There's been so much to say today. It's been rather overwhelming.
The BBC's been absolutely relentless (from what I've heard and seen of it) in pushing a small number of messages very vigorously.
What they've been up to only becomes clear when you watch them very closely over a period of time. Some communique must have gone out from on high to push these angles, and those very angles are duly being pushed for all they're worth.
I like blogging, but a big part of me would much prefer to blog nice stuff about the BBC. There's lots of BBC radio (rather less TV) that I really appreciate. I don't hate every BBC programme or fail to find any Radio 4 comedy funny. (Stop/Start's funny for starters). I could fill this blog with posts about things I've enjoyed hearing on Radio 4. I've even tweeted BBC producers (usually of nature programmes) thanking them.
But I really don't appreciate what they've been up to in the wake of the massacres in Paris. I really, really don't.
And I don't appreciate having to pay for it. (And I'm not the sort of person to steal things by not paying for them).
And I don't appreciate having to pay for it. (And I'm not the sort of person to steal things by not paying for them).
Anyhow, on related matters, and to round things off for the day...
Alan at Biased BBC has highlighted some more Jon Donnison tweets, pushing various angles, including a tweet praising UKIP-bashing James O'Brien of LBC for bullying some some 'ordinary bloke' from Maidenhead (ringing in to his phone-in show) for daring to demand that Muslims speak out without reservation about the stuff done in their name. Anita Anand would be proud of him.
Nabila Ramdani, meanwhile, has, by all accounts, been busy on the BBC today. BBC World (which we UK licence fee payers can't receive) used her for their running commentary during the Paris march. She apparently used the opportunity to denounce Benjamin Netanyahu as a "war criminal". Classy.
Allah knows what other rubbish she came out with but, as we've said before, she's fully entitled to come out with it. The BBC, however, isn't obliged to invite her onto every programme going. That it does seem to feel it's OK to do so, suggests either bias or an absurdly small address book.
Radio 4's Beyond Belief will be tackling 'Fundamentalism' tomorrow, in the light of recent events. Ernie's guests will be (1) Haras Raffiq, Managing Director of the Quilliam Foundation, (2) Julie Scott Jones, Associate Head of the Sociology Department at Manchester Metropolitan University; and (3) Salman Sayyid, Reader in Islam and Politics at the University of Leeds.
The attitude of many of those responsible for publishing the hostile cartoons of the Prophet Mohammed (praise be upon him) can perhaps be best understood by a Marxist analysis. I refer to the quip by (Groucho) Marx: "How dare she get insulted just because I insulted her?"
The supporters of the publication of the cartoons appear to be surprised that many Muslims found the cartoons offensive; at the same they claim these cartoons are part of an effort to throw back the forces of multiculturalism in favour of national (i.e. European) cultural restoration. The conflict between those who see in the publication a noble principle at stake and those who see just another episode of European racism disguised as high moral principle has itself become a metaphor for other conflicts that exceed the xenophobia of a tiny statelet.
And finally (h/t DB), Tim Willcox (of "A lot of these prominent Jewish faces will be very much against the political mansion tax presumably?" fame) "interviewed a French Jewish couple today on the BBC News Channel. The lady was saying that the Jews are the targets now when Tim Willcox interrupted her to say, "Many critics though of Israel's policy would suggest that the Palestinians suffer hugely at Jewish hands as well"...
[UPDATE: This one's going to run. I see BBC Watch and Biased BBC are also on the case now].
...and, frankly, that's the last straw. I'm off to bed. Good night.
[UPDATE: This one's going to run. I see BBC Watch and Biased BBC are also on the case now].
...and, frankly, that's the last straw. I'm off to bed. Good night.
It is stunning that someone usually sensible like Willcox would even try to suggest it's okay for Jews worldwide to face attacks over what Israel does. I know that's the common groupthink at the BBC, but I would have expected Willcox to understand the hypocrisy of saying that's okay but don't blame all Muslims for what other Muslims do.
ReplyDeleteAlthough perhaps he's gone native after leaving his wife and children for the left-wing blonde.
Isn't this part of the problem. We have a senior academic in one of our leading universities claiming that Groucho Marx's famous line was:
ReplyDelete"How dare she get insulted just because I insulted her?"
