Why mainstream media reporters are beneath contempt: Exhibit A, the BBC's Kiera Feldman

"We beg no more. We entreat no more. We petition no more. We defy them."

Enough with the lies. Stop telling us that Islam is a religion of peace. If it is, prove it through action. (video)
http://crossmuslims.blogspot.com/2010/06/deserve-victory.html

Systematic lying to the infidel, must be considered part and parcel of Islamic (and mainstream media) tactics.
(video)
http://crossmuslims.blogspot.com/2010/07/perfect-man.html

The Simpsons' Kent Brockman, himself representatively as evil & gutless as any of our MSM and politicians and other slavish worshippers at the PC altar, expresses the attitude of those who are more than pleased to invite the evil of Islam into our midst,

“Ladies and gentlemen, er, we’ve just lost the picture, but, uh, what we’ve seen speaks for itself. The Corvair spacecraft has been taken over — ‘conquered’, if you will — by a master race of giant space ants [Muslims]. It’s difficult to tell from this vantage point whether they will consume [convert] the captive earth men or merely enslave them [or exercise the third Muslim option, kill them]. One thing is for certain, there is no stopping them; the ants [Muslims] will soon be here. And I, for one, welcome our new insect [Islamic] overlords. I’d like to remind them that as a trusted TV personality, I can be helpful in rounding up others to…toil in their underground sugar caves.”

The MSM, Democrats, leftists, et alia: the Kapos of North America.

The comments about mainstream journalists, who usually have leftist leanings, are so true about nearly every mainstream journalist in India !

I have started believing that there is something about modern, constitutional democracies that makes these types surface in hordes and occupy centerstage ! I mean, why don't we find these types in North Korea, didn't in erstwhile Soviet Union, and don't in any Muslim majority geography in the world !

Sanjay

Robert,

I look forward to the piece, which if it actually comes from the BBC would seem to be a significant achievement for this budding journalist.

A Googlesearch for "Kiera Feldman" already shows your blog entry on Jihadwatch on the first page! That alone is telling, but I thought I'd share a bit more, from her profile on http://generation.prx.org/profile/KieraFeldman:

-------------------------
About Me:
I like making baked goods, radio, and extravagant plans. These days I do the college thing in Providence, Rhode Island. I'm involved in Brown Student Radio and I'm an alum of the KBOO Youth Collective in my hometown of Portland, Oregon.
-------------------------

So, even though your blog entry was typically erudite in the assessment of our craven pro-sharia media, I think you did her a bit too much justice by even granting an interview.

Yes, War is Deceipt ... or in this case, just idiotic. She clearly took advantage of your willingness to tell the truth so that she could make the step from Providence RI to the BBC, on your back and good-will.

It now appears she needed you to even get an audience with a BBC editor -- assuming even that part is true.

You are too good for that sort of crap. The message of how Islamic hegemony and Steath Jihad are gradually destoying Western Society is one nobody wants to hear unfortunately, aside from here and even the most conservative forums. While we hear more and more about Sharia and Honor Killings, for example, on Fox and CNN ... we hear just as resoundingly that these are "extreme" versions and perversions of the original Islam as well!

And so, I suppose, in three or four years, when thunderous and frenzied sermons come out of that Mega Mosque ... some of which calling attention to the very fact that those imams are preaching above the very location of the literal dead remains of infidels, the press will again trot out stories of how it's a "shared site" and all voices need to be heard.

In fact, (weird aside here) it seemed to have really started with Pocahontas: Yes, those insidous lines from the title track of that Disney flick, which is itself a significant whitewash of history: "We need to sing with all the voices of the mountain; we need to paint with all the colors of the wind" or some such nonsense. The early nineties saw this become the mainstream, and this led to us welcoming our own demise by insisting that Islam and Sharia need to be part of the chorus of modern society.

Don't mean to be a downer, but sometimes this struggle isn't encouraging!

Journalism has become an oxymoron all by itself...

I listen to BBC Radio 3 more or less constantly, mostly for the classical music but it is a fine all-round station in the background too. Except that some of the documentaries on say Palestine or the Ottoman Empire have these strange twists and slips I only catch 10 seconds too late: "what did she say, that Palestine history only started with the arrival of the Arabs??" Things like that, presenting the Arab/muslim version of events unchallenged and giving the impression that medieval tyrannical traditions are to be weighted equally with modern Western criticism.
Sometimes I even suspect that Academia itself is more interested in being obliging than true to its roots.

