I never cease to be amazed (well not really) when I see reports in the press reflecting the government's view that the BBC was in some way biased against the Iraq war! Well excuse me while I have a little giggle.

There were dozens of anti-war protests outside BBC Manchester before and during the Iraq War with not a single BBC camera in sight. That is, except for the police cameras attempting to psychologically intimidate the protesters. But this did begin to look slightly farcical, however, when anti-war video cameras began to video the police videoers.

The BBC is the UK governments mouth - much like the filth are it's muscle - so as long as the UK government is under direct control of the US the BBC will keep saying what it is told to say.
C'mon, they are the British Broadcasting Corporation! How is that gonna be impartial?

The BBC was called the Bagdad Broadcasting Corporation by the Sun newspaper for its strong anti-war stance during the Iraq war and the BBC was the one that claimed the Iraq dossier had been sexed up. In no way was the BBC ever pro war. It just gave factual news reports like it is supposed to do.

Rockwell you loser, we at IMC do not base our opinions of the BBC (or anything else for that matter) on what the Sun thinks.

The BBC was virulently pro-war even unto the extent of ordering reporters not to attend anti-war marches (even in a private capacity) and telling the newsdesks not to report anti-war stories opinions. This is a FACT. I've seen the memo from Richard Sambrook, the head of BBC News.

The truth is that the Sun hates the BBC because it stands in the way of Rupert Murdoch's dream of owning and controlling all media.

It may find the BBC's reporting too "left wing" but that's because when you are a right-wing paranoid extremist (as I'm sure you must be aware), almost anything that isn't the establishment's "official" viewpoint will be denounced as "left wing."

For the umpteenth time, Rockwell, LEARN TO THINK FOR YOURSELF!

Quote:"The BBC was virulently pro-war even unto the extent of ordering reporters not to attend anti-war marches (even in a private capacity) and telling the newsdesks not to report anti-war stories opinions."

Funny then how BBC reporters were at every anti-war demo! And how the BBC showed video footage of anti-war marches on TV. Oh and its also funny how the BBC are now in a court case for accusing the government of sexing up the Iraqi weapons dossier!

As requested elsewhere when you erqase my comment I would appreciate an explanation nearby.

British influence is worse than the US influence.
Would you like to see British influence back at the BBC or would you get rid of this pigscum organ of propaganda?

"Funny then how BBC reporters were at every anti-war demo! And how the BBC showed video footage of anti-war marches on TV," bleated government-stooge Rockwell.

"Oh and its also funny how the BBC are now in a court case for accusing the government of sexing up the Iraqi weapons dossier!"

Actually BBC reporters only covered the massive (and frankly, impossible to ignore)
demonstrations in London and Scotland. They utterly ignored the dozens and dozens of events that took place almost daily in the run-up to the war.

The BBC are not "in a court case" you retard, they are part of an inquiry. That aside, they are only there to try and distract attention from the government's real embarrassment: that there are NO WMDS in Iraq and therefore the country was lied to by the government.

The BBC are being accused of slipshod journalism; not opposing the war.

Quote: "they are only there to try and distract attention from the government's real embarrassment: that there are NO WMDS in Iraq and therefore the country was lied to by the government."

Wrong on all counts. The evidence of WMD came from both the British joint intellegence committee, MI5 and MI6 and the American CIA. Their intellegence reports on Iraq's weapons of mass destruction were debated in Parliament and believed by government minister to be reliable and accurate.

Saddam was well known from over 12 years to be hell bent on aquiring WMD including nuclear weapons and went to great lengths to conceal them from UN inspectors. Just because none have been found doesn't mean they never existed. Iraq is the size of France and there are numerous places where those weapons could be hidden. For example there are arms dumps in Ireland that have never been found in over 30 years and Ireland is much smaller than Iraq.

Anyone who thinks that Saddam was not hell bent on hidding such weapons, aquiring nuclear weapons and was not a major threat to the region and to us is a complete and utter idiot!

In 1933 many people in Europe believed Hitler was not a threat 6 years later they learnt to their cost that they had been dangerously wrong. In taking out Saddam the allies have probably prevented world war three!