Post by Teddy Bear on Jul 20, 2012 0:04:39 GMT
It's a common theme where the BBC is concerned, and one we cover continually on this site, that they avoid terming terrorist attacks as Muslim or Islamic inspired, even though it is very much part of the story. As I've stated before, the only reason I can think that they do this, even though it's evident that the terrorism they describe is founded in Islam, is on any search of their website this will not be coupled together.
Given that there have been 19,250 deadly terror attacks committed by Muslims since 9/11, the connecting factor is plainly evident. So how absurd is it for the BBC to go to such lengths. making itself appear so blatantly foolish and twisted as the proverbial ostrich burying its head in the sand?
Richard Dart appeared in a BBC documentary last year about his conversion to Islam made by his own brother. He has now been charged along with some other men with preparing for acts of terrorism over a two-year period by travelling to Pakistan for training and providing information for others about how to do the same. He also discussed targeting Royal Wootton Bassett where many army personnel were based, and officers from MI5 and MI6.
So it would be very pertinent and reasonable for the BBC itself to make the connection of his conversion to Islam, which THEY screened as a documentary, and the subsequent planned terror attacks.
But then, if the BBC was pertinent and reasonable this website for one wouldn't exist.
The Telegraph runs the story, and in the headline and opening passage the truth is made clear.
Daily Mail do the same with just the headline - British Muslim convert accused of travelling to Pakistan for terror training 'discussed targeting Royal Wootton Bassett'
However none of the 3 recent articles by the BBC on the subject connects 'Muslim' to these events.
Four remanded on terror charges
Four terror suspects have appeared at court
Five charged with terror offences
Ridiculous and blinkardly biased!
Given that there have been 19,250 deadly terror attacks committed by Muslims since 9/11, the connecting factor is plainly evident. So how absurd is it for the BBC to go to such lengths. making itself appear so blatantly foolish and twisted as the proverbial ostrich burying its head in the sand?
Richard Dart appeared in a BBC documentary last year about his conversion to Islam made by his own brother. He has now been charged along with some other men with preparing for acts of terrorism over a two-year period by travelling to Pakistan for training and providing information for others about how to do the same. He also discussed targeting Royal Wootton Bassett where many army personnel were based, and officers from MI5 and MI6.
So it would be very pertinent and reasonable for the BBC itself to make the connection of his conversion to Islam, which THEY screened as a documentary, and the subsequent planned terror attacks.
But then, if the BBC was pertinent and reasonable this website for one wouldn't exist.
The Telegraph runs the story, and in the headline and opening passage the truth is made clear.
Muslim convert 'discussed targeting Wootton Bassett'
A white Muslim convert accused of a terrorism offence discussed targeting Royal Wootton Bassett and officers from MI5 and MI6, a court heard today.
Daily Mail do the same with just the headline - British Muslim convert accused of travelling to Pakistan for terror training 'discussed targeting Royal Wootton Bassett'
However none of the 3 recent articles by the BBC on the subject connects 'Muslim' to these events.
Four remanded on terror charges
Four terror suspects have appeared at court
Five charged with terror offences
Ridiculous and blinkardly biased!