RE: Jeremy Bowen's choice of date to hold a Twitter Q&A
In summary:
The BBC's Middle East Editor, Jeremy Bowen, chose one of the holiest days in the Jewish calendar to hold a Q&A on the Middle East. That disenfranchised
all religious Jews and the vast majority of not particularly religious Jews.
In response to my query re this choice of date Jeremy Bowen responded via
Twitter that "the timing could be better" that he "did know it was Jewish New Year" but that it was ok because "it doesn't stop quite a few Jews using social media!".
Jeremy Bowen's choice of day for this Q&A clearly discrminated against religious (and not that religious) Jews, who would be unable to take part in the Q&A and thus created a biased debate.
Surely an unbiased BBC Middle East Editor would take care to ensure that no
interested parties would be unable to take part in the Q&A. Would Jeremy Bowen have held such a Q&A on a Friday during Ramadan?
When considering this matter, do bear in mind that Jeremy Bowen's anti-Israel
bias was confirmed by the Editorial Standards Committee of the BBC Trust who published a report into three complaints about him in April 2009. The Editorial Standards Committee upheld three complaints against Jeremy Bowen
on grounds of accuracy and impartiality.
NewsOnline Complaints initial response to my complaint was this:' Jeremy Bowen did not "choose" this date; he is very busy and it was the earliest day he could fit this event into his schedule. He has acknowledged this in his tweets to you. However, this will not be the only such event with him, so there will be other opportunities for those who may consider they were excluded to take part.This answer was not satisfactory for several reasons. First the explanation of why that day was allocated is not believable or acceptable. An unbiased Middle East Editor would have Rosh Hashonah noted in his diary and accordingly would not schedule a Q&A for that date, regardless of whether he was free on that day.
This was not a debate but a question and answer session so there is no question in our view of it being biased.'
The bare fact is that the BBC's Middle East Editor held a Q&A session on one of the holiest days in the Jewish calendar when the vast majority of Jews would not be able to take part. This decision disenfranchised the vast majority of Jews from taking part. Jeremy Bowen would not dream of scheduling such an event for a Friday during Ramadan and thus disenfranchising Muslims, would he?
As to the glib comment that 'this will not be the only such event with him, so there will be other opportunities for those who may consider they were excluded to take part.', I find that offensive. Should Jews be satisfied that at some unspecified future date we will be allowed to contribute to a Q&A with the BBC's Middle East Editor? Muslims and Christians every time but Jews only occasionally? Do Jews not pay the BBC licence fee? Is the BBC an institutionally anti-Semitic organisation as well as an anti-Zionist one?
I realise that you have other important matters to concern yourself with at the moment but I do feel that this matter is an important one as it addresses the matter of trust in, and the veracity of, the BBC.
Regards
NotaSheep MaybeaGoat
'The BBC intentionally failed to warn Jews about the imminent Nazi threat they face, according to newly discovered evidence, the news media reported. A recent documentary program aired on the BBC investigates whether the service of the British Broadcasting Company in Hungary could have done more to save Jews in the country during the Holocaust, but instead chose to turn a blind eye. In 1942, the Civil BBC was on the front lines of the war of propaganda, spreading across the continent in an effort to help the Allied forces war effort. "The BBC aired news reports every day, giving an update on the war, general news and opinion articles on Hungarian politics. But among all these issues, there are important things that were not said, things that could have warned thousands of Hungarian Jews from the horrors to come in case of a German occupation," explains a historian Professor Ladislaus Lob. The professor is also a survivor of the Nazi concentration camp in Bergen-Belsen. According to the report, a note that sets policy for the Hungarian BBC in 1942 clearly stated: "Not to mention the Jews at all." The memo was written by Carlile Macartney, an advisor to the Foreign office in Hungary at the time. "Macartney believed that defending the Jews will alienate the majority of the Hungarian population at that time, which according to him, were anti-Semitic," Lob said. "Since British directors of the BBC wanted to draw German troops into Hungary and call them an occupying force, the argument was that the anti-Semitic Hungarians would not help the Allied forces if they seem too pro-Jewish." "Since December 1942, the British government and the BBC Hungarian Service knew what was happening to European Jews beyond Hungary, and they knew the most likely destination for the Jews of Hungary when the Germans invaded," he continued.'The BBC and Jews - 'plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose'
"When people criticize Zionists, they mean Jews. You're talking anti-Semitism!"Here's what I wrote about this almost exactly a year ago and here's the Huffington Post today. I raely agree with the Huffington Post, but in this instance they are correct.
