Saturday, February 12, 2011

Michael Buerk exposes the tyrannical narrative of the BBC

With thanks to Bishop Hill for drawing His Grace's attention to this latest example of BBC bias (not to say grossly-distorted and culturally-perverted agenda-setting).

Michael Buerk said the following in his introduction to the Moral Maze:
"...not long ago, to question multiculturalism - the precepts or the policies of successive governments - risked being branded racist and pushed into the loathesome corner with paedophiles and climate change deniers.“
Bishop Hill hopes that they continue with this kind of thing, because 'It makes the BBC look like it is staffed by zealots and nutters. It will win them no friends.'

Initially, His Grace was persuaded by Bishop Hill's indignation at the inflammatory juxtaposition of multiculturalist sceptics and anthropogenic climate-change deniers with paedophiles. But, having reflected (and having read some of Mr Buerk's other pronouncements on the BBC), it is evident that he is actually criticising those who propagate absolutist dogma and hold to an unquestionable creed.

Under the guise of liberal tolerance, the BBC now espouses a fascist and tyrannical cultural narrative, from which to dissent is tantamount to heresy. This is what Michael Buerk is highlighting. To expound a contrary political, religious, scientific or social theory, no matter how reasoned and reasonable, is to join the 'swivel-eyed loons' or, in the words of Medhi Hasan (a BBC favourite) to be an 'oddball, right-wing' nutter. The BBC have become zealots to the creed of political correctness and a hindrance to rational discourse. Of course, their politburo invites in the heretics, to sustain the perception of balance, but they ensure that these religio-political recalcitrants are set-up for humiliation, either by a sneering interviewer intent on pouring scorn upon their thesis, or by an audience who have been virtually coached when and whom to boo.

Michael Buerk is not himself equating anthropogenic climate change deniers and those who question the doctrine and policy of state multiculturalism with paedophiles: he is lampooning those of his BBC colleagues who do so habitually. He chose paedophiles - whom society, rationally or not, now ranks as the lowest form of life and quite beyond redemption - but, were in not for Godwin's law, he could equally have chosen Nazis.

But His Grace still has a question: If a qualified doctor and government adviser (unpaid) can be humiliatingly dismissed for having co-authored a paper in which a reasoned correlation was drawn between homosexuality and paedophilia, why should BBC employees (paid by the taxpayer) remain in their jobs when, according to Michael Buerk, they clearly hold the view that climate-change deniers and multiculuralist sceptics are as perverted in their beliefs as paedophiles?


Blogger Simon said...

Clarification from Buerk is demanded. As presented, it is not clear whether Buerk intends to meter out criticism of the BBC for its religious zealotry or rather that he intends to consign climate "deniers" to the paedophile bin.

12 February 2011 at 12:58  
Blogger Gnostic said...

Buerk by name, absolute tosser by nature...

12 February 2011 at 13:04  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

“Of course, their politburo invites in the heretics, to sustain the perception of balance, but they ensure that these religio-political recalcitrants are set-up for humiliation, either by a sneering interviewer intent on pouring scorn upon their thesis, or by an audience who have been virtually coached when and whom to boo.”

And for the ultimate “set-up” one only has to remember the Question Time appearance of Nick Griffin in 2009.

Surely, it will not be long now before an aspiring Nero at the BBC commissions live screening of Christian “oddballs” and/or “right-wing nutters” being thrown to real lions or burnt at the stake as befits their ‘heresy’.

12 February 2011 at 13:11  
Anonymous Tacitus said...

Hmmm ... sitting on the shelf I see:
"Under the guise of liberal tolerance, the BBC now espouses a fascist and tyrannical cultural narrative, from which to dissent is tantamount to heresy."

The sad thing is that this kind of diatribe usually comes from right-wingers who don't like it when their core values are threatened. Far from being fascist and tyrannical I can see no evidence offered here to be concerned about the BBC. In fact, as a lefty, I would suggest we get attacked just as much.

