Friday, October 17, 2008

BBC: Islam should be treated more sensitively than Christianity

This is the widely-reported inference of statement made by Mark Thompson, director general of the BBC, who is of the opinion that ‘because Muslims are a religious minority in Britain and also often from ethnic minorities, their faith should be given different coverage to that of more established groups’.

Different?

Hindus and Sikhs are also religious minorities also from ethnic minorities, but they are of the opinion that the BBC discriminates against them in favour of Islam. Yet it would undoubtedly be true to say that the BBC also treats them differently to the manner in which the corporation treats Christianity.

But how did we get from ‘different’ to ‘more sensitive’?

And why is a Roman Catholic - also therefore a member of a religious minority - prepared to inculcate the nation with greater respect due to Allah and Mohammed while his own God and Father may be dispatched to Room 101?

‘Different’ is designed to induce respect; it is deployed to encourage greater reflection, a pause for thought, serious consideration before one criticises or denigrates. Jesus is not ‘different’. Church is not ‘different’. The Bible is not ‘different’. Christians are not ‘different’. No, they are all mind-numbingly boring and utterly normal. But anything ‘foreign’ is exotic, and everything exotic is ‘different’, and anything ‘different’ must be handled with care, and anything that must be handled with care must be treated with great respect, and anything that must be treated with great respect must be worthy, and one must be sensitive to what is worthy, for what is worthy is greater than what is not.

Yet Mr Thompson insists that the BBC would broadcast programmes that are critical of Islam ‘if they were of sufficient quality’.

And therein lies the unattainable prerequisite. For this ‘quality’ would have to conform to all the BBC’s self-imposed, politically-correct red tape about ‘respect’, ‘tolerance’ and ‘diversity’, not to mention its responsibility to preach the gospel of relativism and pluralism. And so nothing critical of Islam, the Qur’an, Allah or Mohammed will ever be broadcast by the BBC, for to do so would offend, divide, incite, cause civil strife, and endanger the peace and security of the realm.

Mr Thompson said: "My view is that there is a difference between the position of Christianity, which I believe should be central to the BBC's religion coverage and widely respected and followed. What Christian identity feels like it is about to the broad population is a little bit different to people for whom their religion is also associated with an ethnic identity which has not been fully integrated.”

It beggars belief that the man responsible for broadcasting the musical ‘Jerry Springer -The Opera’ boasts that he has ‘never watched the Monty Python film Life of Brian’, insisting that his ‘Christian beliefs guided his judgments’. It is curious Christian discernment indeed that finds offence in the brilliant satire of Monty Python but none in the unintelligent crudeness of Jesus in a nappy who feels ‘a bit gay’.

Yet it is indeed interesting that ‘no political issue has so far come near Jerry Springer in terms of anger and emotion’. Mr Thompson says: “It wasn't politics that put a security guard outside my house, it was a debate about how the BBC handles religion."

Indeed. And politicians ought to realise that religion is deeper than politics, and that it is folly to try to separate the two, for they are fused, interdependent, symbiotic.

But what irritates Cranmer perhaps the most in the debate over the BBC’s religious output is that he is forced to pay for it through the TV licence: he is obliged to watch his fellow Christians, the Holy Bible, the beloved Church, the holiness of God and the Lord Jesus being ridiculed, despised, trashed and spat upon, while Allah, Mohammed, Muslims and the Qur’an are treated ‘differently’.

Where is the ‘respect for diversity’ or ‘equality’ in that?

25 Comments:

Anonymous no nonny said...

This article makes me wonder what qualifications the Beeb requires of its high office holders. Either a high level of competence in English is not one of them, or the Director General does not see fit to demonstrate skill in our language.

The absence of such a standard surely contributes to the woolly thinking behind programming - which I think His Grace has described. However, when that absence allows the nurture of poor quality exotica (etc.), then our TV troubles mutate into weaponry against our culture.

With due respect to His Grace - one solution lies in refusing to let TV into our houses: it's not fit to watch anyway. In my experience, the TV police initially spend our taxes on refusing to believe such responses, but they retreat upon receiving proof.

