bbc falling to pieces?

[nevermind, neoliberalism has had it 159]

I hear that Ms. Boaden, long standing specialist in covering uncomfortable news up with fluffy trivia, has been given gardening leave, as has  DG Entwistle, on a fat few hundreds of thousands in sob money.Next Mr. Patten and the rest of them, break this nest of MI5/6 vipers u[p. All this hullabaloo is being played out inj front of our eyes, whilst not a single paedophile has been charged yet. Who were these highrankibng police and judges and freemasosn who abused these vulnerable boys and girls?why was a freemasons register before the Wales inquiry not granted by Waterhouse? Have the all male, secret split loyalists something to hide in that department? I mean whop would look into such a fraternity of men, obly, if we can tear the fabric of society to bits instead. Expect Johnathan King to be released, only to be rearrested with a fanfare, just as Glitter and Star, talk about the obvious one''s being held up as tabloid fodder. Lets have these politicians who think they are above the law put in front of judges, not fraternisers , but real judges.http://www.firmmagazine.com/features/1219/Schofield%2C_the_decoy_witchhunt_and_the_black_arts.html

[nevermind, neoliberalism has had it 159]

This is the new face of the BBC, a man for all cases and opportunities. Sadly he is not who he says he is or pretends to be, but good enough for the good ol'' BBC, it fits well.http://www.newleftproject.org/index.php/site/article_comments/who_is_jonathan_sacerdoti_the_bbcs_go_to_man_on_gaza

[nevermind, neoliberalism has had it 159]

The BBC''s limited actions over its failing course has not gone unnoticed and now is the time to call them to account over their blatant failure to report impartially and do its own investigative journalism.Unless the insipid internal connections to the security services are lanced, the full truth about child abuse and the use of people''s sexual proclivities/perversions as levers to steer the news agenda, will not come out or stop.medialense is independent and says it as it is.http://www.medialens.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=section&layout=blog&id=1&Itemid=8

[nevermind, neoliberalism has had it 159]

For a more up to date news and direct link to what is happening in and outside Gaza, please have a look at this reporting and compare it to the diatribe we receive from a self obsessed and rotten BBC.http://rt.com/news/gaza-israel-hamas-attack-687/

[nevermind, neoliberalism has had it 159]

The most bungled BBC interview ever, spokesperson for the pentagon, Zeinab Badawi is trying her best to smear Assange with....? sweet FA, she is totally unprofessional, constantly interupts, just as Gavin Essler and has not an iota of humanity in her.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JhT-EJDUTMcIn contrast, here she is with the wife of the prime war criminal with

whom she is on first name terms. She even refers to ‘Tony’ within.  What a shill...http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XrqwtLd8dBo

[nevermind, neoliberalism has had it 159]

This from medialens on the deep and never ending rusty bucket of WMD lies, this time its Syria, with the BBC playing the usual game. medialens is increasingly being threatened, just as PressTV was and their coverage is fair and square. This from David Edwards, enjoy

