It’s all in the angle taken. Biased BBC contributor Alan observes:
“When Gaddafi’s convoy was hit by NATO aircraft all news reports took similar line…..it was a military convoy trying to escape the NTC troops…even the BBC reported this:
Nato aircraft on Thursday morning struck two pro-Gaddafi military vehicles in the vicinity of Sirte, a spokesman said. “At approximately 08:30 local time (GMT+2) today, Nato aircraft struck two pro-Gaddafi forces military vehicles which were part of a larger group manoeuvring in the vicinity of Sirte,” Nato spokesman Colonel Roland Lavoie said in a statement.
The UK’s Ministry of Defence said …”It was targeted on the basis that this was the last of the pro-Gaddafi forces fleeing Sirte,” .’
Reuters reported this:
Air strike hit 11 vehicles in Gaddafi convoy -NATO
21 Oct 2011 12:55
Source: reuters // Reuters
‘NATO aircraft struck 11 pro-Gaddafi military vehicles that were part of a larger group of approximately 75 vehicles manoeuvring near Sirte, the NATO statement said.
“These armed vehicles were leaving Sirte at high speed and were attempting to force their way around the outskirts of the city,” the statement said.
“The vehicles were carrying a substantial amount of weapons and ammunition posing a significant threat to the local civilian population. The convoy was engaged by a NATO aircraft to reduce the threat.” ‘
or the Telegraph’s reporter on the ground with the NTC in Sirte:
Why then did 5Live continually broadcast the words of Rear Admiral Chris Parry who stated that ‘
NATO has some questions to answer, the convoy wasn’t threatening anybody and ostensibly this was an attack on civilians.’
18:00 5Live News: 21 Oct
Why did the BBC 5Live push a line that this might have been a war crime against civilians when itself had earlier reported this was a military convoy? A fine disregard for the facts in the pursuit of an exciting storyline or one that continues their own narrative…. ie all war is bad and the Western Forces are essentially war criminals killing people for oil contracts.
Is it responsible journalism to report anything anyone says regardless of what the facts are…wouldn’t a little cross checking before the story is headlined be in order? Only a couple of days ago the BBC were castigating the Americans for not co-ordinating information reporting between different intelligence agencies. How is it that the world’s ‘finest’ news broadcaster is unable to ensure up to date information is passed to all its own news teams and co-ordinate and sustain a single line of reporting on a story?
The answer might be of course that it does air whatever it wants to whether or not it is true either to get an ‘exciting’ new slant on a story or to push its own anti-war narrative.”