And yet, when I review the coverage of the event on the BBC today, I note that the word “Islam” is missing from the story. These were just “bombings”, apparently. And the reason for this coyness is that the REALITY of Islam in Britain is wildly divergent from the narrative put forward by Al Beeb. If you want an insight into that, why not read Konnie Huq’s drivel here. Financed by the government, (natch) lovely Konnie wants you to know that Muslims are just like us. Well, some are. But then there are some – like those who struck on 7/7 – who are not in any way like us and yet they are protected and given succour from their own community. Maybe there are harder questions that need asked? Rather than going to Bangladesh, perhaps Konnie should try Leeds?
The BBC, just like the government and the rest of the political hard left, are trying to erase the Islamic component to what happened in London those years ago. Reading the Guardian this morning I see a Police Commander – addressing a group of Muslims, naturally – suggests that the main terror threat comes from the “extreme right”. In this way, the focus of the war against militant Islam becomes diffused and we are no longer clear on who the enemy actually is. Like it or not – and the BBC does not – this date marks a fundamental challenge to our way of life by a dark ages pathology and cotton-wool obfuscation from the State Broadcaster is a poor substitute for facing into the issue. In my view.
Some good comments below the beautiful Konnie's article in the Standard, such as:
"Konnie you are hardly an average Bengali woman. Private school, Cambridge educated, and now, living ummarried with your kaafir boyfriend, which would be considered scandalous among some muslims andd warranting severe punishment
Oh and as far as the Iranian jews and Assyrian Christians are concerned – Iranian jews are virtual prisoners in their own land, living in fear of reprisals each time there is a clash with Israel. Meanwhile the Assyurian church in Iraq is expected to become virtually extinct with 10 years as Christians flee to the west to escape persecution.
Mind you, I wouldn't want to be censorious or intolerant of all that vibrant diversity.
– Andrew, Edinburgh, UK"
Make that man an honorary BBBC member!
And when the BBC want to show us what male muslims are really like, they can wheel on the Scud Stud.
indeed Mr Vance. Another word that is missing is the T word and not one mention of a militant.
It would appear that Al Beeb would like us to all think that the terrrorist attacks just happened for no apparent reason and no explanation
its sort of like Herr Goebels definition of the "big lie"
Yes, the BBC's political agenda is to relegate the centrality of ISLAMIC JIHAD from its narrative and from any understanding of the massacre of July 7, 2005 in London.
The BBC is in denial about Islam.
Suggested reading for today (and for every 7/7):
"Strategies of Denial"
by Hugh Fitzgerald (July, 2009):
[Extract]-
"In opinion poll after poll, Muslims in Western Europe show an astonishing willingness to admit to their support for suicide bombing, and for other forms of terrorism, not even in distant lands, but within the very countries they live in, and of course , given the likelihood that many will hide their real feelings, the true numbers would likely reveal still greater Muslim support for violent Jihad. But even those who support Jihad – the 'struggle' to remove all obstacles to the spread, and then the dominance, of Islam – through non-violent means (as: the Money Weapon, campaigns of Da’wa, demographic conquest), are a menace to the wellbeing of Infidels and their institutions. Those who have studied Islam know that Muslims are taught to offer their loyalty, their sole loyalty, only to Islam, as a faith (in Islam, what is worshipped is Islam itself), and to fellow members of the Umma, the Community of Believers. Islam is centered on an inculcuated division of the world between Believer and Unbeliever, Muslim and Infidel, and on the notion that between the two a state of permanent war, if not always of open warfare, must exist between the two. It makes no sense to expect Muslims to ignore this, to somehow push it to one side. Too many people, easygoing or fearful, choose to rely on examples of outward affability, in circumstances that require it – living in an Infidel nation-state where one does not yet have sufficient numbers to show one’s true feelings – instead of on study, not endless but at least detailed enough, and prolonged enough, of Islam – enough, that is, to give the student a grasp of Islam’s texts and tenets, and the effect of Islamic teachings, reinforced in a thousand ways outside of madrasa and mosque, on the minds of its adherents."
(Hugh Fitzgerald's long, excellent essay is available at 'New English Review' – 'Featured Articles'.)
The BBC page devoted to the 52 victims of the 7/7 attacks includes this : "Fifty-two people were killed in the four bombs which exploded in London on 7 July 2005."
