Spooks at it again; sad insight into the BBC mindset?

egb_hibs

Private Member
Joined
Jul 2, 2002
Unbelievable. Just caught up with this week's episode and lo and behold they're at it again.

Islamist plot to kill the US prez? Not in BBC world it can't be. Nope, it's of course dem Jews again. Mad israeli bint determined to show that no 'enemy of israel' even the prez, is safe. Meanwhile, a jihadi terrorist comes to London to try to save the president.

It's unreal, you can almost feel the effort to will reality away.

Only a story of course, but the whole spectrum of the Beeb's output is infected with it's ideology, and the relentless inversion of reality in a series at least notionally set in the real world of counterespionage, where the jews are out to get us, and are manipulators of hapless muslim stooges, is a nasty glimpse into a nasty mindset.

All very sad.
 
Oddly enough I was watching True Lies (starring Tom Arnold, Arnold Schwarzenegger and Jamie Lee Curtis) which was released in 1993 and was wondering if any movie studio would dare make a movie like that now.
 
On a very day-to-day level, how do you think this conspiracy works? Do secret memos (for some reason I imagine the BBC still having "memos" :lol: ) get sent out to script writers encouraging them to demonise the Jews, with bonuses for anyone writing a hero Muslim character?

I mean, I can see a memo going out requesting that due to current sensitivities, stereotype Islamic baddies should be avoided in light entertainment -that's believable. Suggesting a BBC anti-Jewish conspiracy seems a bit far-fetched though. I can't imagine Steven Fry or Alan Sugar would be quite so happy to work for a company that was so willing to put it's anti-Semitic prejudices on such open display.

I think it's just based on whatever group or nation is making the news to make the plot have some semblance of realism. A Norwegian mad-man wouldn't catch peoples imagination, for example. You have to have some level of trust that people aren't watching "Spooks" and confusing it for reality.

That said, I haven't seen the Chuckle Brothers on TV for a while....
 
On a very day-to-day level, how do you think this conspiracy works? Do secret memos (for some reason I imagine the BBC still having "memos" :lol: ) get sent out to script writers encouraging them to demonise the Jews, with bonuses for anyone writing a hero Muslim character?
I don't believe in conspiracies Hibadelic; I've been fairly clear on that enough times. Conspiracy theories are for the lefties and the batshit right. Anyone who operates in the real world knows things don't work like that.

Rather, I believe that the BBC, like other arms of the establishment, is rammed with people with homogeneous world view, and that this comes out in their output; not because they sit down an plot world domination, I expect they think that's a jewish thing, but because such a uniform set of values leads - in the absence of challenges to them - to a set of assumptions that become pervasive.

As Andrew Marr would have it, regards the BBC's outlook;

"The BBC is not impartial or neutral. It's a publicly funded, urban organisation with an abnormally large number of young people, ethnic minorities and gay people. It has a liberal bias not so much a party-political bias. It is better expressed as a cultural liberal bias"

I think he's having a laugh with the party political bit (he's yet another poo-bah who has a card carrying labour party member) but I think the point he makes about cultural bias is in any case more important.

Consequently you get all the tropes of a PC metropolitan left recurring; jews, catholics, americans, conservatives etc = bad, muslims, gays, liberals etc = good.

I mean, I can see a memo going out requesting that due to current sensitivities, stereotype Islamic baddies should be avoided in light entertainment -that's believable. Suggesting a BBC anti-Jewish conspiracy seems a bit far-fetched though. I can't imagine Steven Fry or Alan Sugar would be quite so happy to work for a company that was so willing to put it's anti-Semitic prejudices on such open display.
How is Steven Fry a jew? I thought he has a rather hard core atheist? Can't really see him identifying very strongly with the idea of a jewish nation either. Not sure about Sugar.

As I say, no conspiracies, just a reflection of views; stuff the BBC with nazis and that would be reflected in it's output. Stuff it full of mormons, and likewise their views would come through.

That said, editorial policy probably helps give some form to it all. Viewpoints such as;

""We need to foster peculiarity, idiosyncrasy, stubborn-mindedness, left-of-centre thinking"

...as well as being nauseatingly up-their-own-arse are, in pc speak, about presenting the inverted world view which such sorts consider daring, having failed to notice that they are now the establishment.
I think it's just based on whatever group or nation is making the news to make the plot have some semblance of realism. A Norwegian mad-man wouldn't catch peoples imagination, for example. You have to have some level of trust that people aren't watching "Spooks" and confusing it for reality.
Well that's rather my point. It's not hard to guess what are the subjects that preoccupy the real MI5; and I really rather doubt that they're uncovering americans or jews behind every other islamist plot in real life, nor encounter many superhero jihadis coming to protect westerners.

