The shameful silence of the BBC

edward

The latest news is that the Jewish victims were tortured before they were murdered. I cannot understand how it is possible to enter into any kind of negotiations with terrorist groups around the world. They plan genocide against all Jews everywhere. The only response seems to be kill or be killed.

george

sir, the editors, management, staff at the bbc use it as their own personal propaganda channel. all their program's are set up to get across the bbc's point of view. Selected programs, audiences, interviews, letters etc. To try and bend the public to their philosophy. They are a very dangerous organisation. why do you not do something about them. regards George

Grumpy the Critic

Absolutely.
Watched a one hour special, during which time the reporter A beaky faced bald individual (can't remember his name) linked up with various other bbc sock puppets, in various locations in Mumbai (at one time crossing over to Barbara Plett (there - remembered one), be-veiled and wondering around some obscure part of pakistan, and STILL no mention of the attack on Chabad House.
Like the whole thing was done expressly to filter out the Jewish aspect.
Another great moment in journalism!

pcollier

I am told BBC online contained no mention that the attacks were committed by Islamic terrorists even after they claimed responsibility.
I assume they are trying to be sensitive but its starting to look like censorship. This isn't the first time I have noticed similar gaps in reporting.

Graeme, Canterbury

When will people realise that the BBC is a leftwing, anti-zionist, pro-muslim organisation. One time, in the mid 1990's, I was listening to the BBC World Service on Yom Kippur and they broadcast a 30 minute long anti-Isreal, pro- palistinian diatribe. Was it just coincedence? highly unlikely

Jason

At least the BBC did not claim the Mossad was behind the attack, as many Arab media had done.

NotaSheep

The BBC have managed to report today on the Jewish community in Bombay without mentioning the torture reports. I think it only fair to conclude that the BBC really is institutionally anti-semitic as well as anti-Israel. Any chance of the Balen report being released any time soon?

IMarcher

Your heading ‘The shameful silence of the BBC’ reminds me of last week’s The Moral Maze. I was amused that you and the rest of the panel claimed that Lee Barnes of the BNP was not being very good at the democratic process because he talked rather loudly and forcefully, when the BBC give you and the rest of the panellists a weekly opportunity to air your opinions and prejudices (plus you all get ample opportunity in other media) while they give almost no time at all to any spokesman for the BNP, and when they do it is strictly controlled. The poor man had to talk forcefully because that’ll probably be the only opportunity he’ll get to speak on the BBC! Furthermore, the panellists said the BNP were ‘racist’, but you failed to be even-handed when you omitted to mention the gross racism of the Labour Party for having spent sixty years pursuing a policy of ethnic displacement and replacement of the indigenous population. It was a very shallow and unintelligent performance by the panellists. Did you really have to connive in the BBC’s shameful silence?

James Murphy

Grumpy the Critic - 'BBC sock puppet.." - that's tremendous, where did you get that? Did you make it up? Such wit must not be allowed to pass unrewarded, thus I hereby award you an £18 million BBC light entertainment contract payable over 3 years - one thing, please remember for future reference that the edgey, culturally adventurous BBC house style is 'F******g sock puppet..."

An American

The BBC almost makes our very liberal ABC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC and CNN look conservative.
Isn't the BBC supported by tax dollars?
Why does the British public continue to support this liberal joke of a TV station?
If only you could get some conservative politicians in power who would literally pull the plug... the money plug on the BBC.
It's so incredibly ironic that if somehow England should become an Islamic country with Islamic laws with among other..the help of the BBC...the first people who would have their heads chopped off would be the very people who head and work for the BBC.

jon dee

If the BBC had to earn its revenue in the competetive commercial world, its personnel and politics would change very quickly.

HarleyDavidson

The BBC is funded by the British Government and the British people themselves meaning the BBC is the face Britain itself. The voice of the British Government and its people. Perhaps that is what is most significant about the BBC.

Therefore, as a North American watching from afar the pro Palestinian anti Israel and at times downright antisemitism broadcast throughout the world from the BBC could only happen with the will of the British people and of the British Government itself. One need not be a rocket scientists to come to this conclusion, indeed this is the single reason why most of us in North America believe the BBC is merely broadcasting what the people themselves believe otherwise there would be consequences no broadcasting company could manage on its own.

India was just another example in a long line of "examples" where the BBC knowingly plays to its audience. Terrorists are not terrorists but described by the BBC as "militants."

Muslims are "freedom fighters" or some other such trash popular by the BBC. Melaine Phillips is one of the few voices Britain manages to cry out in the wilderness against the propaganda of the majority. Why is the rest of Britain so silent? Or has Britain passed the tipping point in its headlong rush to join with the Muslims?

straightchris

Melanie: "While Sky News and other channels were gripped by these dramatic pictures."

Robin Lustig: Images of terror

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/worldtonight/2008/11/images_of_terror.html

I hope that this in some way answers your questions.

Herbert Thornton

Melanie asks - "Had the terrorists chosen to besiege a church or mosque instead, can you imagine the BBC ignoring it this way?"

I think, Melanie, you may underestimate the strength of sympathy & support that Christians feel for their Jewish co-religionists - and that you equally underestimate the BBC's hostility to Christianity. So yes, I can imagine the BBC playing down a similar attack on a church.

An attack on a Mosque, on the other hand would, to the BBC, have been very deplorable indeed & been described by the BBC as "un-Islamic".

Adam B.

The BBC is disgusting. When oh when will the licence fee end? Apparently we can't see the Balen report we paid for because we are children who wouldn't be able to handle its contents.

In 1991, I sat at school next to someone who "informed" me in all seriousness that Saddam had invaded Kuwait because of Israel - yes you see, it was all Israel's fault! Where does he work now? Foreign correspondent for the BBC of course!

Wilfred

HarleyDavidson - please understand that there are HUGE numbers of us Brits who utterly despise the BBC.

You should also know that in order to be able to watch TV (any channel) a household has to pay the licence fee - indeed, simply to possess a TV set with an aerial connection makes one liable to pay the licence fee.

John Bosworth

Ten terrorists (a word not heard on the BBC) attacked a city of many millions with the intention of killing 5000. Yet they chose to divert two of their gang to attack a dozen Jews in a safe house. How much hatred does that indicate these people had? Isn't that worth more coverage than the BBC seems to have mustered. I never thought I'd say this but: truly this must be a systemically anti-Semitic organisation.

phil

AT TIMES I AM SURPRISED THAT THE NEWS ON BBC IS NOT READ BY SOMEONE IN A KEFFIYAH-THEY ARE JUST SHAMELESS.

Vision Aforethought

Come on people, the solution is simple! Don't pay you license fee! If you are fined, send a very well written letter to the BBC / Government and explain that you will not contribute to an entity that is doing all it can to threaten the viability, honor and safety of an industrious, self-depreciating, amusing people who do not deserve the lies and ignorance shown by the recipients of said contribution.

john doe

Here is an excellent article by Caroline Glick in the Jerusalem Post on the jihadist-multiculturalist alliance. She rightly identifies the apologists themselves as evil.

