner of the studio proclaiming her guilty white privilege she keeps on telling these racists that they are right…..white, middle-class feminists just don’t represent ethnic people and are not inclusive. Her co-host Nihal loves it, he havng a problem with white people himself judging by the comments he often makes, so in effect we have a gaggle of black and Asian feminists being racist about white women and the BBC is happy to promote that narrative…..white people are all racist even when they are not.
How did the subject come up? Muslim comedian Shaza Mirza claimed that when she went on the women’s march against Trump earlier in the year she saw absolutely no black or Asian women there and she realised these white, middle-class racist feminists just didn’t represent her. Brett tells us that when she saw that comment she knew she just had to talk about the issue on the programme. Trouble is Mirza is either completely blind or lying. Any look at videos or photographs of the event will show plenty of Black, Asian and Muslim women there…as the video above shows….and look at the video from the march website in which they tell us they are in solidarity with sistas across the world…note the many black speakers…
‘You can only measure something, and how well it’s working, by what it does for you. If you’re struggling, yet every other woman is benefiting from this new wave of feminism, you can’t help but feel it isn’t for me. It’s a fashion. It doesn’t include me, it doesn’t say anything to me about my life. A lot of black and Asian women that I speak to don’t know what the hell is going on.’
Which is odd really as you can find her all over the internet working with white feminists…hardly excluded….
Just another ‘ethnic’ using their ethnicity as a lever to further their careers by playing the race card and playing the ‘victim’. You might have more sympathy for her if she didn’t proclaim proudly that she is a Muslim when she knows full well Islam is a misogynist religion, anti-Semitic, very divisive and warlike…she herself makes jokes about the misogyny…and yet she remains in the religion…and proudly so…..
Look at this photo….apart from Khan there are several Black and Asian people in the picture…at least six visible plus Khan….
Yep…no Blacks, Asians or Muslims at the march….just more dangerous BBC race-baiting, divisive radio.
Funny old world. Muslims insist they are doing Jihad and joining the Islamic State in the name of Allah to further his religion and the BBC insists they are not. They are, the BBC insists, deluded, ignorantly perverting the religion of peace and doing things Muhammed would never have countenanced…despite the ISIS blitz across the Middle East being exactly what Muhammed did…conquering and colonisation, chopping off heads, taking sex slaves, knocking down temples and destroying ‘idols’. It is the 7th century brought to technicolour modern life.
However, someone makes a highly dubious claim that the Vikings were a little bit Muslim and the BBC is there embracing this new ‘fact’ and spreading the glad tidings across the world. Muslims aren’t Muslim enough for the BBC but Vikings can be declared ‘Muslim’ on the evidence of a small piece of embroidery on a piece of cloth.
Some might think the BBC was doing the embroidery, of history that is.
A Swedish ‘academic’ has announced that she has discovered the word ‘Allah’ woven into Viking textiles…the BBC report this as absolute truth…
The question should of course rather be ‘Did the Vikings embroider ‘Allah’ into their clothing?’ but that’s not a narrative the BBC wants….it wants us all to think Islam was widely accepted as a good religion by everyone throughout history and thus we should accept that ourselves never mind all the evidence that this just isn’t true and that Islam is far from the religion of peace that the BBC would have us believe.
The BBC farms out the job of reporting this to a Muslim….Tharik Hussain is a London-based freelance journalist, travel writer and broadcaster who specialises in Muslim heritage. So what we get from the already Islamophillic BBC is a Muslim, whose job is to promote Islamic heritage and interests, to report impartially upon a controversial subject. Naturally what we get is a complete acceptance of the story and the spin that perhaps some Vikings were Muslim….more evidence…a silver ring with an Islamic inscription upon it….no thoughts that this could have been a gift, traded, pillaged or brought North by a slave….it’s a definite sign the Vikings were a little bit Muslim.
The ‘academic’ is in fact a contemporary artists who says “a cliché is something that we are supposed to see in a certain way. When you get close to it, it can have a new meaning – it is that twist I am interested in.” So she is interested in twisting our perceptions….creating new meanings. She certainly did that with her ‘Islamic’ inscription…it has to be rotated and have extra script added to it to make it into ‘Allah’…as even the BBC admits…
Enlarging the patterns and looking at the reflection in a mirror revealed the word ‘Allah’ (God) in Arabic
‘Enlarging the patterns’ is disingenuous….she actually added parts to it not merely ‘enlarged’ it which gives the idea that it was merely magnified.
