Seriously, BBC?

I was reading Biased BBC and came across a series of astonished comments about a new BBC News website article on Donald Trump headlined US election: Clinton security should be disarmed, says Trump. 

Its opening paragraph reads:

...and the article reads as if there might be some truth in this criticism (and is thoroughly one-sided from start to finish).

The point being made at B-BBC is that when you watch the video of Mr Trump saying what he said....

...it should be patently obvious to anyone (who isn't merely intent on twisting his words) that Mr Trump wasn't seriously calling for Hillary's bodyguards to be disarmed.

He was being sarcastic and making a point.

And he certainly wasn't hinting at the assassination of Mrs Clinton or "inciting violence" against her either.

His point was that Mrs Clinton, an advocate of gun control, believes in guns well enough to be surrounded by a large body of gun-carrying bodyguards. She knows the danger she'd face in if her bodyguards gave up their guns, so that's why she won't disarm them.

I can't put it any better than those B-BBC commenters here:

• MartinW

  September 17, 2016 at 9:19 am

  Any sensible person would have immediately known that Trump was merely making a point, and not actually advocating that Clinton should be deprived of armed protection. After all, the same would have had to apply to all candidates. The BBC is either stupid (which it is not) or malevolent and politically biased (which it very much is). And if day-listeners to the BBC are furious at BBC bias, lies and omissions, they should try listening to the reporting of the US election by its ‘World Service’. That is more extremely anti-Trump and Clinton-supporting, and unbearable to those of us who want truth and honesty.
• Roland Deschain

  September 17, 2016 at 9:50 am

  I came on here to comment on that article, but it doesn’t surprise me that someone else has got there first. It really is a masterclass, not just in bias but in trying to convince yourself of something you know isn’t true. It’s quite obvious what Trump meant, even to those who might not support him but the BBC is pretending to itself that it can be spun as advocating assassination.

  I’m actually rather heartened by this as this level of self-deluding bias must be becoming increasingly obvious far beyond those of us who frequent this site. It smacks of desperation.