This is so good.

"We do not come as aggressors. Our war is not a war of conquest; we are fighting in the defence of our homes, our families, and posterity. We have petitioned, and our petitions have been scorned; we have entreated, and our entreaties have been disregarded; we have begged, and they have mocked when our calamity came. We beg no longer; we entreat no more; we petition no more. We defy them!

We beg no more. We entreat no more. We petition no more. We defy them. We are not the aggressors. We are not haters. We are not racists. We are not bigots. We are not neofascists. Those who claim otherwise are knowingly or unknowingly abetting a monstrous evil. We withdraw our sanction from them. We must no longer treat journalists as if they were objective reporters when they are ideologues and propagandists. We must constantly call them out on their game. And refuse to play it ourselves.

Deaer Mr Spencer,

May God grant you (and Pamella) the strength and resilience to continue doing what you are doing.
I have more respect for each and everyone of the islamic terrorists than I do for these lowlife, sub-human-piece-of- s**t (shposes thereoff)called media and journalists.
a terrorist is 'expected'to strap a vest and blow himself up in his quest for the 72 virgins, because that is his true belief. it is not fake it is raw hatred, but at least it is honest. i am only wondering how can these shposes live with themselves, and espouse such views. i particularly take extreme offense when someone with a name like 'feldman' or 'blitzer' or 'bloomberg' or 'chomsky' chooses to join the enemy while pretending to be intelectual and enlightened... it is sickening! it is pretty much like the previous poster fscarn described the ants...

Heaven forbid that Kiera Feldman succeed in her efforts "to focus the story more generally attendees instead of Ms. Geller specifically."

Sanjay_111 said:
"I have started believing that there is something about modern, constitutional democracies that makes these types surface in hordes and occupy centerstage ! I mean, why don't we find these types in North Korea, didn't in erstwhile Soviet Union, and don't in any Muslim majority geography in the world!"

Actually they're the same types; they follow the party line whether in North Korea, the old Soviet Union, or the present-day India and U.S.A. In the Soviet Union they worked for Pravda and Tass; in the contemporary West they work for the NYT, Newsweek, BBC, and MSNBC.

"KBOO Youth Collective"

I can't begin to explain how funny that whole thing is...parse it for yourself...

The devious political behaviour of the British Broadcasting Corporation is such that it can justifiably be called: the Islam Not British Broadcasting Corporation.

And, of course, the BBC propaganda is paid for as a tax by the British people.

It is not surprising that there is a popular website called 'BIASED-BBC' which criticizes, inter alia, the BBC's pro-Islam, anti-Israel output:

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

She has a degree in American Civilization from Brown University and now would facilitate the machinations of those islamists who want to tear down the very civilization that she studied. Oh, perfidious youth.

For more information on the duplicity of the BBC, their editorial agenda to give the British public a false impression of the US, and their mission to educate the public to accept the expansion of Shariah, try the Open Threads at Biased BBC.

Fitzgerald: The BBC: Lord Haw-Haw at Bush House

The BBC has many reporters on the Middle East, and sometimes in the Middle East, who slavishly follow the Arab Muslim line. A few of them seem to have inherited their views, the way in which Kim Philby inherited his alienation from the West from his father St. John Philby, the senior Philby becoming a Muslim and Saudi today, the junior Philby becoming a Soviet spy. One of those to-the-manner-born BBC correspondents bears the the last name "Seale"; the other one bears the last name "Hawley." I have long wondered if the first is the daughter of the notorious Patrick Seale, and if the second, Caroline Hawley, now in Jerusalem (taking the place of weepy Barbara Plett) is by any chance the daughter of Donald Hawley, who has his own story with the Arabs. If so, my my.

It has long been bruited about that Patrick Seale, the British writer and Middle East “expert,” has had very close ties with the regime of Hafez al-Assad, whose biographer he was. These close ties have been intimated by those who have spent long periods in the Middle East, and who have for quite some time followed Seale's louche activities. If this is true, then in this respect he is no different from a number of Western diplomats, especially in Saudi Arabia, nor from George Galloway, the supposed recipient of Saddam Hussein's favors, nor from Robert Fisk, whose assorted ties to various Arab regimes and causes are too long and boring to list. This is all part of the Islamintern International -- a phrase that I think ought usefully to be employed, based as it is on the model of the Comintern of memory.

