BBC running scared of Islam? NO!!!?

by

Home

Comment at end

26th October, 2008

BBC ADMITS IT TREATS MUSLIMS < ISLAM < TERRORISM DEFERENTIALLY

Are you surprised?

For years I have watched BBC television news reports CLEARLY, BLATANTLY and WRONGLY linking the radicalisation of Muslims to our government’s policies in Iraq and Afghanistan. I used to boil over with rage at this incessant, unadulterated rubbish spewed out as fact by an organisation I once respected.

How could they LIE so easily? How could they feed the propaganda machine of these extremists who for decades have intended to destroy us and our way of life? Long before the ‘evil’ Blair came to power Islamist extremists have been working towards this end. And in recent years such as these have been gifted the world’s greatest and most highly respected broadcasting outlet on a plate. The BBC has been no less than a slave to extremists’ ambitions. For that they should be thoroughly ashamed, and in many countries would be held responsible.

Here, of course, where FREE SPEECH rules, they are allowed to say and do as they like, even if it is all but treacherous to the interests of continuing freedom in our land.

No wonder the Labour government has felt compelled to introduce more restrictive laws than many (say they) are happy with. (Please note, that does NOT include me. I have never felt that I am losing my civil rights in the last 11 years. Never.)

Please note: it is the BBC’s television broadcasts in particular who are most remiss here. Radio is quite different. The BBC World Service is still particularly outstanding, wide-ranging and balanced. And Radio 4 is much better balanced within any programme output, although it too features too many personalities who are/were against the Iraq invasion on principle, and thus this colours their contributions.

WHO TOLD THE BBC TO PROTECT US FROM ISLAMOPHOBIA?

NEVER can I recall the BBC doing a TV series on the History of Islamist Extremism, much as it is clearly researchable all over the internet and in numerous publications; perhaps I missed it.

NEITHER do I recall electing the BBC to ensure that Britain was “saved” from “Islamophobia”, a task it seems to have taken upon itself. Its stance is actually having the opposite effect.

I DO recall that the democratically elected government is expected to understand these issues and provide balanced and comprehensive information and guidance to ALL of us.

In this failing, the present government too, is culpable.

Holding hands with much of the press in the UK the BBC is snuggly in bed with the government on this, particularly since Blair left the scene. Many of us could not believe it when the government dropped the use of words such as “Islamist/Muslim terrorist activities”, in January this year, and instead used such convoluted semantics as “anti-Islamic activity.” But this was just one of the government’s verbally dexterous somersaults, designed to pacify the Beeb and the rest of our liberal press as well as the ethnic voter. It may have silenced their BBC critics to an extent; but the Beeb had already all but prohibited such language.  I contend that this semantic psychosis was an insult to the Muslim majority, and BY THE WAY, the rest of us non-Muslims.

But these two, three or more allies in this war against the truth make uncomfortable bedmates when it is understood that the BBC’s opinions on the government’s foreign policy toss around uneasily between them both/all.

I now do not follow the BBC’s “Question Time” nor Radio 4′s “Any Questions” due to its clear bias against the present government’s policy as regards Iraq, Afghanistan and the USA.  And, in recent times, due to its political correctness as regards calling a spade a spade.

In other words calling an “Islamist terrorist an “Islamist terrorist”.

Since we all recognise there is a worldwide problem with Islamist terrorism, the very FIRST thing we all need to do is to identity the problem. It is fundamentalist Islamist terrorism, in case you haven’t been informed yet by the mind-boggling Beeb. It is NOT Islam itself, nor Muslims in general. I contend that the BBC’s unwillingness to make this distinction actually leads to people getting the wrong end of the stick. Thus they are much more likely to become restive than they would if told the truth.

It is not impossibly hard for the average person to differentiate. Unless the BBC, the press and the government FAIL to make it clear that there IS a difference.

