The BBC and its pro-Hezbollah agenda

The foiled bomb plot in England is again bringing into stark relief how the BBC manipulates the news to hide the Islamist component behind all the terror attacks worldwide and to focus blame on Israel. The most recent indictment is a Wall Street Journal commentary from William Shawcross, a British writer. As far as I can tell, it’s in the “pay per view” section of the WSJ, since I didn’t see it in the free Opinion Journal section. If you have access, read it. If you don’t, fair use means I can still share with you Shawcross’ major indictment:

It took President Bush to tell the truth to Britain about the alleged massive plot to blow U.S.-bound airliners out of the sky. In his first comment on the apparently foiled attempt, he put it simply: “This was a stark reminder that this nation is at war with Islamic fascists.”

He is right, but in the first news reports in Britain yesterday, the words “Islamic” or “Muslim” were hardly mentioned, let alone the dread word “fascist.” Instead the common code-words on television were that the 24 men arrested were “British-born” and “of Pakistani origin.” No mention of their Islamist ideology. Does the BBC think they might turn out to be from Pakistan’s embattled Christian minority? I don’t think so.

In Europe, the truth is so terrible that we are in denial. Perhaps it is understandable. We simply do not know how to deal with the fact that we really are threatened by a vast fifth column, that there are thousands of European-born people, in Britain, in France, in Holland, in Denmark — everywhere — who wish to destroy us. You see this denial in the coverage of Israel’s war against Hezbollah. The deaths in Lebanon are utterly tragic. But if you watched only British television, particularly the BBC, you would be hard-pressed to understand that Israel has been forced into a war for its survival. Last weekend people marched in an anti-Israel march though London carrying banners proclaiming “We are all Hezbollah Now.”

Yes, we in England are all one with a terrorist group that has murdered more Americans than any group save Al Qaeda; we are all one with a terrorist group that is dedicated to wiping out a nation and all its citizens; we are all one with an organization that deliberately targets civilians to achieve its religio-political goals; we are all one with a radical Islamist organization that seeks to impose Sharia law on Lebanon, with all that entails — the total isolation and subjugation of women, the marginalization or death of all non-Muslims, and the death penalty for adultery, listening to music, playing sports, eating ice cream, shaving a beard, falling afoul of the local imam, etc.

This kind of perverted thinking, where happy people parade the streets of London, cheerfully and loudly proclaiming their allegiance to mass murders of the worst kind can occur only when you have a dominant, Leftist, state-controlled media that has perverted the discourse, lied about the facts, and hidden all contrary information. Apparently George Orwell was off by 22 years, but otherwise he got it right.

UPDATE: James Lewis writes compellingly about the worldview the BBC trickles through to its captive audience in Great Britain.

UPDATE II:  Just a little editing detail.  I’m pathetically bad at “s” apostrophes.  My brain knows where they go, but my fingers tend to insert them, or ignore them, on an entirely random basis.  I have removed the inapposite apostrophe from the post’s title, but apologize in advance for all the other misplaced apostrophes you have found and will continue to find.

Talking to Technorati: , , , , , ,

Be Sociable, Share!

Comments

  1. jg says

    Bookworm says:
    “where happy people parade the streets of London, cheerfully and loudly proclaiming their allegiance to mass murders of the worst kind.” All of us, I think, cringed when we saw people on English streets celebrating their love of Saddam at the opening of the Iraq conflict. The TV images must lie!
    Surely not Britain!

    Thank you for this fine post about the subject.

    When will the media offer the image of Prince Harry exchanging those stormtrooper/Che G. sweatshirts for the newer one which proclaims, “We are all Hezbollah Now.”

  2. says

    This is the price of socialism. Socialist people I know, support government funded BBC and CBC and ABC stuff. British Broad, Caandian broad, and Australian Broadcasting Corporations.

    It seems to be a …. Britsh offshoot. At least for the former colonies of Canada and Australians. AMerican seem to have gotten somewhere else.

    About the Islamist/islamic fascism thing, check out my post here.

    http://ymarsakar.blogspot.com/2006/08/islamist-or-islamic-fascists.html

    I mostly explained why Islamic Fascism is an adept term, and why the person I disagreed with was wrong in saying that Bush should not have said fascism. The people who dislike the word fascism seems to do it based upon some misguided belief that fascism is a statist central control philosophy where Islamic Jihad is an interantional phenomenon based upon ideology. I draw the equivalent similarities of course.

