Obama reveals true colours
The BBC’s coverage of the revolution in Syria is the latest in a series of examples which shows our state-controlled broadcaster doesn’t understand the basic, ethical requirements of journalism in general and its statutory duties of balance and fairness in particular.
I’ve just listened to a segment on Radio 5 purporting to come from Syria. The first participant was a women the BBC called “Susan” (not her real name) who ranted at length about action last night, in which she talked about shelling from helicopters which is obviously an impossibility. When she eventually ran out of breath, I don’t think anybody was any the wiser about what actually happened. Her mouth motored on endlessly about how terrible it was without really telling us anything, accept at the end when she gave the game away.
People went into the streets and chanted Allahu Akbar, or God is great, she said, and reminding us that the revolutionaries are probably serial Islamists who will replace the current despicable dictatorship with another obscenity led by mad Muslims, if they manage to topple the current incumbents.
The second contributor, from the Free Syrian movement or some such, sounded like Stanley Unwin of “put the picket in the brewflade” fame. This one sounded as though he was speaking impeccable English at first, but it soon became apparent that he was speaking, perfectly, a list of words that actually made no sense at all.
“Well, that’s two from one side, we are about to hear from the Syrian government now,” thought I.
Silly me. Balance there came none.
Remember, the BBC thinks the Syrian revolutionaries are as pure as the driven snow. They never instigate any violence. They are always the blameless victims of it. If they topple Assad, they will introduce a government where freedom of expression and the rule of law are their watchword. Tyranny and oppression will be a distant memory.
Obama reveals true colours
President Obama made a speech at the weekend of such narrow-minded and mind-boggling stupidity, revealing his basic prejudices and lack of understanding of what makes the economy work to such a degree that it may be the spark which launches an election victory for Republican candidate Mitt Romney. God willing.
Obama insulted entrepreneurs and innovators, saying they needed help from government to get their businesses going. Without government built roads, the likes of Microsoft would have gone nowhere.
“If you’ve got a business you didn’t build that,’’ Mr. Obama told voters in Roanoke, Va., last week. “Somebody else made that happen. The internet didn’t get invented on its own. Government research created the internet so then all the companies could make money off the internet. The point is that when we succeed, we succeed because of our individual initiative, but also because we (the government) do things,” the worst president since Jimmy Carter said.
Romney was outraged about the comments.
“To say something like that is not just foolishness, it’s insulting to every entrepreneur, every innovator in America,” Romney said.
Obama’s campaign against Romney has been shameful, seeking to hurt him personally with all kinds of cheap stunts and made-up, unverifiable stories. One story used an incident when Romney was 17 and in high school to try and blacken his character. Expect Obama to stick with this tactic, because anytime the electorate turn to the issues, he will lose because of his record of incompetence and failure.
Needless to say, the BBC won’t be a source where you can find the unvarnished truth about the U.S. presidential campaign. It will of course only be producing stories which help to re-elect Obama.