An anniversary that won't feature on the BBC news today

Today is the 27th anniversary of the Provisional IRA firing mortars at Downing Street in an attempt to kill the Prime Minister and members of the British War cabinet sitting at the time. This attempt seems to have all but disappeared from the collective British memory.

Maybe Theresa May could have asked Jeremy Corbyn for his thoughts on the actions of the Provos on that day. I wonder if he could have managed to condemn their actions without also condemning the actions of the British state?

Why do Andrew Marr, Robert Peston and others seem to hold back when questioning John McDonnell?

It seems to me that political interviewers such as Andrew Marr and Robert Peston seem to hold back when questioning the Labour shadow chancellor John McDonnell. When I say hold back, I mean even more so than when questioning other Labour Party leading figures.

Why might this be? Might it have anything to do with fear of John McDonnell's possible reaction to strong questioning? After all after a 100-strong meeting about the IRA at pub in New Cross in 1989, a newspaper report read: “Mr McDonnell went on to describe the Lewisham Labour councillors who had boycotted the meeting as ‘gutless wimps’ and joked that knee-capping might help to change their minds.”

You can read more about John McDonnell and his support for peace here, including his defence which is the old one that he has “no recollection of making these remarks”.

Jeremy Corbyn refuses to condemn IRA violence again and again

Listen to this piece of BBC audio

Even the BBC's Stephen Nolan seemed shocked by Jeremy Corbyn's refusal. 

Take this refusal and his appointment of John McDonnell to be his Shadow Chancellor and I think we can see what sort of a man Jeremy Corbyn is.

Watch this piece of video from the recent PMQs and watch Jeremy Corbyn's reaction to the question, he looks away from David Cameron and plays with his pen.



Jeremy Corbyn is a disgrace.


Oddly having written this piece I have found another blogger had the same idea but had some extra details such as:

'The most reliable account of all people who died as a result of the Northern Ireland ‘troubles’ is contained in David McKittrick’s extraordinary Lost Lives . Not so much a book as a monument, Lost Lives catalogues, with encyclopedic detail and exemplary dispassion 3636 deaths variously attributed to paramilitary groups, the security forces and others without affiliation. 

58.8% of these deaths were the responsibility of republican terrorist organisations, 28.9% loyalist groups and 10.1% security forces. Of the 2139 deaths that were the responsibility of republicans, 1771 of these were attributable to the IRA. The British Army were responsible for 301 deaths and the RUC 52.'

and 

'Last Thursday, McDonnell — a largely unknown MP until last week — was a guest on BBC1’s Question Time. By now he must have known or have been told that he would have to address issues arising from the comments he had made 13 years previously.

Political apologies are rare but if made with conviction and underpinned with genuine moral compassion they can be incredibly poignant. David Cameron’s Commons statement following the Saville enquiry into Bloody Sunday was arguably his most noble act as Prime Minister. It was an apology delivered without a trace of equivocation or qualification.

McDonnell will never now escape what he said in 2003. On Question Time he expressed not so much the remorse of a man who had offended people more someone who regretted that this had all come back to bite him. It should be noted that he did not retract what he had said in 2003, he merely accepted and apologised that his comments had caused offence.

The inconvenient truth for Jeremy Corbyn is that we, of course, know why he hung up on Stephen Nolan and we know why it took John McDonnell 13 years to offer such a risible, caveated apology.

It is because they wanted the IRA to win.

Their pious homilies to the peace process will not wash with anyone. Their commitment to a united Ireland was total. The relationships they invested in for decades were with terrorists organisations not democratic nationalist parties. It has proved a hard habit to break for them as Nick Cohen and others have demonstrated.'

More at Steve4good but not on the Labour supporting and largely IRA sympathising BBC.

Get him...

I hear that The Sunday Telegraph says Tony Blair faces being summoned before Parliament to explain "secret negotiations" he is said to have held with Sinn Fein leader Gerry Adams over on-the-run IRA suspects. 

I can hardly wait but then Blair is so slippery he'll get away scot free

Why the disparity in treatment?

