|
Post by Teddy Bear on Jan 30, 2012 20:46:49 GMT
It seems to be a common theme on articles by the BBC where incidents related to Islamic or Muslim terrorism is concerned they go out of their way to avoid labelling it as such. If we just take an example of this story today from the BBC Norway jails two for Danish newspaper terror plotAlthough anybody with any common sense could determine that these men were Islamic terrorists, it makes me question why the BBC avoid labelling them as such. The only logical conclusion could be that if anybody searched the BBC website to see how they were reporting on the subject they would mainly find fairly benign examples. Sure enough! As the attached picture shows. Given that there have been over 18,300 deadly attacks by Islamic terrorists since 9/11, isn't it odd that within the last year, according to the BBC search engine, we only have one instance from last February where they actually termed an incident as such? Odd for anybody not familiar with the BBC agenda that is.
|
|
|
Post by Teddy Bear on Jan 23, 2013 19:35:13 GMT
Today we had the story of the BBC editing out the racist epithets from the classic Fawlty Towers episode of The Germans because of what they deem as 'politically correct. They don't understand or care that they are actually insulting the intelligence of their audience in their belief that they need to protect us this way. For years, the failure of the BBC to call Islamic terrorists by that name, preferring instead to call them militants has been an affront to our society's values. I believe they do so only to ingratiate themselves and appease their Muslim audience, thereby empowering these terrorists even further.
|
|
|
Post by Teddy Bear on Feb 21, 2013 16:11:22 GMT
I am struck by the difference between two headlines showing on the BBC UK Webpage today. The first is this one Birmingham men guilty of mass bomb plotThe other is this Rabbi Chaim Halpern arrested in sexual abuse probeThe first sentence of this article tells us Four men have been arrested by police investigating sexual abuse allegations among the Orthodox Jewish community in north London.So not only are we aware that one is a rabbi, even from the headline, but that also the other three are supposedly from the Jewish community in north London. It's also worth noting that at this time it's only alleged that these men have done anything wrong, and is yet to be proved. The men in the first article however have been found guilty of terrorism charges, but nowhere in the article are we told of their religious affiliation. It's fairly easy to deduce though, from the photos of the men, from their names Irfan Naseer, 31, Irfan Khalid, 27, and Ashik Ali, 27, and from certain passages in the article: - The jury heard that Naseer and Khalid had received training from al-Qaeda contacts in Pakistan
- ...Naseer played a key role in sending four other Birmingham men to Pakistan to receive training
- Two other Birmingham men who were part of Naseer and Khalid's plans, Rahin Ahmed, 27, and Mujahid Hussain, 21, have also pleaded guilty to terrorism charges.
- The trial heard the men were inspired by sermons of US-born Islamist cleric Anwar al-Awlaki, who was killed in Yemen in September 2011
.So even the fact that these men also recruited others, the BBC decided not to mention any common link between them. The only mention of Islam is in the final sentence I included above. One might question the motive for the BBC to avoid terming them as Muslims, militant or otherwise, since that clearly is the factor underlying their actions. For one thing, it makes sure it won't appear on any search of Muslim terrorist. The BBC even has the temerity to tell us that Our correspondent added that what was never clear during the trial was what had really made them want to be bombers. They exhibited all the same characteristics as many who have gone before them - including a vague hatred of "Western" society.So nothing wherein Islamists are preaching the need for adherents to launch jihad as the motive for their terrorist intent. The BBC correspondent just 'hasn't a clue'. Contrast all this with the first article and tell me the BBC doesn't have a clear agenda here.
|
|
|
Post by Teddy Bear on Sept 24, 2013 19:13:32 GMT
Following the Kenya shopping mall massacre, some MPs have been called to hear and read the BBC still referring to those that perpetrated this as 'militants'.