12 February 2011 at 13:23  
Blogger Johnny Rottenborough said...

The edition of the Moral Maze where Michael Buerk made that introduction had the BBC’s idea of a balanced panel: a Conservative (Michael Portillo), a former head of Tony Blair’s Policy Unit (Matthew Taylor), and two members of the Revolutionary Communist Party (Claire Fox and Kenan Malik).

12 February 2011 at 13:39  
Anonymous graham Wood said...

What to do about the BBC's undoubted institutional political (left wing) bias?

The answer is simple: do as several, some prominent, members of the public have decided is the only course i.e. decline to pay the licence fee on the grounds, rightly, that the BBC is in breach of its own Charter as an objective public service broadcaster.
It abandoned that position many years ago.
If you have the courage of your convictions you should lead by example, and deny the BBC its facility to impose such bias. will.
The 'Biased BBC site has been exposing this trend for some time.

12 February 2011 at 13:56  
Anonymous Paul said...

Does it surprise anyone that the BBC has a "left wing bias" ? Acyawofter all doesn't most media tend to follow that path ?

12 February 2011 at 15:00  
Blogger The Gray Monk said...

An interesting point of order to ponder here. The term "Fascist" first used to describe Mussolini's political party is today misapplied to the Right Wing of the political spectrum. In fact Mussolini was a socialist and a student of Marx, his maifesto is far more left, than right, and Hitler's Mein Kampf draws more on Marx, Engels and other "Left" political thinkers than anything else. Reading the NASDP Manifesto you could be reading something drafted by any of those on the left and would hardly place it on the Right!

Fascism is a Left Wing invention, not from the Right and is misapplied - ironically by adherents of the Left - to the Right.

12 February 2011 at 15:13  
Anonymous biased bbc said...

Tacitus said..

" Far from being fascist and tyrannical I can see no evidence offered here to be concerned about the BBC. In fact, as a lefty, I would suggest we get attacked just as much"

Erm not by the evidence. Here's a typical day in BBC land.
10 lefty guests against the Tories and one righty in favour ( the Minister defending the topic - Frances Maude)

12 February 2011 at 15:47  
Anonymous Bede said...

I understand that the BBC, for many decades, advertised for its staff solely in The Guardian - does it still? If this is so it explains everything.

12 February 2011 at 16:28  
Anonymous len said...

The BBC is the organisation which tells the sheep what they are to believe in.It would be interesting to find out who defines BBC policy?

It should be renamed the Ministry of Truth, in Orwellian tradition.

12 February 2011 at 17:16  
Anonymous Oswin said...

I'm only surpised that the BBC has missed an opportunity to introduce a wise, benign Iman, to the story-line of ''Lark Rise to Candleford'' ... whence, after much and tribulation, he is finally accepted by Thomas, the postman, as a true and worthy man of God!

12 February 2011 at 17:52  
Anonymous berserker-nkl said...

Does Oswin realise that the BBC is getting rid of Lark Rise to Candleford?

The new Controller of BBC1, a certain Danny Cohen previously of dreadful BBC 3 has decided to pull the plug on this pleasant and popular programme. Reasons: It is getting stale so let's leave while the going is good. Didn't Coronation Street and East Enders get stale Mr Cohen? But you can't get rid of gritty Manchurian and East End formulaic rubbish because they deal with real people! And are deeply Multi Cultural!

Come to think of it is not the term CONTROLLER a word to strike terror. One wonders why the Beeb has not changed it to something more touchy feely.

Come to think of it the term

12 February 2011 at 20:02  
Anonymous Ian of the Midlands said...

There is one simple way to demonstrate, very quietly & with some dignity, your revulsion with the BBC.

Stop feeding them.

I have not paid the TV Tax for 6 years.

And nor will I until its political establishment is dismantled - root & branch.

Join me - they are truly powerless without your money - & no, I have not been dragged through the courts for it - I have private property rights & they have no legally enforceable contract with me for their services.

