All Discussions Tagged 'BBC' - The 4 Freedoms Library2024-03-28T09:20:16Zhttp://4freedoms.com/group/uk/forum/topic/listForTag?tag=BBC&feed=yes&xn_auth=no"Three Girls" - whatever you do, don’t mention the ‘M’ word …tag:4freedoms.com,2017-05-15:3766518:Topic:1868352017-05-15T20:16:44.482ZC J Bernardhttp://4freedoms.com/profile/CJBernard
<p><a href="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/110495518?profile=original" target="_self"><img class="align-full" src="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/110495518?profile=RESIZE_1024x1024" width="750"></img></a></p>
<p>If you wanted to write a drama about child grooming, where would you choose? According to Rotherham Labour MP Sarah Chapman, there may have been more than a million white children abused up and down the country by gangs of predatory Muslim Asian men. Bradford, Halifax, Rochdale, Nottingham, Calderdale, there’s plenty of choice.</p>
<p>Take Calderdale where fifteen…</p>
<p><a href="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/110495518?profile=original" target="_self"><img width="750" src="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/110495518?profile=RESIZE_1024x1024" class="align-full" width="750"/></a></p>
<p>If you wanted to write a drama about child grooming, where would you choose? According to Rotherham Labour MP Sarah Chapman, there may have been more than a million white children abused up and down the country by gangs of predatory Muslim Asian men. Bradford, Halifax, Rochdale, Nottingham, Calderdale, there’s plenty of choice.</p>
<p>Take Calderdale where fifteen Muslim Asian men "systematically" groomed and sexually abused teenage girls in Halifax and Bradford between 2009 and 2011. No, Calderdale is too complex. The police had to sift through nearly 60 hours of interviews with the two victims. There were 1,848 statements, 2,963 exhibits and more than 20,000 items of disclosure in what was described as a "complex and lengthy operation". Worse still, the girls were reported as showing "immense courage and bravery in reporting these matters to the police and in providing evidence". No, not Calderdale, the victims are not victim enough.</p>
<p>How about Rotherham, where eight Muslim Asian men were jailed for 19 charges, including rape, indecent assault and false imprisonment of girls as young as 13 between 1999 and 2003? Perhaps, but in an April 2017 update on the progress of Operation Stovewood in Rotherham, the investigation initiated after Professor Jay’s damning report, the National Crime Agency report revealed that since September 2016 they have added another 2,955 lines of enquiry, bringing the total up to 14,055. As of April this year there are 58 ‘designated suspects’, 276 separate crimes have been reported and an additional 185 victims have been contacted following interviews with existing victims. Rotherham would be too difficult because the abuses, the grooming, the long line of viciously manipulated young girls traded like pieces of meat by Muslim Asian men have not stopped and there are just too many cases.</p>
<p>Rochdale seems almost perfect, although there are a lot of cases there too. In Rochdale, nine Muslim Asian men were jailed for offences including rape on girls as young as 13 between 2005 and 2008. The ringleader of the grooming gang, Shabir Ahmed, was jailed for 22 years after being convicted of a string of offences including rape in 2012. Three members of the gang were convicted of conspiracy and trafficking for sexual exploitation charges. In December 2013, another five Muslim Asian men were jailed after an investigation into the sexual abuse of a girl was reopened following the exposure of police failings. Between September and October 2014, two girls aged 13 and 15 and a 13-year-old boy were groomed by three Muslim Asian men after repeatedly going missing from care. In 2015, three more Muslim Asian men were sentenced for a string of child sexual offences that took place in Rochdale.</p>
<p>How can you write a drama about those events, you might wonder, without exploring the reasons why it happened? How can you put words on paper without wondering what motivated such inhuman violations, not spontaneous but carefully planned and prepared and executed not solely but in groups over a period of years that is so long that it defies understanding to imagine that it could have been happening on such a scale and for so long without someone stopping it.</p>
<p>The BBC must be given full credit for seemingly attempting the impossible, and the BBC’s new drama series ‘Three Girls’ will show whether they have brought it off. With the declared goal of not giving the English Defence League the chance to “hitch … [our] … wagon opportunistically to anything” and not including anything that “could be used by far-right groups to further their racist agenda”, author Nicole Taylor sets out to dramatise the suffering and misery in a carefully sanitized manner with the same sense of political correctness that was one of the major underlying reasons why these crimes were ignored for so long.</p>
<p>How does she intend to avoid mentioning the largest elephant in the room? How does she avoid the inconvenient truth that a British Muslim male is 170 times more likely to be part of a sex grooming gang than a non-Muslim? That there are no recorded instances of non-Muslims grooming Muslim girls as part of a criminal enterprise? The drama technique is an old one, tried and tested in such more notable works as Schindler’s List and The Boy in the Striped Pyjamas - give it a personal slant, focus on the victims, their emotions, their suffering and not what is happening to them. Keep it small scale; choose just one case out the many with one, maybe two major characters, and if you can, find a hero or heroine and give the audience something positive to take away from it all. And so it goes; pick just three girls from the 47 victims interviewed and one social services heroine. The villains in the piece, easy; the police are an easy target, as are social services: the great and faceless establishment; they’re a safe target, no-one will complain if you give them the blame.</p>
<p>Who did it? Why did it happen? No need to worry about that, after all we wouldn’t want to open ourselves to accusations of being racist, would we? Or, heavens forbid, Islamophobic. Why these girls then? No problem, call it class. Oh, but don’t mention the words ‘working class’ that might upset some people and might open us up to accusations of being elitist, even snobs. No, let’s keep it neutral, we’ll call it “a certain strata of society” - has a nice academic ring to it, doesn’t it?</p>
<p>The Daily Express reported in August 2016 that the sexual grooming of children is still going on in Rotherham on an “industrial scale”. They have not stopped in Rochdale either but, in the words of Maxine Peake, one of the stars of Three Girls, “steps have been made and things are getting better” … perhaps she and the BBC team are already planning for a sequel next year and another after that, with a ‘return of’ and a ‘resurrection’ follow up planned for the years after that, if the ratings are high enough.</p>
<p>When sentencing the Rochdale groomers, Judge Gerald Clifton said the men - eight of Pakistani origin and one from Afghanistan - treated the girls "as though they were worthless and beyond respect". He said: "One of the factors leading to that was the fact that they were not part of your community or religion.” Chair of the Equalities and Human Rights Commission, Trevor Phillips said it was "fatuous" to deny racial and cultural factors.</p>
<p>It is highly unlikely that this BBC drama will mention either the ‘M’ word or the ‘I’ word, but we encourage people to give it a chance. Sadly, we suspect that this drama which is supposed to ‘shine a light on the trauma of sexual ‘grooming’, providing knowledge and understanding for parents and children alike’ will be a missed opportunity if the cultural and religious make-up of the perpetrators is ignored.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.englishdefenceleague.org.uk/three-girls-whatever-you-do-dont-mention-the-m-word/">http://www.englishdefenceleague.org.uk/three-girls-whatever-you-do-dont-mention-the-m-word/</a></p>
<p><a href="https://englishdefenceleague.tumblr.com/post/160622412529/three-girls-whatever-you-do-dont-mention-the">https://englishdefenceleague.tumblr.com/post/160622412529/three-girls-whatever-you-do-dont-mention-the</a></p>