Why was it necessary for the furtherance of peace in Northern Ireland to issue Royal Pardons to some convicted IRA terrorists and comfort letters to 200 others but to investigate the British Army's actions on Bloody Sunday? 

Other than Tony Blair and his government being pro Irish Republicanism, can you think of a reason?

Actually there is the possibility that supporting the IRA was trendy in the 1970s amongst the British left, just as other 'Civil Liberties' matters were.

IRA victims use Twitter to hijack Sinn Fein conference - Latest - Belfast Newsletter

Sheer genius, but do Sinn Fein members have conscience over what IRA did?

' Sinn Fein members attending their annual party conference in Wexford at the weekend were reminded of the unresolved issues facing them as hundreds of posts about IRA atrocities were made online by victims and their relatives.

A number of victims took to social networking site Twitter to state the names of their loved ones and the dates of various IRA murders and bombings, using a hashtag that had been created by the party specifically for the conference.'

More here http://m.newsletter.co.uk/news/politics/latest/ira-victims-use-twitter-to-hijack-sinn-fein-conference-1-5866645

Israeli police quiz IRA suspect

Terrorist scum are terrorist scum are terrorist scum.

More here http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-188399/Israeli-police-quiz-IRA-suspect.html

This sentence I found most interesting and may help to explain the BBC's position on Northern Ireland and Israel.

'In hardline Catholic districts of Belfast it is common to see pro-Palestinian slogans painted on walls, while in staunchly Protestant areas Israeli flags are sometimes flown alongside British flags and loyalist paramilitary banners.'

Murders in Northern Ireland - A post for @OfficialMHick

@OfficialMHick has been tweeting away about the need for apologies and reconciliation in Northern Ireland but seems unable to see why apologies from former IRA leaders are needed as well as from the UK government and Loyalist paramilitary leaders.

'In relation to perpetration of killings, Republican paramilitaries account for almost 59 per cent of all deaths, Loyalist paramilitaries for almost 28 per cent, the British Army for 9 per cent, the RUC for almost 2 per cent and other groups each for less than 1 per cent. Republican paramilitaries have killed 74 per cent of all Protestants killed over 25 per cent of all Catholics, and almost 96 per cent of those who were classified as "Non Northern Ireland." Loyalist paramilitaries killed 19 per cent of all Protestants killed, almost 50 per cent of all Catholics and just 2 per cent of the "Non Northern Ireland" category.'

Source  is the very detailed 'Mapping Troubles-Related Deaths and Deprivation in Northern Ireland by Marie Therese Fay, Mike Morrissey and Marie Smyth - The Cost of the Troubles Study'

So whilst the British government setup an enquiry into Bloody Sunday and apologised for deaths caused by the  British Army, has Martin 'machinegun' McGuinness ever apologised for the killings that he authorised or maybe even took part in when second-in-command of the IRA in Derry? Has Martin 'machinegun' McGuinness ever apologised for the IRA murders that took place when he was allegedly the head of the IRA's Northern Command ? Has Martin McGuinness ever apologised for the IRA's 1987 Enniskillen bombing, which left 11 civilians dead?

Here we go again...

The BBC are delighted to report that:

'The police are to launch a murder investigation into the deaths of 13 people shot dead by soldiers in Londonderry on Bloody Sunday in 1972.

The move comes after the PSNI and Public Prosecution Service reviewed the findings of the Saville inquiry, which said none of those killed was armed.

It published its report in June 2010, after a 12-year inquiry.
The police investigation is expected to take at least four years and involve a team of 30 detectives.'

So far as I am aware there will be no equivalent  police investigation into the IRA's massacre at Enniskillen, nor the IRA's killing of Earl Mountbatten, Baroness Brabourne, Nicholas Knatchbull and Paul Maxwell, nor the Brighton bombing nor any of the other acts of murderous terrorism carried out by the IRA under the leadership of various people, one or more of whom may now be British MPs.

