Thursday, 11 September 2008

The age of disinformation

By Sarah Maid of Albion

(Note: I started writing this last week, but was called away to deal with family issues, hence I apologise if it is a little behind the times, however, I think the points remain valid )

On the Sunday evening before last the great beneficiary of the licence fee, the BBC, presented us with "Fiona's story" a disturbing portrayal of the disintegration of a family following the arrest of the father, who had allegedly downloaded indecent images of children from the internet. The father in question having been played by the talented Jeremy Northam, whom many of us will have watched dying a noble and principled death, on the previous Friday night playing Thomas Moore in BBC2's sumptuous historical drama "The Tudors".

In Fiona's Story Northam's role was far less principled and devoid of any vestige of nobility and, given the heavy handed feminist nature of the plot, his guilt was presumed and inevitable. However, even more inevitable was his whiteness.

Indeed as if to highlight the point, the story opened with his wife, the Fiona of the title, (played by a ghostly pale Gina McKee) singing hymns in a Church choir, thus establishing the Christian and Anglo Saxon roots of the family, so essential for any dramatised exploration of the contentious subject of paedophilia.

As they no doubt considered fitting to the subject, the BBC had obviously set aside their usual quota casting rules, and the cast was overwhelmingly white, the single non-white actor playing a social worker (surprise that one huh?) and as such placing her firmly on the side of right. Apart from that single role, and unlike almost any other BBC TV Drama set anywhere after 1960, no other ethnic minority actors could be soiled by association with such an undesirable subject matter.

It was, of course predictable that the BBC, so proud to be controversial and provocative when it comes portraying an effeminate and overweight Jesus in a nappy in Jerry Springer the Opera would chose to locate a drama on the subject of paedophilia in an overwhelmingly white setting. Upsetting white Christians wins a broadcaster brownie points with their friends at Common Purpose, upsetting non-whites, especially, at the moment, Muslims, is a very different issue.

To ask whether the BBC would have the courage to address the growing problem of Asian men grooming under age white girls, or the excessive brutality which passes for discipline in African and West Indian families, misses the point. Courage is not the issue, the BBC would not consider associating child abuse with the non-white community, because it would not suit their agenda to do so.

On the rare occasions that crime or vice is portrayed within the non-white community it is minor and forgivable or they are forced into it be an oppressive (white) society. The depiction of the unforgivable is reserved, Apartheid like, for whites only.

The exception, so far is in relation to Islamic terrorism, although TV dramas featuring a terrorist theme invariably seek to explain, and usually justify, acts of terrorism in terms of Western foreign policy and go to great lengths to expose Westerners as being no less reprehensible than those actually committing the acts, they have not yet found a means of denying that the vast majority of Islamic terrorists are Islamic.

To deal with this dilemma, the thought controllers usually resort to the "tiny minority" lie, in which they seek to pretend that Islamic terrorists are an aberration, who's acts are in direct conflict to the teachings of the Quran and the wider Muslim community.

The night following Fiona's Story, Channel 4's Dispatches documentary "Undercover Mosque - the Return", used the "tiny Minority" lie, but added bells and whistles. After disclosing that extreme Saudi Arabian Wahhabism was being preached to women upstairs in supposedly moderate British mosques, the reporter assured us that such teachings would be shocking to the followers of what she described as mainstream "tolerant and inclusive Islam".

Some might call such a description as disingenuous, others might prefer a more blunt expression. Few would go so far as to claim that most Muslims are fanatical Jihadis who actively applaud terrorist atrocities, however, there are many ways to describe the Muslim faith, but "tolerant" is not one of them, and it is certainly not "inclusive". Yet such arrant nonsense is repeated as fact in supposedly serious documentaries.



When one might be forgiven for believing the disinformation could get no worse, the Metropolitan Police released an advert highlighting the dangers of carrying knives following the spate of teen aged stabbings recently seen on London streets. Of course, who do we see slipping a knife down the back of his pants, but a white boy?, who walks out of his flat whilst a girl screams at him "What have you done?" followed by a crowd, carrying a coffin, who look accusingly at him.

By implication, the white actor is the face of knife crime, however, the role might as well have been played by a middle aged Albanian woman for all the relevance it would have to the reality of knife crime, and, in particular knife related killings, in which white boys feature in around 10% of the crimes, primarily as victims.

Knife crime in London is an overwhelmingly non white problem, and yet the Metropolitan police have spent thousands of pounds of tax payer's money creating a totally misleading and blatantly dishonest version of the truth. Do they really care more about preserving their fantasy than they do about saving young lives?

Surely even the most ardent supporters of a multi-racial society must see that we are being fed propaganda, lies and disinformation a scale which is positively Orwellian, or can it be that the brainwashing has worked, and they actually believe it is the truth?

11 comments:

tomorrow belongs to mo said...

There is a website devoted to the taqiyya disseminated by the licence-jizya funded al-Beeb:

http://www.biased-bbc.blogspot.com/

watling said...

I often wonder why, despite the weight of evidence that points to blacks being grossly disproportionately responsible for knife and gun crime in London and elsewhere, the liberals still refuse to believe it. My guess is that they are fully aware of the truth but are absolutely committed to suppressing it.

So what causes them to deny the truth?

It must be their flawed belief that we are all the same under the skin. Clearly we are not.

Whites don't get sickle cell anaemia, for example. The most successful boxers and sprinters tend to be black whereas the most successful swimmers and cyclists tend to be white (actually I've never seen either a black swimmer or a black cyclist at an Olympic event but I suppose they must exist). Studies show that, on average, whites are more intelligent than blacks.

Despite the evidence, why do liberals still deny the differences?

Of course, to admit that there are differences between the races has enormous implications for society. If we accept that the races are truly different, with different capabilities and a different pre-disposition towards committing violent crime, then aren't we suggesting that the races are in fact different species?

