Broadcaster slammed for falsely implicating immigrants
The BBC has been hammered for feeding into racist stereotypes in its report of the conviction of twenty-one people in the West Midlands on child sex abuse charges.
All those convicted are white Britons – yet the BBC illustrated the article with a headline image showing Palestinian flags:
After outrage erupted over the broadcaster’s fuelling of racist stereotypes, the BBC changed the header. However, the broadcaster did not issue a correction or explanation, instead simply tweeting that the photo had been ‘updated’:
The UK’s national, supposedly impartial broadcaster today fed the fires of racism and anti-foreigner feeling that Tory policy and Labour collusion have been fanning – and then, when it was called out, failed to admit and properly correct its action.
SKWAWKBOX needs your help. The site is provided free of charge but depends on the support of its readers to be viable. If you’d like to help it keep revealing the news as it is and not what the Establishment wants you to hear – and can afford to without hardship – please click here to arrange a one-off or modest monthly donation via PayPal or here to set up a monthly donation via GoCardless (SKWAWKBOX will contact you to confirm the GoCardless amount). Thanks for your solidarity so SKWAWKBOX can keep doing its job.
If you wish to republish this post for non-commercial use, you are welcome to do so – see here for more.
Goebbels would be in awe of the BBC.
Whoever is responsible for slipping those flags into the film should be named and idetified.
Reply to Bevin
Whoever is responsible should also be prosecuted.
The BBC has “form”. Remember it photoshopped an image of Jeremy Corbyn to make it appear he was wearing a Soviet cap thereby visually reinforcing the establishment’s narritive that he was a Stalinist/Marxist/ Communist sympathiser, unBritish etc.
Presumably now in order to please the pro Israel lobby they have associated child sexual abusers with Palestinians and/ or those who support Palestinian human rights. Imagine the uproar there would have been if the BBC had photoshopped Israeli flags on to this photograph or used an old photograph containing Israeli flags to create the impression that Israelis were child sex abusers.
In my opinion this latest smearing of Palestinians by the BBC iillustrates more than just their usual misrepresentation of the issues.It very definitely crosses the line into Islamaphobia/ Arab hatred and incitement to hatred and is a police matter. However I’ll not hold my breath waiting for the police to take action – they’ll be too scared of being denounced as anti Semites by the pro Israeli lobby and the various Zionist groups to do anything about this disgraceful misrepresentation.
Smartboy – “The BBC has “form”. Remember it photoshopped an image of Jeremy Corbyn to make it appear he was wearing a Soviet cap “
You were saying? 🤔
https://i0.wp.com/skwawkbox.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/corbyn-starmlin.png?resize=768%2C432&ssl=1
They are self evidently not the only ones.
Where is this famous ‘context’ of yours steveH?
Was this done before, during or well after years and reams of such day in, day out, vitriolic propaganda directed at the values and ideas represented by the previous LP leadership from every sector of the Corporate media, the so called ‘professional commentariat, even the military?
Are you really claiming by implication that the Skwawkbox has the same national and international reach as the BBC?
That this represents an equivalent?
You really are nothing but a poundworld propagandist desperately hanging around this site making any excuse for your Dear Leader like some Maoist Red Guard.
Reply to Steve H
The state broadcasters interference in the political process (contrary to its Charter) is a matter of record . However the BBC’s association of child sex abuse with Palestinians and their supporters crosses the line into criminality in my opinion. I think it amounts to clear anti Arab racism and is designed to incite hatred of Palestinians . Irrespective of individual political views it is obvious just how wrong and dangerous this is. Yet you appear to be trying to defend the BBC’s potentially criminal act. Why?
Skwawkbox’s cartoon representation of Starmer as Stalin falls well within the tradition of cartoon as political satire, a tradition at least 200 years old.
I don’t normally reply to you. I don’t like to encourage trolling. So, here’s a suggestion- if you don’t like this well informed news site stop posting on it.
Well done Steve for exposing this nonsense from the BBC. It truely is rotten to the core, I think it would be more fitting when talking about paedophiles to show BBC logos while covering the subject, after all the Corporation employed and protected Jimmy Savile and others throughout his career.
…only because Jimmy Saville had the Margaret Thatcher seal of approval.
Ironically, I’m learning a lot about extensive class-based paedophilia – and Thatcher’s use (as in ‘exploitation’) of it – in the 1970s and ’80s from a BBC R4 drama series, GF Newman’s The Corrupted (they’re broadcasting series 4 atm).
The BBC can ‘trope’ like the best of them. Kremlin-backed photoshoped caricatures of one of British politics’ most resolutely pro-democracy mainstream politicians, Panorama’s overtly political assassination-job on the same and Fiona Bruce’s overtly racist treatment (off camera) of a QT panel member, like all propagandists they occasionally try to disguise their own black art.
