You have to hand it to the BBC, they are great at grovelling to terrorists. On Today this morning, in the lead up to the big interview with IRA leader Gerry Adam, there was a helpful contribution in the "Thought for the Day" slot from the Rev Joel Edwards suggesting that the Northern Ireland peace process is Biblical in tradition. ( Blessed are the bombers...?) Leaving aside that little theological aside, Naughtie was granted a few minutes in the august presence of Grisly Adams. True to form, his "interview" was pathetic, allowing Adams the chance to blacken the reputation of the British Army whilst piously expressing his formulaic regret at what has happened. Naughtie COULD have asked Adams is it ever right to kill British soldiers - but he didn't since Adams would haveto qualify that answer. (Right for the IRA to do so, not right for others) Naughtie came across as a useless sycophant, afraid to put any hard questions to Adams and in that regard, on this issue, the BBC stands indicted. Labels: pro-IRA Comments: 7 (unread) - Biased BBC Home ed thomas # Labels: open thread Comments: 16 (unread) - Biased BBC Home Sunday, March 08, 2009 Isn't it curious just how disinterested BBC journalists can be on certain issues? Take this; "NI's Deputy First Minister Martin McGuinness, a former IRA member, said nobody should say or do anything which would see Northern Ireland return to its troubles. "I supported the IRA during the conflict, I myself was a member of the IRA but that war is over," said theSinn Fein MP." Well we all know that McGuinness was an IRA terrorist since has has boasted of this pedigreee but why is it that BBC journalists do not pursue the question as to what crimes he committed when in this criminal organisation? For instance, how many murders did he sanction? Did he carry any out himself or did he just instruct others? Was he involved in authorising the Claudy massacre in which 9 innocents were blown to pieces, for instance? What knowledge does he have of the crimes carried out by fellow IRA terrorists? What rank did he hold in this criminal conspiracy? Apparently NONE of this interests the fearless seekers of truth in BBC journalism so keen are they to follow the government line sanitising the past! The bias here lies in what is left unsaid, in what is not pursued. It is one of my contentions that the BBC is a rancid mouthpiece for government propaganda - so long as the government is of the left. The total BBC disinterest in the fact that the Deputy First Minister of Northern Ireland is a notorious terrorist makes my point. Why it's almost as if the BBC has sympathies with Mr McGuiness. Labels: ira, northern ireland Comments: 46 (unread) - Biased BBC Home sue # Binyam Mohamed. Does the existence of two telegrams-full of questions amount to proof that MI5 colluded in torture? We are being told that MI5 ‘insists’ that it didn’t collude. This reminds me of the way they report that Israel ‘claims’ things, it has a similar implied cynicism. Are we being ‘fed’ an agenda, to be scornful of MI5, while also being ‘fed’ that we should, for now at least, accept Binyam Mohamed’s innocence. His story is not called a ‘claim’ or an ‘insistence’, because we are being told to feel that there is an injustice. A human rights atrocity, so we must forget about all the rest. Does the fact that MI5 supplied questions amount to collusion in the torture? Surely MI5 are entitled to be curious about Binyam, seeing as he’s a British resident and all.However, I only know about the whole thing through the ‘agenda’ and I realise that this means I know next to nothing. Maybe he is innocent, maybe MI5 did collude. But I don’t want to be ‘fed’ that by the BBC. I don’t HAPPEN to trust what I am being fed, and I’ve had enough. Please may I leave the table. Labels: BBC agenda Comments: 52 (unread) - Biased BBC Home ed thomas # [Update: I see David has posted on this below. I think I will leave this post here for now, as it brings a different angle] I suppose they're out of practice, but the BBC has made a hash of reporting the terrorist attack on British soldiers in Northern Ireland. AsPounce and others have pointed out, and as I noticed too, the headline has shifted from "Two die in 'barbaric' Army attack" to "Two die in 'barbaric' Northern Ireland attack". Like others, the first title had me confused as to who attacked whom. The current one completely lacks specificity, and the surrounding text fails to mention the nationality of the "military personnel". By the way, discussion of this topic will probably arouse strong feeling. I hope people remember we can see the BBC as meddlesome, ignorant, cringing and politically motivated without adopting too rigid a view of the issues behind the news. Labels: irish terrorism, northern ireland Comments: 10 (unread) - Biased BBC Home David Vance # Right then, I break my weekend silence (working on the book) to comment on the BBC coverage of the brutal murder of two British soldiers in the nearby town of Antrim. Four other soldiers have been injured, one critically. Now then, apart from the obvious revulsion any civilised person will feel at this attack by "dissident" Irish Republican terrorists, there are a number of points I wish to raise. 1. The BBC ordinarily rushes to get the reaction of Irish Republicans as we witnessed earlier this week when it came to Special Forces being sent to Northern Ireland. But they seem strangely subdued to do so this morning. No comments thus far from Martin McGuinness, the IRA commander who is now Deputy First Minister. Perhaps the BBC will ask him why he does not express his sympathies to the British Army and his respect for the great work they do? Then again, perhaps not. 2. The entire ethos of the grotesque "peace process" which the BBC retails is that is essential to accommodate terrorists if we are to have peace. So, who will be first to suggest that the murderers of these soldiers be allowed to enter government, or at least talk with government? 3. As I argue in my book, you CANNOT get rid of terrorism by appeasing it. For years I have found myself isolated here in Northern Ireland by the BBC because I see no reason to change my mind on this matter. Yet this morning, as the next of kin deal with the horrific loss of their sons, I cannot help but feel that it is not just Irish republican terrorists who should be reviled but also the media establishment including the rotten BBC which on the one hand treats republican terrorists such as Martin McGuinness with grovelling respect whilst paying faux outrage at the Irish republican murders in Antrim. On the Andrew Marr show, Clive Anderson was on to wax how terrible this event is but perhaps it is just a localised one-off? Phew, that will come as relief to the families of the bereaved. Supercilious BBC bastards. Anyway, it's only dead British soldiers so no need for clinical journalism asking questions such as where these murderers came from, who shelters and succours them, where did they get the weapons to carry out this slaughter at Masserene? Now, back to Binyam Mohamad - shall we give him a knighthood? Labels: ira, murder, northern irelandBiased BBC Monday, March 09, 2009
David Vance #ST GERRY OF ASSISI
David Vance #
Monday, 9 March 2009
People often say “I happen to believe..” Well, beliefs don’t just HAPPEN, something influences them. If ever a subject you know about hits the news, while allowing for the fact that news reporting is necessarily selective, you realise that what governs the particular selection is not impartiality, not clarity or simplification, it’s the agenda. It doesn’t HAPPEN to be the agenda, it’s welded to it.
Posts