If the different races are really different species then how can we possibly have a cohesive society? We would have to have different laws for the different races to take account of different behaviours. There would be calls for segregation. In short, there would be chaos.

So the liberals prefer their version of the truth because to accept the real version is just too awful for them to contemplate.

Fyrdist said...

Will someone please offer this girl a position writing for Private Eye?

Amazing.

Anonymous said...

Watling,
Have you forgotten Eric the Eel?
Sarah there was an abysmal recent drama (al beeb, I think) where there was a bunch of whites (crusaders or templars I think they called themselves) and a moderate rational intelligent muslim was beheaded in the street by someone who was modelled on a young Nick Griffin.
I hate the BBC
urban11

Anonymous said...

I rarely watch TV anymore because of the bias and propaganda. When I do watch a bit it is slightly amusing to see how hand fisted they are with their propaganda and brain washing. Slightly amusing and yet slightly annoying.
It is amazing (and worrying) though how many people just sit and suck it all in without realising what is being done.

tomorrow belongs to mo said...

Another typical example of al-Beeb's brainwashing was the appalling 'White Girl' http://commonsenseagainstislam.websanon.com/?p=212

tomorrow belongs to mo said...

Muslims seek to gag criticism of Islam by world-wide blasphemy laws:

"There are strange happenings in the world of international jurisprudence that do not bode well for the future of free speech. In an unprecedented case, a Jordanian court is prosecuting 12 Europeans in an extraterritorial attempt to silence the debate on radical Islam.

The prosecutor general in Amman charged the 12 with blasphemy, demeaning Islam and Muslim feelings, and slandering and insulting the prophet Muhammad in violation of the Jordanian Penal Code. The charges are especially unusual because the alleged violations were not committed on Jordanian soil.

Among the defendants is the Danish cartoonist whose alleged crime was to draw in 2005 one of the Muhammad illustrations that instigators then used to spark Muslim riots around the world. His co-defendants include 10 editors of Danish newspapers that published the images. The 12th accused man is Dutch parliamentarian Geert Wilders, who supposedly broke Jordanian law by releasing on the Web his recent film, "Fitna," which tries to examine how the Quran inspires Islamic terrorism.

Jordan's attempt at criminalizing free speech beyond its own borders wouldn't be so serious if it were an isolated case. Unfortunately, it is part of a larger campaign to use the law and international forums to intimidate critics of militant Islam. For instance, in December the United Nations General Assembly passed the Resolution on Combating Defamation of Religions; the only religion mentioned by name was Islam. While such resolutions aren't legally binding, national governments sometimes cite them as justification for legislation or other actions.

More worrying, the U.N. Human Rights Council in June said it would refrain from condemning human-rights abuses related to "a particular religion." The ban applies to all religions, but it was prompted by Muslim countries that complained about linking Islamic law, Shariah, to such outrages as female genital mutilation and death by stoning for adulterers.

...Amman has already requested that Interpol apprehend Mr. Wilders and the Danes and bring them to stand before its court for an act that is not a crime in their home countries.

... Unless democratic countries stand up to this challenge to free speech, other nations may be emboldened to follow the Jordanian example. Kangaroo courts across the globe will be ready to charge free people with obscure violations of other societies' norms and customs, and send Interpol to bring them to stand trial in frivolous litigation"

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122099204692716155.html?mod=googlenews_wsj

watling said...

Who could forget Eric the Eel? Me, actually. No, I was talking about swimmers, not those who thrash about in the water whilst they swallow half the pool in a frantic attempt to avoid drowning as they barely finish a one horse "race".

Although, Eric raises an intriguing question. According to the politically correct bullshit lie put about by the Communists that the races are identical under the skin, when blacks "underperform" compared to whites in the UK it's due to racism. This is of course despite "positive discrimination" (more correctly known as "anti-white racism").

Eric "underperformed" spectacularly compared to whites yet in his own country of Equatorial Guinea there are hardly any whites and therefore it's hard to see how his uselessness as a swimmer can be attributed to racism. So why did he do so badly?

If there are any liberal leftie types out there who can answer that one I'm sure we'd all love to know. After all, you claim we're exactly the same under the skin so there should be as many black Olympic gold medallists for swimming as there are whites.

tomorrow belongs to mo said...

"Muslim hate fanatics plan to take over Britain by having more babies and forcing a population explosion, it has been revealed. The swollen Muslim population would be enough to conquer Britain from inside, they claim. Fanatics told a meeting of young Muslims on the anniversary of the 9/11 atrocity, that it would then be easy to impose Sharia law on the population, the Sun newspaper reported.


Speaking at a meeting in London, Anjem Choudary, right-hand man of exiled preacher Omar Bakri Mohammed, said: "It may be by pure conversion that Britain will become an Islamic state. We may never need to conquer it from the outside." http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1054909/Have-babies-Muslims-UK-hate-fanatic-says-warning-comes-9-11-UK.html

tomorrow belongs to mo said...

Pakistani high commissioner threatens more London bombings:

"AMERICAN raids on Taliban and Al-Qaeda targets in Pakistan could provoke terror attacks in London, Pakistan’s high commissioner to the UK warned yesterday. Wajid Shamsul Hasan said the US bombings had killed hundreds of civilians but had failed to eliminate any Al-Qaeda leader.

“This will infuriate Muslims in this country and make the streets of London less safe,” he said. “There are 1m Pakistanis in the diaspora here and resentment is mounting. I’m being flooded by text messages from community leaders saying we must organise our anger. "

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/crime/article4749196.ece

tomorrow belongs to mo said...

BBC boss forbids staff to criticise Labour http://www.mailonsunday.co.uk/news/article-1055608/Fury-BBC-boss-tells-staff-lay-Labour.html