The Queen and Martin McGuinness

The Queen is to meet and shake hands with Martin McGuinness today, what on earth could they chat about? Here are some suggestions for questions the Queen could start with rather than the usual "So what do you do?"

1. "So what did you used to do?"

2. "Why do some people call you Martin 'machinegun' McGuinness?"

3. "Do the names Earl Mountbatten, Baroness Brabourne, Nicholas Knatchbull and Paul Maxwell mean anything to you?"

4. "Did you know of the plot to kill Earl Mountbatten before the murders took place?"

5. "Did you approve of or do nothing to prevent the plot to kill Earl Mountbatten from happening?"

6. "Did you know of or approve the murderous attack on the British Army at Warrenpoint on the same day?"

7. "Tell me Mr McGuinness how many people had the IRA murdered before Bloody Sunday?"

8. "Why were you carrying a Thompson submachine gun in Londonderry on Bloody Sunday?"

9. "What do you have to say to the Saville Inquiry conclusion that you had been 'engaged in paramilitary activity' on that day?"

10.  "What do you have to say in reply to this extract from The Saville Inquiry paragraph R2A-4 of the Reply Closing Submission, 'the submission given by Martin McGuinness is 'simply incorrect' and 'flawed'?"

11. Following the Saviile Inquiry into the evnts of 'Bloody Sunday' do you think there should be an investigation into the Brighton bombing, a plot to kill as many members of the British Government as possible?"

12. "Did you have foreknowledge of or approve the Brighton bombing?"

13. "Did you discuss the Claudy bombings with Father Chesney?"

14. "Why did you claim in 2002 that you had never met Father Chesney, when in 2010 you then admitted that you had? Why should we believe this version of your story when you appear to have lied previously about the same matter?"

15. "Have all of the IRA's weapons been decommissioned? All of them?"

16. "When you were second in command of the IRA in Derry how many murders did you arrange or approve?"

17. "When you were second in command of the IRA in Derry how many people did you personally kill?"

18. "When exactly did you leave the IRA?'

19. "Was anyone killed in the circumstances you describe in this interview?"


20. "Will you now apologise to the relatives of all the people the IRA killed, I am one of those relatives Mr McGuinness?"


There you go, that should be enough topics of conversation to make sure that there are no awkward silences...

The death of a tyrant

The BBC's coverage of the death of Colonel Gaddafi has been rather odd. The BBC have been forced to report that Gadaffi was a tyrant and ran a less than pleasant regime but this is at odds with their previous reporting of him as some sort of freedom fighter, standing up to the United States and the victim of Western aggression. The BBC instinctively support the United Nations, as they tend to support most supra-national bodies (although not NATO), and so I am not surprised to note that they have yet to investigate how it was that the country run by a tyrant like Gaddafi was elected to its Human Rights Council last year, to the Security Council in 2008-2009, and as General Assembly president in 2009. The BBC are also obsessively reporting the claims (almost certainly true) that Gadaffi was shot in the head after being captured and publicising the calls for an investigation. I do not remember the BBC being that bothered by calls for investigations into the numerous evils perpetrated by Gadaffi's regime, such a the murder of WPC Yvonne Fletcher, the massacre of 1,270 prisoners at Abu Salim Prison or the many other massacres carried out on Gadaffi's instructions since he started his rule of terror.

The BBC have also not been that interested in investigating Gadaffi's support for international terrorists including the IRA. On that subject it would be interesting to know if Martin McGuinness ever had any contact with Colonel Gadaffi during the period that Libya was supplying weapons to the IRA, weapons that were used to kill British soldiers and civilians.

Gadaffi was a very nasty man who ruled by the use of force and terror and was responsible for the deaths of many thousands of people including, those killed using weapons supplied by him, on British soil. Excuse me if I don't weap a tear because a Libyan decided that a bullet in the head was a reasonable way of ending his life.

Boris Johnson's a fool

'Boris Johnson's a fool' - so I hear many lefties say. Well I say, better a fool than a vile excuse for a human like Ken Livingstone...