<p><a href="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/110495396?profile=original" target="_self"><img src="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/110495396?profile=original" class="align-full" width="176"/></a></p> The EDL and the BBCtag:4freedoms.com,2016-03-17:3766518:Topic:1761752016-03-17T19:12:35.085ZC J Bernardhttp://4freedoms.com/profile/CJBernard
<p><a href="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/110495302?profile=original" target="_self"><img class="align-full" src="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/110495302?profile=RESIZE_1024x1024" width="750"></img></a></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><em><span class="font-size-4"><strong>The propaganda crimes of the BBC are legion</strong></span></em> </p>
<p>1. Intro</p>
<p>2. The actual complaint we sent</p>
<p>3. The BBC response</p>
<p>4. Our response</p>
<p>--</p>
<p><b>Intro</b></p>
<p>Below is a letter we sent to the BBC complaints department on 18 January 2016. </p>
<p>It is not…</p>
<p><a href="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/110495302?profile=original" target="_self"><img width="750" src="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/110495302?profile=RESIZE_1024x1024" width="750" class="align-full"/></a></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><em><span class="font-size-4"><strong>The propaganda crimes of the BBC are legion</strong></span></em> </p>
<p>1. Intro</p>
<p>2. The actual complaint we sent</p>
<p>3. The BBC response</p>
<p>4. Our response</p>
<p>--</p>
<p><b>Intro</b></p>
<p>Below is a letter we sent to the BBC complaints department on 18 January 2016. </p>
<p>It is not often that we seek an apology from the main media outlet in this country. </p>
<p>We wrote this complaint in response to our members' request. We share our letter now for their benefit and as another attempt to get our message across to the public, over the heads of the media elite.</p>
<p>Below our letter is their response. And below that is our brief assessment of that response.</p>
<p>The propaganda crimes of the BBC are legion and will continue. We recognise their role in the betrayal of this country. We can only try to put them right. But our complaints to the media, as always, will be secondary to our main strength, which is: feet on the streets! Join us at our next demo!</p>
<p>--</p>
<p><b>Item 2</b></p>
<p align="center"><b>Alan Spence</b></p>
<p align="center">[EDL’s e-mail address]</p>
<p> </p>
<p>BBC Complaints</p>
<p>PO Box 1922</p>
<p>Darlington</p>
<p>DL3 0UR</p>
<p>18 January 2016</p>
<p>Sir, </p>
<p align="center"><b><u>Complaint and Apology Request</u></b></p>
<p>It was with considerable dismay that we watched the recent episode (series 19, episode 3) of your television drama “Silent Witness”. </p>
<p>While we can appreciate the need to heighten the drama with an emotive description such as “the murky world of hate-crime and counter-terrorism” as published in the program description published on TVGuide:</p>
<p><a href="http://www.tvguide.co.uk/episodeguide.asp?title=Silent+Witness">http://www.tvguide.co.uk/episodeguide.asp?title=Silent+Witness</a></p>
<p>and numerous other websites both in the UK and abroad, there are ways to do this without attacking the English Defence League which is a legal, volunteer-led organisation. </p>
<p>“The murky world of hate crime and counter-terrorism" is a totally different world from which the EDL operates. We are no closer to that "world" than are UKIP, the Conservative Party or any other legal political grouping or national charity. In this episode you clearly link us to a character who is wanted for murder.</p>
<p>It is contemptuous for the BBC to imply that the English Defence League is an organization which would attract someone who would murder anyone, regardless of whether they are Muslim or not.</p>
<p>Given that it emanated from the BBC, a broadcaster who one must assume is well aware of the potential for harm in such an implication and the laws pertaining to defamation, slander and libel, we consider it right to assume that the drama in question and the offending text passed through numerous editorial and production reviews before being broadcast. That it could be a mistake also seems unlikely. It would have taken very little effort to invent a fictitious organisation, or even none at all, but instead your actor was directed to explicitly name the English Defence League as the “hate-crime” organisation. We are therefore drawn to the inevitable conclusion that a deliberate decision was made to cast such aspersions on our organisation as a whole and its members individually.</p>
<p>As an organisation, the English Defence League is committed to peaceful protest and non-violence, as clearly stated in our Mission Statement (<a href="http://edlbackup.com/english-defence-league-mission-statement/">http://edlbackup.com/english-defence-league-mission-statement/</a>). We have had a mission statement since almost the beginning of the EDL and it has changed slightly over the years but it was publically available. In this case ignorance of who we are and how we operate is no excuse.</p>
<p>We do not have a membership as such and we have therefore become accustomed to being held responsible for every act of violence before, during, after or that can in any way be associated, however tenuously, with one of our protest actions. A ‘street movement’ cannot monitor, police and control every individual who shows up at our demonstrations.</p>
<p>It will surely not have escaped the BBC’s attention that the English Defence League has an excellent reputation for non-violent behaviour and cooperation with the authorities, particularly over the past two years, in ensuring that our activities are conducted with the minimum nuisance for the local populace. </p>
<p>In those rare instances when violence does occur, it is nearly always the result of extreme provocation, in defence, or the action of members of so-called anti-fascist organisations whose sole and stated purpose is to disrupt our activities and for whom violence is the means to destroy the EDL, not the unfortunate result. </p>
<p>It must also be well-known to the BBC that the English Defence League is not an anti-Muslim organisation. In the words of our Mission Statement, “We stand for the right of British Muslims to speak freely about problems deriving from Islam.” </p>
<p>Like the rest of the UK, we welcome Muslims who are willing to integrate into our communities with open arm as we have done in the past with the Sikhs, Ugandan Asians and numerous other immigrant communities who have enriched this country.</p>
<p>While we campaign against the Islamisation of this country, the abomination of Sharia law and the bigotry it represents, we consider Muslims to be human beings the same as ourselves.</p>
<p>To even suggest that our organisation, deliberately and with full knowledge, would harbour or have any ties with an individual who would murder a Muslim is, frankly, abhorrent, and cuts right across our values, our behaviour and our actual record.</p>
<p>The English Defence League, unlike so many so-called anti-fascist groups, does not enjoy government funding or donations from trade unions; we rely on voluntary donations. Under the terms of the Defamation Act 2013, we cannot perhaps accuse you of defamation no matter how clearly libellous your implication is that we are a breeding ground for “hate-crime” on the grounds that no “serious harm” is caused to our reputation. However, the implied accusation against us of being a murderous anti-Muslim organisation has serious potential to cause us financial loss, which places the BBC wide open to a very justified accusation of “malicious falsehood”.</p>
<p>Those who take part in our protest activities often do so at considerable personal risk and financial expense, frequently exposing themselves to a real risk of physical harm and loss of employment and housing.</p>
<p>The fact that these individuals, and the EDL as an organisation with full cooperation with the police, make such an effort to exercise their freedom of speech and rights of assembly and association is something that should be applauded, regardless of whether the BBC considers their cause to be “right” or “wrong”.</p>
<p>These principles lie at the core of our democracy and are enshrined in the European Convention of Human Rights.</p>