......	Doesn''t look right? View it online here
	December 12, 2012 Won''t Get Fooled Again? Hyping Syria''s WMD ''Threat'' By: David Edwards   Reading about crimes of state over many years, it is tempting to try to fathom the mind-set of political leaders. What actually is going on in their heads when they order sanctions that kill hundreds of thousands of children? What is in their hearts when they wage needless wars that shatter literally millions of lives? Are they desperately cruel, mindlessly stupid? Do they imagine they are living in a kind of hell where monstrous acts have to be committed to avoid even worse outcomes? Are they indifferent, focused on what will bring them short-term political and economic gain? Are they morally resigned, perceiving themselves as essentially powerless in the face of invincible political and economic forces (''If I didn''t do it, someone else would.'')? Similar questions come to mind as the US and UK governments once again raise the spectre of ‘weapons of mass destruction’ to demonise a target for ‘regime change’, this time in Syria. What is actually going on in the minds of people who know that exactly the same ploy was exposed as a cynical deception just a few years ago? Do they view the public with contempt? Are they laughing at us? Are they playing the only card they perceive to be available to them; one that they know will work imperfectly, but will have to do? In the US, NBC commented: ‘U.S. officials tell us that the Syrian military is poised tonight to use chemical weapons against its own people. And all it would take is the final order from Syrian President Assad.’ US media watch dog Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting asked: ‘So where did all of this new information come from?’ The familiar, ominous answer: ‘Anonymous government officials talking to outlets like the New York Times.’ This, for example: ‘Western intelligence officials say they are picking up new signs of activity at sites in Syria that are used to store chemical weapons. The officials are uncertain whether Syrian forces might be preparing to use the weapons in a last-ditch effort to save the government, or simply sending a warning to the West about the implications of providing more help to the Syrian rebels. ‘“It''s in some ways similar to what they''ve done before,” a senior American official said, speaking on the condition of anonymity to discuss intelligence matters. “But they''re doing some things that suggest they intend to use the weapons. It''s not just moving stuff around. These are different kind of activities.”’ (Michael Gordon, Eric Schmitt, Tim Arango, ''Flow of arms to Syria through Iraq persists, to US dismay,'' New York Times, December 1, 2012) FAIR commented: ‘Absent any further details, that would seem to be a strange standard for confirmation… But the theatrics – satellite images, anonymous sources speaking about weapons of mass destruction and so on – are obviously reminiscent of the lead up to the Iraq War.’ They are indeed. On May 26, 2004, the New York Times published a humbling mea culpa titled, ‘The Times and Iraq.’ The editors commented: ‘Editors at several levels who should have been challenging reporters and pressing for more skepticism were perhaps too intent on rushing scoops into the paper.’ As a result, the paper published a ‘Confidential News Sources Policy’, which included: ‘In any situation when we cite anonymous sources, at least some readers may suspect that the newspaper is being used to convey tainted information or special pleading. If the impetus for anonymity has originated with the source, further reporting is essential to satisfy the reporter and the reader that the paper has sought the whole story.’ (Confidential News Sources, New York Times, February 25, 2004) Clearly this has all been forgotten. The same claims about Syrian WMD have of course also poured out of the UK media. A December 5 leading article in The Times was titled: ''Assad''s Arsenal.'' The first line of the editorial: ''The embattled Syrian regime may be preparing to use chemical weapons. That would be a catastrophe; it must be averted, whatever it takes.’ As ever, Rupert Murdoch''s editors - and, no doubt, the boss, standing just over their shoulders - regretfully declared that Western military ''intervention'' might turn out to be the only answer: ‘we must also hope that the US and its allies would take any action that was deemed necessary to prevent the human and moral disaster that would be caused by the Syrian regime attempting its final exit in a cloud of mustard gas’. War, for the West, is now as normal as the air we breathe. Obviously it is the job of the West, with its blood-soaked track record, to save the peoples of the world from tyrannies that just happen to obstruct its geostrategic goals. In November 2002, as war loomed on Iraq, The Times reported: ‘President Saddam Hussein has been trying to buy from Turkish suppliers up to 1.25 million doses of atropine, a derivative of deadly nightshade. ‘It has wide-ranging medical uses but also protects the body from nerve agents that can paralyse their victims and kill in as little as two minutes.’ (Elaine Monaghan, ‘Iraq move increases chemical war fear,’ The Times, November 13, 2002) In 2010, The Times published the claim that Iran intended to develop a ‘trigger’ for a nuclear weapon. Investigative journalist Gareth Porter reported: ‘U.S. intelligence has concluded that the document published recently by the Times of London… is a fabrication, according to a former Central Intelligence Agency official.’ The counterterrorism specialist Porter had in mind, Philip Giraldi, commented: ‘The Rupert Murdoch chain has been used extensively to publish false intelligence from the Israelis and occasionally from the British government.’ In April 2011, The Times reported of Libya: ''There are increasing fears that Colonel Gaddafi could use suspected stocks of chemical weapons against [Misrata]... There are also fears that Colonel Gaddafi has stocks of nerve gas in the southern desert city of Sabha.'' (James Hider, ''Amid rigged corpses and chemical weapon threat, city fears for its life,'' The Times, April 27, 2011) No matter, The Times might yet see a Libya-style ''intervention'' in Syria. The Guardian reports this week: ''Britain''s military chiefs have drawn up contingency plans to provide Syrian rebels with maritime, and possibly air, power in response to a request from David Cameron, senior defence sources said on Monday night.’ The UK government is planning to fight with ‘rebels’ despite clear evidence of war crimes and the involvement of numerous foreign mercenaries armed and funded by regional tyrants. The Syrian government also stands accused of appalling crimes. Rusting Bins Of Mass Destruction - The Fantasy Specialists In the Guardian, Matt Williams and Martin Chulov used dramatic language to report claims ‘that the [Syrian] regime is considering unleashing chemical weapons on opposition forces’. The Guardian article cited CNN, which in turn cited ‘an unnamed US official as the source of its report’. Williams and Chulov expressed not a word of scepticism in their piece, adding a two-sentence denial from the much-demonised Syrian ‘regime’ as ‘balance’. A BBC article managed this reference to scepticism: ‘Pressed in the interview by the BBC''s Frank Gardner, he said he could understand why the public might be sceptical after the blunders made over Iraq''s alleged weapons of mass destruction 10 years ago.’ To his credit, the BBC’s Jonathan Marcus did rather better: ‘Was there an element of political spin here to accompany Nato''s decision to deploy patriot missiles in Turkey? ‘Sources contacted by the BBC say that there are indications of activity at certain chemical weapons storage sites. ‘However it is of course impossible to determine if this is a preliminary to the weapons'' use or, as some analysts believe, much more likely, the movement of munitions to ensure their security. Indeed such movement has been noted in the past.’ Despite the caution, Marcus promoted the idea that Syrian WMD might fall into the ‘wrong’ hands and that the US might need to intervene to prevent that happening. In the Independent, Robert Fisk went much further, pouring scorn on the claims: ‘The bigger the lie the more people will believe it. We all know who said that – but it still works. Bashar al-Assad has chemical weapons. He may use them against his own Syrian people. If he does, the West will respond. We heard all this stuff last year – and Assad’s regime repeatedly said that if – if  – it had chemical weapons, it would never use them against Syrians. ‘But now Washington is playing the same gas-chanty all over again. Bashar has chemical weapons. He may use them against his own people. And if he does…’ Fisk added: ‘over the past week, all the usual pseudo-experts who couldn’t find Syria on a map have been warning us again of the mustard gas, chemical agents, biological agents that Syria might possess – and might use. And the sources? The same fantasy specialists who didn’t warn us about 9/11 but insisted that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction in 2003: “unnamed military intelligence sources”... And yes, Bashar probably does have some chemicals in rusting bins somewhere in Syria’. If accurate, Fisk''s ‘rusting bins’ make a nonsense of the ‘considerable pressure'' on ''the US to come up with plans to secure the Syrian weapons in the event of the collapse of the regime’ described by Marcus. Alex Thomson of Channel 4 News wrote an excellent piece titled: ''Syria, a weapon of mass deception?’: ‘Without wishing to delve too far into The Who’s back catalogue… we need to remind ourselves in the UK that we won’t get fooled again.’ Thomson offered a rare ''mainstream media'' example of rational thinking on the issue: ‘But just to be old fashioned: what’s the evidence of any threat? What’s the basis for all this? What, in short, are they all talking about? Yes, by all accounts Syria has nerve and chemical agents. But possession does not mean threat of use. Israel is not credibly threatening to use nuclear weapons against Iran, despite possessing them.’ He noted that ''the story built upon nothing [has been] accepted as global fact when it’s nothing of the kind'' and made the obvious point: ‘After Iraq and WMD, if the CIA or MI6 say it’s cold at the north pole, any sensible person would seek at least a couple more sources or would fly there and check.'' Amid the standard channelling of propaganda, then, a small number of journalists have learned from the past and are willing to challenge official claims. But we should also not be fooled by these admirable but rare examples of dissent. The overwhelming majority of corporate media reports - notably the TV broadcasts reaching millions of people - echo the claims of government ‘impartially’; that is, without the least sign of independent thought or critical comment. The best journalists reject such an obviously compromised version of ‘professionalism’ – but they are few and far between.   Write to us: editor@medialens.org This Alert is Archived here:Won''t Get Fooled Again? Hyping Syria''s WMD ''Threat'' Share this media alert: | | Follow us on Twitter, on Youtube and on Facebook The second Media Lens book, ''NEWSPEAK in the 21st Century'' by David Edwards and David Cromwell, was published in 2009 by Pluto Press. John Pilger writes of the book: "Not since Orwell and Chomsky has perceived reality been so skilfully revealed in the cause of truth." Find it in the Media Lens Bookshop In September 2012, Zero Books published ''Why Are We The Good Guys?'' by David Cromwell. Mark Curtis, author of ''Web of Deceit'' and ''Unpeople'', says: ''This book is truly essential reading, focusing on one of the key issues, if not THE issue, of our age: how to recognise the deep, everyday brainwashing to which we are subjected, and how to escape from it. This book brilliantly exposes the extent of media disinformation, and does so in a compelling and engaging way.''
	Donate... In July 2012, we reached our 11th anniversary. We would like to thank all those who have supported and encouraged us along the way. Media Lens relies on donations for its funding. If you currently support the corporate media by paying for their newspapers, why not support Media Lens instead? The email address we have for you is ingo8@ingo8.plus.com, you can change it here Would you like to stop receiving our Media Alerts? Unsubscribe here >> www.medialens.org

