The BBC once more allows its true colors to shine through. Recently a posting proudly displayed on it’s Radio Five website states that,
Zionism is a racist ideology where Jews are given supremacy over all other races and faiths. This is found in the Talmud. There is a law called Baba Mezia, which allows Jews to lie as long as it’s to non-Jews. Many pro Jewish supporters will cringe at this being exposed because they know it exists, yet they keep quiet about it, hey frip, jla and co The Law of Baba Mezia!! Tsk tsk tsk! Its in the Talmud.’
Although this statement received many complaints, the BBC felt it did not contravene the house rules and therefore was left on its site. As a British subject I have long found the BBC’s reporting to be extremely biased and offensive.
Back in 1982 the British traveled half way around the world to fight for some islands that most citizens of the UK thought were located on the north coast of Scotland. There was no imminent threat to the people of Britain as in fact the Falkland Islands are located east of the Argentinean shore.
The whole situation was a charade to bolster up a fledging Margaret Thatcher who had decided to undermine the socialist programs, which at the time were backbone of Great Britain, and in doing so became extremely unpopular. Not once did the BBC report the facts or question this pointless war, the loss of British soldiers, or the enormous cost to the taxpayers. No justification was ever sought.
Yet when Israel, tired of constant terrorist raids carried out on a daily basis on its soil by infiltration or Katusha missiles, killing countless civilians, including children sleeping in their beds or at school, went in to Lebanon to scouge these murderers from it’s boarders, the BBC couldn’t fill its airwaves quick enough with condemnation. Its reporters were not interested in objective reporting but simply to carry out Jew bashing.
No BBC reporter could see the irony that in many ways Great Britain’s presence in Northern Ireland was a true occupation. So why wasn’t this ever stated. Why did the BBC not articulate this crime? A different matter when it came to Israel, who after being the victim of the 1967 war, instigated collectively by several Arab nations, had pushed back the hostile armies and actually won land in the ensuing battles. Now the BBC was able to stretch its Anti-Semitic imagination and rhetoric to find a place in time for its ‘occupation’ agenda.
Lyse Doucet, a BBC reporter, in her days out in ‘the field’ during the second Palestinian Intifada, would file reports that, had it not been clearly stated in text depicting her as working for the BBC, could have easily been mistaken as a spokes person for the PLO. Her judgmental comments were a disgrace to her profession. Belittling bona fide members of a sovereign state, elected members of the Knesset, while sympathizing with known terrorists, were all part of her daily routine. How could an establishment such as the BBC allow such reporting to be considered let alone aired is a mystery? Settlers in Gaza were always labeled as “Jewish” settling in “Palestine”. Such historical and legal inaccuracy only proves the BBC’s judgmental reporting fails all objectivity.
So why is it a surprise that a piece on a Radio Five website offers us further proof that when it comes to non-partial reporting, the BBC cannot hide its true colors.
During the Alan Johnson saga where, Mr. Johnson as a BBC reporter was kidnapped and held for 114 days, the BBC tirelessly held vigils to free their reporter. And, rightly so. However never a word was spoken in scorn. Good tactics in not wanting to aggravate the perilous situation? Maybe. But then what was the purpose of the hugs and amourous words once Alan Johnson was freed. Surely the suffering created by Johnson’s capturers should have led to every literary expletive known.
Not if this would undermine the BBC’s sympathy for one of the most vicious murderers of Jews, Hamas, since Hitler. In fact BBC journalists openly sympathize Hamas and are proud of it. The senior BBC Arabic Service correspondent, Fayad Abu Shamala, told a Hamas rally on May 6, 2001, “Journalists and media organizations in Gaza wage the campaign of resistance and terror against Israel shoulder to shoulder together with the Palestinian people”.
When Saudi Arabian Sheikh Abdur-Rahman al-Sudais, who is not just any imam, but the preacher of the Grand Al-Haraam mosque, the most important in Mecca, opened London’s biggest mosque, the BBC lavishly described him as a respected leader who works for ‘community cohesion’ and a ‘builder of communities’. The BBC failed to mention that this ‘pillar’ of respectability, in his own words, states that “in the name of Allah the Jews must be annihilated, the scum of human race, the rats of the world, murderers of the prophets, and offspring of apes and pigs”
The BBC program, Question Time, has on many occasions brought out the worst
Anti-Semitism live on TV. No pro Israel panelist has ever been anything but a strategically isolated target. If ever this unfortunate guest should be foolish enough to educate the fellow panelists, or even further the audience, how in fact the only true Middle Eastern democracy is Israel will be greeted with hisses and boos.
Tom Gross wrote in 2004 in a piece entitled, ‘The BBC’s very own Mideast foreign policy’, “Using lavish public funding, courtesy of the British taxpayers, and an unprecedented worldwide news reach, (its radio service alone broadcasts in 43 languages, attracts over 150 million listeners daily), is in blatent breach of its own charter, virtually conducting its own anti-Israeli foreign policy.
So maybe after all, the BBC in fact stands for Blatantly Biased Correspondence.