Another comment: I know the Quilliam Foundation are supposed to be good guys but they are led by ex HUT guys. Moreover Quilliam was supposed to be the first modern convert to Islam who established the first Mosque in this country.
I would have been a lot happier with something named, let's say, "The Liberal Muslim Foundation" or the "Congress for Democracy and Islam". Naming it after a (very odd) the person who has established the first Mosque in the UK doesn't sit well with me.
I can't find any such quote on Google and doubt it was ever said. I imagine somehow it's got mashed up in the guy's brain and it was a reference to
the woman who says "I didn't come here to be insulted" to which Groucho replies "Why - where do you usually go?"
But doesn't that speak volumes that a guy who so misunderstands our language and culture is going to be pontificating to us on one of our national radio stations?
Whoops - my post got a bit mangled there. The last two paras were supposed to go after the quote.
DeleteYes, the only citations of that "quote" found by Googling are Salman Sayyid's article and, now, this thread at 'Is the BBC biased?'!
DeleteFame at last! - as Karl Marx said (according to Prof Sayyid).
Try this thought experiment – imagine that Nigerians living London started attacking Muslim businesses and people because of what Boko Haram are doing in Nigeria. Would the Tim Wilcoxes of this world be equally unsympathetic towards Muslim victims? I think we all know the answer.
ReplyDeleteMiv Tucker
Yes Miv, we certainly do.
DeleteAccording to this, Willcox has form with anti-Jewish sentiment:
ReplyDelete"Tim Willcox’s latest statement to offend Jewish viewers is that the Palestinians 'suffer hugely at Jewish Hands'... only weeks after he suggested that 'prominent Jewish faces will be very much against the mansion tax,'" noted Jonathan Sacerdoti, Director of Communications at the Campaign Against Antisemitism.
I can't believe Willcox still has a job if he really said that on air. it's not like he said 'golliwog' in private or anything, but still....
As he got the all clear from the BBC over "A lot of these prominent Jewish faces will be very much against the political mansion tax presumably?", he'll probably get the same here.
DeleteLike you, I'd always rated Tim Willcox. Unfortunately, two such comments within two months suggests much more than a mere slip of the tongue.
With the BBC pushing itself to the front of the pack whenever there's a hue-and-cry against anyone so much as uttering an incorrect thought, whether it's in a leaked private email or in a BBC green room or in a video that was never going to be broadcast (etc, etc, etc), it would be rank hypocrisy (at best) if the BBC didn't take this matter very seriously indeed.
Nick Cohen has a good piece about this at the 'Spectator'.
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/nick-cohen/2015/01/the-bbc-blaming-the-jews-for-attacks-on-jews/
Glenn Beck and other US media have picked this up now, so Willcox is in for a spot of bother. He'll have been yelled at by a line manager by now for causing complaints. It will be made worse because everyone else at the BBC agrees with him, and they'll be angry at people disagreeing and supporting Israel, etc.
DeleteHe's made a half-assed apology on Twitter, but it shows that neither he nor they get it, and confirms our suspicions.
Really sorry for any offence caused by a poorly phrased question in a live interview in Paris yesterday - it was entirely unintentional Tim Willcox (@BBCTimWillcox)
https://twitter.com/BBCTimWillcox/status/554599189674754048
It's the idea itself that's offensive. How could he phrase it in a way that wouldn't be?
I think this comment at 'Biased BBC' sums up my feeling here:
ReplyDeleteDeborah January 12, 2015 at 4:25 pm
Tim Wilcox’s question may have been badly phrased during a live interview but what it showed is:
1) he believes the deaths of Jews in Paris was related to events in Gaza
2) he thinks all Jews are to blame for events in Israel.
Where has he got those ideas?
http://biasedbbc.org/blog/2015/01/11/tim-wilcox/#comment-512545
Well, #1 isn't wrong. That's not to say the deaths are justified, of course. #2 is the double standard I've been whining about for years. I assume Willcox got those ideas, or had them confirmed beyond any doubt, from working at the BBC, where these ideas are considered the middle ground.
DeleteHere's the video of the earlier incident with Tim Willcox I mentioned.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yF5TSWuEwEg
It's not as bad as advertised, actually, and I don't think I would condemn him for this one. But it's yet another incident where the BBC allows casual talk of the all-powerful Jewish Lobby, where they would never allow anyone to frown at a Muslim Lobby, or a Homosexual Lobby or whatever.