  3. says

    “In Europe, the truth is so terrible that we are in denial.”

    Exactly so. I am reminded of the Hungarian Jews of the 30′s who just could not bring themselves to face the truth about the rising Nazi Menace, in spite of calls from within the community to do so. The consequences of that denial were horrific. Europe appears doomed to “repeat the mistakes of the past”.

    Will we rescue them once again?

    I think not.

  4. jg says

    Is there a chance (and when, if so) that Britain could become in essence a Islamist republic? Not soon publicly, but behind the scenes, I wonder.

    You will recall the influx of Arab money as early as the 80′s (earlier?) into England. The well known takeover of Harrod’s was a high profile example. HOw deep is the Arab financial investment in the UK infrastructure? What sectors of British life might have Islamic connections and possibly some control. It’s easy to say the media (especially the state media), but it has to be more than that.

    Speculation here, but the pervasive pro terror atmosphere we see in so many parts of English life would seem to have roots beyond just the number of Muslim emigrants who live there.

  5. says

    The British people need the truth. They are operating in a fog of lies and evasions. I am hard pressed to believe that any great number of Britons, from the football yobs at one end of the spectrum along to the regular working folk in the suburbs and the Sloan Rangers and on to the other Beautiful People, will actually buy into burkhas, shari’a, teetotalism, etc. etc. If they learn the truth, they will turn against the Islamist program and reject those who have lied to them.

    The question is, What Will It Take? Will they learn enough from the alternative media to make the switch? Or will it take a lot of blood in the streets, or raining down on their heads? Perhaps some political party, or individual politician or two, will muster the courage to lead the masses toward the light….and avoid the horror of “learning
    by doing”.

    I have a certain amount of faith in the hard-headed rationality of the everyday Brit. If the “metro-sexuals” who are running the country don’t turn it over to the “hard men” of Islam before the truth leaks out, then Britain will survive as a Western civilization – although it may be a bloody struggle.

    Would I bet on the outcome at this point? Not on your life.

  6. says

    A Coalition government between Labor and an Islamic party can net the Islamic party a large portion of the government portfolios, allowing them to slowly change the laws of the country.

    If the British tolerate the government disarming them of their weapons and locking them up for self-defense whiel giving thieves and murderers a tap on the wrist, what else do you think they will tolerate?

    Hard nosed rationality has not given Brits back their guns or their fox hunting. Without those weapons, Islamic intimidation will work, and when intimidation works, Islamic parties are voted into office immediately. You’re looking at guerrila war politics here, a whole order above normal politics.

  7. mamapajamas says

    re: “It took President Bush to tell the truth to Britain about the alleged massive plot to blow U.S.-bound airliners out of the sky. In his first comment on the apparently foiled attempt, he put it simply: “This was a stark reminder that this nation is at war with Islamic fascists.” “

    A leftist I know commented, “Well… he could have been a little more diplomatic about that… how would you like it if we called Hitler a Christian fascist?”

    Diplomatic? PSHEEEEESH! I think not. I told this clown that Hitler was, by all inside accounts, an atheist. Further, he did not commit his crimes in the name of Christ, nor do any criminals I know of who happen to be Christians. If one did, I’d be out at the front of the line with the rope. The fact is that the terrorists ARE committing their crimes in the name of their God, their Prophet, their religion, and their culture. To call them fascists, or terrorists, or anything else without the “Islamic” tacked on is not “diplomatic”, it’s downright dishonest.

  8. Lulu says

    If Israel fought Al-Queda, “we would all be Al Queda now”, if it fought the SS, there would be sympathetic stories about the poor mom of the SS soldier. The world is so morally sick.

  9. jg says

    MPJ: my personal knowledge of German history always needs work, but, as I’ve stated before, I always felt the Nazi Party to be a reversion to the bloody Germanic gods of the pre Christian era. Norse mythology has always been hard for me to read because of its love of blood and death.

    That defines Nazism well.

    Many 20c. secularists in the West have pagan, evil roots.

Leave a Reply