THE TRUTH HURTS THE BBC’S AGENDA

The truth is that whether or not we had allied with America in its fight against terror, these violent fundamentalists were growing in strength and establishing deep roots decades ago, LONG before Blair or Bush came to power.

There may be an argument that recent conflicts have fomented insurgencies and increased radical recruitment. But that is a whole different argument. Here, in conflating the issues, the BBC is disingenuous.

For forcing THIS generation to cope with this problem, rather than leave it to future generations, perhaps we should be proud, and not ashamed.


OTHER ARTICLES ON THIS

1. ‘FEARFUL BBC WALKS ON EGGSHELLS AROUND MUSLIMS’

The head of the BBC, Mark Thompson, has finally admitted what many of us have long known: that his organization treats Islam more respectfully than it does other religions. In a speech to a religious think tank, Thompson claimed the BBC has to treat Islam with greater sensitivity because Muslims are a minority in Britain and aren’t fully integrated into society.

The BBC’s “sensitivity” has for several years manifested itself in news reports that offer excuses for Islamist terrorism, most commonly by linking radicalization to British and American foreign policy. The failure of many Muslims to integrate, while acknowledged by Thompson, is invariably blamed by the BBC on poverty, injustice, and racism on the part of less enlightened sections of the British public. And the words “Muslim” and “Islam” are invariably omitted from stories about honor killings and forced marriages; such crimes are instead framed as issues for Britain’s “Asian community” to address, to the consternation of reform-minded Muslims and non-Muslim British Asians alike.

The BBC’s kid-gloves approach to all things Islamic isn’t limited to its news coverage — it informs the corporation’s fictional output too and stands in stark contrast to its apparent eagerness to offend Christians. So, while viewers are treated to Jerry Springer: The Opera and numerous shows in which Christians are portrayed as either idiots or villains, the producers of a popular hospital drama last year scrapped a storyline about a Muslim suicide bomber for fear of causing offense.

Few of the BBC’s critics would seriously suggest that the broadcaster should refrain from satirizing religion (the obvious solution for people who think they’re going to be offended by a program is not to watch it); they ask only that the BBC be as “fearless” in dealing with issues surrounding Islam as it is in its treatment of Christianity. But of course that’s not going to happen.

Thompson attempted to justify the BBC’s blatant double standard in his speech, telling his audience:

What Christian identity feels like it is about to the broad population is a little bit different to people for whom their religion is also associated with an ethnic identity which has not been fully integrated.

There’s no reason why any religion should be immune from discussion, but I don’t want to say that all religions are the same. To be a minority I think puts a slightly different outlook on it.

Thompson is certainly right to assert that Muslims are not “fully integrated” into British society. And one of the reasons why many Muslims feel no obligation to assimilate is that the BBC, along with other proponents of multiculturalism, has for years been telling them that they don’t have to integrate.

As for Muslims being a minority — well, they’re a considerably larger minority in the UK than Jews, but the BBC’s hostility to both Israel and the Jewish settler movement is legendary. And Roman Catholics comprise a minority of Christians in the UK; yet, after George Bush, the Pope is one of the favorite targets of the lefty comedians that populate the BBC’s late-night schedules.

(Thompson himself is keen to point out that he’s a practicing Roman Catholic, as if this fact should somehow reassure us that the BBC couldn’t possibly be hostile to Christianity. The archbishop of Canterbury, the increasingly unhinged Rowan Williams, is ostensibly a devout Anglican, but that hasn’t stopped him parroting bogus Muslim grievances and calling for elements of Sharia to be recognized in the UK.)

The fact is that the BBC’s deference to Islam has very little to do with its “minority” status in the UK or the lack of integration on the part of its followers. The real reasons are fear and political correctness.

BBC executives don’t want their heads cut off or their homes burnt down any more than the rest of us do. Program-makers don’t have a problem with offending Christians because they know they’re unlikely to wind up in a video on the internet, wearing a hood and surrounded by a pack of sword-wielding nuns. Christians are exhorted to turn the other cheek; extremist Muslim leaders, on the other hand, encourage their followers to both get mad and, where possible, get even.

