The Irony of the BBC's Cover up' of allegations concerning Jimmy Saville is that the BBC has never failed to point the same finger at Christian Institutions

Janet Street Porter has claimed many at the BBC knew of allegations concerning Jimmy Saville

There is a certain Irony at work in the current appalling saga concerning the late Jimmy Saville. It now appears that the Metropolitan Police are going to investigate the BBC over allegations that they may have permitted (through omission of action) or even covered up the alleged criminality of Jimmy Saville.  As many of you will now know Jimmy Saville has been made the subject of allegations including rape and sexual abuse of young girls.  What is particularly disturbing is that according to some sources these matters were either known about and covered up by the BBC during the 1970's; or at the very least a culture existed at Broadcasting house that made such behaviour permissible.  The veteran broadcaster Janet Street-Porter indeed said as much on the BBC1 programme question time last Thursday night .  You can watch that programme in full on BBC iplayer or just look at the clip I have linked to.  The whole subject is deeply shocking and my thoughts are with the victims.  Jimmy Saville was an iconic figure during the 1980's with his show 'Jim'll Fix it' and whilst these matters are still currently allegations his reputation like that of Paul Gadd is in tatters and deservedly so. Indeed it would appear that both Saville and Gadd may have both abused children at the same time - sickening. There is a link to the media report for that here, the allegations are shocking. 

However there is a certain strong irony concerning this disturbing subject. It would appear that the BBC are now accused of possibly covering up for Saville in his criminality and therefore permitting such behaviour.  Now the BBC have never been shy to dine out on similar allegations concerning for instance the Catholic Church.  Indeed many commentators have accused our state broadcaster of being biased against Christianity.  Indeed the BBC never failed either in it's reportage or in it's dramas to mock and belittle Christianity as well as dining out extensively on the abuse issue.  Yet that is hypocrisy writ large if these current allegations are true, the BBC are rotten. I will say again that my thoughts are with the victims, I just hope that the BBC will now subject itself to the same standard of critical enquiry that it has previously reserved solely for Christians.  This post may be seen as having little to do with libertarianism, but if we can dispense with another morally redundant tax payer funded institution I'm game. 

The BBC has responded to Louise Bagshawe MP over their lack of coverage concerning the murders of the Fogel family

Louise Bagshawe MP has complained and has now got a response.

The BBC's lack of coverage of this massacre (which many of you never heard of) was very typical of the corporation, some murders it seems are more newsworthy than others. This is particularly important when the longstanding bias against Israel and in favour of (or at least whitewashing of) the terrorist groups that face Israel. Time and time again the BBC has been called out for such bias and along with other examples it is highlighted brilliantly by Robin Aitken here.

Anyway this example has led to Louise Bagshawe MP complaining about it and she has at last extracted a response from our state broadcaster here. Well done Louise! But before we go any further it is worth pointing out that the worse part of this whole story was the appalling massacre itself, my sympathies are with the Fogel family whose tragic story has already left the front pages and in the case of the BBC was not mentioned.

Full text below:

MP Bagshawe: Overwhelmed by response

The BBC has admitted that the horrific murders of the Fogel family last month should have been covered on their 24 hour news channel. The massacre, in which a three-month-old baby was decapitated and her siblings' throats were slashed, did not appear anywhere across the BBC's television channels, and was mentioned only briefly on the broadcaster's news website. The BBC gave no mention of Hamas' statement praising the attack or of celebrations about the killings in the West Bank, yet did cover the Israeli government's announcement about settlement construction the following day. The broadcaster's poor coverage was highlighted by Louise Bagshawe, Conservative MP for Corby, who registered her disgust at what she called the BBC's "inexcusable" failure, in the JC as well as on Twitter and in a comment piece for the Daily Telegraph.

Ms. Bagshawe, a member of the Select Committee for Culture, Media and Sport, called on the BBC to admit their "lack of even handedness". She also demanded a list of the other stories which were featured on BBC News 24 on March 11, in preference. Her complaint was passed to the BBC's director of news, Helen Boaden, but it was five days before Ms. Boaden replied. During that time Ms Bagshawe received thousands of messages of support. In her response Ms Boaden said: "I agree with you that the significant nature of this murder of an entire family meant it should have been included on our television news output." However, she denied that the BBC had ignored the story "either because we did not care or because we pursue an anti-Israel agenda". She instead blamed "a remarkably busy weekend" because of the disaster in Japan, events in Libya and the spring meetings of the Liberal Democrats and the SNP which had to be covered "to ensure due political impartiality". "[These] left little room in the main television bulletins for a host of competing stories". Ms. Bagshawe said: "I'm not wholly satisfied with the answer which does not reflect the gravity of the lack of coverage. I would consider the matter finished if the BBC gave an expression of regret because of the hurt they have caused the Jewish community." She added: "I believe that this shows that the BBC will listen and will not merely reflexively defend a clear mistake."

Listen to Jane Garvey (ex BBC) I bet it's not like that today at the BBC!

Don't expect a scene like this at Broadcasting
House this time around!


Listen to Jane Garvey here, she is reminiscing about May 2nd 1997, bet it ain't like that today Labour are finished! Cue a minority Conservative government.