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1227702394020&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

The Dandiprat

I was aghast, two days into this appalling event, to watch the BBC news broadcast, as Huw Edwards asked Frank Gardner if we had any idea who might be behind the attacks; and if we knew who was behind the 'gunmen'. They spun out some charade which convinced me they were there to wear nice suits and sell me dangerous comfort.

Monumental denial.

Oh and when do we expect to be told of the country of origin of the terrorists I wonder?

An American

jon dee,
I wish that private ownership would solve the problem that we see in our very liberal, left-leaning news medias. Unfortunately...it doesn't.
The US has only one TV station that is considered conservative/middle of the road and its Fox...all the other 6 TV stations are far left, liberal leaning. And the worst of the lot is PBS which is supported by US taxpayers. It's just one step behind the BBC with its lefty political agenda. Just goes to show you how all of our tax dollars can be abused.

D Gray

The surviving terrorist of the Mumbai attacks told Indian Police he was told “kill whites, especially British and American tourists”.

Azam Amir Kasab,said the attacks were intended to kill 5,000 people.The Pakistani-born terrorist has made a full confession to police.
He described how its mastermind briefed the group to “target whites, preferably Americans and British.”This quote from the Indian Police has not been reported.But we are talking about a news organization that has hammered today by some for not even using the word 'Terrorist'.As far as the BBC and its conduct over stories concerning Jews....they have been reporting bias coverage for 25 years.

Alice Cripps

Actually, if the terrorists attacking the chabad house wanted publicity, it would seem that the bbc failed to oblige. Complaints in this instance of bias of the BBC are complaints that the BBC didn;t aid these terrorisrs. Much better to complain about the more blatant and malicious examples of bias.

Conservative Cabbie

An American

"The BBC almost makes our very liberal ABC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC and CNN look conservative"

I have just two words for you: Chris Matthews.

I'm not sure even a BBC journo would say following an Obama speech "I felt a tingle run up my leg!"

HarleyDavidson

I'm afraid your logic that the British fully support the BBC because our tax money funds it is flawed. Usually when elections come round, there are more pressing matters to vote on than the TV licence. Should we follow your example and come to the conclusion that because the American government fund ACORN, that all Americans support voter fraud.

HarleyDaavidson

Wilfred
December 2nd, 2008 7:39pm
HarleyDavidson - please understand that there are HUGE numbers of us Brits who utterly despise the BBC.

You should also know that in order to be able to watch TV (any channel) a household has to pay the licence fee - indeed, simply to possess a TV set with an aerial connection makes one liable to pay the licence fee.
=================================
Wilfred could you explain to a North American what you mean by paying a license fee just to own a television? What does that mean? Then you have to pay another fee to watch any channel? Wilfred I have to admit I'm completely out of my depth here. It's such a "foreign" concept if that words will do, to explain my utter stupidity in this matter. Who do you have to pay these "fees" to? And if I broadly categorized Britons foolishly by the BBC then I stand to be corrected. Perhaps you might explain how all this works so I will not make that mistake again. Thank you.

Dave_G

You never hear the BBC or any of our media ,comment on Islamic anti-semitism, unless it's in the context of so called Jewish atrocities being perpetrated against Arabs. Concerning the Mumbai incident I have read that some hostages were released because they were moslem, but this hasn't been mentioned in any of the TV coverage as far as I'm aware.No doubt Jackie Smith and the rest of the political elite , would have us believe that the characters involved ,were being anti islamic in their actions.

DigitalDen

"The Chabad centre was stormed on Wednesday evening by armed militants who seized hostages"
Above quote from todays BBC report on the funerals. I have not heard what the hostages were taken for as they were apparently killed early on in the attack.

I did a search on the BBC News website for "terrorists" and came up with results that confirm most of the views above.

I have never ever got a straight answer from the BBC when making a complaint - they have years of experience in deflecting criticism I suppose

Terry

The BBC is an outdated concept. The need for a government broadcaster is as relevant as the need for a government airline. Take away its funding - it will have to get other funding but the price of that will be the eviction of the sinecured left wing ideological Jew haters. They are today's Neville Chamberlain. They can't get enough of appeasement of islamofascists and their left wing racist support network in the west. Ordinary germans enabled WW2 to take 60 million lives, 10% of which were Jewish genocide victims. The bbc is as ordinary as it is possible to be, and just as culpable. After the inevitable conflict they are helping to fuel, I hope the movers and shakers at the bbc are called to account in the criminal courts for their racist and ideological antisemitism - the very type hitler exploited before WW2.

Rob

Scrap the odious licence fee.
If British left want it to continue then they should jolly well fund it themselves.

An American

Conservative Cabbie,
Yeah...you are right.
If I remember correctly...I believe that Chris Matthews was one of the TV announcers that was taken off of reporting the election news because he couldn't control his 'intimate, tingling feelings' for the One.

Harvey

Shame I missed it . Then again I only tune in to Sky News and al -Jazeera .I gave up on BBC news a while back.

Adam B.

Harley Davidson and American, we all have to pay a licence fee to watch television. The money goes to the state broadcaster, the BBC, whether you watch them or not. It is, in effect, a tax on watching television, and we are all forced to be customers of the BBC, even if we hate that despicable organization. The BBC, as you can glean from the comments, is run by far left wingers who hate Israel, the West, and the USA. BBC comedy shows frequently portray Americans as stupid and backward, although the BBC likes the millions of dollars generated for them by BBC America. If only Americans knew how the BBC sneers at them on its domestic output, (kept well away from BBC America), Americans would be outraged at being taken for a ride.

10no6

I wish someone would organise a protest on the licence fee and the way BBC covers anything and everything to do with Islamic terrorism and continues to pump out anti British, American & Jewish propaganda like a bunch of immature 6th formers trying to be right on!!!!

An American

Adam B,
Thank you for the explanation.
If I read you correctly...you can avoid the tax by not having a TV.
Why not have a country-wide protest by tossing out all of your old TVs into the streets. Go without TV for a year, don't pay the tax.
See if that makes the BBC's news.

Dixon

Harley-American-AdamB The Licece Fee:

Im afraid, Adam, you have slipped up in a way so many do, the BBC is NOT a state property but an independent corporation. The fact that every person who is able to receive TV signals...even if they do not possess a tv set ( for example, if they have a vcr or DVD player with a tuner inside ) is forced by law ( under pain of imprisonment ) to buy that private corporations annual license makes the matter vastly more sickening than if it were a state brodcaster. It means, in effect, that the BBC is a gigantic private corporation ( with a budget more than half the size of NASA ) authorised to levee taxes! The only other such entity that I know of in the position was the East India Company. The EIC had its own army. The BBC has its own police force, being the extensive system of Licence fee enforcement.

It is a truly bizarre and iniquitous state of affairs.

Dixon

10no6
December 2nd, 2008 11:08pm
I wish someone would organise a protest on the licence fee and the way BBC covers anything and everything to do with Islamic terrorism and continues to pump out anti British, American & Jewish propaganda like a bunch of immature 6th formers trying to be right on!!!!

