The BBC capitulates to Islamists

Liberty Scott blogs about the capitulation of the BBC to Islamists:

The Islamists want to return us to the dark ages.  They are not murdering out of a random desire for hatred, nor are they avenging Western involvement in wars in Iraq (which France did not participate in) and Afghanistan (which France had almost no involvement in), they are seeking to impose sharia law.

They achieve their aims by these sorts of events, and the previous attacks on the Danish newspaper Jyllands Posten.

It creates a climate of fear, fear that if you do offend those who want sharia law, they will enforce it.

So what happens is that they get what they want.

That is exactly what the BBC has done (and many other media outlets).

I pick on the BBC for some obvious reasons:

1.  It is state owned.  As such, it is meant to represent the UK, as a whole and embody the ill-defined values of the country.

2. It projects itself as a bastion of objectivity and balance.  Although plenty will accuse of it bias (and it has an inherently statist bias, rarely taking the view that government should do less), it still has some credibility internationally, particularly with the BBC World Service, in not being afraid to take on those who would censor opinions and information that offend them or disadvantage them. 

3. It is the dominant broadcaster in the UK, with the biggest audience across over eight TV channels and dozens of radio stations.

4. It enforces, with criminal punishment, payment by all British households with a TV, payment by force.  We are all forced to pay for the BBC.

The BBC’s editorial policy states in its guidance on “stills, photographs and images” that “The Prophet Mohammed must not be represented in any shape or form”.  

What is that if not appeasement?  It isn’t that representation should not be undertaken if it is intended to be gratuitous.  It is absolutely blanket prohibition on even showing an image that is the source of the offence for the terrorists.

It is as if the BBC simply has agreed with the Islamists, and is, internally, enforcing its own form of self-censorship applying the sharia law that the Islamists are seeking to impose.

So have the terrorists won, if the UK’s dominant, state owned broadcaster, enforces the censorship they want?


Appeasement never works, and the British more than any others should know that.


– Liberty Scott


THANK YOU for being a subscriber. Because of you Whaleoil is going from strength to strength. It is a little known fact that Whaleoil subscribers are better in bed, good looking and highly intelligent. Sometimes all at once! Please Click Here Now to subscribe to an ad-free Whaleoil.

  • conwaycaptain

    The UK media are week kneed.
    The TIMES used to be know as THE THUDERER owing to its position on many things. It ws the TIMES that uncovered the state of the nursing services in the Crimea and the bumbling Generals and the Govt didn’t like them for it.

  • Wheninrome

    “no shape or form” could there be question around his actual existence.

  • Whitey

    This is a real knock to the BBC’s credibility.

  • cows4me

    Liberalism still rules in UK. They just bring themselves to admit that years of political correctness and belief all cultures are of equal value may not have been the right way to go. The UK will still be singing the benefits of years of full on immigration till they are living on their knees. The real problem here is Liberals and their huge ego’s, they just can’t except the fact they have screwed up, badly.

  • spanishbride

    The fact that it has been removed by the BBC is chilling. Censorship of criticism is the antithesis of democracy. it was a well written, reasoned article and now it is gone. Thank goodness Whaleoil grabbed it before it was too late. If the Free Press is this scared the government must be terrified.

    • ex-JAFA

      What’s been removed? Scott’s blog post is still there, updated to say that the BBC policy appears to have been removed. Surely that’s a good thing, unless you’re suggesting that the policy is still in place but is now hidden from public view?

    • Just to clarify: it is the BBC’s policy which has been removed, not Liberty Scott’s post. That said, we are now left to wonder whether the policy has been reversed or simply hidden.

    • IntrinsicValue

      What is also interesting, is that if you type “Muhammad” (and a variety of other spellings) into the search feature on the Editorial Guidelines page, the result is “Sorry no results found, please try searching again”. That implies that ALL references to Muhammad have been removed, and I mean not just hidden but removed.

  • ozbob68

    The Beeb wants balance? Fine, everyone needs to be Offended equally.

  • Davo42

    Back in 1982 the BBC could laugh about it. Not so much now, I never thought we would see the day when the prophecies of the young ones would actually come to pass, but there you go….