What is magnified though is the conclusion….from a scrap of ‘evidence’ we are expected to believe that maybe some Vikings were Muslim and Islam had a significant presence in Europe…this is pure pro-Muslim propaganda not news…literally smoke and mirrors. If the BBC had asked a few questions they might have found a different narrative instead of BBC ‘Truthiness’….
“Vikings had rich contact with the Arab world. This textile? No,” she began, noting that the textile “has no Arabic at all but the story has gone viral” thanks to news outlets like the Times and BBC.
“There is something very troubling here about the relationship between news media and experts, who should have been consulted for verification,” she continued. “It should go without saying that a single scholar’s un-peer-reviewed claim does not truth make.”
“Here’s the deal with Viking ‘Allah’ textile, as I have been able to piece it together over past few days. As an Islamic art historian & archaeologist, I was immediately suspicious about style of Arabic epigraphy. It’s really so simple that I spent five days thinking, it couldn’t be that Larsson would make so fundamental and obvious a mistake,” said Mulder.
Mulder explained that the most obvious issue with Larsson’s methodology was that the Viking textile is dated to the 10th century, while the style of epigraphy in Larsson’s drawing comes from the 15th century.
“It’s a style called square Kufic, and it’s common in Iran, Central Asia on architecture after 15th century,” she said, providing an example of the style.
She added that the earliest example of the style dates to 11th to early 12th century Muslim architecture—all dating to at least 100 years after the Viking textile found in Birka. She also noted that Larsson’s drawing of the word “Allah” in Kufic script wasn’t even common until the 15th century.
In other words, Larsson and her team’s findings are the result of pareidolia—they saw Arabic patterns where there weren’t any.
Mulder’s debunking of Larsson extended to the rest of the textile, as well. She pointed out that Larsson’s claims are based on supposition, and not proof.
The professor also stated that the only reason the story went viral was because of contemporary politics.
That the Vikings had contact with the Middle East and the Far East has never been in dispute. Mulder said that the “Allah” textile exhibits what Stephen Colbert referred to as “truthiness” despite being unanchored from reality, because it helped to reinforce a specific narrative.
“But ‘truthiness’ cannot be enough for news media, especially in this age of accusations of #FakeNews,” said the professor, who urged journalists to “pick up the phone” and call experts before publishing their stories.
Medieval Islamic art and archaeology professor Stephennie Mulder disputes the findings, saying the inscription has ‘no Arabic at all’
The BBC has yet to do so, the original story going un-updated. But then why wouldn’t ‘Allah’ appear in Viking clothing…his name appears everywhere else, Jesus and Abraham were Muslim don’t you know…….which must prove something about Islam if only the BBC could think of it……
Proof ISIS is Muslim…Allah gave them the sign to dress infidel disbelievers in orange jump suits and to behead them…..
‘The alleged murderer was clearly a Muslim, but there is very little to suggest that he adhered to a hard-line interpretation of his religion or that he had political or religious motives.
Still, searching for patterns and for answers is part of what it is to be human. I loathe cliche, but perhaps, for once, this is a “senseless tragedy”, devoid of deeper meaning.’
The BBC is still downplaying the ‘racist’ attack on a 14 year old boy outside a mosque….why? Because they are pretty sure it was an attack by another Muslim, probably Sunni against Shia. No sensationalist headlines shouting about ‘racism’ or ‘hate’….just a boring, undramatic, low key heading as they update the report…
So who’s the man arrested? Any clues? Any religion or ethnicity? They obviously know because we get this oblique statement..
Echoing the police that the motive for the attack was not yet clear, he added: “Background checks so far have not associated the suspect with any particular mosque or community.”
So good probability he is Muslim. Note the BBC does not mention that the boy attacked was a Shia Muslim….possibly very relevant to the story…one clue too many for the BBC to give away? Then we get this…..
“The board of trustees emphasises that whatever the motive behind this attack, it should not be sensationalised and neither used as a justification to spread hatred or incite violence.”
The BBC has no problem sensationalising and indeed faking news that labels an attack as a racist hate crime when it thinks it was done by a white person but when the possibility is that an attack was by one Muslim upon another this needs to be covered up and downplayed so that it isn’t ‘sensationalised’ and ‘someone’ doesn’t use it to spread hate and incite violence even if the story is true?….but it’s OK to spread hate and incite violence then against white non-Muslims in the BBC’s eyes and do so with a false news story?