Cannot someone start an anti-BBC web-site. It could be called "Beeb Watch!" and feature the reader reporting of innacuracy and bias in BBC broadcasts on a daily basis. As well as forums and articles on the topic.

Joe Strummer

The BBC's bigoted views on issues such as Israel, the USA, ( but only when a Republican President is in office ), and Northern Ireland are well known as recognised as biased and impartial.

As someone of Protestant Northern Irish descent, during The Troubles I gave up watching any BBC news reports and current affairs programmes on the Province due to the predictable, very offensive and hostile view given to the world of the beleaguered Unionist community and of the now disbanded RUC police force by the BBC.

Every Provos IRA terrorist with a longstanding record of mindless sectarian violence behind him or her and then eventually killed or captured was to the BBC, of course, " an innocent Catholic civilian" even if found with an Armalite rifles and explosives. Yawn, yawn.

This incessant rubbish was spouted for decades by the BBC, even when the evidence said otherwise. This BBC Mumbai " never blame the Muslims" revisionism is sadly nothing new.

Roland

Americans here need to beware!The comments posted on the BBC are wildly unrepresentative, and express the views of a miniscule number of apparantly derange eccentrics. Most of us over here recognise the value and worth of the BBC. We're glad to criticise it when it's in the wrong, but hold dear the vast range of quality services it provides, from news to music to drama to sport to light entertainment. It funds orchestras, in the BBC Proms probably the largest and most well-loved music festival in the world, produced David Attenborough's brilliant programes on wildlife, provides education and even hosts the lovely Melanie once a week - oh, and is trusted and listened to for news around the world.
Why not check out for yourselves the BBC news website? This currently has a sympathetic report on the funeral in Israel of the Jewish victims of the Mumbai attacks.
I don't work for them - I just don't like to see American friends being mislead.

Fergus Pickering

It is rather silly to call the BBC far left while Denis Skinner lives and breathes. The BBC is what Americans know as liberal. Which, incidentally, it appears that the sainted Barack is not, to judge by his foreign policy team. Any American who does not know how the BBC is funded is extraordinarily ignorant about Britain. So smarten up, my transatlantic brothers. Try readin the Guardian for a bit to see exactly where OUR liberals are coming from.

Brit in Houston

Harley - please spend some time reading these blogs to get a feel for the issues and general approach of the correspondents here. If you had done so, you would have picked up the feeling of most of the folks here which is extreme disenchantment with the BBC and especially the funding arrangements.

You ask some questions that you admit betray your ignorance.

To repeat Wilfred

"You should also know that in order to be able to watch TV (any channel) a household has to pay the licence fee - indeed, simply to possess a TV set with an aerial connection makes one liable to pay the licence fee."

Which part of this are you struggling to understand? We pay an annual fee simply for the right to receive broadcast moving pictures - whether or not we watch the BBC. IF you subscribe to a satellite or cable company, then that is an additional cost - think of the TV licence fee as the "entry cost" for the priviledge of watching a moving picture.

Stunned and amazed? Yup - most of us are too!!!!

Jacob

Isn't there also a shameful silence in the Jewish community?

Why don't they protest the biased reporting at the BBC.

As an American I doubt that we would tolerate ten percent of the lying crap reported at the BBC on Israel without a protest.

Michael B

"I can hear the yawns from Broadcasting House even now..." is a supremely fitting condensation and summary, it sums up a great deal indeed.

Verity

10no6 - Many people have, among them ex Sunday Times columnist Jonathan Miller, who refused publically to pay his licence fee, and, to his preliminary hearing in a Magistrates' Court, they sent SIX barristers. Just a little forestaste of unlimited funds to hire more legal heavyweights to come. How on earth is a civilian to match the funds to retain six barristers for a Magistrate's hearing?

Thye're bullying licence-payers with their own fees.

Geoff M

The BBC's senior management staff has a preponderance of jewish people - being based in North London as it is.

How can the BBC be anti-semitic when they are calling the shots?

JohnW

Harley Davidson/An American,

For a full-on assault of the BBC, I commend you to the "Biased BBC" blog. There you will learn all you ever need to know - and hate - about Al Beeb and its anti-West, Islamo-loving agenda.

The licence fee is an anachronism dating from the first days of broadcasting. It's abolition is long overdue, and I for one am longing for the day that happens. In the meantime, like thousands of others, I will refuse to pay the licence fee on principle - mainly due to the fact that the BBC has fundamentally violated its original charter of impartiality.

Paul

For a long time now I've had to watch Channel4 or ITN to get any decent unbiased news. Trouble is I still have to pay the odious and unfair licence fee unless I wish to meet the baliffs at the door!!! Im sick of having to put up with Bowen and co whining like lap dogs every time they report on the Middle East. The Government have given them their hymn sheet and all the brown nosers are singing from it. The BBC is a total anachronism in the modern world and its getting worse by the week!! GET RID OF IT!!!

JohnW

Jacob,

As an American, you will no doubt also be aware that the majority of Jews in the USA are Democrats, and therefore, by definition, left of centre. I'm not aware of any mass uprising or protests by American Jews against the overwhelmingly far-left mainstream media.

Geoff M - the above comments also answer your question. The Jews in BBC management are default left.

Marin

I suggest comparison of the following two preserntations:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/india/3539171/Mumbai-attacks-Jews-tortured-before-executed-during-hostage-crisis.html
and
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/7760278.stm

Huh?

So are you saying, geoff M, that the reason the BBC's "senior management staff has a preponderance of [J]ewish people" is because it's situated in North London? That's a rather limited view. I guess that by your logic the mosque in Regent's Park is staffed by Jews for the same reason? By the way - a reality check for you: the senior management staff DOES NOT have "a preponderance" of Jews - where on earth do you get your information?

Roland

The spectacle of the unrepresentative Brits here queuing up to try to convince American readers of the awfulness of British life is frankly rather nauseating. It has the air of subserviance to it - an over-eagerness to tell tales and impress the big boys.
I rather suspect they make quite good use of the BBC and enjoy many of its riches. How many of them listen to Radio 4 -it's hard to imagine a better radio station of its kind anywhere in the world, with its astounding daily output. Or if classical music is your thing, what about Radio 3? What other country in the world offers a serious music station, without adverts, jingles or a diet solely consisting of light lollipops? and American TV is more than happy to pick up the best of BBC drama.
I guess American readers might consider the nature of American tv, especially in current affairs/news, and more particularly in the field of foreign affairs.

john doe

"How can the BBC be anti-semitic when they are calling the shots?"

Because they are left wing 'we are all Hizbollah now' self-hating Jews like Chomsky and Finkelstein.

Conservative Cabbie

Roland

We're subservient? And yet you trot out the tired old lines about Radio 4 and 3 and how rubbish American TV is. Give me The West Wing, Frasier, Cheers, Friends, Lost, 24 etc over Eastenders any day of the year. American TV is more intelligent, more innovative, better written etc than almost anything the Beeb produces. (Yea Prime Minister is the exception.)

