Formal charges against the BBC

Formal charges should be brought against the BBC for aiding and abetting the enemy. They continue to systematically attack the United States with rigged polls and unbelievably biased news reporting. We are not talking about mere anti-American slants. We are talking about carefully constructed rigged polls and using anti-war activists disguised as aid workers and freelance journalists.

Here is a link to my earlier post about the rigged poll.

While not mentioning the BBC poll by name, bin Laden did mention that he was following opinion polls. Since the US and UK are his biggest enemies he would almost certainly pay attention to a BBC poll that had this headline 'US is bigger threat than terror.' Due to many complaints the headline now reads 'Globalization' instead of the 'US'. Even the Google cache version has been changed.

Not content to rig polls against the US, the BBC decides to report the following in Falluja"...US gunmen firing at ambulances and civilians." Words that are sure to inflame the situation in Falluja further and increase the danger to US forces.

While the US struggles to subdue terrorists in Falluja and end the siege peacefully and thereby save innocent lives, the BBC decides to incite violence against the US. This is a crime and formal charges should be brought against them.

The article I refer to is here. Who does the BBC use as the source for their story?

The head of mission of a European humanitarian agency with staff in Falluja told BBC News Online that, according to his staff, two of their ambulances had been shot at.

So just who is this "European humanitarian agency"? The BBC does not tell us. That's right. The supposed, world class news reporting organization, BBC did not even bother to tell it's readers the identity of the agency. What are they trying to hide?

And who is "the head" of the agency that they give the following quote to?

"By who? The probability is by US snipers," he said. "He said". Who is "he"?

Is the BBC so incompetent as to not get the name of "The head of mission of a European humanitarian agency" that accuses the US of shooting at ambulances in a war zone the entire world is watching? What are they trying to hide?

Well at least we get the names of the staff and now you will find out some of what the BBC are trying to hide. There are two staff members mentioned in the original article. That's right, the article has been edited, again, by the BBC. The original article told of these two staff members being kidnapped and released. The two staff members used for this story are Jo Wilding and Jenny Gaiawyn. You will not find Ms. Gaiawyn's name (she changed her name to the Celtic for earth-lover) in the article now. The kidnapping part has been edited out and you will find out why later.

Who is Ms. Wilding?

Here is a link to her personal page and here is what she has to say on Iraq.

Those politicians and corporations are sucking your blood and the media is lying to you about it.

By the way, did I mention she is also a circus clown? No joke! Follow the links on her site.

Her anti-war in Iraq page is here which says this

Now the bombing is over and the occupation and carve-up of Iraq are well underway, what's next for the anti-war movement?

And this "I went because I'd been campaigning against the sanctions for a while and felt that I had to actively break them and to see what was happening so I could speak from experience, not just reports. I was in court in March 2001 for throwing fruit at Tony Blair in an Iraq protest..." here.

Writing in the UN Observer she writes this

Iraq: Jo Wilding in Fallujah

2004-04-13 | US snipers in Falluja shoot unarmed man in the back, old woman with white flag, children fleeing their homes and the ambulance that we were going in to fetch a woman in premature labour.

And in an article for Indymedia
She gives us a little biographical data like this:

Jo wilding - journalist, lawyer and circus clown reports from the hospitals of Falluja

I don't know about the lawyer part but I know about the journalist part and so does the BBC because she has written for a British newspaper. Which one? Go on, guess. Give up?

The Guardian!

Nowhere is safe

Although the skies over Baghdad have cleared after the sandstorms, the view from the ground is one of mangled bodies and shattered lives, says Jo Wilding

And in The Guardian here.

Fear and fury in Baghdad

Human rights campaigner Jo Wilding on the mood in the Iraqi capital

There is no way the BBC did know who Ms Wilding is. This is not just some slight ommission on the part of the BBC. This is deliberate and calculated. By portraying her as a "humanitarian aid worker" when in fact she is well known to the British media, including the BBC, as an anti-war campigner the BBC deliberate mislead their readers. This is an outrage and journalism at its very worst. No wonder there is no credit given to the author of the story.

Now who is Jenny Gaiawyn?

First up we have this from The Yorkshire Post.

Jenny Gaiawyn was yesterday heading for safety in Jordan after her release and faces tough questions from her mother, who found out about her ordeal through the media.

The 25-year-old charity worker was with a friend, Jo Wilding, 29, in the stricken Iraqi town of Fallujah when they were snatched as they helped injured civilians.

They were released after 24 hours and Miss Wilding spoke to journalists in Iraq where she said guns and rockets had been pointed at them and they feared they would be burned to death.

Miss Gaiawyn's mother, Royanne Wilding, only found out about her daughter's ordeal when news crews turned up outside her North Yorkshire home asking how she felt about her release.

I wonder why the BBC dropped the kidnapping part from their orginal story? Maybe it didn't happen. They seemed to have had complete access to ambulances and hospitals in the town. Being kidnapped only adds another element of terror to their story.

Her mom adds this for us:

She added: "Jenny has always been like this, an active peace campaigner, working with disabled youngsters, it's just like her to go off and end up in Fallujah."

But how well known is Ms Gaiawyn? Well, Tommy Sheridan MSP knows here quite well. In fact he even made a MOTION TO THE SCOTTISH PARLIAMENT on her behalf. Link here.

Why would he do that you ask.

This Parliament condemns the disgraceful three-month prison sentence handed down to Jenny Gaiawyn on 29 November by Sheriff Morag Galbraith for a breach of the peace at the February blockade of Faslane nuclear base earlier this year; considers this sentence an outrageous attack on this young woman's human right to protest peacefully

Now if you really want to know why the BBC dropped their kidnap story, Richard Littlejohn writing in The Sun has the answer. Besure and visit the site, the cartoon is great.

THIS week's edition of You Couldn't Make It Up comes from Iraq, where two British women were kidnapped near the siege city of Fallujah.

Jenny Gaiawyn, 25, and Jo Wilding, 29, had travelled there to teach children circus tricks.

Like you do.

"We showed them how to make animals out of balloons and played a penny whistle, said Jo, a trainee solicitor.

"They liked the balloons but not the music. They said their Islamic code forbade it and it gave women sexual urges."

Jenny and Jo were released by their captors after 24 hours.

That's how long it took the gunmen to master the dachshund and the giraffe.

Now I know what the army meant when they said the balloon had gone up in Fallujah.

"trainee solicitor" Remember she claims to already be a lawyer.

The BBC knew full well who these people were when they ran the story. They used two well known anti-war activists, one who was jailed for an attack on Tony Blair and the other jailed for anti-nuclear protests. The BBC deliberately called Ms Wilding a "British aid worker" implying she was working for Britain. They deliberately did not tell its readers who the agency involved was nor the head of the agency even though they quoted him.

This article is just part of an ongoing anti-American campaign by the BBC. I encourage all of you to write or call them and demand a full retraction.

There is not one shred of evidence in this article and the BBC knows it. They should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.

note: sorry for any spelling errors. It took me three hours to write this, I haven't had my breakfast and the spell checker isn't working. Oh, well.

UPDATE: I have emailed the BBC and demanded a full and immediate retraction.