It is a fantasy that reflects the neuroses of a particular viewpoint, one that dominates the BBC. On one level it's not important, it's only a show. On the other, it's sadly evident that many people's worldviews are shaped by light entertainment, something the BBC will be well aware of. It's writers are clearly 'ishoo' led in many cases, and it uses it's reach to influence people's thinking and to shape the cultural debate. When this is such a biased effort, it is unacceptable due to (and only due to) it's funding model.

That said, I haven't seen the Chuckle Brothers on TV for a while....
Two of it's more serious performers.

Check out Biased BBC now and again. It is a bit daily mail and full of rants that I often disagree with. Where it is useful, is as an archive of revealing statements by BBC big nobs. The ranting is really rather superfluous; give the BBC luminaries enough rope and they hang themselves.

ps just like to remind you of my longstanding challenge; it's been running several years now and still no winners. Please let me know next time you see a catholic portrayed as just a normal person, never mind sympathetically, in any BBC drama. It's shouldn't be difficult, there are many more than their are gays or muslims, in the real UK. Bonus points if you can a conservative portrayed similarly.
 
Maybe by using a "rogue" Israeli agent, it put a twist to what would otherwise have been a predictable plot?
 
Stephen Fry describes himself as "culturally and intellectually" Jewish which is strange as he was raised Church of England and his "Jewish" mother was an atheist.
 
Unbelievable. Just caught up with this week's episode and lo and behold they're at it again.

You say this as if every episode has the same plot and that you are resigned to that.

Last series

65 1 "Episode 1"
Alrick Riley Story: Zinnie Harris & Ben Richards
Teleplay: Ben Richards 6.55 4 November 2009 (BBC One)
Harry is brought to a group of Indian intelligence officers diguised as terror group, the Sacred Army of Righteous Vengeance. They release fake footage of his execution. Section D uncovers the deceptions and resorts to find Harry. Group leader Amish Mani is keeping Harry alive to divulge the location of a uranium shipment Harry stopped before the CIA and MI6 planted it in Iraq to justify the war. The group also target Ruth Evershed, who is in Cyprus. After returning to London, she is kidnapped also. Lucas and Ros track an MI6 and CIA agent, who was part of the uranium planting plan. After the MI6 agent is killed, they track the CIA agent to the warehouse they held Harry and Ruth, and Lucas kills the leader. After Malcolm succeeds in saving Ruth's stepson, and Harry returns to the Grid, Malcolm retires.

66 2 "Episode 2" Alrick Riley Story: Zinnie Harris & Ben Richards
Teleplay: Ben Richards 5.11 6 November 2009 (BBC Three)[n 4]

When a gas processing plant explodes, the UK allies itself with Tuzbekistan to buy their gas at reasonable prices. However, the negotiation leader is stalling. Malcolm's replacement, Tariq Masood (Shazad Latif) figures out the negotiator is planning to strike against his own country. Jo uses the sister of a woman who the negotiator raped to kill him. However, the actions are disrupted by the Russians, which end the negotiations, though the Russians are willing to sell the UK the gas at the same price in exchange for intelligence to be used against Tusbekistan. In the end, Blake informs Harry of a top secret meeting that took place in Basel, Switzerland regarding a new world order, codenamed "Nightingale".

67 3 "Episode 3" Sam Miller Christian Spurrier & Sean Reilly
5.26 13 November 2009 (BBC Three)

While Ros is undercover in a secret meeting of a Bilderberg Group-like set of businessmen, armed terrorists seize the meeting and take the hostages to an underground bunker to prevent MI5 from releasing them. The terrorists put the businessmen on "trial" for their abuses in power. Jo attempts to stop the incident, and holds the leader before he could detonate C4 so Ros can take a shot. However, because Jo right behind him, the bullet passes through him, and into her, killing them both.

68 4 "Episode 4"
Sam Miller David Farr 5.18 20 November 2009 (BBC Three)

Lucas's interrogator, Darshavin escapes from an immigration centre and demands to speak with Lucas regarding a terrorist attack from Sudanese terrorists with the complicity of the FSB. Harry displays doubts, believing Lucas developed Stockholm Syndrome from his capture. Lucas goes off-piste to get the target, but fails when his CIA girlfriend, Sarah Caufield (Genevieve O'Reilly) interrupts. In the end, MI5 discovers the location from an asset and prevents the attack. In the end, Darshavin is taken to the FSB. Sarah reveals herself to be part of "Nightingale", by killing her boss, Samuel Walker.

