BBC Versus Scientology

[indikit]

Normally I would watch anything attacking Scientology and regale in the fact. But this time I sat and watched the Panorama programme on their web site and kept thinking "This is the BBC reporting - Doubt Everything they Say." Strange effect it had on me. Again, you can see how manipulative Panorama is. Regardless of whether you are for or against Scientology, this programme set out to smear it and nothing else. Because this is what the BBC does best. Not a hope in hell of showing the other side of Scientology.

The funniest comment of all though is to be found on John Sweeney's comments page with regards to both the documentary and his 'losing it'.

news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/panorama/6655207.stm

He actually has the gall to say:

"you see a portrait of an extraordinary organisation which will not accept any criticism of itself whatsoever."

Hello? Does this sound like any place close to home? And does this prove conclusively that the BBC has absolutely no sense of irony whatsoever.

Any chance I can have the opportunity of blowing up in the face of the BBC over their bigoted mercenary convictions.

I for one have absolutely no time whatsoever for Scientology, but to hear John Sweeney suggest that "The Church of England" wouldn't act that way was absurd. Of course they wouldn't act that way. The BBC wouldn't let them. But we all know what other religion the BBC is quite happy to let act that way over and over.

Scientology is a soft target. They're not blowing people up in the name of their religion (cult - who cares). They're not asking people to die in their thousands to protect it. How are we expected to take the BBC going after Scientology seriously when a more brazenly mind-swamped and dangerous religion is given their blessing in news report after news report, documentary after documentary?

Did make me laugh though when the scientologist stalker began his summary of the BBCs intentions as being that of a one-sided reporting.

Yup. That's the BEEB.

[indikit]

Oh Christ, I've just watched the spin machine at work here on Youtube:-



Watch the BBC do what they do best, defend their inappropriate actions to the hilt. What sort of a loaded question is this:
"Tell us what sort of pressure he was under when that clip was made."

Well it's obvious. Someone was talking over the top of him with a lot of bigoted, aggressive bias and one sided view of the facts and John Sweeney didn't like the fact that someone else was doing a better job of it than him.

The true mind numbing cultish swill is that of the BBC attempting to forgive their reporter in the usual limp wristed lefty and hypocritical way that we have come to expect:

"It's wrong of us, but it's right under the circumstances."

The circumstances being that if it's the BBC trying to make a point - then anything goes.

[indikit]

It gets better.



The 3 part attack on the BBC by the Scientologists. How one bigoted, instutionally mind-fucked organisation attacks another. The irony of it all is too much to bear!

The Scientologists list one transgression after another of the BBC against their remit as if it's a new thing. The only good thing about this is to see what happens when the BBC piss off an organization as mighty as them. Unfortunately for the Scientologists they are about to discover that the BBCs bias is buried so deeply within the UK it permeates every agency they think will help them pursue what ever action they are attemtping against the Beeb.

I couldn't care less for the Scientologists equally biased nonsense documentary about the BBC, just as I couldn't care less about the vice versa. They manage to completely crap on their own argument when they actually have a Psychiatrist comment, when Scientology have already made it clear they despise all psychiatrists.

But this a great battle. Reminds me of the old maxim:

My enemy's enemy is my friend.

[Teddy Bear]

I think for the hierarchy of the Scientologists they possibly were expecting 'better things' from the BBC, based on their once earned reputation, but which we long know has been exhausted. I'm sure if any other MS media company were wanting to make a documentary about them they would surely have suspected the 'sensational' approach from the beginning.

It's hard to say how much of an impact the Scientology 'exposee' will change anyones mind. Those who still think the BBC is gospel will probably justify Sweeney's actions, and dismiss any points made by this counter. It might just give a larger doubt in the American audience of the integrity of the BBC, which can't be bad all things considered.

I just enjoy watching Sweeney squirm and 'lose it'.

[steevo]

With minor exception Americans don't think much of Scientologists but we're still a tolerant people by and large and will respect anyone who can show respect. I don't think most have a definitive opinion about the BBC on reporting world news. Most of what we see from them on TV are educational/entertainment programs and these are usually done quite well. I enjoy the one on capturing dinosaurs, and practically everything on modern day wildlife. But of course such quality programming can be a most effective tool causing folks not only to enjoy but want to trust, whatever the Beeb will have to say.

It is obvious people now judge by emotions and if they could see Sweeney, they wouldn't like it.

[Teddy Bear]

American liberals tend to regard the BBC as fair and impartial, mainly because the BBC expresses the view that they want to hear, and with the now well worn out reputation for once being that way. This 'favour' by the liberals is itself proof of the BBC bias, but it will be a long time before the West as a whole really sees the BBC for what it is. The Scientology issue is one element that might raise some otherwise accepting eyebrows.