However, I agree that we, the majority(?), should first specify our grievances and state our case against Big Bro (Auntie must have died or been otherwise immured, I think). So thank you Cranmer - for tackling this in public and, as usual, for showing PC 'euro' jargon in its true colours.

17 October 2008 at 06:06  
Anonymous len said...

Great post, just shows the utter hypocracy of the BBC.
The shame is we cannot opt out of paying the licence fee and are therefore are paying for this sort of nonsense.
Surely there must be some sort of ethics in broadcasting that prohibit this sort of biased behavior, perhaps not!.

17 October 2008 at 08:01  
OpenID berenike said...

Easy way to get out of paying the licence fee. Don't have a telly :-)

17 October 2008 at 08:39  
Blogger Jonny Mac said...

I too was irritated by Thompson's comment. I am particularly wound up when bien-pensants broadcasters and publishers give explanations for why they treat Islam differently from Christianity without citing the obvious and rational consideration that they wish to avoid violent attacks on themselevs, their staff and their property (I excuse Private Eye from this, who explained that they weren't publishing the Danish cartoons partly because they didn't want their office attacked).

Your last point is, I would respectfully suggest, unusally for you badly put. After all, you don't have to watch this crap. The problem, is it not, is that you have to pay for it.

17 October 2008 at 10:48  
Blogger ultramontane grumpy old catholic said...

"... Mr Thompson insists that the BBC would broadcast programmes that are critical of Islam ‘if they were of sufficient quality’".

Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha .......

Another joke coming from the BBC was published in the Telegraph this morning. Responding to David Starkey's criticisms that "The Tudors" was full of historical distortions, a spokesman said
"The Tudors is not a drama documentary, which has always been made clear. It is a highly authored and entertaining interpretation of events during a period of history"

Your Grace, our licence fee pays in part to support this bunch of knock-about comedians.

17 October 2008 at 10:50  
Blogger Unsworth said...

Your Grace

Mr Thompson is either stupid or delusional - possibly both. His position, as you have clearly shown, is at best illogical and - more likely - deliberately biased.

I'd like to see the priciples and rationale for his pronouncements set down own paper for us all to examine in detail. But we know that is not likely. 'Engagement' with the populace is a euphemism to preaching rather than listening. That is what Mr Thompson is about.

He says that this religion is associated with an ethnic identity. What claptrap. Would he care to examine the Muslim communities across the world and then repeat that? Since when have the Saudi Muslims (say) been of the same ethnicity as the Malaysian Muslims? For that matter since when have British Jews been of the same ethnicity as Israelis? Is Mr Thompson some sort of inverted Nazi, wishing to categorise the nation by 'ethnicity', and conflating ethnic origin with religious persuasion?

He says that this 'ethnic identity' is not 'fully integrated'. Is that his job? Is that what we are all paying him to do? Indeed, why should any of this concern him?

It is remarkable that the BBC now apparently sees itself as an arm of a movement to integrate communities. Where in its Charter does it say this?

17 October 2008 at 10:56  
Anonymous Rebel Saint said...

We get what we deserve. Why don't the 55,000 people who know that the BBC is willing to broadcast scurrilous blasphemy actually have enough conviction to ditch their TV sets? Isn't it because the homage you pay to the name of the LORD is not as great as the homage you pay to your own entertainment & leisure?

One of the best things our family ever did was ditch the Pandoras box about 9 years ago. Even better now we can download what we actually want to watch completely free of charge at the BBC's expense.

They "respect" Islam because they fear it. We can never instil that fear into them and remain true to our convictions. But we could hit the only other thing they worship - their money. Alas it will never happen because we just don't care enough yet to actually DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT.