In this country at least, because of the BBC's continued use of the term to describe what was once aptly called terrorists, I think most people would see it as synonymous.
|
|
|
Post by Teddy Bear on Sept 24, 2013 20:13:59 GMT
Damian Thompson expresses his view on the subject.
|
|
|
Post by thehighlandrebel on Sept 25, 2013 10:50:57 GMT
Al Beeb reached a nadir yesterday on R4 news when referring to the terrorists as 'fighters' Fighters my arse...well armed terrorists enter a public place and start slaughtering innocent women and children. Gradually it will morph from militants to fighters to victims and then to heroes and the blame will gradually change from Islam to Christianity, the west and of course Israel and the Jews. BTW I've criticised the churches in the past for lying low on the issue of Islamic terrorism but hopefully things are going to change. www.archbishop-cranmer.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/peshawar-horror-as-muslims-massacre-and.html
|
|
|
Post by Teddy Bear on Sept 25, 2013 17:37:31 GMT
An excellent article by Archbishop Cranmer you posted THR, I'm going to reproduce it here. Also I note even on the BBC main Asia page the story of this atrocity has all but disappeared. We would only know of its existence at all now because on Sunday it was the most popular story for the day, and still shows under that link - as highlighted. The very headline - 'Pakistan Church blasts kills dozens' indicates nothing of what happened, like it was a faulty gas boiler that blew up. Another article they link to is 'Angry protests after Pakistan blasts', which again tells nothing of the real nature of this heinous crime, and who is responsible. Even the original article doesn't use 'Islamic militants' as the perpetrators, though it's easy enough to glean. Just makes sure it won't appear in their search engine under same. I see their main story is about the Pakistan earthquake that killed at least 328 people. Perhaps the Muslims there will start thinking about karma, or how God 'rewards' them for their actions. No doubt their Imam will tell the rest that they have gone to meet their 72 virgins and serving boys early. They clearly think that chocolate snacks in N. Korea, and strawberries in Japan is far more important news to their readers than news of this Christian massacre. Shows the priorities of the BBC.
|
|
|
Post by Teddy Bear on Oct 14, 2013 17:22:52 GMT
It was easy to predict how the BBC would report this story, when the first details appeared of it. Yesterday the news ran that 4 men had been arrested as suspects in a planned terror attack. 2 were in Whitechapel, 1 in Peckham, and 1 in Bayswater' Okay. though no further details were available yet, one can assume just who these perpetrators might be, especially given that 2 were from Whitechapel. Today, after the names and further details were released, the Daily Mail has no problem telling us Four suspected Islamic terrorists held in series of dramatic raids across London amid fears of 'Kenyan mall-style gun attack' on British soilPretty much what we surmised already. But what does the BBC tell usTwo men, both aged 25, were arrested in a car in Mansell Street, Whitechapel, east London, after police fired "Hatton rounds" - ammunition designed to blow out tyres and blow open doors.
One was a British national of Turkish origin and the second was a British national of Algerian origin, police said.
A 28-year-old British national of Azerbaijani origin was arrested at premises in Westbourne Grove, Bayswater, west London, and the fourth man, a British national of Pakistani origin, aged 29, was arrested in Peckham Hill Street, Peckham, south-east London. The 'common link' between these men seems to have escaped the BBC. There is no mention of Islam in this article, or the other video articles they are running about. Terror raid appeared to be a 'targeted stop'Witness: Westbourne Grove terror raid 'looked planned'Shouldn't the public be aware of just which mindset is behind this planned attack? Apparently the BBC doesn't think so, and I just knew they wouldn't - it's the religion of peace don't you know.
|
|
|
Post by Teddy Bear on Oct 14, 2013 19:00:14 GMT
Seems the BBC has decided to update their article to include the word 'Jihadist', but they make the point to put BRITISH men as the second word. Here’s a Newsniffer screenshot to show the recent changes: Which leaves the question that if the Whitehall officials originally said ‘the alleged Jihadist plot was “serious” and intended to use firearms in the UK’, why did the BBC think they had to leave it out of the earlier runs of this article? Rhetorical question of course
|
|
|
Post by Teddy Bear on Dec 25, 2014 19:37:09 GMT
The Commentator picks up on the BBC avoidance again to refer to Islamic murdering terrorists as such. Preferring instead, as usual, to refer to them as 'militants'.
|
|
|
Post by Teddy Bear on Jan 16, 2015 21:51:34 GMT
The Commentator has picked up on another recent example.