<p>Why then does the BBC, an organisation that is subsidised by the European Union, see fit to make such appalling insinuations against our good name and character?</p>
<p>The BBC has failed us. According to the BBC Agreement, you have a duty to ensure that the broadcast was accurate and impartial but you failed. As members of the general public and as licence payers, we expect better from the BBC but you failed.</p>
<p>At this time, we are considering the legal implications of your broadcast and its consequences for our organisation. Nor can we make any statement concerning the reactions of our individual supporters who, as private persons, are free to take whatever legal action they deem appropriate against the BBC.</p>
<p>Apart from the broadcast itself, your implied accusation has been widely published on the Internet and we therefore, as the English Defence League, demand, in the first instance, at least, an immediate and unqualified public apology from the BBC.</p>
<p>To be fair this apology should be agreed with us and directed to ensure it reaches the same audience who are likely to have seen the "Silent Witness" programmes. Therefore it should be broadcast as part of the programme and published in written form on the appropriate BBC outlets.</p>
<p>We look forward to your response.</p>
<p>Yours sincerely,</p>
<p>Alan Spence</p>
<p>Chairman of the English Defence League</p>
<p>--</p>
<p><b>Item 3</b></p>
<p>2 February 2016</p>
<p>Dear Mr Spence,</p>
<p>Thank you for contacting us about Silent Witness.</p>
<p>We understand you’re concerned that the programme portrayed the English Defence League in a negative light.</p>
<p>Thank you for providing us with the TV Guide listings for Silent Witness, but the BBC is not responsible for all billings, other than those which feature on our own official webpages.</p>
<p>Within the programme there was no direct description of the EDL as an organisation that condones hate crime. The character of John Sutherland is portrayed as an intelligent man grieving for the son killed on active duty by Taliban in Helmand province. His actions are seen through this prism of grief. We wanted to explore viewpoints from opposite ends of a political spectrum as part of the discourse into terrorism. John is quickly dismissed as a murder suspect and is revealed as a key witness who helps the police track down the culprits.</p>
<p>We trust this addresses your concerns about this programme.</p>
<p>Kind regards,</p>
<p>BBC Complaints</p>
<p>--</p>
<p><b>Item 4</b></p>
<p>16 February 2016</p>
<p>Our response:</p>
<p>No it does not address our concerns. Our complaint is based on their website and we only used the public listings as support for our case; that is because the slur had been publicly broadcast, the damage was more widespread and a public apology was therefore required.</p>
<p>From the BBC site:</p>
<p>“The murder of a well-known anti-fundamentalist Muslim, Amir Aziz, leads the Lyell team to question who would kill this peaceful but outspoken man. Suspicion quickly falls on a local taxi driver, revealed as a member of the English Defence League whose son was killed by a Taliban IED.”</p>
<p>From <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b06wjd0f">http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b06wjd0f</a></p>
<p>They say: ‘there no direct description of the EDL as an organisation that condones hate crime…’ The key word they think that lets them off the hook is ‘direct’. This is not what we charged them with. The negative slur, innuendo, and implications are very clear. The character is portrayed as a ‘member’ of the EDL even though the EDL does not have a membership. They decided to use the EDL in their program to orchestrate and embellish a manufactured disapproval by the media and political elites of this country</p>
<p>We expected this cursory and shallow response, but we are undeterred and unbowed. </p>
<p>The English Defence League</p>
<p><a href="http://englishdefenceleague.tumblr.com/post/139369243994/the-edl-and-the-bbc">http://englishdefenceleague.tumblr.com/post/139369243994/the-edl-and-the-bbc</a></p>
<p><a href="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/110495161?profile=original" target="_self"><img src="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/110495161?profile=original" width="176" class="align-full"/></a></p> The BBC, The Church of England and the EDLtag:4freedoms.com,2014-05-05:3766518:Topic:1473652014-05-05T12:24:17.872ZKinanahttp://4freedoms.com/profile/Kinana
<p>‘New Life in Christ’ was the theme of this year’s Easter Live Worship from Leicester Cathedral and was led by The Bishop of Leicester, The Right Reverend Tim Stevens (BBC1 TV, 20 April 2014).</p>
<p>The conducting priest, the Dean of the Leicester Cathedral, the very Reverend David Monteith, during the homily, had some unkind words to say about the EDL.</p>
<p>Where did this come from? Was the priest only to blame or was there any connection with the larger BBC Corporation or perhaps from…</p>
<p>‘New Life in Christ’ was the theme of this year’s Easter Live Worship from Leicester Cathedral and was led by The Bishop of Leicester, The Right Reverend Tim Stevens (BBC1 TV, 20 April 2014).</p>
<p>The conducting priest, the Dean of the Leicester Cathedral, the very Reverend David Monteith, during the homily, had some unkind words to say about the EDL.</p>
<p>Where did this come from? Was the priest only to blame or was there any connection with the larger BBC Corporation or perhaps from the head of BBC Head of Religion and Ethics, Aaqil Ahmed? Mr Ahmed became the first Muslim to be the head of the religious affairs programming three years ago, amidst much controversy.</p>
<p>Was there any discussion about the content of the sermon with Mr Ahmed? Could we ever find out if there was? All it takes is a phone call via third parties. So the priest had a national platform on the most important liturgical day of the Christian calendar and used it to disparage a section of the community, many of whose members are Christian.</p>
<p>But Christian or not, the intention was to silence and humiliate all people affiliated with the EDL and to warn people who are drawn to its message to stay away.</p>
<p>Also, people who value freedom in this country should be appalled at this taxpayer-funded denigration of a legitimate political movement in this country.</p>
<p>The EDL have not been banned by the Government. There has been no judicial process to ascertain its harm or otherwise to the nation. The EDL have no right of reply. Will the Bishop publically reprimand the priest or utter an apology? Will he invite us in to discuss what his concerns are?</p>
<p>Okay, what did the very Reverend David Monteith say?</p>
<p>In general (<a href="http://leicestercathedral.org/cathedral-sermons/easter-day/">the full text is found here</a>), his theme was how the Easter event and message is about overcoming fear. In his sermon he said: ‘…We are still learning but we keep discovering a deeper solidarity which overcomes fear. When the English Defence League decided to come to Leicester, we came together in this Cathedral, recognizing that fearful vitriol aimed at one community was vitriol aimed at us all. Every person finds welcome here as in Christ we discover that difference need not mean fear…’</p>
<p>Do the EDL really aim vitriol at ‘one community’? Or do we justly criticise criminal elements within communities and the belief system which produces threats and criminal behaviours? Of course the very Reverend David Monteith produced no evidence of the vitriol that the EDL supposedly cast upon a section of the community of Leicester. And notice he assumed that everyone knew what he was talking about. He did not try to describe the EDL or the ‘one community’ that was supposedly the object of the EDL vitriol.</p>
<p>The dictionary definition of vitriol is ‘caustic or hostile speech, criticism or feeling.’</p>
<p>But what is wrong with vitriol that is well directed? Indeed, what is unchristian about it? Should not all right-minded people, especially the clergy, have criticisms or (dare we say) even hostile feelings towards sections of the community which promote or allow:</p>
<ul>
<li>marriage to girls as young as nine,</li>
<li>Female Genital Mutilation,</li>
<li>so-called honour killings,</li>
<li>the permissibility of husbands beating their wives,</li>
<li>polygamy,</li>