On Sheikh Yusuf Al-Qaradawi

Fine words Ken but you know what taqqiya and doublespeak are, don't you?
In case you really don't, here's Sheikh Yusuf Al-Qaradawi in his own words


On Christmas


Contrast this with how Britain, Europe and the rest of the Western Christian world is told to accommodate the religion of Islam

On justifying suicide bombs (from 2:15)


On the Jews and Hitler and his hope for the future


What do you have to say about those comments by the man you have invited to London and described as representing 'a more progressive strand of Islam than the Wahhabi sect'? Actually Sheikh Yusuf Al-Qaradawi may well be more moderate than the Wahhabi Islamists but that is a question of degree of extermism.

Here's Peter Tatchell on Ken Livingstone and his views of Islamists


So when leftists attack Boris Johnson for being a fool, remember who Ken Livingstone has allied himself with and vote accordingly next year. Ken Livingstone has made his choices and hopes to benefit from the large Muslim vote in London as a result. Let's hope that decent people of London of whatever religion, or none, stand up for the rights of the followers of religions other than Islam as well as homosexuals, etc. In fact for all those people the man Ken Livingstone called moderate wishes harm to.

Ken Livingstone is an unredeemed socialist, a former associate of some of the murderers in the IRA, as well as a recent inviter and defender of an Islamist extremist to speak in London. Let's make sure Ken Livingstone never gets his hands on any of the levers of power by being re-elected to bring more shame on this great city.


As an aside it was the same Al-Qaradawi who led the prayer in Egypt's Tahrir Square following the revolution. The same Al Qaradawi who the BBC represent as being a moderate Muslim leader and who will figure somehow in the future leadership of Egypt; a man who supports suicide bombing of Israel.

A "No shit, sherlock" special with some additional questions that need answering

I read on the BBC  that:

'Sinn Fein's Martin McGuinness has acknowledged that accidental killings by the IRA of civilians could be described as "murders".

In an interview with the Independent, he said the IRA "was involved in incidents which resulted in the accidental killing of innocent people".

Mr McGuinness added "the term used by the relatives of those people who were killed was that they were murdered".'

I will leave out the word 'accidental' from that first sentence because I am not sure of its validity and that leaves us with 'killings by the IRA of civilians could be described as "murders"' - "No shit, Sherlock"

However there are some additional questions that Martin McGuinness needs to answer in relation to this statement. First 'accidental' - Does Martin McGuinness really want us to believe that those killed by IRA bombs and bulletswere killed accidentally? Let's leave aside the fact that the IRA killed dozens and dozens of British Armed forces and Police; has Martin MacGuinness ever apologised for their murder? He seems happy to claim that they were killed as part of a war of liberation but equally keen on having the British government and Army censured for retaliating and killing IRA members; how odd.

Martin McGuinness and the IRA's use of the phrase "legitimate targets" to describe the people they murdered  reminds me of the Islamist terrorists justification of killing infidels as infidels cannot be 'innocent'.

The ame BBC article includes this line 'Mr McGuinness has accused the media of becoming obsessed with his IRA past, claiming that ordinary voters are not interested in the issue.'. I wonder if that's true, do ordinary voters really not care if their future President is a former murderer, really?

However the questions I really want answered though are these: how many British soldiers, policemen and civilians were killed personally by Martin McGuinness, how many on his orders and how mnay could he have prevented by saying 'No' to their IRA killers? Is the answer to all three of those questions really 'no'?

A piece of pertinent information that the BBC see fit to ignore

The BBC report that:

'Martin McGuinness would meet Queen as president

Martin McGuinness has said he will be prepared to meet all heads of state "without exception", if he is elected President of Ireland. 

Sinn Fein announced on Friday that it would be supporting Northern Ireland's Deputy First Minister for the role

Returning from a trip to the US on Saturday, Mr McGuinness said he hoped his candidacy would not be divisive.

When the Queen made her first visit to Ireland in May, Sinn Fein did not take part in any of the main ceremonies.

