Sunday, April 30, 2006
BBC'S RESPONSE TO BEING CALLED CORRUPT RACIST NAZI LIARS
How come in 16 years of reporting on Yugoslavia this is the very first time the BBC have got round to mentioning that Belgrade, unlike the cities under NATO supported rule, has not been ethnically cleansed?To which. somewhat to my surprise I got a reply.
Could it be because the BBC are a corrupt racist bunch of Nazi liars who knowingly & deliberately censored the news to help people the knew to be Nazis publicly committed to genocide or is there ANY other possible explanation?
Thanks for contacting the programme. These are quite serious allegations, could you explain what you mean?Note I am not giving the guy's name because he is merely an apparatchik & if anything, has shown more grace in being uncomfortable about what I said than anybody else in the BBC.
In particular the phrase "corrupt racist bunch of Nazi liars"
The particular point I was making is that in 16 years of the BBC reporting as "news" that the Serbs were generally engaged in ethnic cleansing & that Milosevic was, as a matter of alleged fact, the "Butcher of Belgrade" this was the first occasion, to the best of my knowledge, that the BBC had reported the existence of the non-Serb minorities in Belgrade. There are approximately 200,000 Moslems, 70,000 of them Albanians living in Belgrade, the alleged HQ of ethnic cleansing in former Yugoslavia. By comparison the authorities in Zagreb, Sarajevo & Pristina, whom, if the BBC's word is to be believed, are our multiculturalist allies, are, in truth, former Nazis or Nazi influenced entities who have established largely ethnically cleansed entities.& got:
The BBC has also shown, continuously over the last 16 years, far greater concern for supporting Nazism than for reporting the truth. Examples:
The BBC has reported that Alia Izetbegovic was "a moderate Moslem committed to a multicultural state". In fact he was a former member of the Young Moslems who formed an auxiliary to the Handzar division of the SS, an organisation so genocidal that even German officers complained. He also, before coming to power called for the genocide ("there can be neither peace nor coexistence with non-Islamicists") of Bosnia's Christians & Jews. This was public knowledge but censored by the BBC.
The BBC has continuously reported the "Srebrenica massacre" of Moslem soldiers as undisputed fact whereas the truth is that the story has been repeatedly changed as original claims have been proven untrue (for example it was originally claimed that no militia reached Moslem lines whereas it is now accepted that about 7,000 did & the initial "mass graves" found by the CIA have proven empty). The fact is that there is no real forensic evidence of a large scale massacre of militia & the BBC have censored that truth.
Equally the BBC have censored reporting of the real Srebrenica massacre, the prior genocide of at least 3,800 Serb civilians, mainly women, old people & children, in villages surrounding Srebrenica by Nasir Oric, the local Moslem commander, even after he had been officially "disarmed" by NATO troops. In all the reporting of the faked "massacre" last year the BBC made no mention of the real & undisputed massacres.
Equally, comparing the BBC's reporting of the 10th anniversary of Srebrenica with the reporting of the Krajina Holocaust you will see that the Krajina genocide went, presumably deliberately, unreported Indeed the BBC have deliberately repeatedly called Srebrenica "the worst massacre in Europe since 1945". Krajina was the culmination of the unreported cleansing of half a million people from Croatia, half of whom are still "missing" it is clearly dishonest 7 racist to ignore it. The BBC has clearly deliberately censored reporting of massive genocide by your (ex)Nazi friend Tudjman.
Subsequently, for the 2 months prior to the Kosovo bombing the BBC evening news regularly reported as fact as 1st or 2nd item, allegations of atrocities by the Yugoslavs. In fact you clearly knew that our government considered that the majority of murders were actually of Serb civilians by the KLA, which, bearing in mind the population mix, could only have happened if your KLA friends were deliberately engaged in mass racist murders (ie genocide) & the Yugoslavs weren't. You also failed to report the fact that the overwhelming majority of murders of Albanians were by the Nato & Vatican armed KLA Nazis.
During the war the BBC censored any reporting of the evidence, now clearly proven, that it was NATO bombing & NATO armed terrorists that created the refugees & that the Yugoslav authorities made major efforts to persuade refugees to stay. For example you censored that the refugee column wiped out by a NATO airstrike were returning to their homes, persuaded that the Yugoslavs meant them no harm.