69 5 "Episode 5" Alrick Riley Richard McBrien 4.39 27 November 2009 (BBC Three)

Two officers are found murdered. Eventually, it is revealed Ros's mentor, Jack Colville, is responsible. He was able to access MI5 records, and tracks down the other officers responsible. After Ros and Lucas fail to save the next target, they realise they are connected to a Balkans operation responsible for the death of Colville's girlfriend. Ros fools him into thinking she sanctioned her death, and after a showdown between the two, he kills himself realising it is the system, not the officers, at fault. In the end, Lucas discovers that Sarah murdered Walker.

70 6 "Episode 6" Edward Hall Dennis Kelly
5.11 4 December 2009 (BBC Three)

A team of assassins from a corrupt bank targets an employee who has access to several accounts the British Government needs to make interest payments, otherwise the UK economy will collapse. While Ros finds him, her mental state is in question after the loss of Jo. She eventually finds the elusive man, who reluctantly gives them the accounts. Meanwhile, Lucas confronts Sarah about her involvement in Basel. She escapes before explaining anything. After the payments are made, Blake is forced to resign after forged evidence places him in a scandal. Tariq discovers that the money involved in Basel has disappeared to Pakistan.

71 7 "Episode 7" Edward Hall James Dormer
N/A[n 5]
11 December 2009 (BBC Three)

After a Pakistani intelligence officer is murdered, Section D learn of a radical Hindu group preparing to attack Muslims in London. Lucas appoints a 17 year old Muslim for help. Eventually it is revealed that the cell's handler is running a Muslim cell to attack Hindus, with the intention of pitting both groups against each other. While CO-19 officers stop the Muslim cell, Lucas stops the Hindu cell, who have taken a Muslim school hostage. In the end, Section D learns that Nightingale is using this to provoke India and Pakistan into war.

72 8 "Episode 8"
Alrick Riley Ben Richards 5.91 23 December 2009 (BBC One)

Section D has a week to stop a potential nuclear war between India and Pakistan when the latter takes an Indian submarine, as well as uncover the Nightingale plot and stop it. After Sarah returns, Lucas eventually captures her, though before Nightingale has her assassinated, she admits to setting up the war to contain the future where the Taliban may take over Pakistan. They also learn that the new CIA liaison is also a Nightingale operative. Believing the war might not happen, Nightingale has planted a bomb in the same hotel the Pakistani President and the new Home Secretary, Andrew Lawrence, are staying. When Ros and Lucas find the two, they discover that Nightingale paralysed them. Lucas evacuates the President, who later recovers and orders the release of the submarine. However, Ros fails to evacuate Lawrence in time, and the hotel blows up.



This series

73 1 "Episode 1" Paul Whittington
Jonathan Brackley & Sam Vincent
6.74 20 September 2010
At Ros's funeral, Harry proposes to Ruth, who turns him down. She produces evidence that former Home Secretary Blake worked with Nightingale and ordered the hotel bombing. Harry, shattered by the news, visits Blake in his Scottish home and poisons his drink with a substance that makes it appear the politician has had a heart attack. One month later, Lucas boards a freighter in Tangier to assassinate Somaliterrorist Hussein Abib (Peter Bankole). Before he is able to complete his mission, the ship is hijacked by soldiers working for Abib. Dimitri Levendes (Max Brown), an agent posing as captain of the ship, discovers Abib has loaded the ship with explosives, with the apparent intent of sailing the ship into Plymouth, where a new aircraft-carrier is about to be launched. With the help of private contractor Beth Bailey (Sophia Myles), who has been masquerading as an Eastern European passenger, Lucas escapes the ship. Dimitri kills Abib, but discovers that the explosives are gone. It is discovered that the terrorists are using submersibles to send the bombs up the River Thames to the Houses of Parliament. Discovering that "Talwar", Abib's contact in the UK, is a teenage girl, Lucas tries to force her to abort the mission by threatening to kill her parents. When the threat fails, Harry approves the launch of an EMP bomb underneath the Houses, which disables the subs before they reach their target. In the end, Beth successfully applies to join the MI5 team, while Lucas is paid an unexpected visit with Vaughn, who leaves him with a briefcase.

74 2 "Episode 2" Michael Caton-Jones
David Farr 6.27 27 September 2010
In her first operation, Beth is tasked with protecting an influential oil baron, Robert Westhouse, after receiving intelligence that he may be assassinated by Nigerian agents. In a London hotel, potential oil industry contacts, including an undercover Beth, are the subject of a gun attack in the lift to Westhouse's penthouse suite. Beth and another contact, Chapman, survive unharmed. Lucas, investigating the incident, becomes suspicious, particularly about Beth's role. The narrative switches to a dual perspective of events from the points of view of Lucas, and then Beth. It becomes clear that that the Nigerians want Westhouse dead, because he plans to launch a chemical weapon attack against Lagos and start a coup in order to steal the country's oil reserves. Beth appears to work with Chapman, the assassin, but Lucas and section D also discover that; however Beth successfully explains her subterfuge as "the way we used to work", and avoids any damage. Meanwhile, Harry Pearce takes Westhouse on, face to face, and leaves him with a no-win situation. Lucas gives Beth another chance after he is promoted to Section D chief. Meanwhile, he looks into the briefcase he has been given by Vaughn and finds Maya Lahan (Laila Rouass), his first love. However, she does not want to be involved with him after he left her 15 years earlier.