"Peace for Israel means security, and we must stand with all our might to protect its right to exist, its territorial integrity. I see Israel as one of the great outposts of democracy in the world, and a marvelous example of what can be done, how desert land can be transformed into an oasis of brotherhood and democracy. Peace for Israel means security and that security must be a reality."Dr. King said this on March 25, 1968, two weeks before his death.
I wonder how long it will be before I have to point out this same 'error' again?Dear Mr MaybeaGoat
Thank you for bringing this to our attention. We have fixed the map on this story to show Egypt.
Kind regards
Middle East desk
BBC News website
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world/middle_east/
http://www.bbc.co.uk/complaints/handle.shtml
'In the BBC article headlined 'Israel forces 'kill two militants in central Gaza'', the BBC include this mapCoincidentally I raised the same issue just over a week ago. There seems to be a pattern emerging. In fact on perusing my blog I also found this article from June 2010 that included a different but similarly misleading map, here's the relevant extract:
This map makes it seem as though Israel is both enormous and surrounds Gaza thus explaining how Israel has been able to blockade it for some years now. There is of course a problem with this - Israel does not surround Gaza. The country that borders Gaza to the South East is Egypt not Israel, that is where the Rafah Crossing is...
So why have the BBC omitted the word Egypt from that first map? If the BBC come back and say it was an unfortunate accident due to the scale of the map I will not believe them...'
'The BBC and other media claim that Israel has sealed Gaza off from the outside world. This is a map of Gaza from the BBC website...The BBC's anti-Israel stance is well documented on this blog and others. Their refusal to release the Balen Report and their spending of, so far, around £300,000 on legal argument to keep it secret hardly inspires confidence in their lack of bias. So I hope that people looking for a map of Gaza also found some interesting information re the BBC, Israel and Gaza.
Note that both Gaza and Israel are clearly marked. What is not marked is the other country that borders Gaza to its South-West, Egypt. Egypt has a 11km border with Gaza through which as much aid or even trade could pass as Egypt wants. The BBC often claim that Israel 'controls' the crossings into Gaza. If Egypt wanted t open its border to Gaza it could do so but it does not want to. The Egyptians know what sort of government is in power in Gaza and what they want to achieve. Hamas and its colleagues in the Muslim Brotherhood want to see the destruction of Israel but their view of Egypt's future is not one that the Egyptian government approve of.'
Why Israel had to act against Hamas and some background you won't get from the Israel hating BBC.
http://www.timesofisrael.com/the-wisdom-will-lie-in-knowing-when-to-stop/
'She also told how she has a strict 'no bottom half' clause when it comes to getting naked on film.Here's some video of Keira Knightley's completely uninteresting breasts...
She told the U.S. fashion magazine: 'No bottom half!
'I don't mind exposing my t*ts because they're so small - people really aren't that interested!'
"I always think that impartiality is in our DNA - it's part of the BBC's genetic make-up."That was Helen Boaden, the then director of BBC News.
‘No amount of cajolery, and no attempts at ethical or social seduction, can eradicate from my heart a deep burning hatred for the Tory Party. So far as I am concerned they are lower than vermin.’That's Martin Plaut, the BBC World Service Africa editor. He was being interviewed in The KentishTowner. I wonder how unbiased any reports of his would be if they involve any mention of the Conservative lead coalition government? I wonder how many more BBC editors feel the same? I wonder if any are right-wingers who feel that way aboutthe Labour party?