Of course Patrick Seale would like us to give the Muslims, or rather the Muslim Arabs, whatever they want. Yet there is not the slightest evidence that this will do anything except feed Muslim triumphalism. In the case of throwing Israel to the wolves, it will also remove -- if the Israelis make still further concessions -- the excuse of darura, necessity, which allows some Arab regimes to explain to their own people why, for now, they cannot directly attack Israel. Further reduced in size, Israel would become a much more inviting and plausible target. Most Arab countries would simply have to attack. And then, of course, those 200 nuclear weapons Israel has would most likely, in the end, have to be used.

Whether or not he has a child employed there, Seale’s views get ample airtime on the BBC. The BBC, you will recall, has as its World Affairs Editor a certain John Simpson. Simpson is a key figure in the Islamintern -- along with Edward Mortimer, Annan's chief speechwriter, and Mona Rishmawi, the Palestinian Arab behind Mary Robinson. Simpson has contributed an enthusiastic introduction to one of those books about the U.S.-Israel conspiracy to "hush up" the attack on the U.S.S. Liberty -- the kind of thing that has become the reason for living for so many of the wildest antisemites. Ca dit longue, John Simpson's involvement in this favorite treatment of the American antisemites' favorite topic makes him just the man to run the BBC World Services.

So the next time you have to endure the sneers and snarls directed at Israel from chirpy little Judy Swallow (surely she has the most unpleasant female voice on all of radio), Robin Lustig (and he has the winner in the male voice category), et al (including Barbara Plett, the one who wept on air for the dying Arafat, making her obvious sympathies -- obvious, has been moved to Afghanistan, still in her beloved and colorful Muslim world, but at least out of Israel) -- do make sure to direct some of your ire at John Simpson, No. 3 at the BBC. There has to be a cleaning up of the BBC, and it cannot be done by the Foreign Office. Let us do everything we can to try to make sure that Judy Swallow, nasty Lyse Doucet, Robin Lustig, those Muslims called in to represent Islam, such as would-be suicide-bomber Aziz Tamimi, indeed, so very many at the BBC World Service -- and most of all, of course, Simpson himself, are ultimately let go. How about a nice Committee of Quangos, headed by Vladimir Bukovsky, who lives in Cambridge, and who knows something about totalitarian thought-control, and has been enraged by the BBC's bias for years -- yes, Bukovsky is the man. Aided, perhaps, by others who have the same kind of knowledge of how propaganda works -- Pavel Kohout in Prague comes to mind, and the Polish historian Geremek, and the current foreign minister of Bulgaria (I forget his name). Yes, they will do very nicely.

Attention could profitably be focused on the funneling of American taxpayers' money to NPR, which in turn pays the BBC to broadcast its propaganda (The Guardian in radio-wave form). We do not need to pay for our own Eurabian brainwashing, and should refuse to continue. NPR stations should be discouraged -- in the only way that gets their attention, by limiting their ability to raise funds successfully -- from continuing to inflict the biased BBC, now a stalking-horse for Eurabian views, into American homes. Surely the Senate will want to cease all indirect support for the BBC, with its incredible coverage not only of the Arab Jihad against Israel, but of American, and British, actions in Iraq. Goodbye, BBC. If after the 6,000 jobs are gone, we find that the worst offenders are looking for work, we will reconsider -- that is the attitude the Senate should take.

