The two Boston bombers are reported to be two Chechen brothers.  They have apparently lived in the US for nearly a decade.

Some background digging by the Atlantic Wire here:

Note ‘Beliefs’….Islam

The BBC made some startling claims, including that by their specialist security correspondent Frank Gardner, that the Boston bombers were most probably domestic, meaning white, right wing  terrorists.

This was based on no more evidence other than that the attack occured at a similar time in the year to previous terror attacks…some by right wing extremists.

In effect the BBC has reported news it knew to be false for political reasons….it was a deliberate attempt to play down the likelihood that Muslims could be involved in the Boston bombing…..the use of ‘imported/international’ terrorism rather than Islamic also points to news management.

Why did the BBC jump so readily to this conclusion?

The BBC amongst others, is desperate to deny any connection between violence, especially terrorism and the Islamic ideology.  It does all it can to manipulate people’s perceptions of that ideology and the result of that is that the airwaves are full of programmes or reports such as ‘Muslim Driving School, ‘Don’t Panic I’m Islamic’ and ‘ Hijab for A Day’….all designed to make you think Islam is harmless fun.

Here is the most recent piece of what is outright propaganda for one section of the population:

‘As the investigation into who was behind the Boston bombings goes on, Muslim communities are braced for a backlash should the perpetrator share their faith.’

No such similar emotive, and very lengthy, tract for any similar groups under suspicion on the ‘Right’ such as Christian Evangelists or anti-abortionists…whom it is apparently OK to tar with a broad brush and implicate as a whole community or group as likely terrorists.

Essentially the BBC has puts aside its scruples and deliberately shifted the emphasis of a news story to point the finger of blame for a terror attack onto a group of people, which the BBC is quite ready to demonize and blame without concrete evidence because it fits in with their own political agenda.

The BBC has not been impartial, it has not been balanced, it has not been truthful.

It has deliberately and cynically manipulated the news for poltical reasons in support of a particular ideology….prepared to blame one ‘community’ in order to protect another…against a supposed ‘backlash’.

Which probably makes this Tweet by Mardell somewhat ironic:

Mark Mardell ‏@BBCMarkMardell 17 Apr  CNN very post modern right now – fragmented versions of reality from multiple unreliable narrators

(Updates added below)

Here’s how BBC Radio Five Live’s 1pm news bulletin dealt with the Boston bombing on Tuesday 16 April:

Jonathan Marcus: “The United States has a very large and well-developed group of radical extremists of their own. People I suppose you would categorise as being on the far-right, people who are opposed to federal authority, particularly enraged by things like gun control and immigration and so on.”

Suspect number 1 is now dead, and number 2 – still on the run at the time of writing – has been widely identified on social media as Sunil Tripathi, a Brown University student who has been missing for some weeks. Here’s Sunil:

I’ve a got a sneaking feeling that speculation about the political motivation for the bombings might play a lesser role on the BBC from now on.

Also this from NBC:

Law enforcement sources said the suspects have international links and have been in the country legally for about a year.

UPDATE. Looks like I could have fallen into the speculation trap:

Speculation that one of bombing suspects is a missing student is not correct, sources tell @petewilliamsnbc

— NBC News (@NBCNews) April 19, 2013

UPDATE 2. NBC reports:

Both of the suspects are brothers of Chechen origin and have been in the U.S. at least a year as legal permanent residents, authorities tell NBC News. The suspect on the run is believed to be Dzhokar Tsarnaev, 19, NBC News’ sources say.

The BBC have given over acres of broadcasting real estate to the critics of Mrs Thatcher who claim that she destroyed the mining industry.

I can’t say that they’ve given equal prominence to the fact that, as stated many times across other media, that Labour closed more mines than Mrs Thatcher.

They do have space for this though:

Why the fuss over George Osborne’s tears?

Are they merely trying to make Osborne look in some way foolish or a cynical spinner crying crocodile tears?  Why the fuss indeed.

What the BBC don’t tell us is this….an ex-miner, now a Tory minister comments on the myths being propagated and buttressed by the likes of the BBC.…and yet, so far, the BBC have ignored him.

‘“As a cabinet minister now and a miner in the 1980s, I have been listening to the debate about Baroness Thatcher with particular interest.

‘The BBC ignores a government minister, a miner himself at the time of the strikes who has something strikingly relevant to say about them?