'Who or what do you hate and why? Tories. As Aneurin Bevan said: ‘No amount of cajolery, and no attempts at ethical or social seduction, can eradicate from my heart a deep burning hatred for the Tory Party. So far as I am concerned they are lower than vermin.’ '
'If the BBC had devoted as many reporters to the paedophile scandal as it’s devoting to the BBC scandal, there wouldn’t be a BBC scandal.'Read more of Michael Deacon's article in The Telegraph . It's well worth a read.
Dear sir/madam
Could you please assist me. I was in the process of contacting Helen Boaden re this matter but now find that she has been asked to "step aside" following the Newsnight debacle. Who should I write to in her absence?
Kind regards
NotaSheep MaybeaGoat
The BBC's hatred of Conservatives especially from the 'Thatcher' era is clear and it is this hatred that blinded them to the veracity of the Newsnight report. Boris Johnson has written an excellent piece about this, read it.
I'll let sentences one to four go unremarked upon. But those last two, really!
"In the light of the fact that the director general is also the editor-in-chief and ultimately responsible for all content, and in the light of the unacceptable journalistic standards of the Newsnight film broadcast on Friday 2nd November, I have decided that the honourable thing to do is to step down from the post of Director-General.
"When appointed to the role, with 23 years' experience as a producer and leader at the BBC, I was confident the Trustees had chosen the best candidate for the post, and the right person to tackle the challenges and opportunities ahead.
"However the wholly exceptional events of the past few weeks have led me to conclude that the BBC should appoint a new leader.
"To have been the director general of the BBC even for a short period, and in the most challenging of circumstances, has been a great honour.
"While there is understandable public concern over a number of issues well covered in the media - which I'm confident will be addressed by the Review process - we must not lose sight of the fact that the BBC is full of people of the greatest talent and the highest integrity.
"That's what will continue to make it the finest broadcaster in the world."
'"Then we have to look at Newsnight and... the way in which they behaved, the way they trailed, they made it obvious who it was, or who they alleged it was by referring people to the internet."'What happened seems fairly clear to me; the BBC and its Labour allies saw a way of taking attention away from the Jimmy Saville story and placing the spotlight onto the hated Tory party. Tom Watson raised the matter in the House of Commons during PMQs on 24 October:
"Mr Tom Watson (West Bromwich East) (Lab): The evidence file used to convict paedophile Peter Righton, if it still exists, contains clear intelligence of a widespread paedophile ring. One of its members boasts of his links to a senior aide of a former Prime Minister, who says he could smuggle indecent images of children from abroad. The leads were not followed up, but if the file still exists I want to ensure that the Metropolitan police secure the evidence, re-examine it and investigate clear intelligence suggesting a powerful paedophile network linked to Parliament and No. 10."The BBC took the story forward with its Newsnight programme, a programme that cast serious aspersions without every even showing the alleged victim any photos of the alleged culprit. Basic journalism you'd have thought, but not at the BBC.
'Some Conservatives feel particularly unhappy about the way this has been treated. Of course the treatment of the wrongly accused is the worst feature, but they are not happy that in a fairly unsuccessful attempt to disguise his name the Conservative party was accused of harbouring a paedophile in the Thatcher era. Some Conservatives will ask why the unnamed person had to be described in this way. Would the BBC have said a senior figure of the Callaghan or Wilson era, if the dates had been different, or were they as often seems the case, out to attack Margaret Thatcher? Would they have constantly repeated the word Labour, if the senior figure had been from that party, or sufficed themselves with a general word like politician? Why, in the North Wales abuse cases, did the BBC not constantly refer also to Clwyd Council, the Council responsible for the childrens’ homes? Clwyd was certainly not a Conservative Council. Why did they not add the Labour party label to a very nasty set of incidents if they thought the fact that it was a national Conservative government mattered? Why didn’t the unpublished Clwyd report into the abuse crisis become a matter of interest, as well as the wide ranging enquiry ordered and published by Conservative Ministers?'
Hansard 29 October:Anything you'd like to add Mr Watson?