It is not true that the BBC offers all sorts of news that one could not otherwise get, nor that the presentation of what is given is impressively thorough. Ask yourself only this question: in 2001 the Western world, the world of Infidels, was attacked by a group of Muslims acting logically, and boldly, upon attitudes and tenets of Islam. If the BBC is so wonderful, and devoid of the need for commercial interruptions, it should have been wonderful enough to cover the texts and teachings of Islam, and to do so with such thoroughness that everyone and his brother would know what the Qur'an is, and what the doctrine of abrogation is, and what the Hadith are, and why Khomeini, as virtually his first act, lowered the marriageable age of girls to nine. And we should know enough about Islam, and the BBC interviewers should know everything, so that when they are discussing, say, the Danish cartoons, and a Muslim apologist blandly assures them that Muhammad himself never punished critics, so that Muslim reaction is merely a matter of hurt feelings, the interviewer will no longer silently accept such nonsense, but be able, by referring to Asma bint Marwan and Abu Afak, to offer a sharp rebuttal. Or is the BBC not in the business of rebutting, but rather of collaborating with, apologists for Islam? Does the BBC require those covering anything to do with Islam to learn about it, in detail, and not from apologists? And when do you think, in all the tens of thousands of hours of coverage at the BBC of the Lesser Jihad against Israel, that has no end because no Infidel sovereign state can be permitted on land once possessed by Muslims, presented steadily on the BBC as a matter of "the legitimate rights of the Palestinian people opposed to occupation of occupied Arab land by Israeli occupiers." (There, does the BBC make itself clear?), you the listeners will ever the term "dhimmi" discussed? Will the name "Bat Ye'or" ever be mentioned? Will the murders of Hindus in Bangladesh or Christians in the southern Sudan ever be discussed as being related to the doctrines of Islam, or will that never happen? Will Islam as a vehicle for Arab supremacist ideology ever come up? When was the last time the BBC covered the Berber riots in the Kabyle, or anything to do with Berber resentment of Arab oppression? When has the BBC ever hinted at the general Arab support for (not even mere indifference to) the Arab Muslim massacre of non-Arab, black African Muslims in Darfur? When will the entire matter of whether or not Muslims within Europe can offer real, as opposed to feigned, and permanent, as opposed to temporary, loyalty to any Infidel nation-state become the subject of inquiry, discussion, debate -- or will this issue, on which the destiny of Europe may depend, never be raised at the BBC.

The BBC has done none of this. It is more superficial, more inaccurate, less informative, in its coverage of Islam than many a supposedly "right-wing" American commercial station so easy to dismiss, because nothing critical of Islam appears on the BBC World Service. Who, after all, works at the BBC? There are the ever-expanding number of Arabs and Muslims, as the Arab-language services expand and Arabs replace those who are discharged as so many other language-services are closed down. How many of those Arabic-language speakers are Copts, or Maronites, who might be more likely to tell some unpleasant home truths about Islam, rather than continue to protect it in every way, or how many of those Arabic-language speakers might have been chosen from Berbers or Kurds who know Arabic? And on the regular staff, whom do you think the likes of John Simpson would favor? What colleagues would Judy Swallow, Robin Lustig, Barbara Plett, Lyse Doucet, welcome into their Guardian-parroting ranks?

Occupied Europe, the Europe in which indigenous Infidels are fearful of those bearers of the belief-system of Islam who have come to settle among them, and who do not hestitate to oppose the laws, customs, manners, understandings, of the locals, and whose presence has caused the indigenous Infidels to lead lives far more unsettled and unpleasant and expensive and physically dangerous, than they might otherwise be, from Malmo to Marseilles, from Madrid to Mannheim, is ill-served by the present BBC. For its policies and personnel have created a situation where, in a sense, we know have Lord Haw-Haw safely ensconced in Bush House, rather than having to broadcast to his listeners from Berlin.

As all those who have to listen to it and still have their wits about them, know, the BBC beggars the imagination in its arrogance, its certainty, its bias. At times, it is simply an FM version of Robert Fisk. This we need not permanently endure.

[Posted by Hugh on April 10, 2006]

The News, a couple minutes ago on BBC Radio 3 :

"The killing of 10 doctors in Afghanistan was a robbery, according to local police sources." Good, I am so relieved! I was afraid it was because they hated the infidels who had come to help them.

"Cardinal Keith O'Brien of Scotland says compassionate release of Lockerbie bomber was correct, accuses the Americans of a culture of vengeance" . Excuse me, who have a culture of vengeance? Elsewhere I have caught a few remarks on the attitudes of the Libyans who would seem to benefit from a little less triumphant gloating.

The leftwing media is driven largely by hatred of Christian or western values. These "lamestream" media types have great admiration for Marx and Lennin but see the west as their adversaries. Has anyone ever heard BBC denounce Gorgachev or Communism in general? Since Islam is an adversary of Christians and Jews from which western values were derived, it is only reasonable for the left to have a natural alliance with Muslims who shared the same hatred for Christians and Jews. To them, sharing (hatred) is a beautiful thing.