Gary O

BBC is the voice of islam. Iike many things that came into sharp focus for me on 9/11, bbc's bias (and cnn's for that matter)jolted me to my core on that fateful day. Since then I have seen less and less of that arabist organ to the extent that now I hardly ever tune in to watch their news. And every time I do, I begin to regret it straightaway and change the channel in utter despondency.

For those who still care please visit "bbc bias" website.

It will open your eyes.

Roland

I didn't say American TV output was all lousy, cc - I enjoy a lot of the stuff you mention. But the news coverage? Especially on foreign affairs? I've spent a lot of time in the States - it's frustratingly hard to get a clear view of what's happening in the world from the main networks. My American friends say the same.

How come citizens of countries where there is censorship or state control of news invariably turn first to the BBC? - the only rival for this is Al Jezeera. Which I imagine really would worry you.

What do you think of a state of affairs where Fox News dominates (oh - maybe you think that is umbiased?!) - or the hate-filled world of Rush Limbaugh et al?

Incidentally there's is a really good laugh in one of the blogs above, claiming to turn to Channel 4 news as a refuge from the Marxist coverage of the BBC - now Channel 4 news, with good old liberal Jon Snow, really does come as close as anything in British broadcasting to displaying any form of bias.

Emmet Sweeney

A campaign exists to refuse to pay the BBC license. Please join. They can't jail us all.

Byron in Wahroonga

How utterly horrible. whether to listen to the BBC's terrorist apologia would be bad enough, but having to pay for it regardless is a new level of Hell. If they hadn't hung Lord Haw-Haw he'd be welcome at the BBC now.

Roland

And finally ... the posts above about the Jewishness/otherwise of BBC management? The unsavoury spectre of the old conspiracy theory?

Byron in Wahroonga

***the unrepresentative Brits here queuing up to try to convince American readers of the awfulness of British life is frankly rather nauseating***

He he he. I'll tell you what's nauseating, Roland- your overweening pomposity. Why should Brits be forced to pay be forced to pay for a broadcaster which constantly attacks their culture, history, and values? You're a prime example of the attitudes that have brought Britain so low.

Byron in Wahroonga

***the unsavoury spectre of the old conspiracy theory?***

Nice smear.

If you're not already employed at the BBC, you should be.

JohnW

No, Roland - what's truly nauseating is the BBC's unremitting left wing bias and Guardianistic hubris. A mirror of the Labour Govt, which it serves as the broadcasting arm.

Any idea when the Balen Report will see the light of day?

Byron in Wahroonga

***how come citizens of countries where there is censorship or state control of news invariably turn first to the BBC?***

To keep up with what the enemy's thinking? Just like in the Soviet Union of the 1970s, careful listeners can learn much from State-sponsored propaganda. When I listen to BBC broadcasts I feel a common bond with refuseniks, who once studied Krokodil or Pravda to learn which policies were in or out of favour.

Just by the way Roland, you have a vastly over-inflated idea of the BBC's international influence. Here in Sydney segments are broadcast on the obscure AM 630 frequency only- which gives equal or greater time to Radio Deutsche Bella. Unlike Rush Limbaugh- the world's most popular radio broadcaster- people listen to the BBC only where choices are limited.

G Miller

Aha! My comment about Jews at the BBC pricked a few comments.

Perhaps the senior BBC managers (like Yentob and Abramski) are Jew-ish, i.e. not jewish enough !

Joking aside, and the point I was working towards, why is it that Jewish people at the BBC allow/tolerate/propagate anti-semitic bias?

Is it the same bizarre mindset that British Liberals have with their anti-British/English behavior at the BBC?

What happened to a whole generation of people in the 60's,70's and 80's that has made them so hateful towards their own people and such fervent supporters of Islamofascism, Marxism and multiculturalism?

phil

Roland I,m sure you can find someone to tell you that you are the only one in the parade marching in step -the vast majority of people watching BBC news are well aware of its bias and the fact that a well hidden account of the funeral in Israel does not negate its overall display of anti Israeli rhetoric I watched a lot of those hours of Mumbai and was shocked at how little was mentioned on the BBC of the terror at Chabad house ,unlike Sky news -just watch Bowen (I would rather not) ,one lady reporter even had to be removed to another area so bad was her reportage.

I like the other programmes but we are talking about news here not animals and plays -Do you watch newsnight? ,you might get the flavour there when the middle east crops up . One cannot expect all news to favour one,s own preference and I certainly do not but one can expect fairness rather than the inate bias of our foreign office whose history you must be aware of .

I am writing as Brit who loves his country and just wishes his broadcaster would reflect the true views of its citizens .

Roland

Ah yes, Australia - the land which brought us Rupert Murdoch, Neighbours and Skippy the Bush Kangaroo.

But this is getting off topic. My original point is that the posts here are wildly unrepresentative of the mass of British public opinion about the Beeb. Despite a ceaseless campaign of disinformation and whipped-up anti-Beeb hysteria by its commercial rivals (including of course the said Rupert, and the owners of Mel's very own Daily Mail) - and despite disenchantment with some of the output - the majority of those of us who actually live here are by and large proud of what we have - and would fight to keep it.

phil

Roland an extract from a post I made on "barbarism thread" did you see any of this mentioned on the BBC ?

Do any of you know that the Rabbi murdered along with his family was a member of the Lubavicher movement which is the most kind and charitable of the orthodox branch of Judaism ?.in fact the beasts that killed him had been his guests at the sanctuary in Mumbai scouting how best to do it ,whilst eating his food and sleeping in his rooms -

I will echo Melanies words-"May their memory be for a blessing." and may the souls of all those of any religion who lost their lives at the hands of the beasts rest in peace

Roland

Hi Phil - thanks for a measured response.

I'm not the cardboard cut-out lefty you may think - as I hinted earlier, for me some of the Channel 4 News coverage - including the areas we're talking about here - sails close to bias. I'm generally sympathetic towards Israel, and argue with left-wing friends of mine who do hold more stereotypical views. It just is crazy, however, to accuse the Beeb of bias in the way that the exremist minority have done here. What they are complaining about, in my opinion, is the fact that the BBC isn't pumping out their hate-filled and lop-sided view of the world.
Anyone who watches Newsnight would be hard-pressed indeed to describe Paxman as a New Labour patsy.

Conservative Cabbie

Roland

Yes, I had to take a second look when that person announced they sought refuge in Channel 4 news.

Interesting that you have singled out Fox and Rush Limbaugh as evidence of right wing bias. And of course they are, so what? As private enterprises, they're perfectly entitled. Why no mention of all the vehicles of left wing bias in the US like virtually all the major TV networks and all the major newspapers? It's typical liberal leftist propoganda, anyone supporting the right is biased, anyone supporting the left is balanced and fair. Bias is fine when it's in the private sector, the problem here is that the BBC is funded by the taxpayer, bias should not be a feature of their editorial output, surely you can see that.