'Mr Watson: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how many files relating to the premiership of Sir Edward Heath (a) are retained by Government Departments and (b) have been transferred to the National Archives but have not yet been released under the 30 Year Rule. [124917]'
A bizarre story, probably never to be repeated.
http://www.thesmokinggun.com/documents/double-daylight-saving-drunk-driving-467982
'Obama did not win a single state that fully requires photo IDs to vote, although he was victorious in four states that accept non-photo identification '
http://www.wnd.com/2012/11/did-this-dirty-trick-get-obama-elected/
If the Palestinians control the investigation who, apart from the BBC, will believe it?
http://elderofziyon.blogspot.co.uk/2012/11/arafat-might-not-be-dug-up-pals-and.html
More news you won't see on the BBC or MSNBC as they work for an Obama second term. http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSBRE8A41KH20121105?irpc=932
"C'mon America, how y'all like to freak? Do you honk the chest or pinch a cheek?"
'While every single poll on the planet predicts Democrats will enjoy a turnout advantage of three to eleven points, the latest Rasmussen survey of party affiliation taken throughout October shows that Republicans enjoy a huge 5.8% Party ID advantage going into the 2012 election.I hope Rasmussen is correct.
According to Twitter's invaluable NumbersMuncher, Rasmussen correctly predicted 2008 would be a D+7 election and incorrectly predicted 2010 would be D+3. (2010 was D+0, or even, so Rasmussen gave an edge to Democrats they didn't have.)
If the 2012 race is D+2, Romney's probably going to win. If the race is R+6, Romney's going to enjoy a landslide.
The most important piece of information in this poll, though, is that Rasmussen's sample is a monstrous 15,000 likely voter. Moreover, Rasmussen's Party ID results match similar results found by Gallup and Pew.
Again, if Rasmussen is anywhere near as correct as he's been in the past, all of these polls showing Obama holding small leads, are dead wrong. They're under-sampling Republicans in a major way; predicting an electorate that looks like 2008.'
'On the eve of the presidential election CBS News program 60 Minutes released a transcript of an interview with President Obama in which he said it was "too early to tell" whether the attack on the U.S. consulate in Libya was an act of terrorism.Will the US electorate, aided by some Democratic party polling fraud and an overwhelmingly pro-Obama media, re-elect Barack Obama who is probably the worst US President in history? I fear that they may.
The statement appears to contradict Obama's claim in a second debate with GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney that he identified the Sept. 11 attack that killed Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other Americans as a terror attack the day after it happened.
Romney had criticized Obama at the Oct. 17 debate for refusing to accurately call the assault "terrorism" and pointed to instances where Obama referred to it several times as a spontaneous protest of an anti-Islam video for weeks afterward.
Obama said he referred to it as an act of terror Sept. 12 in a statement in the Rose Garden at the White House. Debate moderator Candy Crowley of CNN agreed and told Romney he was wrong.
But in an interview with CBS newsman Steve Kroft after the Rose Garden statement but on the same day, Obama was asked what he meant because Kroft indicated it was unclear:
Kroft: Mr. President, this morning you went out of your way to avoid the use of the word terrorism in connection with the Libya attack. Do you believe that this was a terrorist attack?
Obama: Well it's too early to know exactly how this came about, what group was involved, but obviously it was an attack on Americans.
CBS News waited until Nov. 4 to post that portion of its interview and offered no explanation as to why it delayed release of a video clip that was pertinent to what became a significant story at the time.
On Friday, Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah, a member of the congressional committee investigating the attack, suggested the White House intentionally misled the public because Obama's re-election campaign was claiming he had crushed al-Qaeda terrorists.
"They didn't want to admit it was a terrorist attack," Chaffetz said. "Admitting it was terrorism would fly in the face of what they had been telling the American people about al-Qaeda."
"No matter what happens on Tuesday, the Congress will continue to dive deep into this issue," he said of the election.
In the Rose Garden, his first official remarks on the attack, Obama read a 44-line statement on the deaths in Benghazi and extolled the memories of those who died.
Toward the end of his statement, he spoke generally of the "solemn memory" of the Sept. 11 attacks 11 years earlier. He talked of mourning those who died then, and how he had visited the graves of troops who died in Iraq and Afghanistan at Arlington National Cemetery and also to wounded troops at Walter Reed.