|
|
|
Post by Teddy Bear on Jan 26, 2015 18:12:54 GMT
What we see throughout this thread is how the BBC excuse or diminish the terrorist actions by Muslims throughout the world, as well as within our own society. Whether its by ignoring reporting on the incidents themselves, or when they do, failing to report on the mindset of these individuals from the perspective of our own values and way of life. Even. as we covered this week, where they present it as if these jihadists are not real Muslims, or somehow 'misunderstanders of their religion'. Their enabling has gone so far that now one of these 'religion of peaceniks' are suing the BBC for labelling him an extremist. The best deduction I can make for this BBC agenda is simply that in their desire to be the world's media outlet, they need to appease all of the Muslim nations - regardless of the negative effect it has on our own. The BBC are the enemy and traitors within. So ignorant and puffed up with their own power and future 'glory', they don't really see the world they are creating. BBC Watch, Honest Reporting, the Daily Mail, the Telegraph, all have articles on this story. Here's the one from Breitbart London
|
|
|
Post by charmbrights on Jan 28, 2015 13:47:56 GMT
On the News At Ten last night (28.i.15) it is interesting to consider the language the BBC used in the carefully scripted report on the conflict between the internationally recognised government of Libya and the rebel groups opposing them. These groups were described as "insurgents linked to Islamic State" and noted that the government "call them terrorists".
So the BBC were careful to give the impression that these were not really terrorists, only called terrorists by the legally established government, and were not part of IS, only "linked to" them.
|
|
|
Post by Teddy Bear on Jan 29, 2015 18:01:04 GMT
This article in Breitbart London by Simon Kent gives the kind of words the likes of the BBC will avoid when describing terrorists and their ilk.
|
|
|
Post by thehighlandrebel on Jan 29, 2015 19:04:33 GMT
A list of things for which the term 'terrorist' is acceptable at the BBC.
Israelis defending their families and homes from rocket and missile attacks. Climate change deniers. EDL. UKIP. Conservatives. White people. Christians. Critcisers of sharia law. Non licence fee payers. Any non Muslim. Non gay people. Non readers of the Koran. Bible readers. Non immigrants etc.
|
|
|
Post by Teddy Bear on Jan 29, 2015 19:39:40 GMT
They say the pen is mightier than the sword. Hopefully they'll come to know us as 'terror-wrists'
|
|
|
Post by charmbrights on Jan 31, 2015 9:56:41 GMT
You missed one HR: Scots voting for independence.
|
|
|
Post by Teddy Bear on Feb 2, 2015 14:54:49 GMT
Peter McKay at the Mail with some thoughts on this topic that no doubt we all agree on. (hat-tip THR)
|
|
|
Post by thehighlandrebel on Feb 2, 2015 18:46:11 GMT
I thought the only way to complain to the Imam...sorry director general of al-Beeb was to send a message in Arabic.
|
|
|
Post by Teddy Bear on Feb 16, 2015 22:30:39 GMT
We saw the BBC do the same after the Paris attacks over a month ago, and they are now repeating it following the Copenhagen murders, they completely omit referring to the sick murderers as Muslims or Islamists. In the latest attack they refer to him as 'Danish born', as if that's what people should only think of him as.
|
|
|
Post by Teddy Bear on Feb 16, 2015 22:50:11 GMT
Typical Liverpudlian, at least as far as the BBC wants us to know:
Jihad Watch has picked up on it:
|
|
|
Post by charmbrights on Feb 17, 2015 11:09:20 GMT
Jihad Watch totally misunderstand the BBC. They would not have said "on December 7, 1941, a group of men from Japan destroyed some ships at Pearl Harbor". They would have said "on December 7, 1941, a group of men tried to attack some ships at Pearl Harbor"!
|
|
|
Post by Teddy Bear on Feb 17, 2015 15:05:11 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Teddy Bear on Dec 4, 2015 23:01:26 GMT
Many MPs are supposedly upset that the BBC seems to find any actions by Islamic terrorists worthy of deeming them terrorists. The excuse used by the BBC is that this term implies a judgement, so they prefer to call them militants or such like.
I'm well aware across the board that judgement is a very weak quality held by the BBC, besides their real reasons to avoid calling a spade a spade in this case. But will MPs do anything about it? No, of course not. Their judgement too is severely impeded, they just want to make it sound like they really care.
|
|