BBC's Syrian Brainwashing: Four Legs Good, Two Legs Bad

How the BBC Works

On the BBC last night there were two news stories.

In one, balaclava clad men were using weapons against the army of the state they grew up in. The army of that state were fighting back against them, sending troops into their towns. The balaclava clad men, who shot at state soldiers, were the heroes for the BBC, who showed them being cheered on, by only a couple of hundred people at most, in a town.

BBC's freedom fighter?

In the next story some balaclava clad men were using weapons against the army of the state they grew up in. The army of that state were fighting back sending troops into their towns. The balaclava men, who shot at state soldiers, were the terrorists for the BBC, who said they 'only enjoyed support in a few enclaves.'

One of these stories was about Syria and the Free Syrian Army which shoots Syrian soldiers (and civilians) and the other was about Northern Ireland and the Real IRA which shoots British soldiers (and civilians).

Yet the BBC tells us one are heroes, freedom fighters, brave patriots fighting occupation and oppression, whilst the others are extremists, terrorists, murderers seeking to upset peace, opposed by the majority and with no justification in their actions. The language in one report is a complete reversal of the language in the other report, which goes to show how the BBC plays the British public, pushing us to support "balaclava men" when it suits them, the Secret State and the political classes, but to oppose "balaclava men" that suits all those vested interests.

Funnily enough, in the latest Private Eye there is a report on how the British Ambassador to Bahrain sent out a statement congratulating Bahrain for putting down its uprising, and stating how Saudi Arabia was correct to send in vehicles and men to help put down the uprising. The same British State is now busy telling us how wrong Syria is to try and put down its own uprising!

Or let's put it this way, when does the BBC think an Arab with a bazooka is good: when he's killing Syrian troops. Would they say the same if he was killing Israeli, Iraqi, Afghani or Saudi troops?

So to recap, it's Syrian armed insurrectionists good, Irish armed insurrectionists bad.

Bahraini/Saudi crushing rebellion good, Syrian crushing rebellion bad.

And what's the news just in: four legs good, two legs bad?

Just so long as the BBC is there to tell us!