The BBC being pro-Establishment is a fact of life. Don’t you just know that their Panorama and Newsnight efforts will not be finished until they get Sir Keior Starmer his second or third term?
I’ll just leave this here…
https://forums.richieallen.co.uk/showthread.php?tid=1204
Make of that what you will.
Even before Starmer’s Corbyn-halted “negotiations” with Mishcon de Reya, it looks like some of the law firm’s clients are at the very centre of this Establishment Paedophile Ring, not least Dame Margaret Hodge, “who was at the very heart of the Islington Child Abuse Scandal, which in turn linked to Jimmy Savile and organised paedophilia in both Jersey (Haut de la Garenne) and other London boroughs including Lambeth and Richmond upon Thames (Grafton Close). By a remarkable coincidence, Ms Hodge’s New Labour colleague, Keith Vaz (a Labour Friend of Israel), was employed as a solicitor first by Richmond upon Thames Council, and thereafter by Margaret Hodge’s very own Islington Borough Council, during the very periods when care homes overseen by both authorities were hotbeds of organised paedophilia and child trafficking”.
Even if only 5% of richieallen’s thread were verifiable, and could be systematically validated, it would cause the Establishment’s role in sustaining these Paedo Rings to collapse like a house of cards. You’d imagine that Starmer (being a ‘forensic lawyer’) would know this and want to stay clear of the whole thing. Maybe Jeremy inadvertently- and for all the right reasons – actually helped “mr rules” Starmer avoid some of the splashback? (Not that he deserves it.)
Toffee…Bloody hell. As you say if only 5% were true…..
Well the article’s almost five years old, and still up – And I’ve not heard owt about the author being sued.
As for jim vaz, qwerti’s on the ball. Stymied an investigation into janner in the early 90’s and sought to protect nonces by making it a requirement of the Law to conceal allegations of child abuse.
…And he subsequently became chair of the home affairs committee, while hodge was made children’s minister.
They’re fucking laughing at us.
What can you expect from a supposedly public owned company that protected some of the worst pedos for over 30 years does the zionist dame hodges daughter lizzy watson still work for the bbc who would protect the apartheid state of Israel at all cost I bet the bbc wont show the atroclties at the AL AQUA MOSQUE
Maybe I can help with the source of the photo. Wolverhampton Crown Court is the location for trials of activists protesting against Elbit. There’s one currently taking place in which Tony Greenstein is a defendant. My educated guess is that the Beeb was looking for a stock photo of the building, found one with supporters of the Elbit protesters carrying Palestinian flags, and croppedit.
I really found it strange that very few outlets actually named the perpetrators, and the few that did, didn’t do it straight away. I thought that the reason was perhaps because they were Asian/Muslims (yes I do have my own unconscious bias, but also the West Midlands are very multi ethnic) and the BBC and others didn’t want to give the far right any fuel for their hateful rhetoric.
Turns out, they are all very white, of all ages, male and female and seemingly, from their names, related. What is the BBC playing at?
The names and pictures were published 10 hours ago (round midnight) on the BBC.
Reply to Ben
The names and photos appear to have been taken down because they aren’t on the BBC website now.
Just looked up the names of the defendants. An unusually high proportion of people found unfit to plead, and some of them share the same name as a defendant who gave evidence for the prosecution. Those found unfit to plead were the subject of trials of fact, and a report refers to them being “sentenced”, although I suspect this is not the correct legal term. This may perhaps have had some effect on the ability/willingness of news media to name them immediately. Most defendants appear to live in inner suburbs of Walsall on the east side of the A34.
I’d hazard a guess: That the defendants are all working class (and not, therefore, the class and ‘calibre’ of the well-connected people mentioned in Toffee’s richie allen link (above)?
Maybe someone with local and case knowledge can comment. As Alan Harrison (below) points out, “most defendants appear to live in inner suburbs of Walsall on the east side of the A34.” ‘Wrong’ side of the tracks?
This Tuesday marked the 55th anniversary of the assassination of justice and anti-racism campaigner Martin Luther King.
He was hit by a single bullet that was fired at 18.01 hours. The assassin hid behind a bush that the authorities cut down the next day in order to destroy evidence.
So, let us remember Martin Luther King and James Earl Ray who was framed for the killing. He did not actually get a trial but was coerced/tricked into a plea bargain by Percy Foreman, a friend of President Johnson.
Ray later appealed to Judge Preston Battle for a trial but he, very conveniently, died of a heart attack before he could give his ruling!
The fact that Martin Luther King was so promptly rushed to hospital where he died from a single bullet wound is suspicious as was the similar death of Lee Harvey Oswald in 1963.
This link offers an alternative view of how Dr King died:
https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=martin+luther+king+jr+death+hospital&docid=603531295541839063&mid=6EFC7511940A121494FF6EFC7511940A121494FF&view=detail&FORM=VIRE