"Our country is only as strong as the character of our people and the service of those both civilian and military who represent us around the globe," he said. "No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation, alter that character, or eclipse the light of the values that we stand for."
After the debate in which Obama claimed that statement referred to Benghazi, GOP vice presidential nominee Rep. Paul Ryan defended Romney's characterization of Obama's refusal to admit the truth.
"It was a passing comment about acts of terror in general, it was not a claim that this was a terrorist attack," Ryan said on ABC's Good Morning America that week. "Nobody believes that that Rose Garden speech from the president was suggesting that that (individual act) was an act of terror."
Contributing: Donna Leinwand in Washington'
'The last three polls Marquette has conducted of the presidential race have had a sample of D+2-4. Their polls throughout the year have ranged D+2-6. Their poll right before the June recall election of Scott Walker used a sample of D+5 and accurately predicted the election results. The sample for this latest poll? D+11. 'Here's another Breitbart
'One of the chief reasons the media is so mistaken in their zeal to proclaim Obama the election winner is that most of the polls they're basing their predictions on are wildly inflating Democrat turnout. The overwhelming majority of media polls are an assuming an electorate that is at least as Democrat as the one in 2008, with many polls assuming a higher Democrat turnout. This is just daft. The latest CBS poll of 3 swing states is the most recent to show that GOP has a huge turnout advantage over Democrats. '
An email will be sent later today. I wonder if Helen Boaden will have the time to respond.
uk . Best wishes,BBC News website'
'Here's the first map and note the lack of the word Egypt and the way that there is no differentiation between Israel and Egypt in terms of colour as there would be in any normal map (I believe mapmakers usually work to a three colour rule)...So one year on and are the BBC being shoddy or is there an agenda here?
Here is the BBC's latest response, that includes an actual apology:
NewsOnline Complaints to me
Dear Sir,
Sorry not to reply sooner to your complaint.
One of the maps http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-14035536 is plain shoddy work, for which we apologise. It should mark Egypt.'
'Complaint title: Deliberate misdirection of readers of article
Complaint description: I note that still the BBC can't name Egypt on a map of Israel and Gaza. On the above link you will see a map. This map makes it seem as though Israel is both enormous and surrounds Gaza thus presumably explaining how Israel has been able to blockade it for some years now. There is of course a problem with this: Israel does not surround Gaza. The country that borders Gaza to the South West is Egypt not Israel, that is where the Rafah Crossing is... So why have the BBC omitted the word Egypt from that map? Before you tell me that 'The first map is not intended to be an accurate geographic or political representation but to show the location of Gaza and where this particular incident happened. Had Egypt been involved in any way in this story, the map would have included Egypt.' as you did in your first reply to a similar complaint of mine last year, please note that in October last year I received this second reply regarding the same map from NewsOnline Complaints 'Dear Sir, Sorry not to reply sooner to your complaint. One of the maps http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-14035536 is plain shoddy work, for which we apologise. It should mark Egypt.' Why is the BBC still using this shoddy map? Why are you trying to mislead people?'
“This is an absolute double standard. I was convicted of false accounting but I never forged documents as Denis has. Why has he not been prosecuted when we were?”That's Eric Illsley, the former Barnsley MP, as quoted by the Sunday Times. He received a 12-month prison sentence for false accounting. He has called on the police and the CPS to pursue Denis MacShane following his resignation as an MP.
'Luke Rudkowski hits the streets of NYC to find out where Obama supporters really stand on his policies. Now he did this in an underhanded way where the policies where presented to be Romney's, but this was only done to get an honest opinion. The reactions when the truth was uncovered varied but they were very telling to say the least. Here are some of the sources that were mentioned throughout the interviews 1st question, part 1 - Obama, in Europe, signs Patriot Act extension http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/43180202/ns/us_news-security/t/obama-europe-signs... 1st question, part 2 - Warrantless Spying Skyrockets Under Obama http://reason.com/archives/2012/10/03/warrantless-spying-skyrockets-under-obam 2nd question - President Obama Signed the National Defense Authorization Act - Now What? http://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/2012/01/02/president-obama-signed-the-na... 3rd question - Secret 'Kill List' Proves a Test of Obama's Principles and Will http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/29/world/obamas-leadership-in-war-on-al-qaeda.... 4th question - Drone wars and state secrecy -- how Barack Obama became a hardliner http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/jun/02/drone-wars-secrecy-barack-obama 'So why are these people still supporting Barack Obama? Of course the reason these people don't know these facts is that the US media like the BBC in the UK is all but actively campaigning for Barack Obama's re-election.