Speaking to the BBC on Saturday morning, Mr McGuinness said he had given careful consideration to his decision to stand.

He was asked how he would handle another Royal visit to Ireland, given his party's position on the Queen's historic trip.

He said: "If the people of Ireland decide that I should be their president, my responsibilities and duties would be to meet heads of state from all over the world and to do that without exception and that would be my position."'

 How magnanimous of Martin McGuinness to deign to meet the Queen in the future.

The BBC do admit that 'Martin McGuinness, ... has admitted being second in command of the IRA in Derry in the 1970s' but don't link that to the fact that the IRA murdered the Queen's cousin Louis Mountbatten, 1st Earl Mountbatten of Burma, in 1979. Gerry Adams, Martin McGuinness's SinnFein/IRA colleague, said of Lord Mountbatten's murder:

'The IRA gave clear reasons for the execution. I think it is unfortunate that anyone has to be killed, but the furore created by Mountbatten's death showed up the hypocritical attitude of the media establishment. As a member of the House of Lords, Mountbatten was an emotional figure in both British and Irish politics. What the IRA did to him is what Mountbatten had been doing all his life to other people; and with his war record I don't think he could have objected to dying in what was clearly a war situation. He knew the danger involved in coming to this country. In my opinion, the IRA achieved its objective: people started paying attention to what was happening in Ireland.'

What has Martin McGuinness ever said about this cold-blooded murder? Did he have any part in it, the ordering or approving of it? Have the BBC ever asked these questions? Do the BBC even care?

Regardless of the answers to those questions, would the Queen want to meet one of the men who at the very least was high up in the organisation that killed her cousin, the man who was her eldest son's favourite uncle?


UPDATE:
I see that Biased-BBC have a related piece about the BBC's lack of interest in Martin McGuinness's IRA background:

'why not ask when did McGuinness leave the IRA, exactly? When he was occupying the position as Capo di tutti capo, just how many innocent lives did he arrange to have terminated.Perhaps even more pointedly, how many peope did he murder HIMSELF? What exactly did he "command"?'

A Conservative Prime Minister with principles; no not Cameron, John Major.

'There is a story that when Bill Clinton invited the leader of the Sein Fein (sic) party and likely the militant IRA as well, Gerry Adams, to the White House on St. Patrick's Day in 1995, and after you refused to take Clinton's calls.

It is a true story. We had been promised by the White House that they wouldn't do it and they did. It is all very well for the White House to invite Adams because Bill Clinton was put under pressure from the Senate. But the money that was being collected in America was being used to blow up British soldiers in Ireland. I don't think people in America understood that. After 9/11, they did. I was beside myself with anger over it. It was a direct betrayal.

Who had promised you in the White House? Do you remember?

I do remember. But I'm not going to tell you who it was. The promise came not directly to me. It came to my chief of staff. You can make your own judgment as to who it was. But it was someone who was in a position to make a promise on behalf of the president and had it delivered. And the promise was explicit. It was not casual. The promise was sought, considered, offered and accepted by us, and then it was reneged on.'

More of an interesting interview at The Atlantic. I wonder when/if David Cameron will ever take a stand over an issue he truly believes in?

Just a quick ponder

When the Queen's visit to Ireland was announced the BBC asked Gerry Adams for a comment. Now that Irish terrorists (obviously not from the IRA) have issued a bomb threat on the people of London will the BBC do the same now? If not, why not?

Does this mean that the IRA didn't really completely decommission their arms?

Police Officer Ronan Kerr was killed by men who until recently were members of the Provisional IRA. Police Officer Ronan Kerr was killed by men using IRA weapons, weapons that should have been decommissioned. So two questions come to mind: first how did Ronan Kerr's killers get access to Provo weapons and second does this mean that the IRA did not really decommission all of their arms?

The second question is one that I suspect we all know the answer to... Can we expect a statement from Gerry Adams and Martin McGuinness and if so should we believe a word that they say?

Before Lockerbie will there be a Northern Ireland terrorism related trial?