[nevermind, neoliberalism has had it 159]

Now Journalists and Newspapers are being asked to keep quiet about politicians who might have been caught with childm porn, what next? child abuse exemptions from the law?http://www.politics.co.uk/news/2013/01/30/no-establishment-child-porn-cover-up-minister-insists

[Joanna Grey 0]

I think you read that wrong nevermind, Tom Watson published the letter regarding the use of D notices and how their use is monitored to ensure that they are issued correctly. Tom Watson is the driving force behind Operation Fairbank.

In other, more up to date news;

http://www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/news/10192832.Thirty_arrested_in_child_sex_grooming_inquiry/

[nevermind, neoliberalism has had it 159]

All friends and associates of Jimmy Saville were they? and how long did the police know of this ring and had refused victims access to justice until now?What of those who he shook hands with Jimmy Saville and smiled for public photos and who were equally frequent visitors to Haute La Garenne and St. Saviours on jersey?What bell did not ring when he spent 11 christmas''s with Margaret Thatcher? and what of those in the BBC who actively aided and abetted this man and those of a same mind set he worked with?Trust it will not be forgotten and for Mr. Bett to use Jimmy Savilles paedophilia to justiofy his ''democracy dodging''( Pickles) council tax rise of 1.965%, avoiding a public referendum, is despicable and cheap.

[Joanna Grey 0]

"What bell did not ring when he spent 11 christmas''s with Margaret Thatcher?"

He did not spend 11 Christmases with the Thatchers. One thing Saville was extremely good at was self-promotion which included a lot of lies, boasts and deceptions. He managed to wangle his way into the lives of Royalty, Government (including other nations) and anyone in a position of power that he thought could bolster his public ''saintly'' image. He was a master deceiver, a lot in the BBC were convinced that he was not interested in sex and that his claims to have had one-night stands were just a boast, after all no woman ever came forward to say that they had slept with Saville. To keep bringing up Margaret Thatcher''s name seems trivial and petty, Carole Thatcher insists that Saville never spent Christmas with them and others indicate that he was entertained at Chequers but never as a friend or adviser. He claimed not only the Thatchers as personal friends but also Charles, Diana, the Blairs, etc, etc. The pervert fooled the whole nation for several years and if anyone was aware and turned a blind eye to his paedophilia then they should be held accountable.

[nevermind, neoliberalism has had it 159]

All his fault then isn''t it, nothing to do with others sunning themselves in his limelight or providing him with a platform to carry on, despite the alarm bells that rang more than once. The pervert fooled the whole nation for several years and regardless of whether he met Royals at Haute de la Garenne or not, this inquiry is ambling along.''The pervert fooled the whole nation for several years''.More like decades, JG and I''m looking forward to see Mr. Betts extra 1.965% for extra policing, trodden out as needed to bring the perverts to account, actually finding any of them and bringing them to justice.

[nevermind, neoliberalism has had it 159]

Something is about to break in the news and it has a/ more Norfolk link/s. The playground of sordid paedophiles is about to be opened up to full scrutiny.How long has the Elms Guest House been ''serving'' young boys to those who now hide and hope for that this all will blow over?Who will be arrested first and are these arrests warning others?Why are not all those who have visited that establishment not arrested in one swoop?

[nevermind, neoliberalism has had it 159]

Something is about to break in the news and it has a/ more Norfolk

link/s. The playground of sordid paedophiles is about to be opened up to

full scrutiny.How long has the Elms Guest House been ''serving'' young boys to those who now hide and hope for that this all will blow over?Who will be arrested first and are these arrests warning others?Why are not all those who have visited that establishment not arrested in one swoop?http://www.onlinepublishingcompany.info/content/read_more/complexInfobox/site_news/infobox/elements/template/default/active_id/2571

[Joanna Grey 0]

Norfolk links?

[nevermind, neoliberalism has had it 159]

and this one bang on the subject of the thread. An article by Ian Burrell in the Independent on Saturdayhttp://www.independent.co.uk/news/media/tv-radio/hundreds-of-staff-testify-to-abusive-culture-at-bbc-8487846.html spoke of 850 BBC complaints of bullying and sexual harassment and this from the IB Times.http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/articles/433347/20130209/bbc-sex-abuse-saville.htmslowly getting to the bottom of it.

[Joanna Grey 0]

No need for two links, it''s the same press release.

The BBC has approximately 20,000 employees (a lot more if you include freelancers and those in subsidiary companies) and that figure of 850 is just contacts - several people may have told the ''story'' of just one incident that affected a colleague. I think it prudent to await the actual report itself rather than reading between the lines.

[nevermind, neoliberalism has had it 159]

And this is the final straw, after the weekends revelations on how Entwistle shoved the Saville affair aside, now we have an arch zionist in charge of BBC policy making.http://www.redressonline.com/2013/02/arch-zionist-gets-top-bbc-strategy-job/

[Joanna Grey 0]

"And this is the final straw"

You could always protest.

[Syteanric 1]

Dissolve the BBC into regional companies, bring in advertising, do away with the TV Liscencesave the industry....

[drurys testamonials V 15 0]

Already they are sharing news reports etc

 

Had Radio 5 on in the car from yesterday as was listening to cup final. Switch to Radio Norfolk when I got in it earlier and the same report was on both.