12 February 2011 at 21:28  
Anonymous Jonathan Stuart-Brown said...

When wise Conservative and Labour Governments in the 50s, 60s and 70s made ITV produce programmes in each region (by franchaises) and out of insecurity The BBC man marked them, then the BBC and ITV brought a much wider range of people into TV and Radio land. When unwise Con and Labour Governments permitted ITV companies to merge and just produce from London, the BBC closed its regional bases and became a West london only affair. The salaries rocketed and the West London Guardian readers (only 50 000) took over to a far far greater extent.
Entertainment not too bad. News and debate feeble with the odd brilliant exception.
Having said that it all comes down to prayer and repentence. If we prayed and repented, God would give us a wise Government and brilliant BBC. As we do not - in the main - we get what we deserve.
2 Chronicles 7:14 (New International Version, ©2010)
14 if my people, who are called by my name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, and I will forgive their sin and will heal their land.

12 February 2011 at 21:50  
Anonymous DocBud said...


You claim:

"Michael Buerk is not himself equating anthropogenic climate change deniers and those who question the doctrine and policy of state multiculturalism with paedophiles"

He may not be with the latter, he most certainly is with the former:

"pushed into the loathesome corner with paedophiles and climate change deniers."

The meaning is very clear, climate change sceptics are already in the loathsome corner with paedophiles, he just doesn't think multicultural sceptics should join them. No other interpretation is possible.

13 February 2011 at 01:02  
Anonymous Oswin said...

Myself @ 17:52

should read: ''...trial and tribulation...''

berserker @ 20:02

There you go! They can't work-in that bloody Iman, so they're dropping the whole show!

13 February 2011 at 02:15  
Anonymous Atlas shrugged said...

Under the guise of liberal tolerance, the BBC now espouses a fascist and tyrannical cultural narrative, from which to dissent is tantamount to heresy.

I agree, however you seem to be implying that this is some how new, it is no such thing IMO.

The BBC is, and has always been a vitally important tool of the establishment.

I believe I have shown many times in the past how the establishment uses its controls over our great and not so great universities, to push certain medium and long term agendas. Then spreads these mind control agendas towards the general public using many media outlets, including the broadcast media, films, books, and advertising.

The agendas change over time as the neads of our corporatist establishment change.

Large, indeed perfectly gigantic amounts of money can and are made in the so called free-markets by people who can spot long, medium, and longer term trends, in all kinds of issues and matters.

However, the establishments 'bets' always pay out, because they know exactly what these changes in society are going to be, because they have the power, and use it, to make them happen.

Feminism, never ending Middle-Eastern wars, and the establishments latest scam, man made CO2=globle warming, being just 3 highly profitable examples.

However the important thing to remember is that these are just 3 out of hundreds over just the last 100 years.

The BBC is therefore Fascist, because the establishment is Fascist. The establishment is represented by the owners of the worlds banking system, as well as the worlds multi-national military and industrial complexes. For these chaps, competition is the worst kind of swear word.

These people only understand MONOPOLY, and only then, when they also make up all of the rules as they go along, and of course always control the BANK.

These people long since gave up any form of real gambling as a way of making REAL money, and therefore retaining very real power for themselves.

They long since formed extremely well funded tax free 'charitable foundations' to help spread their fascist control freakery around the entire planet. The fruits of these long term investments have payed out many times, however they are not content with their previous ill gotten gains, they want the lot.

The BIG JACKPOT, so to speak, or the largly metaphorical JACK-BOOT, stamping on the face of humanity for eternity.

For lovers of The BBC, like for example Tacitus.

How much more evidence do you need to come to the conclusion that the BBC is a wholly FASCIST institution?

Surely watching just one episode of Doctor Who, or the BBC Nine O'clock News is all a fully conscious individual should ever require.

Oh, I see.

Well, perhaps you could try watching The BBC while being awake next time?