David Gibson

The bbc are rebranding their annual charity event, it will be called 'Children in need-of brainwashiing'

Conservative Cabbie

Roland

"Anyone who watches Newsnight would be hard-pressed indeed to describe Paxman as a New Labour patsy"

I think you miss the point. Most of us aren't suggesting necessarily that the BBC support the labour party, it's more about their support for liberal and leftist values independent of party political identity. It'a about liberal indoctrination. There are plenty of people who watch BBC news believing it provides a balanced view of the world, those people are being indoctrinated to support particular values, that is what I, and I think many of my fellow contributors are concerned about. It's not because we are "hate-filled", what a typically leftist and stupid thing to say, it's because we want fairness, something the BBC doesn't provide.

Emmet

Roland, if you can't see the bias in calling terrorists "militants" (the same word used for animal rights activists) and for repeatedly highlighting Israel's response to the actions of these militants as aggression, then you obviously share the bias yourself. It's leftists like yourself who are filled with hate-filled venom, not those who oppose the BBC.

Wilhelm

Why does newsnight reader, 55 year old screeeeeaming harpy, mutton dressed as lamb Kirsty Squawk speak like that ? across between Lloyd Grossman and Malcolm Rifkind were she puts the emphasis on all the wrong words.

Kirsty Squawk wants soooo deperately to be taken seriously as a proper journalist, but she will never be because she dresses like a
teenager. Some people would say a tart, but I would never say that because Im a gentleman.

Remember when she wore a short mini skirt on
Late night review at the Cannes film festival. Awful.

Wilhelm

Remember BBCs Question Time the week after 9/11. The multicultural diverse ethnic audience and panel shouted down the American Ambassador, he was close to tears.

The audience and panel were actually blaming America for it and deserved it

Roland

Conservative Cabbie - I guess we'll get nowhere with this - any left-of-centre blog will be just as full of complaints that the BBC represents a conservative (small c), capitalist or establishment view of the world, and that it excludes more radical or minority voices(maybe proof the Beeb is getting it just about right?).

My gut feeling is that what you call 'liberal' is pretty much where most people - excepting the extremes on the far left and (much represented here) far right. This may not be happy news for many here, but it's a fact. Most people, in the UK at least, are fairly tolerant, easy-going and do not crave conflict. The problem arises with those voices on the extremes, or margins. How, and when, should they be represented? It comes up most often with the case of the BNP, and perhaps also with extreme Islamist advocates.The consensus of the broad majority is more-or-less represented; what space is there for a various minoritioes outside this consensus. Here too the BBC could argue that it makes attempts to find a space,proportionate to the minority status of the viewpoint in order to fulfill its public remit.

Right - got to work now.

Wilhelm

In the BBC's world

West = Bad
Christianity = Bad
America = Evil
Israel = Bad

Islamofacism = Good
Multiculturalism = Good
Illegal immigration = Good
Communism = Good

Michael Grayeff

Wakey, wakey, Melanie. The BBC doesn't consider Jewish lives as worthy of attention in the sense of "human interest" and "victims of violence" which is the mainstay of its news coverage. In their outlook, Jews are "Jews" rather than human beings. If Jews are attacked, it rates at most a passing mention but only in the context of it "Being a threat to the peace process". It's a form of anti-semitism (or "Jew hating" as a friend of mine prefers to call it) but I doubt whether there's anything much anyone can do to alter the institutionalised left-wing liberal culture which prevails at the Beeb.

Adam B.

Roland, how do you know they're unrepresentative comments? Have you taken a poll? Are you seriously saying that the BBC does not mock Americans, and generally takes an anti-US line? As an American who lives in the UK, I've lost count of the number of times i have felt deeply upset and uncomfortable with jokes about Americans and Israelis. And the BBC sits in judgement of itself, not answereable to anyone but itself. How Kafkaesque is that? And as for the good programmes you list, how about the dreck of tittytittybangbang, 2 pints of lager and a packet of crisps, fame academy, all of BBC 3's output, Jonathan Ross, the obscene Graham Norton - if you like it, you pay for it. Just don't be so generous with my money. Essentially, you don't believe in people having a choice. I hate the BBC, it represents a whole host of political agendas I despise and think are damaging. Why am I forced to be a customer?

Adam B.

Roland, everyone at the BBC feels sorry for a dead Jew. It's just living ones they have a problem with.

Wilhelm

Adam B

You forgot to mention Noel Edmonds House Party with the gunge tank, Mr Blobby and the childish garbage Doctor Who, plus they think swearing is clever, if I wanted to hear swearing I'd join the navy.

The BBC get £3 Billion from the BBC tax.

An American

Geoff M,
I've always been perplexed about why American Jews vote predominately liberal/Democratic. I have never understood why they vote that way since it is Republicans/conservatives that are the stonger supporters of Israel.
It would be interesting to hear from an American Jew's viewpoint on this.

An American

Roland,
I listen to Limbaugh and he is never hateful. He uses humor as his weapons and it works. He's entertaining and informative. I don't agree with everything the man says but he is a true Constitution loving Conservative, unlike our leaders in the Congress...Reid and Pelosi who spew hatred everytime they get up to the mike.
Reid recently said that he and his fellow Congressmen would no longer have to put up with the smells coming from the visitors to our Capitol.
US citizens and visitors are no longer welcome in the halls of the Capitol. They will only be able to visit the Capitol Visitors Center in the basement.
If you have a chance...read the bloggers on Reid's statement on Drudge...they are hilarious.

Limbaugh has been out sick since Reid's latest dumb statement. I can't wait to hear him on this subject...I'm sure I'll be laughing a good long time.

Dixon

Roland
December 3rd, 2008 10:52am
And finally ... the posts above about the Jewishness/otherwise of BBC management? The unsavoury spectre of the old conspiracy theory"

Such is Rolands level of comprehension of debate that he thinks the old conspiracy theory was popped by those of us attacking the bbc! Read back, Roland, youll see it was brought up as an exculpation of the bbc, not a criticism. Then it was bbc critics who pointed out the absurdity of the comment.

But you see, thats how it is people like Roland approve of the bbc, they dont understand anything about anything anytime, anyhow! They are spoon fed bbc rubbish likelittle babies that, intellectually, they are.

Rolands example of the "brilliant" David Attenborough. That man has for years been using the word "designed" to describe evolved characteristics. Then hes surprised when people start to believe in "intelligent design". Atthbro wasted 40 years of broadcasting in his abject inability to convey even the most rudimentary fact that evolution is not an elective process. Creatures dont evolve from flippers to feet "because there was more food on land" to choose one of his golden howlers. Attenbro is little short of an absolute idiot!

Next, Roland will be saying I have attacked evolution. Such is his inability to followan argument.