Imagine their shock if 55,000 people didn't just complain but posted back their TV licences. And imagine the impact on 55,000 families if their children weren't indoctrinated by advertising & soap operas, with parents who play board games with them, who read to them etc etc

17 October 2008 at 11:14  
Blogger Dave said...

Your Grace,

Reith must be spinning in his grave. His whole philosphy was that the BBC wasn't there merely to entertain but to "make people better".
During the dark days of WW2 when we were on the verge of defeat, with the remnants of our army rescued from the Dunkirk beaches and the whole country at the mercy of the Luftwaffe, King George VI went on the BBC radio and summoned the country to prayer. They prayed and Hitler was diverted from invading us and turned his attention to Russia. The rest, they say , is history.
Even as late as the late 40s and early 50s the BBC was happy to be described as the evanglism arm of the Church of England. It is a matter of record was founded by a Christian as a christian organisation.
People forget so easily. The chattering classes, the intellectuals who began plotting England's downfall in the trenches of the first world war, the media and the unelected government have been working towards this time for almost a century. They play with fire.
Islam will not tolerate them once dhimmitude has been established. They will be the first to die by the sword or by public hanging.
I fear for our country. Has God turned his back on us, or did we turn our back on him?

17 October 2008 at 12:50  
Anonymous Stephen Gash said...

We organised a "No sharia here!" demo outside Lambeth Palace on 11th September which was not particularly well attended, but nevertheless a breakthrough in that people from minority groups did attend.

There are many people in England and other parts of the UK who have fled Islam and sharia law.

Islamophobia is a sensible human emotion, but there are those like Mark Thompson who channel their own Islamophobia into dhimmitude.

Some of the most vehement opponents of Islam are ex-Muslims, but Mark Thompson, Hazel Blears, Rowan Williams can't seem to grasp this fact and ask themselves why such apostates are so strident in their opposition.

17 October 2008 at 13:48  
Blogger dizzyfatplonka said...

I see nothing 'different' about them they are just like the other billion or so abroad.

Mohammeds quote
'the people of the book' is all muslims need to be free of islam because Mohammed never in his lifetime wrote any books and all islamic doctrine comes from books which makes those who believe they are followers of Mohammed really people of the book.

2 Corinthians 3:6 (The letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life) is allegorized in its interpretation to mean that Scripture is a dead letter and only the Spirit is what is important.

17 October 2008 at 14:07  
Blogger Griff said...

The fact that there seems to be an uneasy alliance (bonded by liberalism) between both of these anti-Christian camps might suggest that they are both ultimately cut from the same Satanic cloth.

When the enemies of Christendom combine forces to persecute it we can better see into the deeper heart of their purpose.

17 October 2008 at 14:25  
Blogger Terry Hamblin said...

But in last night's 'Silent Witness' the villain did turn out to be a Muslim who really did intend to blow up a night club with 300 young people in it and the armed response police, who all the way through seemed to be guilty of a shoor to kill policy who connived over their evidence, were exonerated. Wonders will necer cease.

17 October 2008 at 15:25  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Cranmer

You are being far too kind to the BBC as usual.

Please understand the BBC is EVIL working for EVIL, and that does not at all mean they are working for Islamic anything.

Yes of course the BBC if it wished could divide the country causing riots discontent,racism, violence,ect simply by being very nasty to our Muslim brothers. But the BBC is far to clever for that sort of transparently simplistic sort of propaganda.

What the BBC is doing deliberately, exactly what it results in achieving. Which is to turn Christian, Muslim, Hindu, and Jew against each other, by treating these highly motivated strands of the SAME RELIGION differently.

( When of course the common sense thing to do. Is to treat every body the absolute same, whenever at all possible. Not only be actually doing this, but to also be seen to be doing so.)

It worked in 1920-30 Germany where the people where originally encouraged by the German state to give preferential treatment to immigrant Jews. Only to later turn their own people against them firstly by subtle propaganda. Then by black ops and disinformation, followed by concentration camps.

Jews were used as the method by which the establishment could set the conditions for there stooge Hitler to come to power.

The Jews were in the end blamed for every ill the German people were suffering. From rampant inflation, pornography and subversion, to child abuse and course that old tried and tested chestnut, terrorism. While the German government at first actually had the nerve to appeal to the German people to be more understanding towards there fellow Germans.

Waited until the people themselves apparently started complaining about the fact that all the shops and businesses seemed to be owned by Jews and then they got things such as 'Crystal Night'. Even then, at first Hitler said it was only a few over enthusiastic young patriots getting a bit out of hand.

We are being played like a fiddle just like the Germans were, and our beloved BBC is wittingly or not conducting the same Hegalian symphony.

The establishment only bother to think of new ways to divide and rule us while generally buggering up our society and robbing us blind, if the last method did not work well. Otherwise they play the same old scratched record, time and time again.

