Four letters: to and from the BBC and the OPCW
Many of us are concerned about the BBC's strident support of the war against Syria's government and people and its backing for the aggressive designs of the US, UK, French, Turkey and the Gulf tyrannies.
These emails are revealing. I suggest you might consider making contact with the BBC about the issue. Read on!
1. Here is my complaint I made to the BBC:
Subject: Complaint to the BBC about chlorine attacks alleged on Today
Date: Thu, 29 May 2014 13:29:55 +0100
I'm complaining about an item on Today (24 May 2014) purporting to be an account by an unnamed Syrian doctor of a chlorine gas attack in Kafr Zita,
Hama, Syria.
A male voice claims to have witnessed a chlorine attack which he identifies by a strong smell of bleach in the locality. There is a strong
smell of bleach in my bathroom but I don't think it's down to chemical weapons.
The article seems to have been initiated by Hamish de Bretton-Gordon who is a well-known propagandist, always on the BBC. He was formerly
employed by the MoD on CW and now runs a company specialising in CW allegations.
The story lacks any credibility. The Syrian government has very modern weapons and it's hard to see why they would use chlorine gas which,
apart from being antiquated, is banned internationally. Why would the Syrian government use such weapons against villagers?
The voice made several dubious claims about the OPCW, which must be the world's most respected organisation. It has recently won the Nobel Peace
Prize and is currently overseeing the removal of 93% of Syria's chemical weapons. The interviewer (Sarah Montague?) suggested that his life was
in danger if his name were known to the OPCW. It is noteworthy that it was not asked to comment.
I shall be writing to the OPCW for their comments. I urge the BBC to seek a statement from that body. The BBC's commitment to the
anti-government forces in Syria is well known. However, the BBC should broadcast news and not propaganda.
2. And here is the reply they gave:
3. The third and fourth letters are more interesting, my question to the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons.
4. And here is the OPCW's reply:
These emails are revealing. I suggest you might consider making contact with the BBC about the issue. Read on!
1. Here is my complaint I made to the BBC:
Subject: Complaint to the BBC about chlorine attacks alleged on Today
Date: Thu, 29 May 2014 13:29:55 +0100
I'm complaining about an item on Today (24 May 2014) purporting to be an account by an unnamed Syrian doctor of a chlorine gas attack in Kafr Zita,
Hama, Syria.
A male voice claims to have witnessed a chlorine attack which he identifies by a strong smell of bleach in the locality. There is a strong
smell of bleach in my bathroom but I don't think it's down to chemical weapons.
The article seems to have been initiated by Hamish de Bretton-Gordon who is a well-known propagandist, always on the BBC. He was formerly
employed by the MoD on CW and now runs a company specialising in CW allegations.
The story lacks any credibility. The Syrian government has very modern weapons and it's hard to see why they would use chlorine gas which,
apart from being antiquated, is banned internationally. Why would the Syrian government use such weapons against villagers?
The voice made several dubious claims about the OPCW, which must be the world's most respected organisation. It has recently won the Nobel Peace
Prize and is currently overseeing the removal of 93% of Syria's chemical weapons. The interviewer (Sarah Montague?) suggested that his life was
in danger if his name were known to the OPCW. It is noteworthy that it was not asked to comment.
I shall be writing to the OPCW for their comments. I urge the BBC to seek a statement from that body. The BBC's commitment to the
anti-government forces in Syria is well known. However, the BBC should broadcast news and not propaganda.
2. And here is the reply they gave:
Dear Mr Bennett Thank you for contacting us regarding Radio 4's 'Today' programme on 30/05/2014. We understand you feel the service advocates foreign warfare, which was exemplified by personal comments from John Humphrys. Please be assured, we strive to present accurate and relevant information throughout our news output. BBC journalists are well aware of our commitment to impartial reporting. They seek to provide the information which will enable listeners to make up their own minds; to show the political reality and provide the forum for debate, giving full opportunity for all viewpoints to be heard. It is not always possible or practical to reflect all the different opinions on a subject within individual news programmes. Editors are charged to ensure that over a reasonable period they reflect the range of significant views, opinions and trends in their subject area. Political figures and others in positions of responsibility should be given the opportunity both to explain their thinking on matters of public concern and to answer criticisms of it. The interviewer's job is to put the questions likely to be in the minds of informed listeners and to look for answers. The interviewer conducts the discussion with the proper combination of firmness and civility. Nevertheless, we value your feedback about the content of the programme. All complaints are sent to senior management and programme makers every morning. We included your points in this overnight report. These reports are among the most widely read sources of feedback in the BBC and ensures that your complaint has been seen by the right people quickly. This helps inform their decisions about current and future programmes. Thanks again for taking the time to contact us. Kind Regards Alastair O'Donnell BBC Complaints
3. The third and fourth letters are more interesting, my question to the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons.
Subject: Fwd: Complaint to the BBC about chlorine attacks alleged on Today Date: Fri, 30 May 2014 10:34:12 +0100 From: Colin B Bennett To: media@opcw.org Dear Sir or Madam Like many people, I am an admirer of the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons and consider it one of the few organisations that has lived up to the original ideas of the Nobel Peace Prize. I have heard representatives of the OPCW being interviewed on the radio and they always give a very good account of themselves and deal with loaded and negative questions very well. For example, when a BBC interviewer suggested the Syrian government had been slow to facilitate the removal of its stock of chemical weapons (I understand 93% have already been removed) the OPCW spokesperson pointed out that the US is years behind in its agreed programme to destroy its stock of chemical weapons even though there is no war waging in that country. Below is an email complaint that I made to the BBC on 29 May 2014. It is self-explanatory. The BBC have not yet had time to reply but I will furnish you with that reply when it arrives. I took an audio recording of the BBC interview of which I complain and I would gladly send it to you if you would like to have it. It is on an audio cassette and although this recording method is somewhat antiquated I'm sure the resources of Switzerland can assist you in finding a player or turning it into another format. I think it's very important that the OPCW makes every effort to deal with these allegations of chlorine attacks. The BBC account is highly questionable and the references to OPCW in it are not at all convincing. Thank you very much Yours faithfully Colin Bennett
4. And here is the OPCW's reply:
Dear Mr Bennett, Thank you for your email. My office has been in regular contact with the BBC from the outset of the Syria mission and is fully aware of its coverage, as we are of the activities of Mr de Bretton-Gordon. Michael Luhan Spokesman and Head, Media & Public Affairs Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons The Hague, The Netherlands Tel: +31 (0) 70 416 3710 Mob: +31 (0) 6 5356 8512 Fax: +31 (0) 70 416 3280 Web: www.opcw.org
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home