"Were killed"? Makes it sound like an accident. THEY WERE MURDERED and if you knew any of the MURDERED you would understand the pain and anger that I and others feel at such a reprehensible comment.
I wonder if the BBC sanitisation of these things is simply a result of being under pressure to promote 'social cohesion' rather than a ong term strategy?
Looks like I've accepted that the BBC is a major part of the overall social engineering of the government. Oh dear, apathy roams the land.
Reporting of facts would be good, for todays reality and for posterity.
The BBC charges licence payers on the basis of independent, impartial, factually reported news.
If, as Liquid P suggests, BBC are 'under pressure', i.e. political resulting in left wing bias and censorship, then licence payers are, in effect, being defrauded.
Left wing dictators and staff obeying orders should be funded by the 'left wing' protagonists – not licence payers, most of whom are also tax payers.
Also what struck me is how Al Beeb went about telling people that not all muslims were terrorists after the bombings…yet remained strangely silent about Jews in this country not being responsible for Hamas's war in Gaza at the start of this year (which lead directly to muslims rioting in Trafalgar Square a number of times.
Mailman
The riots in China kicked off with mobs of Muslim youths going round town attacking, wounding and killing Han Chinese and destroying shops, houses and vehicles.
Then the police and paramilitary cracked down hard.
80% or more of the wounded in hospital are Han Chinese. But the flavour the BBC has been giving is that "militants" – no religion usually named – have been in fights with the authorities, and to the casual listener or viewer it is the militants who have been killed or wounded.
This is a deliberate skewing of the facts.
Oh – it was a bunch of those lovely Al-Qaeda Uighurs that got sent to Bermuda.
http://www.andrewpointon.com/tag/tony-benn
This is the kind of braindead idealist that makes life in this country so difficult!!
Curiously, the Daily Telegraph also doesn't say much about the bombers' motives:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/5765770/Families-remember-July-7-victims-on-fourth-anniversary-of-bombings.html
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/5765669/July-7-bombings-memorial-unveiled-in-London.html
My own conclusion is that these bombings were either a late effort by some Luftwaffe pilots, unaware of the surrender signed on Luneberg Heath all those years ago, or a protest by some of the more excitable animal rights activists.
Whenever this subject comes up I make the point that all this whitewashing is doing the muslim community, this who wish merely to get on with their lives no good.
The police knew within 4 hours who the bombers were and that they were home grown and has no links to Al Qaeda. A senior policemen actually stated this on a BBC show live that evening but was quickly hushed up. The lid was kept on by the government misinformation that it was an AL Qaeda cell that slipped in from France via Eurotunnel and kept this sham up for as long as possible diffusing anger in the crucial 72 hours after the bombing.
If it happens again even of it so an Al Qaeda cell slipped in via France no one will believe the government and the consequences for the muslim community will be dire. Yes I will use the phrase there will be rivers of blood.
And yes under the muslim religion she so loves the divine Connie would be stabbed to death for having sex outside marriage, having a relationship with a dhimmi, not wearing the burka and maybe just for being educated and having an opinion.
Not a sheep,
The BBC page you link to says : "Fifty-two people were killed…….."
But the one in DV’s link says ”Fifty-two people died………….”
presumably by coincidence.
The article about police officer Sawyer’s theory that the next terrorist attack will come from the far right could well be selective, it’s in the Guardian don’t forget, but given that Scotland Yard would have a vested interest in community cohesion, it is somewhat understandable. He wouldn’t want to cause resentment in ‘the community’ and, heaven forfend, precipitate another multiple dying coincidence.
sue said…11:53 AM, July 07, 2009
"precipitate another multiple dying coincidence"
What a wonderful line…..
How must the BBC scum ache, not being able to use it for real to report what happened…
"Multiple dying coincidence hits London Transport, no one to blame.
FS
Her ears must be ringing after the drubbing she got on the ES comments section of her 'article'!
R4 had its programme about William Morris and Islam this morning while this afternoon R5 has Yusuf Islam as a guest on the Simon Mayo show. One could almost be forgiven for thinking that the BBC is undertaking some sort of PR campaign on behalf of a certain religion associated with a certain anniversary today. But no, that couldn't possibly the case could it?
DB – It is no longer just a religion, it has been elevated to the status of "Ethnic Group" (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/8137824.stm), equivalent to a race, and thereby granted all of the protection afforded to it by that status.