Atlas shrugged

17 October 2008 at 23:10  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Conspiracy conspiracy conspiracy and more conspiracy.

We must start to understand how the above is achieved. A conspiracy can affect millions but does not need many to be actually in on the deal. In fact in a national dictatorship only one person, if even that many, needs to see the whole EVIL picture.

THE LIE IS DIFFERENT AT EVERY LEVEL

For example; members of Common purpose or even the people who recruit them, do not need to know the true purpose behind their organization. Still less who is indirectly financing and promoting it. The same could be said for feminism, socialism, communism, despotism, fascism, environmentalism etc etc etc.

For example; I doubt very much that ANY of the Hitler youth knew that the American and British establishment were financing Hitlers war machine. Still less that some of these people were in fact supposed to be Jewish. Still less that Hitler was an MI5 trained agent and the grandson of one of the Austrian Rothschild's. Still less that the whole plan was to destroy Germany's independence and steel its wealth by fighting a war it could never have ultimately won, under any circumstances.(Very much like this Osama Bin Larden chap.)

Even Hitler himself did not need to know exactly what he had been sent to Germany to do.

In theory at least it could only really require ONE PERSON in the entire world to know exactly what is going on and why. For things to get very nasty indeed.

We used to call this the unseen hand or the all seeing eye. Now we dont call it anything, because we have been very successfully mind controlled since birth. Therefore we can no longer fully understand anything important at all.

A faith in god or a creator used to get us through the worst of things. At least in the past we believed in a better place. This time we don't even have that. Whats worse we have our TV's filling our heads up with propaganda and disinformation every second of every day.

Still its not so bad. If we are good little boys and girls we might get another chance, and get sent back here again, some time later. There again, does anyone seriously want to come back to this ignorant pile of evil rubbish?

So mote it be

Atlas shrugged

17 October 2008 at 23:58  
Blogger King Athelstan said...

First they came for the English, and I said nothing.
Then they came for the Christians, and I said Nothing.

18 October 2008 at 00:13  
Blogger wileysnakeskins said...

Just insane what a country like England, who went through the years of bombing that Hitler did in his attempt to make them submit, will now submit to an ideology of more hate with what, 50 something dead, not belittling the loss of life just the fear and bend over take in the butt attitude a once great culture has come to. Cowardism breeds submission and that's what islam means, wake up and smell the shit, you submit or die, Give me Liberty or Give me Death.

18 October 2008 at 00:31  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

wileysnakeskins

If you had read my above comments you may have understood that it is not insane, it is mind control by the establishment propagated by their very own bought and sold media. If they wanted us to bend over we would. If they want us to fight in the future, we will.

At the moment they want us to do exactly what the BBC want us to do. When they want us to do something different, they will mind control us to do exactly that.

It does not have to work on every one at the same time and is not intended to. They can easily select the people they wish to mind control at any given time. If they want to wind up the Muslims they will. If they wish to wind up Daily Mail readers they will. If they want to tell you that the economy is doing just fine so you will borrow and borrow even more money, they know you will never be able to pay back in a host of lifetimes, they will.

The media is evil working for evil. Such clever evil that most if not ALL of its servants have little or no idea exactly what type of Evil they do indeed serve.

We like to think we have minds of our own and know a thing or two about our true history. When in fact we know next to nothing worth really knowing.

Perhaps its best I started doing the only thing I really do know how to do and thats being the best father to my children I can. Perhaps you should do the same.

Because one things for sure, unless its on the BBC 9 o'clock news, no one will believe anything I tell them. However absolutely 100% true it actually is.

Atlas shrugged

18 October 2008 at 01:33  
Anonymous rugfish said...

I refuse to be wound up by this unthinking clot and I will continue to refuse to watch BBC which is utter garbage anyway I guess as a result of it being infested with Common Purpose graduates.

I might be tempted to indulge again if anyone can confirm the subliminal integrated news service has been removed along with the spiral hypnotic circle.

Whilst I'm on here, why does BBC news have 2 presenters, a weather person, a BBC reporter which they 'interview' and a myriad of specialists who all talk dribble ?