Why does the BBC ignore him?  If nothing else he is a prime example that social mobility isn’t dead…and that the cabinet has genuine working class men in its ranks.

Normally something that the BBC would leap at.

Half the story all the time from the BBC.

Warrior and healer

Obama has a tough task as innocents die, says Mark Mardell

Mardell doesn’t say he believes Obama is an inspirational warrior prophet but clearly he thinks Obama is heaven sent….leaving us with this thought about Obama…..

‘He is at his best when his words seek to leave the world a different place.’

Get a room!

The BBC are continuing down the road of pointing the finger of blame at white, far right groups or individuals  and other domestic possible candidates for the Boston bombing…..you have to ask on what evidence?….other than the coincidence of the date of the attack there is nothing else to go on.

The German centre left publication Süddeutsche Zeitung writes:

“Hysteria is the triumph of terror, but America has responded remarkably unhysterically to the bombs in Boston. This demonstrates a new maturity.’

Shame the BBC haven’t displayed the same maturity as they rush to judgement for their own reasons.

The New York Post says this photo has apparently been released by US authorities in the course of the investigation:

Now there is absolutely no evidence that these two were involved in any way…but it shows that the following claim by Frank Gardner is, er, somewhat premature and that the investigation is still open to many possible scenarios.

The Telegraph has noted that a ‘witch hunt’ is in progress for the culprits…it can’t help when the BBC join in…..

FrankGardner has made up his mind though….it’s a Redneck Rampage:

‘So what lines is the Boston investigation following and why?

A home-grown US operator with a domestic agenda

As of Wednesday, this is thought to be the most likely culprit.

The FBI maintains a long list of potential threats emanating from US individuals or groups harbouring violent intentions towards the federal government, civil organisations, or society in general.

The list includes white racial supremacists, fundamentalist Christian extremists, animal rights activists and anti-abortionists. So-called “lone wolf” operators – individuals not belonging to any known terrorist group – are far harder for the authorities to detect and track.’

Perhaps Frank Gardner should read the FBI’s own statement:

Contrary to widespread reporting, no arrest has been made in connection with the Boston Marathon attack. Over the past day and a half, there have been a number of press reports based on information from unofficial sources that has been inaccurate. Since these stories often have unintended consequences, we ask the media, particularly at this early stage of the investigation, to exercise caution and attempt to verify information through appropriate official channels before reporting.

Where’s the evidence for his claim?

He has no evidence to back it up but here the same lack of evidence is used to deny the involvement of Jihadists:

‘America has long been their favoured target, but there are reasons to question whether this was the work of jihadists.

There is no suicide element, the explosive used was relatively low power and, most importantly, there has been no claim of responsibility.’

As far as I am aware no such statement has been made by US officials as to the effect that this is a domestically inspired attack.  As the New York Times says today they are pursuing a broad range of avenues…..

‘While investigators have focused on the images of the possible suspect, they are continuing to pursue a broad range of other avenues, one law enforcement official said.

“We try not to get tunnel vision about it,” the official said, adding, “we’re working a lot of other possibilities.”’

‘Tunnel Vision’…the trouble with the BBC is that they only see one thing at the end of that tunnel…an angry white man.

Such quick and easy judgements based on pure conjecture with a good dose of wishful thinking thrown in for good measure sparks off the usual witch hunts against the Right which if it happened to Muslims the BBC would be outraged about.

The BBC feeds that frenzied witch hunt  by making claims that have absolutely no truth to them at the time made.   The bombers could well be over taxed, angry white men, or it could have been Jihadists or anyone with a grudge about something.

We don’t know, even the US government probably doesn’t know yet…and the BBC certainly doesn’t know.

A perfect example of how this type of reporting gives the excuse to anyone with a bee in their bonnet to whip a frenzied attack on the Right  is an article from ‘Salon’:

Let’s hope the Boston Marathon bomber is a white American

This is an incredibly partisan, highly ideological, not to mention intensely racist tract.

It suggests that white, right wing groups do not get the same attention as for example Muslim groups do.

Really? Tell that to the FBI:

‘The FBI will continue to enhance its crucial partnerships with federal, state, local, tribal, and foreign law enforcement agencies; other members of the U.S. intelligence community; and the private sector to combat the unrelenting threat of domestic terrorism.’