The BBC equally showed your commitment to balance by allowing debate on both sides during the Yugoslav bombing. This both sides being those who wanted to bomb Yugoslavia & those who wanted a ground invasion. The side that pointed out that, since Nuremberg, planning an aggressive war has been a war crime, were generally kept off the air.
After the war the BBC decided not to equally seriously, or indeed almost at all, report the genocide & ethnic cleansing, not to mention kidnap, rape & sale of schoolchildren, carried out under NATO occupation. For example you have completely censored any reporting of the Dragodan massacre of 210 civilians, something less than but not much less than My Lai, carried out by officially disarmed KLA, rearmed as NATO police, under UK government authority.
Obviously you decided to give almost no coverage to the Milosevic "Trial of the Century" after he started taking the prosecution witnesses apart. Particularly egregious was the decision to censor any reporting of the evidence of Lord Owen, a major & entirely respectable UK establishment figure, that Milosevic was the "only leader who consistently supported peace" & "a man to whom any form of racism is anathema". The undisputed fact that he was poisoned has been largely ignored
Finally I would like to point out the way your reporting deliberately made Fikret Abdic an unperson, never referring to him by name but merely as a "local warlord". In fact he was the most popular Bosnian Moslem politician, pro-free enterprise but anti NATO's al Quaeda allies & the only one whose following crossed ethnic lines (understandable since other Moslem leaders were committed to genocide). You deliberately censored any reporting of his "trial" by the Croatian Nazis (an entirely new meaning of Nazi War Crimes Trial) & imprisonment purely for opposing al Quaeda. Joseph Stalin was not more keen on removing people from history than the BBC here.
It seems unnecessary to continue. Since you have maintained these over 16 years I must accept that they represent the very highest standard of honesty of the BBC. However if even one of these is correct then the BBC have lied continuously to support people you know to be Nazis in a way bound to assist them in genocide. I think it is reasonable to call that corrupt.
If you believe I have been factually wrong on even one of these matters, let alone all of them, I assume you will let me know what.
Thanks for your reply.So I did & the BBC in London's defence to being presented with evidence that they are "corrupt racist Nazi liars" is:
I'm slightly bemused why these comments are being directed at me as .............. in Scotland rather than the BBC as a whole.
You have a series of questions about BBC coverage in general dating back 16 years, a time when I was still at school, and this programme didn't exist. I don't feel qualified to answer for the BBC as a whole on its coverage of the conflict in the Balkans.
Could I suggest you contact the BBC's complaints unit and emphasise that you have a complaint about the BBC's coverage across the board on this matter. You will find their contacts via the BBC's website.
As mentioned in my last e-mail though I do object to be called "racist, corrupt and a Nazi".
If you have any other queries about this programme specifically please direct them to the programme e-mail address Gary@bbc.co.uk.
In the event that the BBC ever feel able to give any defence whatsoever I will, naturally, publish it. I would even publish something that just tried to answer the original question. In the event that anybody working for them feels able to explain why they don't personally consider themselves to be genocidal liars they are free to comment. Until then I obviously would "object" to any of them suggesting that they are in any way honest since this would impugn my integrity.
STOP PRESS _ TODAY (11th APRIL)I have received:
Dear Mr Craig
Thank you for your e-mail. Please accept our apologies for the delay in
replying. We know our correspondents appreciate a quick response and we
are sorry you have had to wait on this occasion.
I note your concerns regarding our reporting of the Bosnian War and the
Srebrenica massacre. However, without specific dates, times and channels
of broadcast or BBC News Online addresses, we are unable to address your
Please be assured, however, that your comments have been fully registered
on our daily audience log. This internal document will be made available
to the News team and Senior BBC Management.
Once again, thank you for taking the time to contact us.
Thank you for your email. I regret, but cannot claim to be surprised that the BBC find it impossible to deny having corruptly lied, over a period of 16 years, to assist people you know to be Nazis to engage in genocide.
I am not exactly sure, for example, what part of the phrase "2 months prior to the Kosovo bombing the BBC evening news regularly reported as fact as 1st or 2nd item, allegations of atrocities by the Yugoslavs. In fact you clearly knew that our government considered that the majority of murders were actually of Serb civilians by the KLA" is to unspecific to identify but I must accept your word that you have been unable to do so.
I will get back to you to assist you further.