BBC bosses order reporters not to use word “terror” in reporting jihad attacks

See the source image

See the source image

See the source image

See the source image

 

BBC bosses order reporters not to use word “terror” in reporting jihad attacks

 

Jun 12, 2019

By

Reprinted from: Jihad Watch

 

Frequent setbacks and even losses in the global jihad can be blamed on Western Leftists who persist on scoring against their own team. Unfortunately, this is not sports, it’s a violent war which is taking lives and ruining the same. While the aim of jihadists is to ““Kill them wherever you find them” (Qur’an 2:191, 4:89), and to subvert the House of War, the goal of Western Leftists is to appear ‘non-racist’ and ‘non-Islamophobic’. Leftist leaders and mainstream media have fallen fully into a trap to the detriment of all citizens. “BBC bosses” are now being rightly accused of “sanitising” jihad attacks. “Reporters will be told to avoid using the word to describe any terror attack, unless they are quoting someone else. Instead, they will refer to terror attacks by naming specific details, such as the location and the method of slaughter used.”

It still remains to be seen whether BBC will turn a blind eye to the usage of the word “terror” by reporters if an isolated attack committed by a “white nationalist” turns up.  In so doing, the public will be fooled into believing that the global jihad is not a homeland security threat, only “white nationalism” is.

As enemy jihad combatants and their stealth allies steadily prevail upon Western democracies, citizens of a once-free world will continue to live in the dark, unable to take precautions. If a given community has a high rate of islamic supremacist crime and terror attacks, the motivation will be concealed by the BBC, with other media perhaps likely to follow. Citizens will continue to be beaten down by the ‘Islamophobia’ battering ram that warns about the global jihad. Already, crimes by Islamic supremacists are being committed against infidels without reports about who is committing these crimes. The argument used is that the identity of the perpetrator does not matter; that it is discriminatory to report on race or religion in criminal matters. Crimes perpetrated by Islamic supremacists have introduced a unique dilemma; ie. identity does matter when there is an ideology driving criminal acts, eg. rapes against infidel women. Every creed and race has been found among rapists, perpetrators of domestic violence and unspeakable violent acts against innocents, but there is no creed or race that sanctions such actions against disbelievers but Islam.

The BBC has now ordered a move that will end up further endangering the lives of Western citizens by keeping them in the dark, yet executives at the BBC are paid wages by those same citizens.

David Green, a former Home Office adviser and chief executive of the think tank Civitas, said: ‘If they don’t want to use that [the word terror] then they’re failing in their public service duty which is to be clear and accurate. ‘I think there is a common usage, which has some recognition in law, which if you use attempted killing or injury to a political objective, then that’s terrorism. ‘It would be misleading not to say that these are terrorist episodes if they are attempts to advance a political or ideological cause through violence.

It is no wonder that mainstream media has been steadily losing money, in favor of more reliable internet sources that report truth. Unfortunately,  Canada engaged the socialist route in a big media bailout for political gain.

“BBC bosses accused of ‘sanitising’ Islamist attacks after it emerges reporters will be told to stop using the word ‘terror’ unless quoting someone else”, by Katherine Rushton, Daily Mail, June 9, 2019:

The BBC has been accused of ‘sanitising’ terrorism under plans for an effective ban on journalists using the word ‘terror’.

Reporters will be told to avoid using the word to describe any terror attack, unless they are quoting someone else.

Instead, they will refer to terror attacks by naming specific details, such as the location and the method of slaughter used.

The controversial edict means that the BBC will no longer use the phrase ‘terror attack’ to describe the massacres at London Bridge or Manchester Arena, as the corporation did when the atrocities occurred.

Reporters would describe them as the London Bridge van attack or the Manchester Arena bomb attack instead.

But yesterday, MPs and experts accused the broadcaster of ‘failing in its public service duty’.

David Green, a former Home Office adviser and chief executive of the think tank Civitas, said: ‘If they don’t want to use that [the word terror] then they’re failing in their public service duty which is to be clear and accurate.

‘I think there is a common usage, which has some recognition in law, which if you use attempted killing or injury to a political objective, then that’s terrorism.

‘It would be misleading not to say that these are terrorist episodes if they are attempts to advance a political or ideological cause through violence.

‘The Christchurch one [in New Zealand] was someone a bit wacky but he was trying to make a political point, and all the Islamist episodes are aimed at a political outcome.’

Conservative MP Andrew Bridgen said: ‘They are terrorists and these are terror attacks. The BBC should not try to sanitise the behaviour of terrorists by not calling it out.’….

 

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

No comments yet.

Leave a Reply, please --- thank you.

Powered by WordPress. Designed by WooThemes