The BBC reports that little quote from Mosque officials but fails to report this from yesterday….
The founding member of the Shia mosque, who asked not to be named, believes the attack was ‘inspired by Daesh’ – the Arabic nickname for ISIS.
He said: ‘There is no doubt that this was a targeted attack.
‘The victim might have been random, but in my mind it is clear that these people are from Daesh, and wanted to kill a Shia Muslim based on the belief that they would go to heaven.’
‘The West thinks the animosity with Daesh is a new thing, but we’ve been dealing with this for 1,400 years.
If it had been a quote about the Far Right the BBC would absolutely have printed it and broadcast it widely, loudly and often.
The BBC clearly hasn’t learnt a thing since Rotherham and Rochdale and still censors ‘bad news’ about Muslims that paints them or their ideology in a negative light.
We must learn from our past, when the BBC has been slow to challenge the conventional wisdom of the day. Churchill’s pre-War warnings about the dangers of German rearmament were heard by radio listeners not in his own country, but in the US.
The way Churchill was handled is a powerful warning of the dangers of the BBC believing it is being balanced by silencing the voices of those who do not represent conventional wisdom.
If there’s one cliché question that people associate with media training, it’s this one: “When did you stop beating your wife?”
It’s offered as an example of an (almost) impossible question to answer well, since most people will look guilty when they deny the charge. Imagine, for example, that Senator Smith answers the question by saying:
“I’m offended by that. I never beat my wife, and how dare you suggest that.”
The banner headline will inevitably be dreadful, something like:
“SENATOR SMITH: ‘I NEVER BEAT MY WIFE’”
The rather hopeless Emma Barnett who bluffs and blusters her way through interviews, getting lucky sometimes as a politician self-implodes due to a failure to prepare rather than her skill as an interviewer [she failed to really skewer Shadow International Trade minister Bill Esterson on the customs union even though as Guido says‘He is completely clueless, completely out of his depth, unable to answer the simplest of questions, scrabbling about looking at his notes, completely unfit for the job.’ She knew she had something but got overexcited at the smell of blood and couldn’t think it through and formulate the killer question…still, Esterson helped her out going over the cliff edge without being pushed] , asks if Trump is racist or is he just trying to appeal to his Base?…his ‘Base’ who according to the BBC are racist being apparently all white and working class. So Trump is either a racist or a supporter of racists…and therefore racist. Hmmm…isn’t that in fact racism from the BBC?, the same racism it displays here in the UK towards Leave voters who are all tarred with the same ‘racist’ brush merely because they are white. Naturally the picture is far more complicated than the BBC wants you to know…voters for Trump and Leave were a very mixed bag politically, socially and racially.
Did the BBC ask if Obama was an Islamist, or even a Muslim, when he, not just said there might be two sides to any story, but actually supported the one side that was doing the violence when he said ‘The future must not belong to those who slander the Prophet of Islam’…what by saying the Islamists are Muslims doing Allah’s work? Clearly they were…read the Koran.
Then we have the BBC itself eihter sayng there is no blame for Muslim terrorism or that the West’s behaviour drove Muslims to act in this way…Muslims, Muslims acting out the violence not just standersby, are the real victims here…
‘The alleged murderer was clearly a Muslim, but there is very little to suggest that he adhered to a hard-line interpretation of his religion or that he had political or religious motives.
Still, searching for patterns and for answers is part of what it is to be human. I loathe cliche, but perhaps, for once, this is a “senseless tragedy”, devoid of deeper meaning.’
Justin Webb & Co on the Today show insisted that all the evidence pointed towards the Boston bombing being done by white supremacists when there was no evidence of that at all…just the BBC covering up for Islam.
Then we have Tim Wilcox making excuses for the murder of Jews in Europe by Muslims….Israel commits such bad war ciimes against the Palestinians that Jews around the world must expect revenge attacks on them….
Remember Jeremy Bowen claiming that the Muslim Brotherhood were moderates?….’The country’s only properly organised mass political movement outside the ruling party is the Muslim Brotherhood, and it would do very well in any free election. Unlike the jihadis, it does not believe it is at war with the West. It is conservative, moderate and non-violent. But it is highly critical of Western policy in the Middle East. ’
Remember Mark Easton favourably comparing Muslim extremists with Churchill, Mandela and Ghandi?….’There is, it seems to me, an inherent contradiction between banning orders and the core British value that one should be tolerant of different viewpoints. History tells us that the development of new ideas of governance and government require people to think radically. Extreme views are necessary to test the wisdom of the mainstream.