<li>the killing of people who leave the religion of Islam,</li>
<li>the superiority of Muslims over non-Muslims,</li>
<li>a society in which Muslims must rule over non-Muslims,</li>
<li>the destruction of democracy and its replacement with the Sharia,</li>
<li>the holding up of Mohammed as the perfect man whose actions are a model for all human behaviour for all time.</li>
<li>and, particularly relevant for an Easter service, the persecution and killing of Christians in Muslim-majority societies, as commanded in many verses of the Quran.</li>
<li>etc.</li>
</ul>
<p> Are not the members of the EDL also part of the community of Leicester? Evidently not. It seems his feelings of compassion and inclusiveness do not extend to the EDL. We are simply an object of ridicule and the cause of all that is wrong in the community of Leicester. Rather than the cause of strife, the EDL simply point out what people like the very Reverend David Monteith, despite (or perhaps because of) their education, refuse to see and a future they refuse to contemplate.</p>
<p>We say: the Sharia-pushers are here and so too is the English Defence League!</p>
<p><a href="http://www.englishdefenceleague.org/the-bbc-the-church-of-england-and-the-edl/">http://www.englishdefenceleague.org/the-bbc-the-church-of-england-and-the-edl/</a></p>
<p>04 May 2014</p> When Tommy Met Mo - BBC Documentarytag:4freedoms.com,2013-11-07:3766518:Topic:1410432013-11-07T13:47:06.032ZPaul Austin Murphyhttp://4freedoms.com/profile/PaulAustinMurphy
<p><a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b03ghfyp">http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b03ghfyp</a></p>
<p><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-dssx9KQZ8cA/Unt5zkemt-I/AAAAAAAAMkE/2AQekot8fSk/s1600/TommyRobinson1911821.jpg" target="_blank"><img class="align-right" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-dssx9KQZ8cA/Unt5zkemt-I/AAAAAAAAMkE/2AQekot8fSk/s320/TommyRobinson1911821.jpg?width=320" width="320"></img></a></p>
<p>Although many in the EDL are suspicious of the Quilliam Foundation, it's interesting to note that the foundation itself is suspicious of Mo Ansar. Then again, Mo Ansar doesn't like the Muslim Uncle Toms who make up the foundation either.…</p>
<p><a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b03ghfyp">http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b03ghfyp</a></p>
<p><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-dssx9KQZ8cA/Unt5zkemt-I/AAAAAAAAMkE/2AQekot8fSk/s1600/TommyRobinson1911821.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-dssx9KQZ8cA/Unt5zkemt-I/AAAAAAAAMkE/2AQekot8fSk/s320/TommyRobinson1911821.jpg?width=320" width="320" class="align-right"/></a></p>
<p>Although many in the EDL are suspicious of the Quilliam Foundation, it's interesting to note that the foundation itself is suspicious of Mo Ansar. Then again, Mo Ansar doesn't like the Muslim Uncle Toms who make up the foundation either. <a rel="nofollow" target="_blank" href="http://paulaustinmurphyseverythinganything.blogspot.co.uk/2013/03/proper-muslims-according-to.html">And neither do the Leftists who like their Muslims to be Islamist and radical</a>. (Trotskyists/progressives think that Islamists, and even many plain Muslims, are basically Trotskyists/progressives with the simple addition of brown skin. That is, through a miraculous piece of Marxist 'analysis', Islam itself is completely erased from the picture.)</p>
<div class="yiv0862756445separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a rel="nofollow" target="_blank" href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-XMnOe-snJ-o/Unt55Qd7YuI/AAAAAAAAMkM/OkcxSEAi3eI/s1600/19-10-2013-Mo-Ansar.jpg" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-XMnOe-snJ-o/Unt55Qd7YuI/AAAAAAAAMkM/OkcxSEAi3eI/s320/19-10-2013-Mo-Ansar.jpg" border="0" height="80" width="320"/><br/></a></div>
<div id="yui_3_13_0_1_1383831893881_5071"><span id="yui_3_13_0_1_1383831893881_5070" style="font-size: small;"><span id="yui_3_13_0_1_1383831893881_5069" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span id="yui_3_13_0_1_1383831893881_5068">Mo Ansar has been critical of various and many moderate Muslims, which leaves you wondering why the BBC and so many others regard him as the official voice of Muslim moderation. It seems that when any Muslim is critical about any aspect of Islam, Mo Ansar doesn't like it. It also seems that when any Muslim is critical of any aspect of Muslim behavior, Mo doesn't like that either. Again, if that's the case, why has Mo Ansar become The Voice of Moderate Islam for the BBC and the rest?</span></span></span></div>
<p><span id="yui_3_13_0_1_1383831893881_5075" style="font-size: small;"><span id="yui_3_13_0_1_1383831893881_5074" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span id="yui_3_13_0_1_1383831893881_5073"><br/> To be more specific on the Mo Ansar/Quilliam rupture (not that they were ever in agreement), Maajid Nawaz also questioned Mo Ansar's supposed moderation. And it was then that Tommy Robinson 'realised that even within the Muslim community there are people who are sick and tired of fanatical Muslims'.</span></span></span><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span> </span></span></span></p>
<div id="yui_3_13_0_1_1383831893881_5080"><span id="yui_3_13_0_1_1383831893881_5079" style="font-size: small;"><span id="yui_3_13_0_1_1383831893881_5078" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span id="yui_3_13_0_1_1383831893881_5077">Predictably, the self-publicist - and supremely well-manicured - Mo Ansar took the credit for Tommy Robinson's 'conversion' (or 'reversion'?) to open debate with supposedly moderate Muslims. (This ended with the BBC's programme, <a rel="nofollow" target="_blank" href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mz2NBT5H9sU">'When Tommy Met Mo'</a>.)</span></span></span></div>
<div><span id="yui_3_13_0_1_1383831893881_5083" style="font-size: small;"><span id="yui_3_13_0_1_1383831893881_5082" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span id="yui_3_13_0_1_1383831893881_5081">This Tommy-&-Mo tete-a-tete dates back to a TV debate in 2012. Mo, being Mo, waited for the cameras to focus in on him before he invited Tommy for dinner at his home. (At this dinner, Mo would have made sure that there would have been more cameras as well as every journalist in the UK. Then Mo, no doubt, would have sent the conversational transcript to the BBC, <i>The Guardian</i> and <i>The Huffington Post.</i>)</span></span></span></div>
<div><span id="yui_3_13_0_1_1383831893881_5088" style="font-size: small;"><span id="yui_3_13_0_1_1383831893881_5087" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span id="yui_3_13_0_1_1383831893881_5086">Tommy Robinson himself said - as reported in <span style="font-weight: normal;">the blog, <a rel="nofollow" target="_blank" href="http://www.d-intl.com/?lang=en/">Dispatch International</a></span> <span id="yui_3_13_0_1_1383831893881_5085" style="font-weight: normal;">(in the article <a rel="nofollow" target="_blank" href="http://www.d-intl.com/2013/11/05/tommy-robinsons-long-journey-has-only-begun/?lang=en">'Tommy Robinson's long journey has only begun'</a>) -</span> that he was 'offended that people thought I had bought his rubbish'. I'm not sure if I personally believed that Tommy was taken in by all this but I was still nonetheless dumbfounded. Tommy can hardly be surprised that people were similarly perplexed or angry because no one - except Tommy - would have known what was going on in his mind.</span></span></span></div>
<div id="yui_3_13_0_1_1383831893881_5090"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span>Despite that, Tommy went into more detail about Mo Ansar. He said:</span></span></span></div>
<div><blockquote><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span>“<i>Mo Ansar is the perfect example of how Muslim leaders in this country behave. They are not trying to solve any problems. They only want to defend Islam. Ansar thought that he would emerge as he good guy in he film but I knew all the time that he would be exposed. What he stands for is exactly what made us start the EDL. He spends 95 percent of his time calling other people Islamophobes.”</i></span></span></span></blockquote>
</div>
<p><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span><i>Dispatch International</i> also asked Tommy if Mo Ansar influenced his decision to leave the EDL. Tommy replied:</span></span></span></p>
