Dim-witted or just biased? BBC Radio, presumably in the name of balance, keeps giving free publicity to the approximately 17 members of the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament. Last month Radio 4 dragged on a spokesman for CND to react to the deal on nuclear weapons between Russia and the U.S. Last week Radio 5 invited CND to comment on the day’s newspapers. Remember the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament? If we’d listen to these communists, socialists, their fellow travelling dupes and Britain-haters in the 1960s, 1970s and 1980s we’d all be speaking Russian today. If we’d listened to CND and thrown away our nuclear weapons unilaterally, the Berlin Wall would still be there, or if not, it would have been breached in the other direction from East to West and communists would be governing Europe. Thanks to the leadership of Britain’s Margaret Thatcher and U.S. President Ronald Reagan, cowardly, traitorous, misguided outfits like CND were thwarted. It is worth remembering that Prime Minister Tony Blair and the awful Cherie, to further their careers in the Labour party in the early 80s, became members of CND. Why would the BBC think it was worthwhile interviewing CND? If it is for balance, will the BBC be inviting right wing organisations like the British National Party to review the papers? I don’t think so. I think the BBC probably does it just to incite and aggravate people like me. If they are going to invite these people on and give them an opportunity to air their devalued and outmoded views, the BBC should explain what they stand for. By the way, Minister for Europe Peter Hain is still a member of CND. Is the BBC biased or just dim-witted? The BBC invited Tariq Ali, that tired old ‘60s leftist and hater of all things British and American, to comment on the U.S. conduct of the war in Afghanistan. He proclaimed himself “dubious”. What a surprise. Why does the BBC persist in seeking the views of people like Ali who represent just their own sick view of the world. Asking Ali for his views on the war in Afghanistan is a bit like going into an internment camp during the second world war and asking Oswald Mosley, leader of the British Fascists in the 30s, for his comments on the war with Germany. Or is this some warped BBC idea of “balance”? Neil Winton, May 15, 2002 Is the BBC dim-witted or just biased? Radio 4 this morning in its reaction to the deal on nuclear weapons between Russia and the U.S. dragged on a spokesman for CND! Remember the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament? This is the outfit, supported by Prime Minister Tony Blair and Cherie too in the early 80s, which would have had the West prostrate itself before the Soviet Union. If we’d listened to CND, the Berlin Wall would still be there, or if not, it would have been breached in the other direction from East to West and communists would be governing Europe. Thanks to the leadership of Britain’s Margaret Thatcher and U.S. President Ronald Reagan, cowardly, misguided, fellow-travelling outfits like CND were ignored and thwarted . Why would the BBC think it was worthwhile interviewing CND? The spokesman was an ignorant, motor-mouthed young woman with nothing interesting to say but who said it with much frenzy. By the way, did you know that Minister for Europe Peter Hain is still a member of CND? Biased or dim-witted? I ask myself the question all the time while tuned into BBC news programmes and listen to the quality of the interviews. This morning on Radio 4 we had a smug Australian (SA) spokesmen for an outfit called Transparency International talking about corruption between corporations and third world governments. SA was so blinded by his outrage about the corruption and bribery that he didn’t give a damn about the short-term damage that might be done to ordinary people if western companies were forced just to pull out. His killer argument was an apparent correlation between high child mortality and corrupt dealings with western companies. The BBC interviewer didn’t seem to understand this. What would happen to child mortality rates if western companies had to pull out? What would happen to ordinary people in Africa or South America or Asia if companies were forced out because local traditions were incompatible with high-minded westerners, like SA? Dim-witted or biased? This morning in an interview about illegal immigrants, the BBC interviewed one Shaun Woodward, a junior minister at the home office. I’m assuming this is the Tory turncoat traitor Shaun Woodward who crossed the floor late in the last parliament. The BBC couldn’t tell me if in fact this was the same person, but why wasn’t this made clear in the introduction? Surely this was an important background fact? Or is the BBC adding fear-of-offending-the-government to its list of inadequacies? <Radio 4 now tells me that it didn’t describe Woodward’s former life as a Tory because this would have been “pejorative”. “Pejorative” to add context and fact? Can you imagine the field day the BBC would have had if Woodward had joined a Conservative government from Labour? Get ready for Woodward to join the Conservatives again as soon as they get power back. You read that here first.> Neil Winton, May 14, 2002 Top