Remember Hugh Sykes telling us that Cologne was a Far Right conspiracy?….‘There are conspiracy theories in the air that the New Year’s Eve attackers were encouraged to make sexual approaches to German women, told that it was the normal thing to do on New Year’s Eve. If true, they may have fallen into a well-laid trap.’
Remember the BBC report that said Cologne was an IS conspiracy? …’Some analysts have suggested that IS has encouraged a link between refugees and terrorism in order to foster hostility to refugees in Europe, although it is not known if the latest attack was carried out in co-ordination with the IS leadership in Iraq and Syria.’
Trump didn’t cheerlead or excuse white supremacists, he just said there was violence on all sides, as there was, and that the Media should make note of that.
What is happening is that the violent left are claiming the moral high ground and saying their attacks are justifiable in a fight against ‘Fascism’…and yet they are the true Fascists whose real purpose is to silence all opponents by fear, violence or the indirect method of bullying government, companies [such as internet providers], academia and the media into only accepting one narrative as ‘acceptable’…..all else must be silenced.
Unfortunately it seems to be working to a massive extent and the left wing extremists have a stranglehold on the Establishment which dares not oppose them even slightly for fear of being called racist and a supporter of Fascism and white supremacy.
It should be the BBC’s duty to stand up to such people…and yet it supports them and spreads their narrative…see above video with Emma Barnett…who ‘as a Jew’ should know better as she gives support to people who are the most anti-Semitic…left-wing and Muslim extremists, whereas bad old Trump supports Israel to the hilt.
“Elijah Muhammad,” Muhammed Ali told the TV viewers of 1970s Middle England, “Is the one who preached that the white man of America, number one, is the Devil!”
The whites of America, said Ali, had “lynched us, raped us, castrated us, tarred and feathered us … Elijah Muhammad has been preaching that the white man of America – God taught him – is the blue-eyed, blond-headed Devil! No good in him, no justice, he’s gonna be destroyed!
“The white man is the Devil. We do believe that. We know it!”
Whilst the BBC wouldn’t dream of making any association of black supremacist groups with Obama they have no problem at all in making a positive association of Trump to white supremacists…here actually stating that they are his ‘shock troops’…
A disparate group of provocateurs is challenging conservative orthodoxy from the right. They hate political correctness and love Donald Trump – but their critics say they’re nothing but bigoted white nationalists.
We see this again as the BBC condemns Trump for not singling out white supremacists alone for criticism after violence in Charlottesville whilst not condemning the left’s violence….
President Donald Trump condemned “in the strongest possible terms this egregious display of hatred, bigotry, and violence on many sides”.
“The hate and the division must stop right now,” he told reporters, speaking in New Jersey, where he is on a working holiday. “We have to come together as Americans with love for our nation.”
Democrats and Republicans alike took issue with his choice of words, noting that he failed to refer to the central role of white nationalists.
Why should Trump denounce only the Far Right extremists when it was in fact the Far Left groups that attacked the rally? The violence, as with so many EDL rallies attacked by the ‘peaceful’ UAF, was started by the Left. The BBC and anti-Trump US politicians conveniently ignore that left wing violence…and the BBC quotes Republican critics without telling us they are long time critics of Trump…such as Cory Gardner.
President Donald Trump reacted to Saturday’s violence in Charlottesville by condemning violence “on many sides.” His critics pounced, saying that he should have specifically condemned violence by white supremacists, and that by not doing so, he in fact condoned such violence.
The critics are guilty of a double standard, and of exploiting the violence for political gain, widening America’s divisions at a time when national unity is the only proper course.
Condemning one side alone would essentially have given the other side a pass for its tactics — and a political victory that neither deserved.
The purpose of the lie is to connect Trump to white supremacists by implying that he has something to disavow. Many of Trump’s critics compounded that lie Saturday by recycling falseclaims about members of his staff.
Trump’s critics are guilty of something worse than hypocrisy. They are trying to divide the country when the right thing to do is to stress common bonds, as Republicans did in June, though they were the targets.