<div><blockquote><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span>“<i>In no way. The fact is that he confirmed my opinions. He is the embodiment of all that is wrong with Islam. Are we going to solve any problems with clowns like him? Many Muslim leaders need to be exposed the way he has been. After the film, he has refused to talk to me.”</i></span></span></span></blockquote>
</div>
<p><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span>Mo Ansar, if anything, is worse than people like Anjem Choudary because he believes pretty much the same as the latter, but does so with a smiling face. That is, with a smiling face plus the required and oft-repeated phrases especially selected from Leftist, multicultural and even post-modernist vocabularies – all used, by Mo, to convince his <i>kuffar</i> false friends that he's just like them, only with the irrelevant – I'm sure - addition of being a fundamentalist/reactionary Muslim.</span></span></span></p>
<div><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span><a rel="nofollow" target="_blank" href="http://paulaustinmurphyseverythinganything.blogspot.co.uk/2013/01/muhammad-ansar-talks-to-radio-4-about.html">Mo Ansar has also carried out a campaign to ban <span style="font-weight: normal;">'Islamophobia' in social media</span></a>. I will translate that into English for you. Mo Ansar has carried out a campaign to stop <i>all</i> criticism of Islam and Muslims (such as himself) on social media - particularly on Twitter. Or, in other words, Mo has attempted to impose sharia blasphemy law on social media. More laughably, this totalitarian (or Islamist) campaign of his is at least in partly motivated by his immense ego. That is, it is partly – or mainly – motivated by the criticisms he himself has received on Twitter and elsewhere.</span></span></span></div>
<p> </p>
<div><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span>So this is the sort of personality Mo Ansar actually has. Again, all this is strange behaviour from the BBC's very own officially-moderate Muslim.</span></span></span></div>
<div class="yiv0862756445separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-2ewAuQlBSJw/Unt5_HaEK2I/AAAAAAAAMkU/vtetFJqiIMo/s1600/lmbvc.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-2ewAuQlBSJw/Unt5_HaEK2I/AAAAAAAAMkU/vtetFJqiIMo/s1600/lmbvc.jpg" class="align-left"/></a></span></div>
<p><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span>On a personal note, I myself was reported to Twitter by Mo Ansar after just four posts on his Twitter page. That was not a surprise. He's well known to having a penchant only for his Twitter sycophants - and they don't all work for the BBC. Someone has even created a Twitter account by the name, <a rel="nofollow" target="_blank" href="https://twitter.com/BlockedbyMo"><span style="font-weight: normal;">'Blocked By Mo Ansar'</span></a><b>.</b> There's also a very funny Twitter page called <a rel="nofollow" target="_blank" href="https://twitter.com/kingofdawah"><span style="font-weight: normal;">MoDawahMOParody (King of Dawah)</span></a> which lampoons Mo's cheesy use of popular- culture references, as well as his many post-modern/Leftist phrases, his intolerance of contradictory views and his pseudo Islamic scholarship.</span></span></span></p>
<div class="yiv0862756445separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: small;"><a rel="nofollow" target="_blank" href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-67KuV8KfZUg/Unt6DNgIHSI/AAAAAAAAMkc/vtjc3m9Hec0/s1600/5fe5db278379cdeee658d552c961938a_bigger.jpeg" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-67KuV8KfZUg/Unt6DNgIHSI/AAAAAAAAMkc/vtjc3m9Hec0/s1600/5fe5db278379cdeee658d552c961938a_bigger.jpeg" border="0"/></a></span></div>
<div><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span>Finally, these are the four posts Mo Ansar found objectionable:</span></span></span></div>
<div><blockquote><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span>“<i>Did you know that 'Mo' has a direct line to Allah? They speak every day. He's also second-cousin to Muhammad himself.”</i></span></span></span></blockquote>
</div>
<div><blockquote><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span>“<i>Muslims invented the cheese sandwich. They also created world peace, for a year, in a small part of Arabia - ca. 643.”</i></span></span></span></blockquote>
</div>
<div><blockquote><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span>“<i>I wonder how long it takes Mo to trim his beard/tash. Neat. I'd love to know which moisturizer he uses.”</i></span></span></span></blockquote>
</div>
<div><blockquote><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span>“<i>I think everyone should embrace deeper diversity. Such as Borneo head-hunters & Texas chainsaw massacrists. Love all and each .” </i></span></span></span></blockquote>
</div>
<div><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><i> </i></span></span></div>
<div><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><i> ************************************************</i></span></span></div>
<div><span style="font-size: large;"><span><b><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Some Islamic Nuggets From the Islamic Messiah:</span></b></span></span><br/><div class="yiv0862756445separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><b><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-Y0wd-RMnZik/Unt8BSlY0RI/AAAAAAAAMlo/h7s2FqA911g/s1600/20130922-163006.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-Y0wd-RMnZik/Unt8BSlY0RI/AAAAAAAAMlo/h7s2FqA911g/s320/20130922-163006.jpg?width=320" width="320" class="align-left"/></a></span></b></span></div>
<br/><div class="yiv0862756445separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><b><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-t3mrU795NY4/Unt8FjQrzWI/AAAAAAAAMlw/bT2n-qT1RL8/s1600/lgf.22.png" target="_blank"><img src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-t3mrU795NY4/Unt8FjQrzWI/AAAAAAAAMlw/bT2n-qT1RL8/s320/lgf.22.png?width=320" width="320" class="align-right"/></a></span></b></span></div>
</div>
<div><br/><div class="yiv0862756445separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><i><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-zU1bY5Ri99k/Unt6V_ypEbI/AAAAAAAAMks/CY8lsSb59Vc/s1600/20130622-213713.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-zU1bY5Ri99k/Unt6V_ypEbI/AAAAAAAAMks/CY8lsSb59Vc/s320/20130622-213713.jpg?width=320" width="320" class="align-left"/></a></i></span></span></div>
</div>
<div class="yiv0862756445separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-GJ1rRRfuOc4/Unt6j5q6oeI/AAAAAAAAMk8/8D4tWc5Xs5I/s1600/MNBCC.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-GJ1rRRfuOc4/Unt6j5q6oeI/AAAAAAAAMk8/8D4tWc5Xs5I/s320/MNBCC.jpg?width=320" width="320" class="align-right"/></a></div>
<p> </p>
<div class="yiv0862756445separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-NK6vfYUKFLM/Unt6o50c-kI/AAAAAAAAMlE/ltqu1U39tnQ/s1600/MBNBVVC.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-NK6vfYUKFLM/Unt6o50c-kI/AAAAAAAAMlE/ltqu1U39tnQ/s320/MBNBVVC.jpg?width=320" width="320" class="align-left"/></a></div>
<div id="yui_3_13_0_1_1383831893881_5104"><br/><div class="yiv0862756445separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a rel="nofollow" target="_blank" href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-9EgjovjOM9Q/Unt68LJmcLI/AAAAAAAAMlU/ltuAMqLd-zA/s1600/20130622-213713.jpg" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"> </a></div>
<div id="yui_3_13_0_1_1383831893881_5100" class="yiv0862756445separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-Fzi9-p5h9BY/Unt6yFegxEI/AAAAAAAAMlM/h6sx9CdGEy0/s1600/BR3oUBZCQAANTi-.png" target="_blank"><img src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-Fzi9-p5h9BY/Unt6yFegxEI/AAAAAAAAMlM/h6sx9CdGEy0/s320/BR3oUBZCQAANTi-.png?width=320" width="320" class="align-right"/></a></div>
</div>
<p> </p>
<div id="yui_3_13_0_1_1383831893881_5091"><br/><div id="yui_3_13_0_1_1383831893881_5097" class="yiv0862756445separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><span id="yui_3_13_0_1_1383831893881_5096" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span id="yui_3_13_0_1_1383831893881_5095" style="font-size: x-small;"><i id="yui_3_13_0_1_1383831893881_5094"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-2T0-8kJBtus/Unt6ZfzjHzI/AAAAAAAAMk0/GHRDaNqeWCM/s1600/20130922-163006.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-2T0-8kJBtus/Unt6ZfzjHzI/AAAAAAAAMk0/GHRDaNqeWCM/s320/20130922-163006.jpg?width=320" width="320" class="align-left"/></a></i></span></span></div>
