UK - BBC supports Hizb ut-Tahrir

This is a blatant show of support by the BBC for a radical Islamic organization that wants to overthrow the British government.

"It is understood no direct links have been found between Hizb ut-Tahrir and a support for violence. "

Understood by whom? Clever way of ducking responsiblity for reporting, no? The BBC doesn't state that no direct links have been found, just that this "fact" is understood by -- ? Beyond that, the BBC's assertion is demonstrably false as you will see later.

Now that the BBC has planted the idea that the "collective" understands HT doesn't have any direct links to a support for violence, the BBC want you to believe HT is no threat to the UK.

"The political party advocates the creation of an Islamic state across the Middle East."

The BBC gives HT legitimacy by simply calling them a "political party" without reporting that HT is opposed to democracy. In fact, HT pressures Muslims not to vote.

The BBC also wants to give you the impression that HT is no threat to the UK by stating HT simply "advocates the creation of an Islamic state across the Middle East". When in fact, HT advocates a world wide Muslim Caliphate and wants the world ruled by Muslims and Islamic law. The BBC continues its support for HT.

"But it is understood that neither the police nor the security services have been able to find direct links between the group and violence. "

There's that collective "understood" again. Notice also the subtle shift from "support of violence" to simply "violence". And yet 6 paragraphs later the BBC admit that they themselves found a direct link to the support for violence.

"A Newsnight investigation in 2003 discovered that HT's website promoted racism and anti-Semitic hatred, called suicide bombers martyrs, and urged Muslims to kill Jewish people. "

Supporting suicide bombers and urging Muslims to kill Jewish people is clearly supporting violence. And clearly the BBC supports HT while we pay for the privilige.

Here is a far better written, more factually accurate, more informative and best of all free expose of HT. Read it and you'll see why the BBC is a danger to the British public. What does this say about the vaunted BBC when a blogger can do a far, far better job of informing the public than they can?

The question we should be asking is, how many BBC employees are members of HT?