Biased BBC reporting

The BBC/Guardian poll highlighted today by the Today Programme has 47% against and 46% in support of the [Afghanistan] war. That's roughly a 50-50 divide *according to you*. Whether those figures are true or not is another matter.

But the important point is that BBC representation of the two arguments is TOTALLY BIASED in favour of the war, and any thinking person knows that this is because in non-totalitarian countries which are not governed by naked force but by various other factors, control and influence over what people think is vital - the so-called hearts and minds issue. In this struggle, the BBC, founded as the propaganda arm of the British Empire in 1922 to bind the Empire together and justify its existence, play a key role, which is why the BBC -- and indeed much of the rest of the UK mainstream -- are now pulling out all the stops, including all the sentimentality stories about soldiers' families, the dead returning home, the comrades' paeans of praise and thanks etc in order to keep the public on side.

Over the past EIGHT YEARS the BBC has NOT given its viewers and listeners an EQUAL and BALANCED representation of the arguments for and against the war. In particular the BBC has utterly FAILED to point up the link between the war and 9/11. WE ARE THERE BECAUSE OF 9/11. That was the justification for going in. The deeper and more sinister reasons go back to the late 1990s, to the ideas of Brzezinski ("The Grand Chessboard", 1997) and his backers, to the imperial programme of Cheney-Perle-Wolfowitz-Feith gang and PNAC. BUT THE JUSTIFICATION WAS 9/11. And the Bush regime official conspiracy theory of 9/11 was a complete LIE. The BBC has colluded with this LIE for EIGHT YEARS by its totally unbalanced representation of that event. The British political class, with a few honourable exceptions, has also colluded in this LIE.

Our 18 year old soldiers and all the other soldiers are actually dying along with tens of thousands of Afghans because of: 1) the US determination to anchor itself geostrategically in the region, in accordance with the long-range strategy goals laid out by Brzezinski and others, 2) the US determination to push pipelines from Turkmenistan and the Caspian down to the Indian ocean through Afghanistan and Pakistan. The Taliban had refused the UNOCAL deal for this, so as so often in the past, US megacorporations turned to the US military for help. 3) The desire of the British military high command and of British intelligence services a) to stay sweet with the Americans and maintain 'British credibility' with them (see General Sir Richard Dannett's statements - which stank of reality - in The Independent 1st June 2009) and b) the army high command's desire to give their troops real live combat experience, now that 30 years of fighting in N.Ireland and 6 years in Iraq are over, 4) profits and employment for the arms industry.

THAT is what this war is about, and all your BBC talk about elections, democracy, education for girls, burqas, 'we have to finish the job now we're there', 'honouring the troops' sacrifices', 'we have a duty to leave the place better than we found it' etc is frankly, all flannel designed to deceive the public in classic official propaganda tradition.

On this issue you need to distinguish yourselves from the communist media of the Cold War era and stand up for the truth! If you can't do that, then at least give us a REAL 50-50 balance of the REAL arguments that reflects REAL public opinion and not just the interests outlined in the 4 points above.

Terry, MEDIALENS

Nice one Terry, and don't forget that the BBC gave even less coverage to the "anti-war" crowd before the Iraq invasion than Fox News. The BBC is indeed the propaganda arm of a mendacious govt, passing on its lies as news. This applies to the "wars", the ME, Israel, elections in other countries (in particular Iran and Venezuela but not Egypt or Saudi Arabia which has never had an election), the economy, and a lot more.

Incidentally, the events in Iraq and Afghanistan are not "wars", they are invasions. They are imperialistic, illegal, immoral, racist, and cowardly (bombing people from 10,000 metres instead of on a man-to-man basis, overwhelming them with barbarous new weapons) invasions and occupations.

What makes me really want to puke is the holier than thou attitude of Boaden, Thomson et al. and the obscene salaries they get for toeing the govt line while pretending to be independent and neutral.

Sherwoodian, MEDIALENS

Actually, the Beeb AND successive administrations are both obedient executive arms of the self-perpetuating gic-class who have ruled Britain from way back (you can argue about starting points, but long ago, anyway) and still do now, behind the facade of 'democracy' -- so it seems to me, anyway.

Socio-political revolutions to establish real democracies here are still to do. And the Westminster circus, the BBC, and all the major organs of the current corporate media will need to be taken comprehensively in hand, removed from any stigma of commercial business purpose, and rebuilt from the foundations up, I think. We also need written constitutions for all the countries of the island, too.

It's interesting, though, that despite the constant deceit-blast of the Permanent Bullshit Blizzard, people like Terry above are legion; people who understand the realities behind the bollocks pretty well, from their own efforts at intellectual self-defence; to the point where a steady two-thirds of the common Brits are against the war DESPITE the worst efforts of the PBB operators in the media and amongst the pocket-pols.

Lying/self-delusional propaganda can only go so far before people's good sense peels off from the official BS line.

Rhisiart Gwilym, MEDIALENS


Reference Articles:

Wikileaks cracks NATO's Master Narrative for Afghanistan

Afghanistan: What are We doing There?

Afghanistan: The Dollar Line