</div> The BBC has come to loathe those it serves - Daily Telegraphtag:4freedoms.com,2013-10-08:3766518:Topic:1395602013-10-08T03:46:08.972ZAlan Lakehttp://4freedoms.com/profile/AlanLake
<div class="storyHead"><h1><span style="font-size: 1.5em;">A great organisation has grown too Leftie and too big</span></h1>
<div class="artIntro"><div id="storyEmbSlide"><div class="slideshow ssIntro"><div class="nextPrevLayer"><div class="ssImg"><a href="http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/02693/1bbc_2693647b.jpg" target="_blank"><img class="align-right" src="http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/02693/1bbc_2693647b.jpg?width=620" width="620"></img></a><div class="artImageExtras"><div class="ingCaptionCredit"><span class="caption">The BBC has suffered an infestation of soggy…</span></div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div class="storyHead"><h1><span style="font-size: 1.5em;">A great organisation has grown too Leftie and too big</span></h1>
<div class="artIntro"><div id="storyEmbSlide"><div class="slideshow ssIntro"><div class="nextPrevLayer"><div class="ssImg"><a href="http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/02693/1bbc_2693647b.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/02693/1bbc_2693647b.jpg?width=620" width="620" class="align-right"/></a><div class="artImageExtras"><div class="ingCaptionCredit"><span class="caption">The BBC has suffered an infestation of soggy Leftism</span> <span class="credit">Photo: GETTY</span></div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div class="oneHalf gutter"><div class="story"><div class="cl"></div>
<div class="bylineComments"><div><p class="bylineBody"><span>Bruce Anderson</span></p>
</div>
<p class="publishedDate">5:10PM BST 05 Oct 2013</p>
<p class="comments"><img src="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/template/ver1-0/i/share/comments.gif" alt="Comments"/><a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/bbc/10357915/The-BBC-has-come-to-loathe-those-it-serves.html#disqus_thread">1095 Comments</a></p>
<div class="cl"></div>
</div>
<div id="mainBodyArea"><div class="firstPar"><p>It has been an interesting week. Syria, the Tory conference, Islamic terrorism in Kenya, Yemen and Nigeria, budget-lock in Washington: the world overflowed with news – but not on the BBC. That once-great news organisation seemed determined to turn every bulletin into a seminar on the life and opinions of Ralph Miliband.</p>
</div>
<div class="secondPar"><p>As Lefties would say, there was a sub-text here. The BBC went well beyond objectivity. It was using the Miliband affair to attack its enemies. In so doing, it was also exposing its own cast of mind.</p>
</div>
<div class="thirdPar"><p>When John Birt became director-general of the BBC, he realised that there was a problem with many of his journalists. In recent years, there had been an infestation of soggy Leftism (my paraphrase, not his words). These characters often lived in an intellectual bubble, socialising solely with their colleagues and with others who held the same opinions. They never met anyone who argued that there might be a case for the death penalty, or that Maggie was not a monster any more than Reagan was a slow-witted war-mongering cowboy.</p>
</div>
<div class="fourthPar"><p>As they all held the same views, they also persuaded themselves that theirs were the only permissible ones and that anyone who disagreed was morally inferior. Some Marxists used to talk approvingly of “fused groups”: cells of like-minded comrades who would reinforce each others’ revolutionary rigour. The BBC was in danger of becoming a fused group.</p>
</div>
<div class="fifthPar"><p>John Birt also thought that his employees were underpaid. There, he was able to take corrective action. But the fused-group mentality persisted, especially over Europe and the environment. The BBC is not incapable of neutrality. It would like to have displayed more of it during the Falklands War. But on the EU and climate change, it preferred to act as a political commissar, suppressing all criticism.</p>
</div>
<div class="body"><p>That brings us to press regulation, and the next negotiations over the BBC licence fee. As the Marxists would say, it is no accident that the BBC should have tried to embarrass the Daily Mail just before the regulatory proposals are discussed. Plenty of people in the BBC would like to regulate the press, in the hope that thus tamed, newspapers would be less willing – and less free – to complain about the BBC and the licence fee. Papers have to earn their living in the free market. The BBC earns its living, courtesy of the criminal law. No wonder it seems keen to deploy that law against the free press.</p>
<p>There is a further factor. Marxists in their fused groups, wondering why the populace is not rallying behind the socialist revolution, have come up with the answer: “false consciousness”. If people appear to reject socialism, they are clearly suffering from false consciousness, so their views can be disregarded (cf the BBC with Eurosceptics and climate-change doubters). But one of the major proponents of false consciousness is the capitalist press.</p>
<p>It is impossible to overestimate the extent to which the Left hates the so-called Right-wing press, especially the popular Murdoch papers. Disregard the manufactured indignation about the hacking of Bimbo Bimbette’s phone calls. Lefties believe that but for the Sun, Michael Foot and Neil Kinnock would have won elections.</p>
<p>They also loathe the Daily Mail. Forget raucous football chants. For the Left, the two greatest obscenities are “lower-middle class” and “suburbia”. Hence their detestation of the Mail, which is the laureate of both. When they think of Mail readers, those on the Left imagine that they are all like Harry Potter’s adoptive parents, the neo-fascists of Privet Drive. When the Left sneers at the Mail, it is sneering at millions of decent people who get up in the morning, go to work and generally help to keep the country going – while also paying a large number of licence fees.</p>
<p>On the subject of suburban decencies, as the Cameroons would say, the BBC just doesn’t get it – as was proved by its despicable coverage of last year’s Royal River Pageant. There was a basic problem. It did not seem to occur to those in charge that tens of millions of their fellow countrymen revere the Queen and would expect the BBC to cover such a royal event in the way that would have come naturally to Richard Dimbleby.</p>
<p>In his era, one Home Service announcer, closing down the programme for the night, said “home, service: two of the most beautiful words in the English language. Goodnight.” It is impossible to imagine anyone in the BBC talking like that today. The BBC does not love its country.</p>
<p>So why should it benefit from a licence fee? That could be justified, if the BBC were like Covent Garden or the National Gallery: supplying a cultural service which the market cannot provide. When it comes to culture, however, the modern BBC is in the Hermann Goering camp. As regards current affairs on television, the BBC is living on its past reputation. Today’s output is feeble. The main concern seems to be low-grade popular entertainment, which is not especially popular.</p>
<p>The other month, I was deep in the country, on my own, trying to do some intensive writing. At the end of a day’s work, I was in the market for light entertainment: something like Dad’s Army, Steptoe and Son, Dr Finlay or Upstairs, Downstairs. I searched the BBC schedules in vain, and made do with DVDs of Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy and Smiley’s People (both much better than the books). The BBC used to be a great organisation, at many levels. But it has grown too Leftie and too big, even though it often gives the impression that it only consists of two sections: the directorate of paedophilia and the bureau of pay-offs.</p>
<p>So what about a £50 licence fee, to pay for the Home Service, the World Service, the Third Programme and one television channel, along the lines of BBC2’s original remit? In the interim, before the BBC next attacks the free press, it should look up the passage about motes and beams – assuming that there is a Bible somewhere in Broadcasting House.</p>
