Monday, 6 February 2012

BBC's blatent agitprop

The Home Affairs Committee have just published a report on tackling violent extremism. "Roots of Radicalism" is published on the Parliamentary website, and presumably news organisations were given advance access to the embargoed version to allow them to craft suitably considered articles. The majority of the MSM, even the Guardian, correctly introduce the report as being primarily concerned with Islamic extremism. A rough reading suggests that some 98% of the report is about Islamic extremism. So how do you imagine the BBC reports the publication on its website? Correct. "MPs fear far right terror threat". As a distortion of the truth, it's up there with "WWII bomber found on Moon" and "Freddie Starr ate my hamster". 

Anyway, apart from this breathtaking distortion from the BBC, with never a mention of Islamic radicalism in its headlines, the report usefully defines radicalism as
"vocal or active opposition to fundamental British values, including democracy, the rule of law, individual liberty and mutual respect and tolerance of different faiths and beliefs. We also include in our definition of extremism calls for the death of members of our armed forces, whether in this country or overseas"
The report identifies Islamic terrorism as by far the biggest threat to the UK, followed by Northern Ireland-related terrorism, the threat from which is 'severe'. But not a mention of either of these in the BBC's headlines. Instead it concentrates on what is described as a minor threat, with no incidents since 1999, from a collection of deranged individuals, and which threat is rightly classified as of minor concern in the report. 

And we are taxed to fund this agitprop rubbish. There's more truth in Pravda than from the BBC these days.

17 comments:

Barnacle Bill said...

Ah but didn't you know a lot of the towelheads are very right wing?

Anonymous said...

The head of religious programming, the 'editorial line' has always been rabidly pro Palestinian and anti Israeli - whatever the why's and wherefores. Recently aired programmes have been unashamedly biased towards painting the 'religion of peace' in all its beneficence and 'enlightenment' and nothing could be further from the actual truth.
Without its 'renaissance', humanity; it is stuck and will remain locked in its ways, unchanged and set by men steeped and preaching hatred and violence. A relatively recent and hateful sect initiated by Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab - Wahhabists hold it back, with it there is no way forward. Saudi Arabia, perceived by some to be a friend and ally is the main exporter of this anti western ideology, a pact having been made with the ideologues - zealots in return for peace in their own land.
The School of Oriental and African studies, funded by oil money - is now overrun by fundo-Islamists as is the UCL and they have heavy influence in the Beeb and foreign office, the beeb is being, or should we say, it has been gradually subsumed.

Isn't this the EU ethos, divide and trash, to promote 'opposing views and alternatives to Christianity' through their Frankfurt School strategy.
Which - the BBC the perfect medium but always beware the law of unintended consequences, 'today he is your friend and tomorrow, he will be the wolf in the nursery'.

Anonymous said...

As good a reason as any I can think of to get rid of the television tax and let the BBC run itself by raising its own money - like any other industry has to.

The only reason the BBC spouts this nonsense is because it luxuriates in the knowledge that, no matter who they offend, they will have their coffers replenished by force. If they had to attract and retain advertisers, then spouting offensive drivel would not happen, or they would simply go out of business. It is time for a radical overhaul of broadcasting in Britain.

Coney Island

Anonymous said...

On the subject of BBC bias I was pretty disgusted by the BBC's Big Questions programme yesterday. They were debating welfare caps and one of the anti cuts speakers was from a group called 'Mums Against Cuts'. I googled this group and it is apparently connected to an extreme Left group called 'global women's strike' who have extensive 'anti-zionist/jew hating' articles on their website.

Although I'm a Tory I accept that there are opposing views on the subject of welfare cuts and I know that there are principled mainstream centre left bloggers and commentators who could have put an anti cuts viewpoint.

Why on earth did the BBC not book a sensible anti cuts speaker rather than one linked to extremist groups?

The BBC had the opportunity to put up a sensible commentator but instead booked a complete fucking dodgy loon.

Anonymous said...

I saw this too - the BBC are really bloody stupid to think that:

a) No one would notice

b) That should the Islamists get any sort of power that for example the gays / yummy mummies at the BBC will be embraced for their support. See what's happening in Tower Hamlets for example..

Raedwald said...

Anon 11.12 -
I've done something I very rarely do and removed your comment. It's defamatory and too simplistic to be true; it's not any individual at the BBC, but rather an institutionalised and pervasive bigotry and prejudice in the bones of the bureaucracy itself that's responsible.

Anonymous said...

Raedwald, I cannot comment about the removed comment because I didn't see it and this is a case of 'your gaff your rules' but I agree with you that the problem with the BBC are not down to individuals but rather with the BBC's 'groupthink'.

Oldrightie said...

Not content with their extorted revenue, the BBC are also, like many Government departments, jockeying for EU money and future seats at the eventual table of EU total power.

Anonymous said...

No Radders, you're missing the point.
The threat comes from the far right (of the map)... well actually the right hand side anyway.

Anonymous said...

"Not content with their extorted revenue, the BBC are also, like many Government departments, jockeying for EU money and future seats at the eventual table of EU total power."

Good point Oldrightie, couldn't agree more.

Big Ben Ten said...

BBC went out of their way to make a pro Falkland islanders news report the other day. even though they were in Argentina showing masked kids throwing paint at a British bank they restrained themselves from saying 'popular uprising against British colonial oppression'.
I was impressed.

Are they trying to atone for being so anti the last Falklands war it was almost traitorous?

Greg Tingey said...

Barnacle Bill is correct ...

Militant islamicism is to all intents and purposes fascist, if not actually Nazi (at least one Labour MP has noted this, good for him)
They regard women as fit only for the kitchen and breeding, want "lebensraum", regard the "West" as decadent, and our pure new way is better, and they want to kill all the jews - sound familiar?

Also, having seen some Torygraph headlines recently, and the mis-spellings, I'm more inclined to the cock-up theory, myself.

Greg Tingey said...

And, to further reinforce my suggestion of the cock-up reason for the BBC's titling - look no further than the header to this very article ...
Should it not be "BLATANT" rather than ... er ... "blatent"

yokel said...

Just before 8 on Today (on 6 Feb) is an academic saying why the right wing is the problem. Listen to it on BBC iPlayer for the rest of the week (about 1 hour 50 minutes in)

David C said...

Thanks for this post. I half-heard something about the threat of right-wing terrorism from some (presumably lefty) academic on the Today programme. I googled it later and could find nothing, which surprised me. Your explanation is the obvious one which I should have thought of, i.e. the BBC made it up.

Greg Tingey said...

I suspect it is a directive from "on high" - quite possibly the vile RC Patten ...
After all, this morning, Hick Sanatorium, who has just won some US primaries, was referred to as: "Socially conservative"
Rather than: COMPETELY BATSHIT INSANE ....
for instance

Anonymous said...

I'm sympathetic to your general thread, however when I clicked the link to the report I noticed that para 8 says "Strategy cited extreme right-wing terrorism, which in the UK has been "much less widespread, systematic or organised than terrorism associated with Al Qa'ida";[7] however, there are 17 people in Britain currently serving prison sentences for terrorism offences who are known to be associated with extreme right-wing groups."
The BBC didn't actually make the right wing bit up this time, and did mention islamic extreemism - and the story is certainly not on the WWII bomber on moon level.
Good blog though