'The BBC blurb for the Danny Baker Radio London afternoon show runs 'The radio genius with great guests, calls and music.' They're quite correct but then why have they cancelled his show?'Menawhile the pinheads at the BBC still have this on the Radio London schedules for today
'Soaking Britain may be in for a new bout of flooding in coming months, the Environment Agency has warned. Rivers are full after the wettest April to June on record, followed by more rain in July, September and October. The earth is saturated and in many areas there is no more space left in aquifers to store water that seeps through from the surface. The agency warn that people should be ready for floods even with relatively small amounts of rain. They warn of increased risk of river flooding in November and December, especially in the south-west and northern and western parts of England and Wales. Devon, Dorset and Hampshire are also vulnerable to flooding from water coming up through the soaking ground because groundwater in aquifers moves much more slowly than surface water, and will take more time to flow away underground. Sarah Jackson, the Met Office's chief adviser to the Government, said: "We are heading into the winter period which is traditionally the wetter period of the year in the UK. "Because the ground is so wet, if we do have any prolonged heavy rainfall in any part of the country, there is going to be heightened risk of flooding." The agency said more than 1.1 million people are signed up to receive its flood warnings - which can be sent by email, text, or a message to a landline or mobile phone.'How peculiar because it was only six years ago that the BBC's print arm, The Guardian, reported as fact that:
'Scientists know a lot about how events will unfold...which means that whatever we do, our climate destiny is fixed for the next few decades... Rainfall will decline in the summer and the increased deluges in winter will struggle to replenish thirsty reservoirs because much of the water will run off the baked ground.'
'largest reductions in summer precipitation of 40 per cent (central estimate) are to be seen in the far south of England. A decrease of 65 per cent is indicated at the 10th percentile with a 6 per cent decrease at the 90th percentile)'Meanwhile on their front page the worry is flooding. In case the Environment Agency decide to 'amend' their website, here's a screen grab...
'Radio and TV presenter, Danny Baker, has lashed out at the BBC for making radical cuts in jobs and funding.
Baker, who presents a BBC London 94.9FM show, as well as one on Radio 5Live, used Twitter to criticise the corporation.
He tweeted, “So the BBC London afternoon show – current Sony Gold Holder – is to be part of the Delivering Quality First cuts. The logic of Genius.
“Nothing like having your show axed under an initiative called Delivering Quality First to let you know how valued you are. #CrapOutFirst
“Just off up the end of the garden with 3 Sony Gold awards (one current, one not even mine) and a stick of dynamite. #DeliveringDynamiteFirst…
Several of his followers responded, and one even began a hashtag campaign, #savethecandyman hashtag campaign.
Twitter user John Bradley wrote, “#prodnose Cutting the wonderful award winning Danny Baker Show while claiming to #deliverqualityfirst is ridiculous #bbc #savethecandyman.”
And another, Amanda Hodgson, tweeted, “Anyone who listened to Danny Baker @prodnose on Desert Island Discs knows what a valuable asset he is to the #BBC big mistake there guys.”'
'Next weekAs Rob Brydon has tweeted:@prodnose is inducted into Radio Academy Hall of fame. Not surprising, he's the best. Today the BBC are axing his show. Dickwits.'
As Danny tweeted:'Glad that BBC are axing@prodnose Danny Baker's daily radio show. I've had it up to here with his wit, warmth and originality.'
'Deep thanks to everyone who has responded about the radio. We dwell amid pinheaded weasels who know only timid, the generic and the abacus.'As Danny says 'I hope they choke on their abacuses'