The Telegraph report that:

'Moussa Koussa could face criminal proceedings in a British court for his alleged involvement in IRA bombings within weeks, The Daily Telegraph can disclose.

The legal team representing nearly 160 British victims of IRA bomb attacks which used Libyan-supplied Semtex are considering bringing a private prosecution against the former Libyan foreign minister within weeks.

They are looking at both private criminal and civil proceedings against Mr Koussa, who defected to the UK last week and is being questioned by British officials.

A criminal action, which could commence within weeks, could see Mr Koussa charged with multiple charges for murder, conspiracy to cause murder and offences under the counter-terrorism laws.

If criminal charges are accepted by magistrates, they can issue a warrant for the police to arrest of Mr Koussa. The Director of Public Prosecutions could then take over the case, if he deems it to be in the public interest.

A civil prosecution would see lawyers seek damages from Mr Koussa on behalf of the victims for loss, wrongful death and “trespass to the person”.

...

He said Mr Moussa had been the direct link between Tripoli and the IRA army council, while he worked as a diplomat in his country’s London embassy.'

I do hope that something does come of this and if so I wonder if any Northern Ireland politicians will be nervously watching proceedings and awaiting the invitation to attend as a witness.

In case you fell for Ken Livingstone's genial old uncle act on Newsnight last night

On Hugo Chavez and Socialism



On Sheikh Yusuf Al-Qaradawi

Fine words Ken but you know what taqqiya and doublespeak are. In case you really don't, here's Sheikh Yusuf Al-Qaradawi in his own words
On Christmas

Contrast with how Britain, Europe and the rest of the Western Christian world is told to accommodate the religion of Islam

On justifying suicide bombs (from 2:15)


On the Jews and Hitler and his hope for the future

What do you have to say about those comments by the man you have invited to London and described as representing 'a more progressive strand of Islam than the Wahhabi sect'? Actually Sheikh Yusuf Al-Qaradawi may well be more moderate than the Wahhabi Islamists but that is a question of degree.

Here's Peter Tatchell on Ken Livingstone and his views of Islamists


So remember who Ken Livingstone allies himself with and vote accordingly next year. He has made his choice and hopes to benefit from the large Muslim vote in London as a result. Let's hope that decent people of London of whatever religion, or none, stand up for the rights of the followers of religions other than Islam, for homosexuals, etc. In fact for all those people who the man Ken Livingstone called moderate wishes harm to.

Ken Livingstone is an unredeemed socialist, a former friend of the IRA, a recent inviter and defender of an Islamist extremist to speak in London. That's the truth about the ex, and he hopes future, Mayor of London - Ken Livingstone; let's make sure he is not re-elected to bring more shame on this great city.




As an aside it was the same Al-Qaradawi who led the prayer in Egypt's Tahrir Square following the revolution. The same Al Qaradawi who the BBC represent as being a moderate Muslim leader and who will figure somehow in the future leadership of Egypt; a man who supports suicide bombing of Israel.

The Queen's visit to Ireland, the BBC's choice of guest to comment - Gerry Adams - and a complaint (update)

Further to this post I have had a reply, to which I have in turn replied.

As a reminder, here's my original complaint post:

'Further to this and this I have lodged a complaint with the BBC:

 

Complaint type: BBC News

Location: England

What is your complaint about: Radio News

Programme title: 5Live 10pm news bulletin Friday 5 March 2011

Transmission date: 05/03/2011

Complaint category: Offence

Complaint summary: Choosing to intreview Gerry Adams re the Queen's future visit to Ireland

Full complaint: BBC 5Live 10pm News carried a piece about the upcoming visit by the Queen to Ireland. The BBC chose one person to interview about this visit; not the BBC's royal correspondent but Sinn fein's Gerry Adams. So for an opinion on the first royal visit to Ireland for 100 years the BBC choose the man who lead an organisation (Sinn Fein), in the public's mind, intrinsically linked with the terrorist organisation (the IRA) that blew up and killed the Queen's uncle, Lord Mountbatten, in 1979. Did anybody at BBC 5Live News wonder if it might be a trifle tasteless to interview a leading figure in Sinn Fein about the visit of the Queen to Ireland bearing in mind that history?

