A B-BBC reader writes…
“We all recall the BBC and the rest of the MSM ghoulish exploitation of the murder of Jo Cox to further their own political agenda. The conflation with Brexit, hate crime and white supremacism to tar millions of people as racist bigots was just too appealing to ignore at the expense of the poor woman’s ghastly murder.
So when I heard that a man had been arrested trying to stab people on a train in London, whilst shouting “he wanted to kill Muslims”, I expected a similar narrative to emerge. However, it hasn’t been forthcoming. The news was carried on BBC London’s Bulletin last night – with no mention of the M word – while the BBC website article is tucked way, way, way down.
This was strange as surely it was a blatant example of Islamaphobic hate crime (and probably the closest you could get to a real one). Yet the BBC report is sterile and straight.
“A 38-year-old man has been arrested on suspicion of causing grievous bodily harm and remains in police custody. Train services were temporarily stopped on the line. Police said they were not treating the attack as terrorism, but as a hate crime.”
But hate crime is all the rage at the moment? It must be yet another indication of the post-Brexit backlash against minorities?
“Shellby Curry, 24, from Forest Hill, said she saw a man “waving what looked to be a knife in his hand” near the station and screaming words like “Muslims… kill them all”. She described the attacker as a black man with short hair, who she thought appeared to be in his late 30s or early 40s.”
The attacker was black.

A black man, probably mentally disturbed, committing a hate crime against a Muslim just doesn’t quite fit with the Beeb’s neat, politically correct viewpoint (unless of course the cops shot him dead, which they didn’t). Rather than being suched into a PC vortex, the story is relegated and nothing representative of wider society. I wonder if that would be the same if the attacker was white though….

Update. The man has been charged: Man charged after train attack at Forest Hill train station – BBC News. The M word is now totally removed.

Meanwhile, as the M word continues to be omitted in relation to massacres – for both perpetrators and victims – in places such as Aleppo and Yemen (loving the Beeb’s subtle normalisation of the burka in their coverage) when committed by and to other Muslims, the M word is included when the perpetrators are non-Muslim and the victims are Muslim. There is also other news stories about terrorism, handing cash over to terrorists, FGM, rape, et al where the M word is carefully sidestepped. .

Instead, the BBC prefers to wallow in its echo chamber of pro-Muslim bias. There have been a few anti-Islam stories but it the output is stacked in the positive/Muslims as victims narrative. Stories just from the past month or so include:

That’s just a sample.
I am so bored of hearing this incessant, unrelenting narrative. It does, of course, cut to the very core of the nature of Islam, which literally means submission. The struggle – whether political or violent – will continue until society gives in. Until it submits to the onslaught and acknowledges that Islam is superior.

It struck me that, under sharia, non-believers have to pay a jizya in order to be treated like second class citizens before the superiority of Islam.

Sounds not too dissimlar to the current set-up at the BBC. Except their mandatory tax is called the licence fee.

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Email this to someone
Bookmark the permalink.

5 Responses to WHITE, BLACK AND BROWN…

  1. TPO says:

    The BBC trend of distorting news to fit its agenda is blatant.
    You highlight the downgrading of the man attempting to stab people on the train because he is black.

    Well here’s another one. Your link listed at 13 which appeared on December 8th; “First US Somali lawmaker gets ‘islamophobic threats’ in taxi.”
    It goes on, Washington DC’s Metropolitan Police Department told the BBC it was not aware of having received any complaint about the incident. Ms Omar declined to provide more details because “she wants to focus her time in DC attending the trainings, conferences and meetings she has scheduled over the next few days”

    Have we heard any more from the BBC on this. I’m not surprised really because more details have now come out, but you’d have to go to a more reliable and reputable news source to get the information.

    “Liberal Outlets Falsely Tie Trump To Cab Driver Who Allegedly Harassed Muslim Lawmaker”

    “The victim, Ilhan Omar, has since provided details that suggest that her driver was likely not a Trump supporter and that the incident had nothing to do with the president-elect. The 34-year-old Omar, who was elected to office in Minneapolis, said in a statement released on Monday that her driver was an African immigrant.”


  2. TPO says:

    Certain news items that appear in the press should, I think, be circulated as widely as possible because they are most definitely in the public interest.
    One that surfaced on Saturday was this:

    “Untouchable: The jihadi sleeper agent we can’t deport – or even identify – despite being branded ‘the very model of a modern terrorist’
    The man was convicted of amassing terrorist materials, including bomb-making manuals, on his computer.
    A jury heard that he created a list of targets such as nightclubs and airports, and was described by the trial judge as an ‘Al Qaeda sleeper agent’ waiting to launch an atrocity in the UK.
    He was jailed for nine years at Manchester Crown Court but was released after only five years.
    The Home Office then ordered that the terrorist be deported to Jordan. Earlier this year he appealed against his deportation at the Special Immigration Appeals Commission (SIAC), a secret court that only hears cases involving foreign terrorists and others who pose a threat to national security.
    But as the married father began his appeal, Mrs Rudd wrote to his lawyers, revealing she will no longer deport him.

