Monday, 17 April 2017

Assertions and counter-assertions

Talking about Peter Hitchens, his complaint about BBC bias over grammar schools wasn't his only beef with the Beeb this week:

In the light of that, this commentary from the BBC's Lina Sinjab seems worth noting:

The fact that most of the victims of this hideous attack were Shia suggests to me an 'interest' on the part of some radical Sunni Islamist rebels, surely?


  1. Neither the UK Government nor the BBC has grasped, in the slightest, the multi-asymmetrical nature of the Civil War in Syria.

  2. I believe the Americans wanted an excuse for a spot of gun boat diplomacy, more as a message to Russia, China, Iran and North Korea.

    It's a war zone, the actual user of the chemical weapons will never be 100% confirmed even if the war stopped tomorrow.


    You will never hear the BBC jump to conclusions in an apparent Islamic attack, but the first BBC news report I heard just minutes after the murder of Jo Cox did mention the "Britain First" claims and conclude a right-wing murder.

    Yesterday morning on Radio 5 (from 2:16 in the above link) Lina Sinjab makes the bold assertion that it's hard to see why the rebels could be behind the attack because "it's not in their interests". Compare and contrast with the lack of journalistic scepticism over the alleged chemical attacks a few days ago.