Abu Nudnik

HarleyDavidson makes an amusing error when he says:
"Therefore, as a North American watching from afar the pro Palestinian anti Israel and at times downright antisemitism broadcast throughout the world from the BBC could only happen with the will of the British people and of the British Government itself."
Americans assume people get what they want. But American democracy is such that the people get what they want. European "democracy" is such that the people get what the "enlightened people" want them to have. They're still stuck on governments and their subjects while the American idea was expressed pithily by RR: "People have governments, governments don't have people."

phil

sent this earlier today ,think it got lost but seems now in accord with other views

Roland off subject maybe :) but I see Paxman as one who is more interested in what he has to say than those he is interviewing-continual rude and aggressive interuptions and a desire for sensationalism to gain ratings -perhaps he is more balanced than kirsty wark as he seems to want to fight with all sides at once -All I want is to get at the truth and sometimes its very hard to find on that programme which is the flagship for the BBC

Abu Nudnik

Two posts by Roland point out his far left leanings:

...any left-of-centre blog will be just as full of complaints that the BBC represents a conservative (small c), capitalist or establishment view of the world...

Despite a ceaseless campaign of disinformation and whipped-up anti-Beeb hysteria by its commercial rivals...

Jerry

Roland, Hitler loved his dog and Eva Braun. He smiled frequently and not everything that came out of his mouth had to do with the Final Solution. The BBC has many aspects that have nothing to do with prejudicial behavior, but it does not excuse its clear prejudices in any manner. Attempts to move the discussion away from its Jew-hating is a terrible method of forming argument that reminds me of the limitations of human thinking and cognitive ability. Don't fall for your own summary of reality.

Dixon

Wilhelm
December 3rd, 2008 1:25pm
Why does newsnight reader, 55 year old screeeeeaming harpy, mutton dressed as lamb Kirsty Squawk speak like that ? across between Lloyd Grossman and Malcolm Rifkind were she puts the emphasis on all the wrong words.
Kirsty Squawk wants soooo deperately to be taken seriously as a proper journalist, but she will never be because she dresses like a
teenager. Some people would say a tart, but I would never say that because Im a gentleman.
Remember when she wore a short mini skirt on
Late night review at the Cannes film festival. Awful."

Im more bothered by the fact she speaks like a Dalek! Can anyone actually understand what shes saying?

phil

for those interested

The Chief Rabbi will lead the Anglo-Jewish community in mourning for the victims of the Mumbai massacres tonight. As head of the United Synagogue, Sir Jonathan Sacks will join leaders of Chabad, communal leaders and representatives of the Israeli embassy in London at what is expected to be a packed service at Mill Hill Synagogue in north-west London.

Representatives of the local Indian community have been invited to the service, in which speakers will issue a defiant message against terrorism and offer words of comfort to the families of the bereaved

Maven

A report by the BBC today about Hebron leads with "Jewish Settlers" and a suitably presented photo of "A Jew" http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/7762469.stm. Yet the BBC won't use "Islamic Terrorist".

Ramkumari Ramsundar

readers and bloggers should note that the gunmen had mowed down scores of Indian citizens going about their daily businesses at the Chatrapati Shivaji Terminus. this very important aspect has been smoothed over in favour of the reporting of the number of foreigners murdeed by the Islamic Terrorists.

does this mean that Indian ( non-white blood) is of lesser importqance than European blood? Scores of Indian families are left without a mother, father or, more importantly a SOLE breadwinner. What suffering these families face in a SECULAR MINORITY APPEASING and COWARDLY INDIA!

Additionally the BBC have omitted to report that our own MEP for NORTHWEST ENGLAND was spared by the Islamic terrorists at the point he came face to face with them. How was that possible?

We have been told that the Islamic terrorists spared the lives of those whom they identified as Muslims .

phil

Ramkumari Ramsundar-----you are understandably highly emotional on this subject but please do not assume that many of us here do not care for the Indians massacred

-Just read the barbarism thread ,I and others have written our thoughts and prayers and you would be wrong to assume that you are less important because of your colour or race .

I will echo Melanies words-"May their memory be for a blessing." and may the souls of all those of any religion who lost their lives at the hands of the beasts rest in peace

Conservative Cabbie

Phil

On your Paxman comment.

I watch Fox regularly (i'm sure Roland isn't suprised). They're two serious politico's Brit Hume and Chris Wallace are so much better than Paxman. When they conduct an interview, they actually listen to what the interviewee has to say and don't interrupt, unlike Paxman. Paxman is all about ego (his own naturally), he should watch Wallace and Hume to see how real interviewing should be done.

Fox obviously leans to the right on most of it's content, but it's serious political reporting is right out of the top draw. It's panel of experts are superb, especially Mara Liasson and Juan Williams, as good as, if not better than anything in the UK.

Conservative Cabbie

Roland

You started something there!

I would find it unlikely that anyone could think the BBC is conservative with a small 'c', small government is definitely not a position advocated by the Beeb.

Yes, the majority of people in the UK are easy-going and tolerant, I would take issue with you that that means they are liberal. I'm easy going and tolerant too (although I dislike the word tolerant) but I would definitely not agree that I am liberal.

You're arguement about the BBC representing the majority view is well put and interesting. I would suggest though that this is a case of the tail wagging the dog. Is the BBC representative of the majority view or is the majority view shaped by the BBC? I would suggest the latter.

An American

Dear Ramkumari Ramsundar,
Please accept my condolences on the loss of the lives of your countrymen and women. I agree with you that somehow Indian deaths have been diminished by the American and UK media. That is what we are all complaining about...the liberal and misleading medias.
We all grieve the world over for the innocent lives that continue to be murdered in cold blood by these Islamic thugs.
We'll all need to pull together to defeat this growing Islamic threat.

Andy M

Melanie, here's a constructive suggestion. If you consider the BBC to be an inherently antisemitic organisation, why don't you stop working for them? Take a principled stand. Your American readers will love you for it, and your British constituency will no doubt march on Broadcasting House demanding that you be made DG.

Or are you just a hypocrite?

Byron in Wahroonga

***the land which brought us Rupert Murdoch, Neighbours and Skippy the Bush Kangaroo***

That's right, Roland.

You really resent success, don't you?

Roland

Thanks for a good belly laugh laugh Brian in Wahroonga!You warm up a frosty night over here in the UK.Goodnight all

Dixon

Andy M
December 3rd, 2008 9:46pm
Melanie, here's a constructive suggestion. If you consider the BBC to be an inherently antisemitic organisation, why don't you stop working for them? Take a principled stand. Your American readers will love you for it, and your British constituency will no doubt march on Broadcasting House demanding that you be made DG.
Or are you just a hypocrite?"

Thats like daying, if you are in a police force that is corrupt and you dont like it, leave the police force! How does that make a helpful difference?

Dixon

G Miller
December 3rd, 2008 11:40am
Aha! My comment about Jews at the BBC pricked a few comments.
Perhaps the senior BBC managers (like Yentob and Abramski) are Jew-ish, i.e. not jewish enough !
Joking aside, and the point I was working towards, why is it that Jewish people at the BBC allow/tolerate/propagate anti-semitic bias?
Is it the same bizarre mindset that British Liberals have with their anti-British/English behavior at the BBC?
What happened to a whole generation of people in the 60's,70's and 80's that has made them so hateful towards their own people and such fervent supporters of Islamofascism, Marxism and multiculturalism?"