    However, SIAC ruled he cannot have refugee status – which would allow him to stay in Britain for life – on the grounds that he is a convicted terrorist. SIAC imposed an anonymity order that prevents this newspaper from naming him and also identifying at least four aliases he has used to rent properties, open bank accounts, and even get a job. We cannot even reveal the codename he was given to anonymise him during the deportation case.
    The SIAC judgment, made public last week, said the man had used so many aliases that his real identify was still uncertain. Robin Tam QC, representing the Home Office, told the hearing that the terrorist’s connections with other jihadis and his use of aliases made him ‘in many ways, the very model of a modern Al Qaeda terrorist’ – echoing the Major-General’s song in Gilbert and Sullivan’s The Pirates Of Penzance. The judgment said the man entered Britain in 2002 from Rotterdam, where he was sharing a flat with four other jihadis.

    After he entered Britain with his wife in 2002, he gave immigration officials a false name and said he was from Iraq, producing a forged Iraqi birth certificate. He and his wife were allowed to stay in the UK and were placed in accommodation in the North of England.

    He claimed up to £100,000 in benefits using his genuine passport, which he kept hidden from immigration officials. He also opened several bank accounts under different names and worked in higher education.
    But in 2006, anti-terrorist police raided two properties that he and his family lived in, seizing two computers belonging to him that contained a vast library of terrorist material, including manuals to make car bombs. He had also been in contact with an Al Qaeda cell in Britain linked to Dhiren Barot, who was convicted of plotting to detonate a ‘dirty’ bomb – containing radioactive material – on the London Underground in 2007.

    Now I don’t know about the rest of you but there are extremely disturbing features about this, not least the fact that SIAC have issued a blanket ban on any form of identification on individual.
    Having been in the business and now thankfully retired, it came as no surprise to me that Birnberg Peirce, the IRA’s solicitors of choice in the UK, provided legal representation, at tax payers expense, for this Islamic terrorist.

    Which brings me to the BBC. Given the gravity of this and the fact that SIAC, in my opinion, have made a disastrous ruling that puts the citizens of this country in danger, one wonders why there is not a whiff of this story anywhere on the BBC. I can only conclude that their agenda is at work again.

    For those of a more enquiring mind further reading is provided here:


  3. Umbongo says:

    It’s salutary that many of my on-message friends and neighbours are slowly becoming agnostic concerning the Narrative or, if not the Narrative itself, re the hitherto unimpeachable and taken-for-granted sea-green incorruptibility and impartiality of the BBC. They have even begun to speak to me again after my apostasy in voting Leave despite being white, middle class and having an IQ of more than 100. Manifestly, though, they largely remain in thrall to the tenets of the BBC religion; climate change warmism, the destruction of Israel, unrestricted immigration, the “it’s nothing to do with Islam” schtick, “black good:white bad” and so on.

    Even given this bedrock of bien pensant thinking, the endless repetition of the Narrative and it’s injection at every opportunity into any BBC programme or web-page is beginning to wear down their psychological resistance to my constant refrain asserting the undeniable bias of the BBC. This morning (without prompting!) one of them drew my attention to the “Moslems like Us” programme. Even he thought that the choice of participants was so blatantly twisted to ensure an obviously “isn’t Islam wonderful and its aderents (apart from the whitey convert and nutter obviously) are so charming and, well, British” outcome that the whole programme became an exercise in propagandising a particular (ie BBC) viewpoint rather than a disinterested look at reality.

    Maybe the great British public is stirring at last!


  4. Alex says:

    Excellent post. Yes, I am at exploding point with the disgusting BBC lies and censorship; they are only interested in making British patriots feel guilty and ashamed of themselves and their heritage – and they now give ethnic minorities and Muslims special treatment. It’s that simple; it’s cultural Marxism, which is being spewed forth at universities across the west indoctrinating millions of young people. Also, I am finding the abject fabrication, by the pathetic BBC, of this so-called rise in ‘Far-Right extremism’ utterly loathsome and tiresome, especially when the real threat comes from Islamic extremists. Apart from a few loser skinheads this mythical large-scale rise in the far-Right is simply a red-herring by the Left to cover-up the real fascism that is blighting communities across the world: extremist Islamism. Apart from a handful of murders by lone nutters, how many wide-scale terrorist acts do we observe by the ‘far-Right’? The so-called ‘far-Right’ are nothing but drunken, noisy football fans who wave flags. But, they fit the convenient narrative for the Left, and so become the smokescreen that masks the leftie cowardice that is truly behind the rise in Islamofascism

    In this typically left-leaning and misleading article below the author portrays the main threat as anything but Islamist extremism; its objective is propaganda, but it will fail because like the Remoaners and Democrats, the BBC are simply hopelessly out-of-touch with normal British people, and wilfully ignore the elephant in the room.



  5. Wild Bill says:

    “National Action, formed in 2013, will be the first extreme right-wing group to be banned in the UK.”
    Never even heard of them.
    But “will be the first” is the worrying part,are they just testing the water,don’t forget that some people say UKIP are a far Right organisation.
    The BBC probably consider this BLOG to be far Right.