The reluctance of BBC types to do anything that might invite violence from Muslims is, if not admirable, at least understandable. Their continued enthusiasm for the discredited doctrines of political correctness and multiculturalism is arguably more troubling, given the corrosive effects of those ideas on free speech and on the “social cohesion” our elites profess to be so concerned with.

The BBC has become the standard-bearer for the cult of post-colonial, white, middle-class guilt (middle-class in the English rather than the American sense). This is the British strain of what Mark Steyn and others call Western civilization’s self-loathing: the belief that white Westerners and the Judeo-Christian tradition are to blame for much of the world’s ills. One manifestation of this belief is the assumption that people with dark skin are inherently “nobler” than people with white skin — one particularly apologetic former head of the BBC memorably referred to the organization as “hideously white” — and that any religion practiced by such people is consequently more deserving of our respect than Christianity.

Of course the BBC’s worldview encompasses much more than an uncritical disposition towards Islam. A couple of years back Charles Moore, a former editor of Britain’s Daily Telegraph newspaper, summed it up thus:

The BBC’s mental assumptions are those of the fairly soft left. They are that American power is a bad thing whereas the UN is good, that the Palestinians are in the right and Israel isn’t, that the war in Iraq was wrong, that the European Union is a good thing and that people who criticize it are “xenophobic,” that racism is the worst of all sins, that abortion is good and capital punishment is bad, that too many people are in prison, that a preference for heterosexual marriage over other arrangements is “judgmental,” that environmentalists are public-spirited and “big business” is not, . . . that government should spend more on social programs, that the pope is out of touch except when he criticizes the West, that gun control is the answer to gun crime.

Everyone’s entitled to their worldview, of course. What the BBC is not entitled to do is abuse its position as a respected broadcaster to ram its views down the throats of those who look to it for information and entertainment — and to demand hundreds of millions of pounds of taxpayers’ money to do so. Neither is it entitled to give encouragement to extremists by reassuring them that contrived grievances are legitimate, and that intimidation and violence are understandable responses.

Ironically, Thompson, in his eagerness to demonstrate his Christian bona fides, likes to tell interviewers that he’s never seen Monty Python’s Life of Brian. Despite the controversy that film generated, it’s not especially disdainful of Christianity, and can be read as a satire on both unquestioning religious belief and secular cults. Islam is sorely in need of a similar lampooning right now, but the attitude of Thompson and others like him means we’re unlikely to ever see a Life of Mohammed.

2. ‘The BBC will tackle Islam differently to Christianity, admits its Director General’

By Liz Thomas
Last updated at 10:38 PM on 15th October 2008

BBC programme-makers tackle Islam differently from Christianity, its director general has admitted.

Mark Thompson was responding to criticism from comedian Ben Elton, who accused the BBC of being scared to make jokes about Islam.

Mr Thompson said: ‘What Christian identity feels like to the broad population is a little bit different to people for whom their religion is also associated with an ethnic identity which has not been fully integrated.

‘There’s no reason why any religion should be immune from discussion, but I don’t want to say that all religions are the same. To be a minority I think puts a slightly different outlook on it.’

Mr Thompson, who spoke at a lecture for think-tank Theos, said shows critical of Islam would be shown if they were of high quality.

Elton made his comments earlier this year in an interview with Christian magazine Third Way when he was asked if too much deference was shown to religious people.

‘I think it all starts with people nodding whenever anybody says, ‘As a person of faith …’,’ he said.

‘And I believe that part of it is due to the genuine fear that the authorities and the community have about provoking the radical elements of Islam,” he said.

‘There’s no doubt about it, the BBC will let vicar gags pass but they would not let imam gags pass.  They might pretend that it’s, you know, something to do with their moral sensibilities, but it isn’t. It’s because they’re scared. I know these people.’