The hatred of all things modern ( "Western" ) shared by the left and environmentalists is rooted in their rejection of "patriarchy". Although dressed up in all manner of Marxist gobbledygook and sub Freudian psycho-babble, simply put this is subconsciously a hatred of anything representing ones father or parental authority. When they use the term "patriarchy" their ideologues come stunningly close to a direct expression of this unconscious urge. Hence their visceral identification with the biggest enemies of "The Man", such as Islamism.

The campaign for an academic boycott of Israel was lead by Stwven Rose, himself Jewish. A neuro-scientist whose work I have necessarily cited in my own, but all the same someone who, in spite of his intelligence exhibits exactly this "knee jerk" principle of unconsciouslyopposing ones fathers.

This is the missing piece that ties various otherwise puzzling mutuality of left and Islamism together in common cause.

john doe

Dixon: Spot on. However, you can't get more patriarchal than Islam, which is the opposite....a total identification with the 'father' ie Allah, Mohammed,and one's actual biological father. So it's ironic that someone would reject and despise male authority in their own culture and then ally themselves with another more virulently patriarchal system. It speaks of enormous confusion, cognitive dissonance and double think.

David

Tsk Tsk how dare you print such an article. How could anybody even contemplate the thought that the BBC is anti semetic. What next perhaps you may suggest the BBC is pro MUslim or even that they have a bias towards women and Ethnic minorities.
OF course we all know the BBC is totally neutral in all matters... Except perhaps those concerning white British people... especially those of the male gender.

tony

I can confirm that the BBC is totally left-wing and anti-Israel.
One of their most rabid anti-Israel reporters was Lyse Doucet. My jaw used to drop when I listened to the things she had to say.
Then, she witnessed a bomb go off in a bus in Tel Aviv and saw the victims of her 'Palestinian Pals' right in front of her eyes. She saw dead bodies, limbs and people shrieking in terror.
This caused a paradigm shift in her consciousness and lo and behold, as her attitude swung in favour of Israel, she was dropped from the list of reporters who hang around the middle-east.
Thanks to the British Bullshitting Corporation!!

phil

tony did you try orla guerin ,now that was a real beauty .At times I felt her eyes might pop out of her head and land on her nose which was 3 feet long -its ok Pete if you dont print this :)

tony

Phil...yes...Orla is one of my 'pet hates' too! I love your description of her! They are so ensonced in their own hatred and partisan views that they make totally suitable BBC reporters.

Joshua

The BBC, as a matter of deliberate policy, also remained totally silent during the Holocaust.

stanley Jerusalem

Dixon
December 4th, 2008 12:29am

G Miller
December 3rd, 2008 11:40am
Aha! My comment about Jews at the BBC pricked a few comments.
Perhaps the senior BBC managers (like Yentob and Abramski) are Jew-ish, i.e. not jewish enough !
Joking aside, and the point I was working towards, why is it that Jewish people at the BBC allow/tolerate/propagate anti-semitic bias?
Is it the same bizarre mindset that British Liberals have with their anti-British/English behavior at the BBC?

The Chief Rabbi of the British Commonwealth Rabbi Professor Sir Jonathan Sacks gave a lecture some 10 or so years ago in which he examined the phenomenon of the self-loathing Jew. One who has been brought up and educated in British society and has incrementally denied and ultimately attacked their own Jewish [and invariably irreligious] roots, in a somewhat similar manner to the vast number of German and central European Jews of the last century who, having embraced the emancipation and enlightenment of the post-Napoleonic era eschewed orthodox religion, found themselves confronted with vicious anti-semitism, ingrained into their mainly Catholic neighbours and friends without any recourse to intellectual or other defence.
They needed, like the BBC Jewish management, to be more British than the British, even when it required selling their own down the river - and all in the cause of what they hoped was acceptance.Appeals to them evoked "I have a Jewish heart" and suchlike responses. Well I've got a jewish tuchas!

stanley Jerusalem

Joshua - as accurate as your statement may be, it is taken out of a contemporary context in which demoralisin news in wartime about which listeners can do nothing is liable to be witheld for reasons of public morale. Also, it is a well-known fact that the chattering classes of wartime and prewartime England were
" no more anti-semitic than absolutely necessary"

Adam B.

Orla Guerin reminded me of the grim reaper. And her anti-Israel agenda, come what may, was always transparent. She had artistry in the way she could turn a suicide bombing which targeted innocent Israelis into a rant against the victims.

stanley Jerusalem

Adam B. Are you actually expressing admiration for Guerin's manipulation of her audience and the truth? I suppose Pierrepoint had his admirers too and he was doing his duty.

stanley Jerusalem

not to mention Max Mosley's dad whom we housed and fed, free of charge for the entire war.

Pete Hoskin

stanley Jerusalem: received the message you sent to me. Apologies for any delay in replying - I'm on a day off today.

Have tracked down the comment you refer to in our system, and have now approved it. Don't know why it didn't get through in the first place, but it should be showing above shortly.

Roland

I found this post by Joshua on Stephen Pollard's blog. What evidence does he have for this crazed and offensive allegation?

''Through its deliberate silence the BBC collaborated in the genocide of the Jews in Europe during World War II.

In case you missed that: the BBC in its own way was as guilty of the murder of 1.5 million Jewish children as the Einsatzgruppen, Mengele, Heydrich, Himmler or Hitler.

Today, the BBC is even more deeply involved in assisting the Islamofascists complete what Germans and Austrians started.

It truly is an evil organisation.''

Stated by: Joshua on August 11, 2006 6:48 PM

Joshua

Stanley Jerusalem, you are wrong on all counts.

The word "demoralising" suggests that they were concerned about the fate of the Jews in Europe. This was not so. As Foreign Office officials put it, "Jewish sources are always doubtful," and "The Jews tend to exaggerate German atrocities." the BBC took the same line. May E Jenkin, Children's Hour assistant director, stated: "If you give Jewish broadcasters an inch, they come clamouring for a mile." If they were concerned at all, it was about Arab sensibilites and the fear that they would be perceived to toeing a pro-Jewish line. Even towards the end of the war, when Nicholas Winterton reported from Majdanek with "the most horrible story I will ever have to tell you" the BBC was loathe to publicise the Holocaust. Winterton said the following about this: "I was given a kind of reprimand. They told me they didn't want this atrocity stuff. They seemed to think it was Russian propaganda." Months went by before the broadcast eventually went out. Later, when Dimbelby covered Belsen, he had to threaten to resign before the BBC would broadcast his piece.

Anti-Semitism in Britain both before and during the war was rampant. The results of an early opinion poll (Mass-Observation) on anti-Semitism taken on the eve of war by the British government was so shocking that the results had to be suppressed. During the war, anti-Semitism actually rose in Britain. As regards that last, at least as regards an excellent subjective account, I would direct you to Orwell's famous piece.

Joshua

A further comment about Britain's lack of concern about the Holocaust. From an article about the Holocaust at the PBS website:

"Four months after the State Department confirmed the dimensions of the Holocaust, British Foreign Secretary Anthony Eden met in Washington with President Roosevelt, Secretary of State Cordell Hull and Undersecretary of State Sumner Welles. At this meeting, Eden expressed his fear that Hitler might actually accept an offer from the Allies to move Jews out of areas under German control. No one present objected to Eden's statement."