    • corporate refugee

      You need to watch the BBC comedy “Citizen Khan”.

    • Pharmachick

      Thanks for that, aside from the commentary being bang-on, I seriously love The Young Ones. Such a pity about Rik Mayall.

  • jay

    What all these lefties and cowards don’t grasp is that the true meaning of free speech is the right to be controversial and offend people. Everywhere on earth people have and always have had the right to say things that are inoffensive. It’s the right to say whatever you want, even if it offends, that millions have fought and died for.

    Isn’t it amazing how easily we give up that right by capitulating to these people. In our cowardice we have allowed those three men to win. What a disgrace.

  • corporate refugee

    Sorry to spoil the party, but in its defence the BBC does continue to make and broadcast the excellent comedy “Citizen Khan” which many Muslims object to (200+ complaints after the first episode).

  • crosstherubicon

    The BBC is absolutely not representative of the British people and hasn’t been for decades. The BBC is anti British, anti Christian and pro Muslims. BBC Question time (a political program on weekly) put out a questionnaire to people who apply to be audience members. They are asked on that questionnaire what political party they’d vote for if an election was held tomorrow? This is how they weed out conservatives or right leaning politicos and fill the audience with left wingers as representatives of the British public. That program’s audience is always full to the brim with lefties with very few right wing thinkers for balance.
    Plus the program is supposed to be local audience from where they’re filming.
    I once watched it many years ago when it was filmed on the west coast of Wales.
    That area is almost exclusively white British, yet the audience were nearly half full of Muslims and other minorities, where did they ship them in from?
    And another BBC series ‘Spooks’ about MI5. A few years ago was about some radical Christians from the middle east who come to London as suicide bombers to blow up a mosque. One couldn’t make it up! Well there’s no way they would put the other way round as that would have offended Muslims

    • James

      interesting comment- the British also set up the “Crown” (Inc) in Saudi Arabia in 1930’s- around the same time they awarded Palestine to the Rothschilds. They also pretty much run Brunei, with British military basis all over that country- which also has Sharia Law. perhaps Sharia Law is the Agenda- even for the Crown? A wider perspective of history (as in longer than 2000 years) suggests such massive world changes do occur. My research suggests the Crown (incorproated) changes their religion and power centre / capital (or their New Jerusalem according to their religions) every 2000 years.

      • Brunei the most boring place on earth.
        If a Xmas tree can be seen it is a criminal offense. Yep lovely muslim place.
        At least at Brunei Shell we could get booze, that and the UK army barracks were the only places you could buy booze.
        I recommend Brunei for all wowsers.

  • crosstherubicon

    And the BBC head of religious programming (in a predominantly Christian country) for the past 10 years has been a Muslim! Cowards!!!

  • James

    do we have freedom of speech in NZ? or are we all now fearful of being spied on. will we end up with secret arrests and the IRD and other Govt/ Crown agencies persecuting those who have different views? i guess the litmus test is whether alternate views are allowed on blogs- or get censored etc. personally- i respect the people who have had to do the actual fighting – not the media and politicians- who are often exposed as being ‘on the pay roll’ in one way or another.

    “If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy.” – James Madison

    • Cadwallader

      In NZ we definitely have freedom of expression but part of retaining that freedom requires constant surveillance of those who would stifle it. I refer of course to our very biased media. I can see that if you remove BBC references from the article we have an adequate description of TV3 and National Radio. The onslaught this blog received from there msm last year is proof positive of this.

  • LesleyNZ

    I wonder if the BBC Editorial has the same attitude and policy to images of the Christian religion and Jesus Christ and His father God (NOT Allah). Mohammed is supposedly prophet (man) not God. The BBC know Christians will not retaliate with violence. Christians leave it up to God to be judge.

  • Just a thought …

    Hey , I’ve got a great idea… let’s just ignore it and it will go away…… Brilliant.. Hmmmm let’s just wait and see how that will work out ……….

  • Chris W

    If this were a policy implemented impartially and applied to the group sensibilities of all citizens, and it didn’t interfere with news reporting, I wouldn’t have a serious objection. I don’t really care either way, but it’s not an actual necessity for a public broadcaster to randomly offend its citizens.