<p>As for Ralph Miliband, his reputation can look after itself. Although sons are entitled to express their filial piety, Ed Miliband should be careful. He almost gives the impression that he has been crying himself to sleep every night over the insults to his father. This invites cynicism about his motives, and scrutiny of his father’s beliefs.</p>
<p>We are assured that far from hating this country, Prof Miliband loved it. He had a funny way of showing it. He wanted to abolish all our institutions plus our current economic system, replacing them by Marxian socialism, which has been so successful wherever it was practised. That is an odd way of displaying love. If Ralph Miliband loved this country, Oscar Wilde was right: “Each man kills the thing he loves.”</p>
<p><a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/bbc/10357915/The-BBC-has-come-to-loathe-those-it-serves.html">http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/bbc/10357915/The-BBC-has-come-to-loathe-those-it-serves.html</a></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div> The BBC and its Covert Agendatag:4freedoms.com,2013-06-01:3766518:Topic:1261352013-06-01T03:13:33.324ZAlan Lakehttp://4freedoms.com/profile/AlanLake
<p>Consider this sting on MP Patrick Mercer:</p>
<p><a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-22738901">http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-22738901</a></p>
<p>Interesting, but why did they target Patrick Mercer? Why not target any on of the other 500 MPs? Why not the Labour MPs? Is it because he's an old style Tory and staunch supporter of Soldiers rights?</p>
<p>Then on the same day we have this 'rehabilitation' of the white genocidal tyrant, Muggabe:…<br></br></p>
<p>Consider this sting on MP Patrick Mercer:</p>
<p><a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-22738901">http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-22738901</a></p>
<p>Interesting, but why did they target Patrick Mercer? Why not target any on of the other 500 MPs? Why not the Labour MPs? Is it because he's an old style Tory and staunch supporter of Soldiers rights?</p>
<p>Then on the same day we have this 'rehabilitation' of the white genocidal tyrant, Muggabe:<br/> <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-22738042">http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-22738042</a></p>
<p>I couldn't bear to watch it. Would they do the same for Hitler or Stalin? Are they childish simpletons? Every person, whether tyrant or saint, can give a nice performance sat round a smart dinner table with their family. Does that somehow excuse genocide they are guilty of? Their racism? Their suppression of democratic process? Their beating up of the opposition leader of the MDC (Movement for Democratic Change)? For Christ's sake, he was interviewed, covered in blood and bruises, on their own bloody channel! They've got the memory of a goldfish.</p>
<p>The BBC has sunk to a new low. I detest their totalitarian and racist supporting Oxbridge graduates, who think they have the right to enforce their world view on the rest of us.</p> British war graves attacked in Benghazi - BBC Reporttag:4freedoms.com,2012-03-04:3766518:Topic:968902012-03-04T10:42:24.307ZAlan Lakehttp://4freedoms.com/profile/AlanLake
<h1 class="story-header">Apology after British war graves attacked in Benghazi</h1>
<div class="videoInStoryB"><div class="emp page-bookmark-link-aware" id="emp-17249426-11746"><img height="252" src="http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/58862000/jpg/_58862993_graves.jpg" width="448"></img> <a title="Click to play"></a><a title="Click to play"></a></div>
<p class="caption">The video is believed to show graves being attacked by armed men in Benghazi</p>
<p class="caption"><a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-17244211">http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-17244211…</a></p>
</div>
<h1 class="story-header">Apology after British war graves attacked in Benghazi</h1>
<div class="videoInStoryB"><div id="emp-17249426-11746" class="emp page-bookmark-link-aware"><img src="http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/58862000/jpg/_58862993_graves.jpg" height="252" width="448"/><a title="Click to play"></a><a title="Click to play"></a></div>
<p class="caption">The video is believed to show graves being attacked by armed men in Benghazi</p>
<p class="caption"><a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-17244211">http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-17244211</a></p>
</div>
<div class="embedded-hyper">Libyan authorities have apologised after video footage emerged showing graves of British servicemen being attacked by armed men in Benghazi.</div>
<p>Headstones were broken at the Benghazi War Cemetery and the Benghazi British Military Cemetery, the Commonwealth War Graves Commission (CWGC) said.</p>
<p>Among the graves targeted were those of British and Commonwealth servicemen killed during the Second World War.</p>
<p>The National Transitional Council (NTC) has pledged to catch those responsible.</p>
<p>The video footage, filmed by the attackers, appears to show about a dozen armed men kicking down headstones and trying to damage a cross.</p>
<p>The BBC's Gabriel Gatehouse, in Tripoli, says the attackers referred to "Christian dogs" and a Jewish memorial was also targeted.</p>
<p>Our correspondent says the attack was "calm, almost casual".</p>
<p>It is believed the attack could have been carried out in retaliation for the burning of the Koran by US soldiers at a military base in Afghanistan last month.</p>
<p><span class="cross-head">'Broken and disfigured'</span></p>
<p>The CWCG said on its website that <a href="http://www.cwgc.org/news-events/latest-cemetery-information/benghazi-war-cemetery.aspx">headstones were "broken and disfigured"</a> at both cemeteries last weekend. About 109 headstones are understood to have been attacked at the Benghazi War Cemetery.</p>
<div class="caption body-narrow-width"><img src="http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/58862000/jpg/_58862704_014079801-1.jpg" alt="A headstone broken at the Benghazi War Cemetery and the Benghazi British Military Cemetery" height="171" width="304"/> <span>The National Transitional Council strongly condemned the attacks</span></div>
<p>The organisation said it would conduct a full survey of the damage once it was safe to do so.</p>
<p>"Both cemeteries will be restored to a standard befitting the sacrifice of those commemorated at Benghazi, but this could take some time because we will need to source replacement stones," the CWCG said.</p>
<p>"In the meantime we will ensure that temporary markers are erected over the graves."</p>
<p>No-one was injured in the attack, it said.</p>
<p>The NTC <a href="http://www.ntc.gov.ly/NTCNews.aspx">said in a statement on its website</a>: "Some people attacked the graves of non-Muslims in Benghazi, including the graves of some of the nationals of friendly countries, including the states of Britain and Italy."</p>
<p>It says it "deeply regrets" and "strongly condemns" the attacks, and pledged to prosecute those involved.</p>
<p>The BBC understands that at some point during the attack on the British Military Cemetery a group of older people intervened to stop it.</p>
<p>It is understood a separate attack was carried out on the Italian War Graves Cemetery, also in the eastern city of Benghazi.</p>
<p><span class="cross-head">Graves 'respected'</span></p>
<p>In June last year Foreign Secretary William Hague laid a wreath at Commonwealth war graves on a trip to Benghazi.</p>
<p>BBC Southern Africa correspondent Karen Allen said that <a href="https://twitter.com/#%21/BBCKarenAllen">up until now Commonwealth war graves had been respected</a> in Libya, and it was sad to see attacks in Benghazi.</p>
<p>In November last year our correspondent reported that Tripoli War Cemetery, one of five Commonwealth war cemeteries dotted across Libya, were left untouched during the uprising.</p>
<p>The CWGC held services at its cemeteries in Tripoli, Benghazi and Tobruk to mark the 93rd Armistice Day last year.</p>
<p>There are 1,214 Commonwealth servicemen of the Second World War buried or commemorated at the Benghazi War Cemetery, according to the CWGC, 163 of the burials are unidentified.</p>