Adam B.

No stanley, I'm saying that she would go out of her way to distort events. There's nothing to admire about that.

Dixon

Going on about, Lyse Douchette, Orla Geurein, Bartbara Plett...et al, dont you notice how they all uniformly speak in that strange artificial BBC foreign correspondents accent...slightly American, slightly Irish, slightly Jamaican, like no actual accent anyone speaks outside the BBC.

It reminds me how feminists used to always speak in an affected manner resembling someone who is deaf. Long drawn out endings down the nose. An example was Beatrix Campbell. She was on Newsnight las noght. She speaks normally now. The fashion has passed.

Small self-conconsciously distinct tribes have these affectations as a signifier. A current one os the Pashmina scarf. And, as I say, that strange accent that BBC foreign correspondents strive to speak in.

Its all very irritating.

johndoe

Jeff Jacoby on UN antisemitism:

http://www.jewishworldreview.com/jeff/jacoby120508.php3

Joshua

Stanley Jerusalem,

The word "demoralising" suggests they were concerned about the fate of the Jews in Europe. This was not so. As Foreign Office officials put it, "Jewish sources are always doubtful," and "The Jews tend to exaggerate German atrocities." the BBC took the same line. May E Jenkin, Children's Hour assistant director, stated: "If you give Jewish broadcasters an inch, they come clamouring for a mile." If they were concerned at all, it was about Arab sensibilites and the fear that they would be perceived to toeing a pro-Jewish line. Even towards the end of the war, when Nicholas Winterton reported from Majdanek with "the most horrible story I will ever have to tell you" the BBC was loathe to publicise the Holocaust. Winterton said the following about this: "I was given a kind of reprimand. They told me they didn't want this atrocity stuff. They seemed to think it was Russian propaganda." Months went by before the broadcast eventually went out. Later, when Dimbelby covered Belsen, he had to threaten to resign before the BBC would broadcast his piece.

Anti-Semitism in Britain both before and during the war was rampant. The results of an early opinion poll (Mass-Observation) on anti-Semitism taken on the eve of war by the British government was so shocking that the results had to be suppressed. During the war, anti-Semitism actually rose in Britain. As regards that last, at least as regards an excellent subjective account, I would direct you to Orwell's famous piece.

Joshua

"What evidence does he have for this crazed and offensive allegation?"

The deliberate silence of the most influential broadcaster in the world had to important effects:

1) The Nazi perpetrators and the millions of collaborators could go about their business of mass-murder in the belief that their secrets were safe.

2) The victims, many of whom were still unaware of their eventual fate, were not warned and could not take appropriate precautions.

Roland

British unwillingness variously to believe, take seriously or act on reports of the Holocaust are indeed both well-documented and deeply shameful. They may have sprung from a range of motivations, including the prevailing anti-semitism cited, and perhaps an instinct to deny evidence of the horror being perpetrated. From that to a moral equation beween the BBC and the perpetrators of the genocide is a step too far.

phil

Roland et al I think this subject is getting out of control and is best left alone by people who are basically in agreement .

If you really want to know about the disgraceful behaviour of some during the war and after ,just study ernest bevin,s record,and I type his name without capitals on purpose . If there is an after life I hope he is finding ways to explain what he did .

Herbert Thornton

Phil,

The subject really is getting out of control. This an especially sensitive topic for me because of what one of my own cousins, then a soldier in the British Army, experienced in 1946. He was in a bar - in Tel Aviv I think - where Irgun or similar group detonated a bomb. Fortunately he left the bar a few minutes before the bomb exploded. So your expressing antipathy to Ernest Bevin, whom Irgun, led by Menachem Begin plotted in 1946 to assassinate, is rather like throwing petrol on a fire.

Would it not be better for us all to concentrate on the present rather than on old grudges?

Adam B.

Herbert, Bevin was an anti-Semitic thug, ("Jews are pushing their way to the front of the queue" and other such sensitive remarks, sending survivors of the death camps to Germany of all places quite deliberately just months after 6 million of them had been murdered, and speaking with anti-semitic epithets in private meetings, as reported by Jewish representatives who had the misfortune to meet with him). Sorry you feel the need to defend him.

phil

Herbert I am sorry about your cousin and I am glad he wasn't hurt-Irgun did not represent the majority view ,and were outlawed by the state ,but they consisted of people who were inflamed at a time when the survivors of the Holocaust were being treated wickedly by by what passed for a human being -the said E bevin-I do not condone terrorism in any form even against a man I would refer to as subhuman .and certainly not against my nations soldiers .

We were discussing here the BBC and it was getting out of hand, but no apologies from me for my feelings about bevin .one of the most disgusting people ever to have shamed our nation ,

Herbert Thornton

Adam & Phil -

For reasons that have nothing whatsoever to do with his policies and opinions about Jewish refugees, Ernest Bevin is still greatly respected by many of our countrymen.

The BBC is indeed utterly disgusting, but that is not Bevin's doing.

I'm sorry to see that you still haven't taken my point. We should be standing together against the rottenness that now permeates the BBC instead of being at each others' throats over the reputation of a man who died more than half a century ago.

phil

Herbert I am not at your throat -I am just glad to have had the opportunity to write about a man that so many found truly despicable .You would find many who would spit on an image of a man who sent so may others to their graves by his lack of compassion for the victims of hitler -I really have no more to say about this abomination -just read history -we have .

Adam B.

Herbert, you're right, we should stick together, and we do. However, I'm not going to revise my opinion about Bevin. He was a nasty piece of work. But I agree the BBC's stance is a present danger, and we need to tackle that instead of going over the past, which won't change our current predicament.

Herbert Thornton

People are entitled to think whatever they like about Bevin as Britain's Foreign Secretary.

But as Minister of Labour during World War 2 he was the director of Britain's wartime domestic economy. As such, he exercised complete control over the labour force and the allocation of manpower. His role in defending us all against Hitler's Nazis was so vital that without him we might have lost the war.

Many of those who now criticise so bitterly should at least allow that they might not be alive today were it not for him.

Let the dead lie in peace, & as Adam says, let us join together to fight today's enemies.

phil

Sorry Herbert there are too many who are not lying in peace because of this mans actions -I dont have an ounce of gratitude for what he did .he didnt do it for me or any of the relatives that I lost .nor those survivors that he sent back to hell .No sir I hope he is answering even now for what he did .Your cousin thankfully survived .mine did not .

Herbert Thornton

Phil,

Obviously I am thankful that my cousin survived, but in fighting Hitler, several of my friends and relatives died. So please don't try to minimise my losses compared to yours.

If Hitler had won the war, not just those be both now mourn, but many many more would have perished - including, very likely both you and me.

Bevin was a very great man and we both have reason to at least acknowledge what he did for us.

Herbert Thornton

"those be both now mourn" should have read "those we both now mourn"

phil

Herbert enough now if you want to think what bevin did was right .so be it -he will still go down in the role of infamy for many more people than you -lets leave it at that please