13 February 2011 at 04:08  
Anonymous Voyager said...

Your Grace, the EU has a Directive to privatise State-run railways; another to privatise State-run postal has NO Directive to privatise State-run broadcasting corporations in Europe.

Surely this is hardly consonant with freedom of expression or media, so it must be that BBC et al are simply the 20th Century equivalent of a State Church to address the masses with edicts of the ruling dictator ?

Why did Cameron guarantee the TV licence for another 5 years ?

13 February 2011 at 08:37  
Blogger Gnostic said...

Your Grace, I have listened to the offending comment several times and cannot pick up on any intended sarcasm, not even through Buerk's inflection. Rather than people attempting to interpret what was passing through Buerk's mind at the time, perhaps the man himself would care to qualify his comment?

Until he does I'm going to take his words at face value and call him out on them.

13 February 2011 at 08:49  
Anonymous Anguished Soul said...

You can see how the Anti-Christ will take over and be accepted, can't you? And the mark of the beast...

Only a few years ago, an acquaintance made the remark that he thought the Lord was going to return in his lifetime and I laughed.

Now, I've stopped laughing.

13 February 2011 at 09:55  
Blogger Bred in the bone said...

They only read off an autocue their masters dictat, which is why we still have controversy about building seven still standing after the auntie beeb reported it fallen on 9/11.

As for those who believe privatising the beeb would make any difference, its like I point out to the Wife when she sits there flicking from station to station to watch all the soaps.

Its the same bloody storyline being rehashed in everyone, Men jumping into bed with one another, mixed race couples, drugs, sex changes you name it, if its in the liberl agenda its on there, every channel.

What happened to the nine o'clock watershed?

13 February 2011 at 10:05  
Anonymous DanJ0 said...

"mixed race couples"

The horror! :O

13 February 2011 at 10:18  
Anonymous DanJ0 said...

I suppose I'm the only one who thinks it was just a bit of rhetoric, not to be taken too seriously, to kick off the programme.

13 February 2011 at 10:19  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The aspect of refusing to pay one's TV licence would be very effective, if ONLY the greater percentage of the population would agree to do so, all at the same time. Only "en masse" is it going to have any voice. Unfortunately most people are too lazy to make the effort to block their direct debits.

13 February 2011 at 10:40  
Blogger Bred in the bone said...

DanJ0 said...
"mixed race couples"

The horror! :O

I am sorry you feel that way, I have mixed race relatives and they are fine.

I am capable of seperating family issues from State propoganda, if the soaps want to potray real life they should do away with muslims and Cockneys drinking down the pub together why their sons jump into bed and instead show muslims dealing drugs to our children and getting them into prostitution.

But after nine is my point.

13 February 2011 at 11:12  
Anonymous DanJ0 said...

"I am sorry you feel that way"

It was sarcasm, in case it wasn't clear.

13 February 2011 at 11:30  
Blogger Bred in the bone said...


Then you forgot to define your intentions with a mouth on your face ;-D

13 February 2011 at 11:54  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

If I want to read the Manchester Guradian, I shall buy it. So why should I have to pay, under threat of prosecution, for the Manchester BBC?

13 February 2011 at 17:29  
Anonymous non mouse said...

You can't buy The Manchester Guardian, because it dropped Manchester, between 1959 and 1964.

Anon's point on Al-Beeb may still stand. It may only be a matter of time, though, before the corporation ceases to claim that it's British.

13 February 2011 at 19:28  
Blogger killemallletgodsortemout said...

DanJ0 said...
"mixed race couples"

The horror! :O


(DanJO...Isn't that what lefties would be shouting, their righteousness, indignation and threats to sue writ large on their furrowed brows?)

Oh, the irony.............

14 February 2011 at 14:06  
Anonymous DanJ0 said...

killemallletgodsortemout, what are you on about? The "The horror! :O" is faux-shock at something that is, and ought to be, completely unremarkable. What on earth differences does it make to the rest of us if a couple is mixed race? That was my point, you numpty.

14 February 2011 at 17:53  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Newer›  ‹Older