<p>The Benghazi British Military Cemetery has 284 burials, 11 of them unidentified.</p>
<p>The graves are of servicemen and women who died in the region in the years following the Second War. </p> The Life of Muhammed (pbuh) Courtesy of the BBCtag:4freedoms.com,2011-07-11:3766518:Topic:614322011-07-11T21:21:07.422ZPat McCrannhttp://4freedoms.com/profile/PatMcCrann
<p>In a ground-breaking first for British television, this three-part series presented by Rageh Omaar charts the life of Muhammad, a man who - for the billion and half Muslims across the globe - is the messenger and final prophet of God.<br></br> <br></br> In a journey that is both literal and historical, and beginning in Muhammad's birthplace of Mecca, Omaar investigates the Arabia Muhammad was born into - a world of tribal loyalties and polytheistic religion.<br></br>
<br></br>
Drawing on the expertise and…</p>
<p>In a ground-breaking first for British television, this three-part series presented by Rageh Omaar charts the life of Muhammad, a man who - for the billion and half Muslims across the globe - is the messenger and final prophet of God.<br/> <br/>
In a journey that is both literal and historical, and beginning in Muhammad's birthplace of Mecca, Omaar investigates the Arabia Muhammad was born into - a world of tribal loyalties and polytheistic religion.<br/>
<br/>
Drawing on the expertise and comment of some of the world's leading academics and commentators on Islam, the programme examines Muhammad's first marriage to Khadijah and how he received the first of the revelations that had such a profound effect both on his life, and on the lives of those closest to him.<br />
</p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p><a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b012mkg5" target="_blank">http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b012mkg5</a></p> The BBC - Lying Again: complicit in your submission to the coming Islamic UKtag:4freedoms.com,2011-07-03:3766518:Topic:596842011-07-03T02:13:24.329ZAlan Lakehttp://4freedoms.com/profile/AlanLake
<p>This is a jolly little video. Look how this bomb disposal expert survives the blast. Isn't it amazing! He lived thanks to his body armour, (but lets not mention all the people without that benefit that died before him).</p>
<p><a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-14002457">http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-14002457</a></p>
<p> </p>
<p>Of course, they've no idea what political reasons are behind this - except to mention that the election was a few days ago so…</p>
<p>This is a jolly little video. Look how this bomb disposal expert survives the blast. Isn't it amazing! He lived thanks to his body armour, (but lets not mention all the people without that benefit that died before him).</p>
<p><a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-14002457">http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-14002457</a></p>
<p> </p>
<p>Of course, they've no idea what political reasons are behind this - except to mention that the election was a few days ago so trick the viewer into thinking its part of the red shirts - yellow shirts dispute.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>But try do a google search on "thailand narathiwat islamic terrorism" and see what you get. The death toll topped 1700 by Sept 2006 alone:</p>
<p><a href="http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1698332/posts">http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1698332/posts</a></p>
<p> </p>
<p>It rose to 3,500 by Sept 2010:</p>
<p><a href="http://www.chakranews.com/islamic-terrorists-kill-4-buddhists-set-homes-on-fire-in-thailand/907">http://www.chakranews.com/islamic-terrorists-kill-4-buddhists-set-homes-on-fire-in-thailand/907</a></p>
<p> </p>
<p>There's a whole stinking ecosystem of Islamic terror groups in those 3 Southern Thai provinces, but we can't possibly expect the BBC to inform us of any of it, can we?</p>
<p><a href="http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/war/thailand2.htm">http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/war/thailand2.htm</a></p>
<p> </p>
<p>I suspect the BBC will only start to wake up, when they start being blown up.</p> How and why the Guardian and BBC collude with despots & terroriststag:4freedoms.com,2011-04-20:3766518:Topic:516072011-04-20T14:14:31.266ZPat McCrannhttp://4freedoms.com/profile/PatMcCrann
<p>How and why the Guardian and BBC collude with despots & terrorists<br></br> <br></br> April 20, 2011 in Uncategorized | Tags: BBC, Brian Whitaker, Chris McGreal, Guardian, Harriet Sherwood | by Guest/Cross Post<br></br>
<br></br>
A guest post by Geary<br></br>
<br></br>
As Harriet “Hen the Pen” Sherwood joins Jeremy “Our Man in Hamas” Bowen in Tripoli, we might reflect for a moment on the freedoms and privileges bestowed by their despotic hosts on them and the likes of Fisk, say, and Ugly Orla…</p>
<p>How and why the Guardian and BBC collude with despots & terrorists<br/> <br/>
April 20, 2011 in Uncategorized | Tags: BBC, Brian Whitaker, Chris McGreal, Guardian, Harriet Sherwood | by Guest/Cross Post<br/>
<br/>
A guest post by Geary<br/>
<br/>
As Harriet “Hen the Pen” Sherwood joins Jeremy “Our Man in Hamas” Bowen in Tripoli, we might reflect for a moment on the freedoms and privileges bestowed by their despotic hosts on them and the likes of Fisk, say, and Ugly Orla (Guerin).<br/>
<br/>
Are they permitted to file from Arab capitals by blood soaked dictators thanks to their reputations for fearless independent impartial even-handed reporting? Of course not. Quite the opposite. They are welcome precisely because they have a track record of never calling an Arab spade a spade, never calling Arab terrorists by that name, of being as indulgent as they can get away with towards Hamas, Hezbollah and their puppet-masters.<br/>
<br/>
Never mention the inter-Palestinian murders, the Syrian torture chambers, the Jew-genocidal Charters of foundation. Or Arafat’s unscrupulous personal “proclivities”. And, if you’re Barbara Plett, shedding a tear for the dying terrorist mafioso does your BBC career no harm at all. Oh, and of course, they are also welcome in the Palaces of Blood for their fame as being metronomically reliable in taking every opportunity on offer to badmouth Israel. Do you want a career as journalist in the Middle East? Be nice to dictators and terrorists but spit venom at the one democratic and civilised country they wish to destroy. After all, Israel will always let you back in. The worst that can happen to you is a black look from the border police.<br/>
<br/>
Sherwood and Bowen are no fools or, rather, they have no lack of low cunning. They know that one day, to further their careers, they might want to report from Gaza or Lebanon or Damascus, just as they are now reporting from Tripoli. (By the way, on Libya, both the Guardian and BBC are calling in old favours. The Guardian for its pro-Gaddafi family special pleading (here and here and here), the BBC for Bowen’s Bambi-eyed adoration of the old goat himself. You rub my blood-soaked back, I’ll rub your unscrupulous mercenary spine). And so they are careful to lay the cautious groundwork: don’t be hard on dictators, be nice to the terrorists, dump on Israel.<br/>
<br/>
They know that, when they apply to enter some repressive Arab badland, their portfolio is going to be scrutinised by the Intelligence Services (aka the Torture Police). Ah good, Mr Bowen talks of the “Israeli occupation of Gaza”, excellent. Ah, Ms Sherwood, she of the chicken-heart and blind eye to Israeli virtues and Arab misdeeds. Very good. Let them in.<br/>
<br/>
And, in the meantime, the one country in the region with a free press gets such a bad press from the collaborationist Guardian and BBC. But there is a special punishment reserved in Dante’s Hell for sycophants like Bowen and Sherwood, like Ugly Olga, Plett, Brian Whitaker and the squalid Chris McGreal. They are destined to pass eternity steeped in excrement, commensurate to the ordure they speak and write.<br/>
<br/>
Strange thing is, they seem to be up to their necks in it already<br />
</p>
<p><a href="http://cifwatch.com/2011/04/20/how-and-why-the-guardian-and-bbc-collude-with-despots-terrorists/" target="_blank">http://cifwatch.com/2011/04/20/how-and-why-the-guardian-and-bbc-collude-with-despots-terrorists/</a></p>
<p> </p>