However Thompson’s admission was met with derision by Christian and media groups.

Stephen Green, director of Christian Voice, said: ‘Mr Thompson seems to be saying that because Islam is a minority religion it should be treated with kid gloves.

‘This is ridiculous. All religions should be treated with equally and with the same approach. I think the reality is that the BBC treats coverage of Islam and Muslims differently because it is terrified of offending them. It is political correctness. The BBC is simply not bothered about offending Christians despite the majority of this country being of that faith.’

John Beyer, director of Mediawatch, said: ‘All religions need to be treated in the same way, otherwise how can the BBC claim to be impartial?

‘I think that any approach to religious debate and discussion that is not impartial is not what the BBC should be doing.’

The corporation faced accusations of blasphemy from Christians after it broadcast controversial stage show Jerry Springer – The Opera live on BBC2.

A record more than 47,000 complaints were made against the show which was strewn with expletives and featured Jesus, Mary and God as deviant guests on Jerry Springer’s TV show and up to 300 swear words.

However Mr Thompson, a practising Catholic, did insist that programmes that criticised Islam would be broadcast if they were of sufficient quality.

He revealed that his religious beliefs did play a part in the editorial decisions he made.

In his speech last night, the executive claimed there are now more programmes about religion on BBC television and radio than there have been in recent decades, whereas coverage has declined on ITV.

A BBC spokesman said: ‘People should look at his actual comments rather than trying to infer additional meaning that isn’t there.

‘What Mark Thompson said is that all religions are not the same – he did not say Islam, or indeed any faith, should be treated more sensitively than Christianity.  In fact he made it crystal clear that no religion should be regarded as off limits for the BBC.’

3. Pat Dollard, respected photo-journalist, with close associations to the US Marines, refers to this here. He pulls no punches (my bolding):

‘The fact is that the BBC’s deference to Islam has very little to do with its “minority” status in the UK or the lack of integration on the part of its followers. The real reasons are fear and political correctness.

BBC executives don’t want their heads cut off or their homes burnt down any more than the rest of us do. Program-makers don’t have a problem with offending Christians because they know they’re unlikely to wind up in a video on the internet, wearing a hood and surrounded by a pack of sword-wielding nuns. Christians are exhorted to turn the other cheek; extremist Muslim leaders, on the other hand, encourage their followers to both get mad and, where possible, get even.

The reluctance of BBC types to do anything that might invite violence from Muslims is, if not admirable, at least understandable. Their continued enthusiasm for the discredited doctrines of political correctness and multiculturalism is arguably more troubling, given the corrosive effects of those ideas on free speech and on the “social cohesion” our elites profess to be so concerned with.

The BBC has become the standard-bearer for the cult of post-colonial, white, middle-class guilt (middle-class in the English rather than the American sense). This is the British strain of what Mark Steyn and others call Western civilization’s self-loathing: the belief that white Westerners and the Judeo-Christian tradition are to blame for much of the world’s ills. One manifestation of this belief is the assumption that people with dark skin are inherently “nobler” than people with white skin — one particularly apologetic former head of the BBC memorably referred to the organization as “hideously white” — and that any religion practiced by such people is consequently more deserving of our respect than Christianity.’


HOW THE BBC HANDLES COMPLAINTS

Have you ever complained to the BBC about its prejudiced “reporting”? I have. As have others I know who feel that for years we have been let down by the BBC in their ‘balanced reporting’ responsibilities.

Recently I wrote to the BBC over what  felt was a particularly biased Newsnight report on Iraq. It showed terror-stricken crying children calling for their mother as British soldiers searched their home for insurgents. (Insurgents who are killing people of all nationalities and all religions and none.)

It also featured, in highly emotive coverage, British soldiers complaining about their task in Iraq. It never felt the need to balance those views with the views of others who were proud to be there – bringing democracy and peace to Iraq for the first time in 30 years.

I wondered why they hadn’t seen fit to use this kind of video.