Trump’s critics tried the same tactics in 2016, and all they achieved was more hatred. It is well past time for the slander to stop.
We had a look at The Tyranny of the Left a little while ago as freedom of speech is rapidly being closed down in order to try and shut out right wing voices in the US and today in the Telegraph Daniel Hannan notes in relation to Venezuela…
We all hate fascism, so why does the extreme Left always get a free pass?
Socialism always begins with the same trajectory. It begins with slogans about The People; it ends with the knock in the night.
This equally applies in the so-called liberal West as we see the UKIP leadership candidate, Anne Marie Waters, demonised on the Today programme by John Humphrys who could hardly disguise the disdain and contempt for her…her crime? She thinks Islam is ‘evil’. Well evil is a strong word…but possibly appropriate in relation to an ideology that calls itself a religion. The likes of Humphrys have no problem calling fascism evil nor the people who practice it…or indeed those who don’t practice it but hold views, such as on immigration, that the Humphrys of this world want to censor and so label anyone who holds them as facists, nazis and racists. And of course the infamous Google show trial and sacking of a man who said something that is pretty well the standard view…that women are better at communicating and have more emotional intelligence…this you can hear spouted many, many times on the BBC itself…the BBC that promotes the vision of more women in Parliament and in business because they bring a different outlook on the world and we will have a friendlier and more polite Parliament with less testosterone floating about. Apparently such views get you sacked at Google and the BBC doesn’t say a word to condemn Google.
Google that tells us diversity and inclusion are at the heart of its operation…and then sacks a man who dares to have an opinion that doesn’t match the one that Goolge has decided everybody must adhere to. I note that when the BBC first reported his words they concentrated merely on his comments about why fewer women achieve great success in tech companies failing to mention that the whole document was in fact about Google’s left wing attitude and its censorship of debate….vindicated as we now see in a pyrrhic victory as a man with ‘right wing’ views is sacked.
Over the weekend, Google was rocked by the publication of an internal manifesto that alleged wide-ranging political bias within the company. In exclusive interviews with Breitbart News, more Google employees are now speaking out.
The 10-page manifesto, which was met by an immediate backlash, described a climate of fear at the company, in which employees who challenged prevailing leftist narratives on diversity were faced with immediate threats to their career.
Niall Ferguson is right, the real tyranny that we should fear is that of the Left…unfortunately the left have a monoploy of the media, academia, social action groups, social media and in politics as even right wing polticians dare not voice their true opinions…just look at the Tory Party now.
Still, there’s always the impartial and non-partisan BBC to hold such people to account and to ensure that there is a balance of views and ideas being aired in public. LOL.
Search Biased BBC
Recent Comments
MarkyMark April 18, 2024 at 10:52 am on Midweek 17th April 2024https://mermaidsuk.org.uk/patrons/ "When Charlie began her transition at the age of 30, she abandoned racing altogether, unable to see how s...
MarkyMark April 18, 2024 at 10:49 am on Midweek 17th April 2024Barry Gardiner says he only got 500K from a chinese spy and needs more money - please send foreign aid!...
MarkyMark April 18, 2024 at 10:46 am on Midweek 17th April 2024HA HA "The survey suggests that making a success of the plan to deport Channel migrants to Rwanda is vital...
MarkyMark April 18, 2024 at 10:45 am on Midweek 17th April 2024"But 45% of voters still DON'T want a Starmer government" ... Missions - no longer policy or promises ... HA...
G April 18, 2024 at 10:42 am on Midweek 17th April 2024RPI currently? 4.1%. Due to the antics of the ONS recently, I'm even beginning to doubt this number. Anyway, it's...
tomo April 18, 2024 at 10:41 am on Midweek 17th April 2024The BBC stance on "climate" is driven by nut job activists and leftoids who will say anything ... I see...
tomo April 18, 2024 at 10:39 am on Midweek 17th April 2024MM that poll.... https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13321083/Tories-trail-Labour-major-political-issue-including-defence-tax-migration...
MarkyMark April 18, 2024 at 10:16 am on Midweek 17th April 2024"Labour poll higher than the government on every major political issue, from education and healthcare to the economy, Brexit and...
MarkyMark April 18, 2024 at 10:15 am on Midweek 17th April 2024Dinosaurs fail to submit tax return for net zero .... [img]https://static01.nyt.com/images/2021/02/23/science/15comet/15comet-articl...
