...on the terrorist attacks in London. After all, just a few months ago, they ran a three part series entitled 'The Power of Nightmares'; which, according to the BBC website...
... explores how the idea that we are threatened by a hidden and organised terrorist network is an illusion.
It is a myth that has spread unquestioned through politics, the security services and the international media.
At the heart of the story are two groups: the American neo-conservatives and the radical Islamists.
Both were idealists who were born out of the failure of the liberal dream to build a better world.
These two groups have changed the world but not in the way either intended.
Those with the darkest fears became the most powerful... Together they created today's nightmare vision of an organised terror network.
A fantasy that politicians then found restored their power and authority in a disillusioned age. Those with the darkest fears became the most powerful.
Note the revolting equalization of the "neo-cons" and the terrorists; but most importantly, this three part series that ran in January proposed radical Islamic terrorism was no more than a myth to support the rise of the Republican Party....revolting at the time, virtually criminal now.
Guess they were wrong...but how much did the British lower their guards due to this piece of liberal propoganda? Had they run a series on vigilance, may some of the attacks have been stopped? How many lives has this report cost? Will the BBC look inward, and reconsider its position?
As Spongebob's boss Mr. Krabs would say, "When Scallops fly out 'o me Pants!!"
Biased BBC comments:
....Though no time to draw political blood when too much of the real stuff has been tragically split in our capital, Marc, at USS Neverdock, makes a legitimate point on behalf of all those people who might have lowered their guard as a result of the undermining of the notion of a War on Terror by some BBC journalism. 'The Power of Nightmares' assured us there was no real organised Islamic movement bent on our destruction, yet the massive organisation behind the London bombings - the syncronisation, the planning - suggest quite the opposite. It suggests the BBC's flagship programme of the last year, its main publicised recent claim to excellence, was in fact highly flawed. And as forewarned is forearmed, the BBC has in this regard, and others less well-known, certainly been unconducive to the public good. '
"The BBC had the courage to put the series out and this shows they were right"', said the maker of the film... as it showed at Cannes.
A bit early with the self congratulations, weren't you?
Link to BBC excerpts here: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/3755686.stm
Biased BBC is here: http://www.biased-bbc.blogspot.com/ (scroll down to July 7th)
What you said -
ReplyDeleteIt is a myth that has spread unquestioned through politics, the security services and the international media.
At the heart of the story are two groups: the American neo-conservatives and the radical Islamists.
Both were idealists who were born out of the failure of the liberal dream to build a better world.
These two groups have changed the world but not in the way either intended.
Those with the darkest fears became the most powerful... Together they created today's nightmare vision of an organised terror network.
A fantasy that politicians then found restored their power and authority in a disillusioned age. Those with the darkest fears became the most powerful.
It is something that you would not understand. It comes from a culture that you can barely comprehend.
You can get a small glimpse from -
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/4679681.stm
"London Mayor Ken Livingstone was with faith leaders and members of the city's Olympic bid team at Trafalgar Square.
Mr Livingstone told the BBC after the silence: "This city has survived the past week because we didn't turn on each other, which is what the bombers wanted. We supported each other."
and -
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/13/international/europe/13leeds.html
"Local people note, for instance that when race riots erupted in 2001 in nearby Bradford, Leeds remained relatively quiet. Even in the more downtrodden neighborhoods where the suspected bombers lived, residents proudly stressed the harmony between various faiths and races.
"It's quiet here," said David Talbot, a convert to Islam and a longtime resident. "We don't have the demonstrations and troubles that other places do. The coexistence with the wider non-Muslim community is usually good in Leeds."
Zahir Birawi, chairman of the Leeds Grand Mosque, said: "We could have never imagined that there are people here who could have been involved in something like this. There is clearly a group willing to ruin the reputation of the community here."
The beginning of your inability to understand (and don't feel that I am picking on you personally because you are far from alone in this) is the idea of "inclusion" rather than "exclusion. The voices you hear in my quotes are talking "inclusion" and "equality"... we are all in this together.
From the Beeb again -
""Both the Muslim and non-Muslim community here will have to deal with issues that we have been sweeping under the carpet," Mr. Talbot [a convert to Islam and a longtime resident] said. "Our crime rate amongst young people is disproportionate, and there's a higher percentage of kids going into prison for drugs. As a community, we're not bringing this up. Religion has nothing to do with it, so the question is, what does?"
Inclusion and equality.
Not suspicion and hatred.