Of course it’s American, patriotic and pro-McCain, so what could I expect?

DISINGENUITY

From the BBC I received in response a bland defence of their programming structure, referring to their “series of programmes” which they say provides the balance missing in the edition which concerned me (see impartiality extracts from BBC charter).

This “balance” argument is highly arguable and disingenuous. The damage was done on the first programme.

This kind of reporting, in a programme such as Newsnight, is taken by some to be a “news” item and obviously factual, typical and just, well, the way it is!  Can’t imagine why some of us expect news and not opinion from “Newsnight”!

And the later programme to which they referred in their reply to me focussed on the success of the American surge and the resulting re-vitalising of parts of Iraq.

It failed to balance in any way the unhappy troops emphasis of the earlier programme. It failed to afford us any pride in our success or foresight in putting our country and its courageous forces in the front line.

In other words, good as the second report was (Mark Urban) this edition failed to counter any feelings we had that the British army was an unhappy place and its political leaders in 2003 were clearly wrong. In this sibsequent edition of ‘OpinionNight’ they could hardly deny that local Iraqi communities were recovering well as it was all over the fact-based news. I found this OpinionNight politicised stance a betrayal of the licence payer as well as of our armed forces.

Never forget the BBC’s agenda.

This is to complain about the original decision to invade Iraq, our alliance with the USA and our (evidently) dreadful treatment of our armed forces. This has been an ongoing story since 2003 and many, many programmes have been built around this viewpoint.

The BBC isn’t PAID to have an agenda. We do not VOTE for the BBC, but we DO pay for it through the licence fee.

Perhaps it’s time we stopped paying.




Free Hit Counter


About these ads

Tags: , , , , , , ,

6 Responses to “BBC running scared of Islam? NO!!!?”

  1. Free Religion News and Blogs » BBC running scared of Islam? NO!!!? Says:

    [...] BBC running scared of Islam? NO!!!? By keeptonyblairforpm Despite the controversy that film generated, it?s not especially disdainful of Christianity, and can be read as a satire on both unquestioning religious belief and secular cults. Islam is sorely in need of a similar lampooning right now … Tony Blair – http://keeptonyblairforpm.wordpress.com/ [...]

  2. Cassandrina Says:

    bbc handles complaints in the same manner as the government “listens” to the public.
    bbc do not know of CRM and have no interest in using it if it did understand the concept.

    Downsizing, restructure, increased professionalism, objectivity and balance is needed, but the current senior management have not a clue how to do this.

  3. Stan Says:

    Well done,BS, for exposing this scandal. There is certainly a left-liberal bias at the Beeb which has even been admitted at a BBC meeting on the subject http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-411846/We-biased-admit-stars-BBC-News.html.

    To see how this works in detail examine the full BBC Trust report on a complaint about an item on BBC News suggesting that terrorism was caused by British foreign policy at
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbctrust/assets/files/pdf/appeals/esc_bulletins/2008/mar.pdf It is the last item of the list of contents headed Ten O’Clock News July 1 2007 (page 32).

  4. keeptonyblairforpm Says:

    Thanks for this Stan. Great for people to be able to read the whole “judgement”.

    And much as I dislike the Daily Mail, I DO admit that it occasionally has useful information on there. Just a pity that they censor so heavily comments which disagree with them (like me, on Blair.) They criticise management of news while they manage it themselves.

    Still, it is not beneath me to use their information where and when I consider it useful.

  5. Ross & Brand: Sack these immature BBC ‘broadcasters’ « Tony Blair Says:

    [...] people are up in arms over this than over the BBC’s “Soft on Muslims” report, as I wrote about here a few days ago. That is hardly surprising. This is the Age of The Celebrity, [...]

  6. BBC Pays Out £30,000 to Upset Muslim (MCB LEADER)!!!!!!!! « Tony Blair Says:

    [...] Is the BBC running scared of Islam? VOTE here [...]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s