I am looking forward to seeing the first reports of "ethnic riots" between the methodists and seventh day adventists who uncomfortably live side by side in my town.
Or am I missing something here ?
The "In't Islam Briiliant!" PR campaign takes a hit. The Sun had the story first, followed by the Mail, making it difficult for the Beeb to ignore. They must be gutted.
DB
The William Morris prog was a bunch of rubbish, no scholarship, merely friendly-to-Islam conjecture presented in a feel-good manner by a guy who sounded a right prat.
A waste of our licence money.
Just heard 'Islam' mentioned on the BBC today.. But it's Radio 5 with 'Yousaf Islam' on performing live.
The BBC really do know how ot piss people off don't they?
Nice to see the Muslim Council of Britain honouring the 52 that died on 7/7
http://www.mcb.org.uk/
DB
The BBC story has a picture of the Jamaican jihadist with a caption saying he denied supporting terrorism.
How the hell can a BBC editor let that caption get by – he was CONVICTED.
Airbrushing jihadist nutters to the bitter end.
When has the BBC ever suggested – or let anyone else suggest – that these fools are immature, stupid and twisted ?
It took Yousaf islam about 30 seconds before he started slagging George Bush off on the Mayo show.
Fucking towelhead twat.
Just thought I'd search for IRA bombings on the BBC website. Sure enough, fairly randomly, I found this:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/july/20/newsid_2515000/2515667.stm
"IRA bombs Stock Exchange"
"An IRA bomb has blown a 10-foot hole in the London Stock Exchange."
Contrast, as DV says, with coverage of any given attack by Jihadist terrorists, especially ones that actually killed people, where bombs sometimes even magically come into existence and explode without any help from anyone.
@ JohnA I hadn't noticed that caption, good spot. From your description of the William Morris thing I'm glad I missed it.
@ Martin. Yes, Yusuf blamed the world's "polarization" on the "Bush era". A number of his co-religionists and some planes, more like. And Mayo – in full suck-up mode – says that musicians who find religion get treated differently depending on their religion, offering as an example the easy acceptance of black gospel singers. How many black gospel singers demand the death of blasphemers, as Yusuf Islam has done?
I've blogged about the 'extreme right terror threat story' today and find the whole thing disgusting.
How can people just look at all of this bias and not realise?!
'Electrician of Hate' LOL How I love the sub-editing at the Currant Bun. Classic.
Field.Size suggests: "Multiple dying coincidence hits London Transport, no one to blame."
This headline would never appear in a BBC report as the word "blame" is never used.
Mayo kid-gloved the Rushdie question and then let Yusuf Islam get away with his usual two-faced revisionist platitudes about the "interpretation" of the Koran.
Here's what he said on the programme Hypotheticals, no "interpretation" necessary:
Robertson: You don't think that this man deserves to die?
Y. Islam: Who, Salman Rushdie?
Robertson: Yes.
Y. Islam: Yes, yes.
Robertson: And do you have a duty to be his executioner?
Y. Islam: Uh, no, not necessarily, unless we were in an Islamic state and I was ordered by a judge or by the authority to carry out such an act – perhaps, yes.
[Some minutes later, Robertson on the subject of a protest where an effigy of the author is to be burned]
Robertson: Would you be part of that protest, Yusuf Islam, would you go to a demonstration where you knew that an effigy was going to be burned?
Y. Islam: I would have hoped that it'd be the real thing.
Did Mayo bring this up? Did he bollocks.
DB: Mayo is just a wanker and an excuse of a human being.
I let Radio 5 know what I thought of them 🙂
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1198111/If-choose-live-country-live-rules-says-judge-jails-Muslim-extremists-arson-attack-publishers-home.html
Here are 3 more men that I ask myself… WHAT are we doing letting deranged idiots like this into our midst, and allowing them to stay amongst us?…..
FS
TopTip
By downloading Cat Stevens mp3s (some good old records he had too) from various dark torrented corners of t'interweb, one is depriving him of funds that might otherwise be channelled to the nutty worldwide jihad or hamas/hezbullah.
And a good singalong can be had for nowt.
A breakthrough. June Kellys' BBC report at 5.17pm described the atrocity as "Islamist terrorism".
sue said…
Not a sheep,
The BBC page you link to says : "Fifty-two people were killed…….."