If you have ever looked at the list of what constitutes a likely terrorist in the US it covers just about anyone who has said anything about government being too big, or taxes too high or mentions the Constitution….white, Christian, anti-abortion, animal rights activists are all targeted….fly the US flag upside down and you get arrested as a terrorist….or having a missing finger, shaving your beard off, paying with cash, bulk buying food:

Read Der Spiegel and you will know that the Neo-Nazis are under constant observation and security attention in Germany.  In the UK  the EDL et al in this country are the subject of similar attention from the security services.

The Far Right in no way has a ‘free pass’ to do as it likes nor a ‘get out of jail free card’.

Thatcher couldn’t reform the BBC, Kim Jong Un hasn’t been able to….let’s see what you can do….

Peter Allen relates to Nicky Campbell how when as a young journalist he asked Mrs Thatcher this (5 mins 30 secs) about the Falklands War:

‘Why are you bothering to fight this war when you  know perfectly well that you will have  to give them back to the Argentinians eventually.‘

Give them back?  The Argentinians never owned them.   And if anything Spain has a stronger claim than anyone else…other than Britain of course.

‘Give them back, surrender quietly without a fight’ is a fairly typical attitude of the Left that has served this country so badly for decades….do not stand up for your own rights, do not defend your own lands, do not defend your own values and beliefs….but do celebrate every other culture, belief, value or territorial demand however daft, however unfounded.

Peter Allen was followed shortly after by historian and frequent BBC presenter, Dr Kate Williams who called the Falklands ‘Islas Malvinas’….and claimed that  increasingly across the rest of the world they were using that name and that it’s going to be very difficult for the Prime minister who has to hand them back as he will have to eventually.

Not the first time the BBC has handed the Falklands over to the Argies:

Anger over ‘Malvinas’ gaffe on BBC

The lives of 257 ­servicemen were lost to ensure that the Falkland Islands remain a British dependency. But perhaps someone should remind the BBC.

For, to the astonishment of the ­Falklands’ hardy residents and soldiers who fought to liberate them almost 30 years ago, the islands were re-­christened ‘the Malvinas’ — the contentious name for the islands used by Argentina — by the writers of children’s TV show The Sarah Jane Adventures.

No less a figure than Major-­General Sir Jeremy Moore, who accepted the Argentinian ­surrender, refused to allow the use of ‘Islas Malvinas’ in the ­documents signed in 1982, dismissing it as a propaganda term.

John Humphrys has long thought along the same lines as Peter Allen and Kate Williams:

‘So the time has come for Britain to negotiate. A deal should be struck which establishes Argentinian sovereignty over the islands while allowing the islanders to remain British and which perhaps shares the spoils of oil exploration.’

If you Google BBC ‘Islas Malvinas’ you will find out that the BBC refers to the Falklands as ‘Islas Malvinas/Falklands’ on their foreign language service.

La población de las islas Malvinas/Falklands terminó de votar en un referendo de dos días sobre si quieren seguir siendo un territorio británico.

I suppose the BBC has a history of this type of rebranding and relocating sovereignty of particular countries as it suits….Londonderry becomes Derry to suit the IRA, Jerusalem is stripped of its status as capital of Israel to suit Palestinian terrorists, the Scottish ‘Administration’ becomes its ‘Government’.

The names all have massive political symbolism and the BBC seems all too ready to side with those it has decided it likes best regardless of international law, custom or tradition.

Once again the BBC, the oh so impartial BBC, plays politics.

Thoughtful in the comments has thoughtfully provided us with this link which I think deserves to be put up in lights here….let’s hope it wasn’t all talk:

The BBC’s new director of News & Current Affairs, James Harding, on the BBC (Whilst at the Times):

“The BBC distorts and suffocates an industry. It is too big.”

“Big, bloated and cunning” – headline of a leader on the BBC, 2010

“The BBC ought to be a creative force for entrepreneurship. In reality it stifles innovation.”

“Its websites, which may seem like a handy and innocuous extension of its news gathering, have destroyed jobs, livelihoods and creativity.”

“What the BBC is not, and never has been, is an organisation devoted to investigative journalism.”

Thoughtful wonders ‘how long it will be before he sings a different tune??’