"I do remember... the corridors of Broadcasting House were strewn with empty champagne bottles. I'll always remember that"
Jane Garvey on BBC Five Live, May 10th 2007, recalling May 2nd 1997.

Another Story the BBC Missed, Johnson Beharry VC refused to shake Gordon Brown's hand

I suppose I should not be surprised. That the BBC our state broadcaster, which I am legally obliged to fund has missed this story. Johnson Beharry a VC winner recently snubbed the PM at an official function. Why did the BBC ignore this story? Same reason they ignored this one. The answer lies in BBC bias by omission. Now who would be willing to say that if a US Serviceman who won say a Congressional Medal of Honour, yet went on to snub George Bush jnr that the BBC would ignore that story. Of course not for one thing they would find that a more comfortable subject matter to deal with. That is because that admittedly hypothetical scenario would fit into a anti-Bush/US meme. The BBC does not want to embarrass Gordy our PM.

How the BBC Reports on and Frames the Debate around Islamic Terrorism

Right well I have not blogged on the carnage in Mumbai as the situation is being extensively covered elsewhere. However here are the facts that the MSM including the BBC have not mentioned Re 27 November in Mumbai.

1. A series of attacks aimed completely indiscriminately at Western and Hindu citizens.
2. The targets included hotels, restaurants and a Jewish centre.
3. The perpetrators were Islamic Jihadis, which other group would kill Jews because they are Jews? Or ask people whether they are British or American before killing them and taking them hostage.



Okay so the problem is? Well all Al Beeb will call these people who are Muslims killing in the name of Islam is 'militants'. There is no discussion at all of the ideology (Islam) that motivated them and continues to do so.

That is until today 29th November. In a further example of the BBC's bias 'Any Questions' hosted a discussion where Mumbai was discussed. The panel was as is always the case with Question time composed predominately with people from the left. Indeed Caroline Lucas dribbled during and overwhelmingly (Dimbleby did not contradict her or allow an opposing viewpoint) blamed the situation on Israel and actions taken by the west.
The panel comprised of:

1. Caroline Lucas Green party (hard left).

2. Geoff Hoon Labour party (left).

3. Vince Cable Liberal Democrats (left).

4. David Willetts Conservative (centre-right).

So that is what you pay your licence fee for a panel that is 75% left wing and includes the hard left. Where is the balance and impartiality in that. Why in their reporting of an act of Jihadi terrorism will the BBC not accurately tell people who actually conducted the attack and why?

A Pompous Ass on his travels

Stephen Fry presents his series on America during Sunday evenings on BBC1. I am in spite of Fry's commentary really enjoying watching this on Sunday nights on BBC1. Basically Fry travels America and meets people and goes to interesting places across America. I have one criticism, the supercilious nonsense that Fry continually comes out with. This is in keeping of course with the BBC's and Fry's anti-American prejudices. For instance he makes off hand comments when he meets a group of sophisticated Americans here. He says supposedly to himself 'if only their foreign policy was as sophisticated'. This seemingly innocuous piece of arrogance is off course recorded and broad casted. I do not mind off course except it would be great if someone would mention to Fry 'How is British foreign policy more sophisticated'. Of course the BBC love this sort of cheap politicking.

Later in Montana Fry is eating at a German American diner. His hosts like most Americans are of course friendly and indulge their guest. That does not stop fry making plain stupid comments along the lines of 'Invading Poland' etc. Such comments are of course jocular but where is the fun in such a stupid comment that demeans Fry. Again if this programme was actually meant to inform the viewing public about America it would have been fair to point out the unqualified support German Americans such as these gave in world war one/two to the allied cause. It is a fact of history that the last US soldier killed in 1918 was a German American Private Gunther. As for world war two names such as Eisenhower and Nimitz spring to mind. Of course Fry for ever the conceited buffoon he is never mentions this.

I feel this is a shame as generally people in the UK do not understand America. This series with Fry hosting it in such a stuffy and condescending manner represents a missed opportunity to actually tell a great story.

Taxpayer's money yes your money!Used to fund Pro-IRA film

I suppose green is really a good font for this one. Well a welsh film company has been given a grant of £150K to help produce a film called 'hunger'. This documents the last six weeks of the life of Bobby Sands the IRA hunger striker. Read about it here, the Conservative MP David Davis has criticised this and together with a woman from the film company Laura Hastings -Smith they briefly debate the issue. Needless to say the BBC interviewer harangues Davies constantly but hardly mentions the film's obvious bias at all to Smith. Smith herself answers this question without being prompted to and simply states the film 'highlights fundamental conflicts that cannot resolved through negotiation'. Smith misses the point that reviewers have stated the film is biased in favour of Sands and the IRA. Plus what she says is wrong as the conflict had no end of opportunity to end through dialogue, Northern Ireland was then and still is a democracy with full representation in Parliament. Sands died a failed martyr for a cause that was furthered by murder pure and simple, including deliberate attacks on civilians. Sands himself was a gunman who had targeted police. Still I might watch it when it is released on telly. Now when will taxpayer's money be used to fund drama about the struggle against terrorism hat we faced then and continue albeit in another guise today?