But the one in DV’s link says ”Fifty-two people died………….”
presumably by coincidence.
The BBC are slipping, past practice has been to count the bombers among the fatalities, eg note the photo caption
The bombs killed 56 people in London on 7 July
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4744211.stm
The figure in the text of 52 is probably a stealth edit from the previous use of 56.
Field.size: Notice the BBC report makes on mention of the judges comments about living by our rules.
The BBC report also fails to point out that the beloved prophet shagged the arse off a 9 year old girl. This was of course part of the book. What so stupid Muslims don't want us to know that the prophet Mohammad was in fact a peodaphile?
Also notice that yet agian Muslims can't live alongside other people (China) and not the BBC's sympathy is with the Muzzie's as usual
Off-Beeb slightly, but I'm very disappointed with the lack of acknowledgement/coverage of the 7/7 anniversary and memorial from the U.S. 'counterjihad' Blogosphere today..
Philip: I noticed that. Fox News and CNN didn't cover any of the live event. Fox didn't even mention it.
I also get annoyed when Fox continually refers to the 'Europeans' not fighting in Afghanistan.
Martin – they (Fox) appear to have a small piece about it on the front page now. However – small very definitely is the word.
Martin
Could it be that the Americans don't tend to think of the British as Europeans – I don't.
"The BBC report also fails to point out that the beloved prophet shagged the arse off a 9 year old girl. This was of course part of the book. What so stupid Muslims don't want us to know that the prophet Mohammad was in fact a peodaphile?"
To be fair, this is the case for pretty much every British media outlet (even the Daily Mail!)
Oh sure they're not funded by a compulsory fee but the point is that they always refer to Mohammed as a prophet and deliberately hide the 6 year old wife story while screaming about other paedophiles, knowing full well that the vast majority of their readers would be outraged if they found out.
Of course, that outrage wouldn't result in suicide bombings and losing of heads so they keep pandering to the Muslim/left wing alliance.
Oh sure they're not funded by a compulsory fee but the point is that they always refer to Mohammed as a prophet and deliberately hide the 6 year old wife story while screaming about other paedophiles, knowing full well that the vast majority of their readers would be outraged if they found out.
Not quite. The BBC also tries to hide Michael Jackson's paedophilia and preference for sleeping with young boys. Could it be because Jacko was, as the BBC is often keen to point out, also a follower of the great Prophet Mo?
"precipitate another multiple dying coincidence"
"What a wonderful line….."
Yes, it is. It also reminds me that the ROP attempted to repeat the dose on 21/7/05. But for the fact that their home made explosives failed, we would have another anniversary coming up shortly.
"Social cohesion" – absolute claptrap. It's amazing how none of the rabble of cringing left-wing advocates of this mythical "social cohesion" are quite unable to explain why any of the peaceful law-abiding populace would want to be on the same planet as, let alone wishing to associate with, murderous Islamofascists. Why don't they go to residents of the inner cities of Leeds and Bradford and speak to non-Muslims and ask them face to face what they think of "social cohesion"? Do you think they're scared of the answers they will get?
Moreover, am I the only one suspicious of this bankrupt Government's sudden revelation of a "far right plot" to whip up racial tension? As if having people blown up by Islamists isn't enough, they have the gall to shove this out on the very anniversary of 7/7. Of course, there's no suggestion that they would be diverting attention away from the real problem is there?
All faithfully reported of course by Labour's dutiful servants, the BBC.
Philip said…
” Her ears must be ringing after the drubbing she got on the ES comments section of her 'article'!”
12:36 PM, July 07, 2009
Drubbing? What Rex said?
What IS ‘the ES comments section?’
‘article?’
Ears rang, but no-one was there.
verification word – hidear – spooky
Very interesting discussion on Harry’s Place concerning what that prompted police concerns about the far right terrorist threat.
It seems there was some substantive evidence, but opinion is mixed over whether there is a politically motivated element to the timing of the publicity.
It also highlights whether certain people’s principles over terrorism alter depending on who in particular the terror might be directed against.
Anyone catch the Beeboid report on the commemoration service yesterday. One victim's family interviewed. Who? You guessed it…. a Muslim family.
A rather strange editorial choice for any normal organisation… but not for the disgusting, traitorous BBC.