Chomsky suggests it won’t be long before he conforms:

‘Most people are not liars, there are outright liars and brazen propagandists in journalism and in the academic professions but the norm is obedience to the culture, adoption of uncritical attitudes, taking the easy path of self-deception.  There is also a selective process in the academic professions and journalism…people who are independent-minded and cannot be trusted to be obedient don’t make it by and large.  They are filtered out along the way leaving you with a monoculture of similar thinking,  attitudes and world views.‘

The BBC has perhaps lost its way.   Listening to Nicky Campbell this morning I couldn’t help thinking that the old fashioned virtues of respect, courage, integrity, moderation, justice, wisdom, loyalty, dignity, honour, striving for excellence, humility and sincerity all seemed in somewhat short supply at the BBC in these modern times.

Courage for instance…the BBC lacked the courage to just refuse to play the ‘Ding dong’ song when it has stopped many other less offensive things from being broadcast….the BBC didn’t have the backbone to take a moral stance and ban it outright but surrendered its principles to political pressure from the anti-Thatcher lobby.

As The National Broadcaster with a uniquely privileged position and  high expectations demanded of it, the BBC falls short again and again.  The death of Mrs Thatcher has highlighted those failings quite starkly.

Within minutes of her death being announced the BBC was already tearing into her reputation telling us that she was incredibly divisive and that there would be celebrations over her death.

Now today on her funeral the BBC doesn’t seem able to rein itself in and maintain a proper respect on such an occasion.  They could have restricted themselves to a dignified reporting of the funeral but instead they filled the hours with arguments, snide comments and jokes about her legacy…things about which they have been talking all week and will be talking about for years to come.

As I said I think the BBC has lost its way and forgotten, or doesn’t think it necessary, how to treat some subjects with a degree of respect and dignity that in previous eras would have been expected.

I have no doubt that on the death of Nelson Mandela, whom David Miliband called a terrorist,  the BBC will suddenly remember how to act in a fit and proper manner and its presentation will be far more reverential and dignified than the approach it has taken for Mrs Thatcher’s death and funeral.

John Sweeney spends 8 days undercover in North Korea.

BBC News head of programmes Ceri Thomas said: “This is an important piece of public interest journalism.” Asked whether that justified putting student lives at risk, he replied: “We think it does.” 

So what exactly was the public interest that merited the James Bond approach?

We are informed that North Korea has been indulging in a great deal of sabre rattling rhetoric of late.

The BBC, in the shape of John Sweeney, seeks to find out if North Korea intends to go to war or is that mere rhetoric,  just flag waving bravado from a new leader?

So what did we learn from the actual visit?

That North Korea has few, if any shops, no advertising, no freedom of religion and you can’t walk where you like….all summed up with a shocking illustration of North Korean barbarity…a barbed wire fence around a field.   But you can get a phone signal leaking over the border from South Korea.

When declaring North Korea was in fact a Neo Nazi state Sweeny gave as evidence the fact that a picture of Lenin and one of Marx had disappeared from a public square….but the camera kept out of view the massive hammer and sickle emblem on top of the building so prominent in previous shots.

And that war?  Erm…well…no politicians, no statesmen, no diplomats from North Korea wanted to be interviewed so Sweeney asked his young female tour guide what she thought….it’s all America’s fault…we might have a war, we might not.

To make up for the lack of enlightening footage from North Korea Sweeney interviewed Western experts on the area, defectors living in South Korea…and a Youtube clip of a North Korean gulag.

I believe I could have made the same report from the comfort of my home using the phone and the internet….and a trip oop North to the wastelands of Northern England laid bare by Thatcherite government policies.

An utter waste of half an hour of my time watching Panorama, a waste of BBC funds paying for Sweeney’s 8 day swannee and a stupid risk to take with the accompanying students who had everything to lose and nothing to gain.

They might have ended up with a few days of rigorous interrogation and a couple of months in a North Korean chokey..but Sweeney had nothing to lose….if he doesn’t get discovered he gets his film (such as it is)…if found out and thrown in jail for a couple of years say..the BBC wll still support him and pay his wages…and when he gets out he will have an even better story…and have lost a bit of weight…so all good for him.

I haven’t looked but I can imagine anyone of those students has a better tale to tell on Facebook than Sweeney has come up with.

Still, he’s the professional, he knows what he’s doing.

An important piece of public interest journalism?

Nah, self indulgent tosh.