Britannia Radio

MORE OBAMALOVE....

>> WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 18, 2010

Anyone catch Mark Mardell's take on Obama's latest u-turn on the building of a Mosque at Ground Zero? Note how Mardell lashes "the right" whilst claiming that Obama is "middle of the road". Also, for good measure, Mardell conjures up images of Islamphobia to make us feel sorry for America's beseiged Muslims. Is Marky getting a little upset that "The One" is looking more and more like a one term President? Surely not?

CUBAN HEELS

Little bit of Obama-love here from Michael Voss which happily also lavishes attention on Castro's Cuba. No mention of the gross violations of human rights which passes for everyday life in this Communist hell-hole. But hey, never mind that, let's dance...

FREE DRUGS?

>> TUESDAY, AUGUST 17, 2010

I knew that this was one story the BBC would just love. I refer, of course, to the lunatic call from Sir Ian Gilmore for drug use to be de-criminalised. Happily, Dominic Casciani is at hand to explain the difference between decriminalising and legalisation of illegal drugs. The BBC memo is that we cannot win the war on drugs so best divert all that cash to helping drug addicts. Yip - I can see why the BBC likes this one..

A DAY WITHOUT THE BBC

Been away for the past few days and have been mercifully spared BBC coverage. But just back to see the BBC once again pimping Alistair Darling as an economic genius. It seems that as we now live in year zero, Darling has been repackaged as the sensible voice of the economy there to keep that young whippersnapper George Osborne in his place. Meanwhile Derek Simpson was on the news to give us his received wisdom on inflation. Can't wait for Gordon Brown to return to the scene as the man with the golden economic touch.

BBC Eases Blockade on Balance

At the beginning of the year Jane Corbin made an appalling Panoramaabout Jerusalem called “A Walk in the Park” which was full of malicious innuendo.
However this time she must have done something right, because this one about the Mavi Marmara incident has antagonised Ken O’Keefe and at least one other Israel-hating blogger. They are convinced that the ‘pro Israel BBC is at it again’. You’d laugh, if it wasn’t so sad.

It was gratifying that this Panorama took Israeli testimony seriously at last, bearing in mind that as far as the BBC’s concerned we’ve been conditioned to be grateful for small mercies.
Jane Corbin’s whole programme lacked context, so you knew that despite being presented with an exceptionally generous airing of the Israeli perspective, most viewers would still be thinking uneasily about the ‘’humanitarian crisis in Gaza, the ‘illegal blockade’ and ‘the Israeli attack occurring in International Waters’.

Panorama could have been more forthcoming about the IHH, and about Ken O’Keefe’s dubious record. They could have said something about the reason for the blockade, and about Hamas’s genocidal ambitions.
But I realise that one programme can’t tackle everything, and learning that there was a pre-planned strategy of violent resistance from the activists, and that the ‘aid’ was symbolic rather than useful might have set some people thinking.

The programme would have been livelier if they’d taken a little look at the media’s response, notably the BBC’s instant reflexive condemnation of Israel. In view of all the emerging evidence, a hindsight examination of the rush to pass judgement would have made compelling viewing.

There was very little in the programme that wasn’t already in the public domain, should anyone have taken the trouble to find out, despite Jeremy Vine’s hyperbole about revelations.

Honest Reporting has linked to the Panorama message board. I haven’t looked at it since this morning, when many comments said it was outrageously biased in favour of the evil Zionist entity. They know it’s evil because the BBC has told them so.

KICKING A MAN WHEN HE'S DOWN...

The BBC's report of the resignation of Lord Pearson of Rannoch as leader of UKIP makes drearily predictable reading. The stress in commentary by Ross Hawkins is totally on what the BBC perceived he did not do well, most notably that he regarded a question about banks as "minutiae". But what Mr Hawkins fails to mention is that Lord Pearson was by this time deeply frustrated by the BBC's systematic avoidance during the election campaign of raising anything that would cut across the desire by the three main parties to avoid the EU as an election issue. Note, too, the choice of the picture of Lord Pearson. Not his best side, as they say. The corporation hate UKIP and everything to do with it, so yet again, this is seen as an open goal to knock the enemy.

Latest BBC Spin on Obama & the Mosque

>> MONDAY, AUGUST 16, 2010

The concluding, take-this-away-as-your-final-thought, paragraphs of a BBC article on the reaction to Obama's support for the Ground Zero mosque:

"It was a bold decision - Obama could have stayed out of what is ostensibly a local matter," wrote polling analyst Nate Silver on the political website FiveThirtyEight.com.
"But a careful evaluation of the polls reveals it to be less politically risky than it might at first appear."

That would be the same Nate Silver who admitted recently his participation in Journolist, the controversial exclusive email list for Democrat-supporting hacks:

Almost always, I made exactly the points in these discussions that I made on FiveThirtyEight. Sometimes, I used the phrasing "we" when participating in these discussions, which I would not ordinarily use on the blog. I’ve disclosed from the first day of FiveThirtyEight’s existence that I’m usually a Democratic voter, and Journolist’s membership consisted of mostly Democrats, so this seemed fairly natural.

The anonymous BBC journalist's description of a "polling analyst" from a "political website" doesn't really do justice, does it? One of the new intake, perhaps, or just an old BBC hand? Same difference either way, I guess.

Hat tips to commenters David Preiser and Craig, the latter adding this:

That article's use of polling evidence leaves a lot to be desired too:

"While polling suggests a majority of Americans oppose plans to build the mosque, a Fox News poll released on Friday suggested 61% supported the developer's right to build the mosque."

That poll comes in two parts, and the second part (the one the BBC quotes) needs to be seen in context:

36. A group of Muslims plans to build a mosque and Islamic cultural center a few blocks from the site of the September 11 terrorist attacks in New York City. Do you think it is appropriate to build a mosque and Islamic center near ground zero, or do you think it would be wrong to do so?
30% Appropriate
64% Wrong

37. Regardless of whether you think it is appropriate to build a mosque near ground zero, do you think the Muslim group has the right to build a mosque there, or don’t they have that right?
61% Yes, they have the right
34% No, they don’t have the right
http://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/081310_MosquePoll.pdf

All in all, quite a tendentious piece of Obama back-covering. Still, what's new?

Update 20.00. I think we have our answer as to which BBC journalist is trying hard to spin this story in Obama's favour - former Newsweek political correspondent (and Twitter follower of Nate Silver) Katie Connolly.

ARDENT ROYALISTS?

The BBC hate the royal family and all that it stands for. Except, of course, when it's Prince Charles on one of his many loony green missions. Then they choose a very nice smiley picture of him and drone on about greenie nonsense such as that the royal train is running on "sustainable biofuel" and that he's encouraging that the people of Wales to help the rainforests. Then they become ardent royalists.