Surely the BBC is over staffed when you have 5 or 6 BBC people all talking to each other and calling it 'NEWS' ??

18 October 2008 at 10:42  
Anonymous martin sewell said...

Yesterday afternoon I watched CEE BEEBIES with my young grand daughter which included an multi -racial group of young children singing together. I have no problem with that.

What was interesting was that the cross cultural action-song to bind the disparate group together was along the lines of " I want to bubble bubble bubble - Alleluia!

I think this rather makes your Grace's point.

What are the chances of the Beeb running a "nonsense song" containing the lyric " Allah Akbar bubble bubble bubble"?

Is not the underlying cultural message ( and don't the PC cultural police love "messages") that Islam - indeed any other religion - is to be treated senstively but that Christianity and nonsense can be put together without a second thought.

18 October 2008 at 10:45  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Like you, I find the attitude of the Guardian rather odd in this respect.

They are quite happy to be as rude and sarcastic as they like about Christianity. Which, in itself, I don't have to much of a problem with, as they pride themselves as being more 'humanist' or 'agnostic' or giving an 'alternative' point of view.

But then they have spent months in giving over space on their 'Comment is Free' website to long detailed analysis of the Koran. Nothing wrong with that either, as the commentary has tried to give 'both sides of view'.

But the juxtaposition of the two different approaches does rather stick in the craw.

No one is asking for 'special treatment', just a bit of fairness.

Will the BBC review this policy if, as seems likely, we end up with more active attendances at mosques than at, say, C of E church services ?

18 October 2008 at 17:54  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Cranmer,

I'm not absolutely sure you can infer that Thompson is saying that he thinks 'Jerry Springer..' is less offensive than 'Life of Brian'.

One can argue that his actions speak louder than his words in this regard - but he does say [well, Telegraph quotes him, which may not quite be the same..] :-

"I've taken a personal choice very seldom to watch programmes that have depictions of Jesus. I'm very sensitive about depictions of the Gospel story."

As for other faiths and humour, I don't have a full knowledge of the series 'Goodness Gracious Me', but I think this series which explored many facets of the humour in multi racial Britain did touch on some aspects of faith and Asian people.

18 October 2008 at 18:04  
Blogger Miss Snuffleupagus said...

Your Grace
Do you not exaggerate a tad in your final paragraph? But I get the point. But the problem is not with the Muslims. The problem is with white people who feel they need the exotic to make their lives more interesting.

19 October 2008 at 11:09  
Blogger Ælfheah said...

Auntie just wants a quiet life. If there were Protestants and Roman Catholics taking to the streets every time some "comedian" made a crack about religion, and especially if a few of them were prepared to do time in chokey for unguarded remarks about burning people, then in a generation or two the media-atmosphere around Christianity would be very different. (Obviously a "Christian" 9/11 - not that 9/11 itself was essentially Islamic, but never mind - would certainly help to nudge things along in the right direction as well.)

The BBC is worried about "Islamists" stirring up controversy. So far there've been no "Christianity-ists" (not a single one!) to make the case for the other side.

19 October 2008 at 22:41  
Anonymous wrinkled weasel said...

There is an emerging consensus among public organisations that Christianity can be either sidelined or banned altogether.

This week our local "cultural centre" has evicted a Christian worker who agreed not to proselytise but would not agree to make no mention of Christianity if asked. This was despite having philosopy, current affairs and human ecology on the menu of courses.

This is outrageous of course, but in all of this we must ask ourselves how God sees the picture.

Early Christians were martyred and met in secret on pain of death. The message still got out. I became a Christian through the personal witness of one believer - not a church, not a movie and not a public media event.

We pass the message quietly. We meet seekers and those who seek shall find. Believers know that the majority of people they meet will die and cease to be. The rest will inherit the Kingdom. We are after all talking about the most powerful presence in the universe, up against a bunch of clueless wet lefties. They may or may not be part of the evil times in which we live, but God is

"far above all rule and authority and power and dominion"

sleep well.

19 October 2008 at 23:57  
Blogger Stop Common Purpose said...

You can find out more about the media, Mark Thompson and Common Purpose here: www.stopcp.com

28 October 2008 at 12:49  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Newer›  ‹Older