Receive a reply: Yes

Contacted us before: Yes

Complaint related to previous contact: No

Title: Mr

First name: NotaSheep

Surname: MaybeaGoat

Email address: notasheepmaybeagoat@gmail.com

Under 13: No

 

I wonder how long I will have to wait for a reply and how the BBC will justify their choice of guest... Somehow I doubt that they will accept a breach of taste.'

Here's the reply that I have just received from the BBC:

'Dear Mr MAYBEAGOAT

Reference CAS-637702

Thanks for contacting us about BBC Radio 5 live.

I understand you felt it was inappropriate to interview Sinn Fein’s Gerry Adams on the subject of the Queen’s first official state visit to Ireland.

The visit of the Queen to Ireland has created a lot of debate due to the history between the country and Britain over a number of years. As such, we’ve heard from a number of figures across our broadcasts, including Gerry Adams.

While you may personally disagree with the views of Mr Adams, he is fully entitled to hold them in the context of legitimate debate. For other views on the visit, please see the BBC Online link below:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-12652934

Nonetheless, your complaint will be added to our audience log, a daily report of audience feedback that's circulated to many BBC staff, including members of the BBC Executive Board, channel controllers and other senior managers.

The audience logs are seen as important documents that can help shape decisions about future programming and content.

Thanks again for taking the time to contact us.

Finally, I have attached an invitation from BBC Audience Services' Head of Communications & Complaints, asking you to participate in our customer survey. We would welcome your views on our service.

Kind Regards


BBC Complaints
www.bbc.co.uk/complaints

NB This is sent from an outgoing account only which is not monitored. You cannot reply to this email address but if necessary please contact us via our webform quoting any case number we provided.

__________________________________________

Dear Mr MAYBEAGOAT

Thank you for your recent email to the BBC. It is our aim to provide the highest standard of responses to emails we receive. To help us do this, I am writing to ask you to complete a customer satisfaction survey which is being conducted by the research company Ipsos MORI.

Your response will help us to judge how your most recent email was handled, so we'd be grateful if you could rate the service you received and the quality of our response. We aren't expecting you to rate the BBC, its output, or any previous contacts you may have had with us. The purpose of this survey is to help us understand the level of service we currently provide when responding to emails and to ensure we achieve the highest possible standards. We may use your individual responses to help in our staff training and performance management.

The questionnaire is very straightforward to complete and should take no longer than 5-10 minutes. You can log onto it in two ways, depending upon the email system you are using. You can either click onto the following website address, or paste it into your address bar (where you normally type in a website address). You will be guided through the questionnaire automatically once you have logged into it.

Website Address: http://survey2.infocorp.co.uk/webprod/resources/bbcinfo/start.asp?st=6&pass=CAS-637702-7DF6Z9

Thank you very much for taking the time to assist us.

Keith Jones
Head of Communications & Complaints, BBC Audience Services'

And here is my reply:

'Thank you for your reply.

Gerry Adams is indeed entitled to hold his views and if the BBC wish to promote them then that is a matter for you and your collective consciences. My point was that on that news broadcast you chose to broadcast just one interview: with the man who lead an organisation (Sinn Fein), in the public's mind, intrinsically linked with the terrorist organisation (the IRA) that blew up and killed the Queen's uncle, Lord Mountbatten, in 1979.

Interestingly of the seven people interviewed on the page to which you linked - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-12652934 - six welcomed the visist whilst only one did not. That was the one person that you decided to give air space to on the news broadcast in question. Why not any of the others?

The BBC is often guilty of blatant bias, in this case you were clearly guilty of a complete lack of taste and decency as well.

By the way, the invitation from BBC Audience Services' Head of Communications & Complaints, asking me to participate in our customer survey has expired. So you clearly don't welcome my views that much.


Regards

NotaSheep MaybeaGoat'