75 3 "Episode 3" Michael Caton-Jones Richard McBrien 6.04 4 October 2010
Section D are forced to take an FSB officer, Viktor Barenshik, onto the Grid to track down Aibek, a rogue nationalist from Azakstan, who is looking for a nerve agent known as Paroxocybin. While following Aibek across London, it is revealed one of the original scientists of the agent before its destruction kept a sample. It is also revealed Viktor wants to take the agent to the Russians in order to justify their invasion of Azakstan. When Section D discover this, they give Aibek a deal to blackmail Viktor. Beth later kills him, and Tariq forges the video as if it was Aibek that had done and got away from the building. Meanwhile, Vaughn approaches Lucas asking him for an MI5 file named "Albany".

76 4 "Episode 4" Paul Whittington Jonathan Brackley & Sam Vincent 5.22[38]
11 October 2010
A trio of highly skilled Chinese agents arrive in the UK to kidnap and assassinate Dr. Jiang, a scientist developing revolutionary desalination technology. Kai, an asset from the Chinese embassy, informs them of a bomb in the same building Jiang is working in, but it is later revealed to be a set-up to kidnap Jiang. After finding her, the head of Chinese intelligence informs Harry that if they do not hand in Jiang back to the Chinese, they will detonate a bomb. Dimitri finds the bomb and disarms it, and Jiang is transferred to the CIA. Lucas delivers the Albany file to Vaughn; believing he is free from him, he and Maya restart their relationship. Although reported to have left the UK, the Chinese agents reveal that their mission is in fact to track Lucas for undisclosed reasons.

77 5 "Episode 5" Julian Holmes Jonathan Brackley & Sam Vincent & Oliver Brown
5.34[39]
18 October 2010
While Beth and Dimitri go undercover during the US President's visit to chair top secret peace talks between Israel and Palestine, a plot to assassinate him is uncovered. Belieiving it is the work of Lebanesemilitant Muatt Hutri, the section are able to arrest him, but he convinces them he is in London to stop it. It is revealed the actual assassin, Baltasar Jad is attempting to perform an impossible shot from a building a mile and a half away to take out the president. Lucas arrives and kills Jad, but it is later discovered the sniper is a diversion. The actual assassin is Israeli Anna Cohen, who plans to blow herself up with the president as revenge for her father deserting him when she was once captured by Palestinians. Her father and Dimitri are able to talk her out of doing it. In the end, Lucas realises Vaughn has no intention of leaving him alone.

78 6 "Episode 6" Julian Holmes[40]
Jonathan Brackley & Sam Vincent[40]
25 October 2010[41]
Head of CIA London Alton Beecher (Colin Salmon) oversees the installation of an advanced US cybersecurity system in the Grid, after an American drone is hacked in Afghanistan.[40]

So, in the last 2 series there is one episode covering an Israeli terrorist and even then all the other Israelis were good guys.

This time I don't think you actually have a valid point although I await being corrected.

>>Full list of episodesURL]
 
well done Dub, i was about to reply to EGB that the balance of this series has been fairly balanced. and thats hes just picking on 1 episode.
 
I've never watched spooks before but I caught a bit of this one. Why anyone would think that this show represents some kind of reality, or even begin to offer analysis on current affairs, is beyond me. It is trash TV that seems to be geared towards little more than glorification of technology with the subtext of national security. To its credit, it is challenging the Islamic extremist stereotype, something which is rarely seen on our TV's and especially in this kind of programing, however I don't think it represents any BBC worldview or anti-Semitic undertones within our state broadcasting network.

If it had been a straightforward Islamic extremist out to kill the president nobody would be asking any questions. But to use an Israeli terrorist, something not exactly unheard of, is suddenly anti-Semitic? Why not take issue with a perpetual lumping together of the Arabic world as terrorists, or Islamic fundamentalists hellbent against the West?
 
Unbelievable. Just caught up with this week's episode and lo and behold they're at it again.

Islamist plot to kill the US prez? Not in BBC world it can't be. Nope, it's of course dem Jews again. Mad israeli bint determined to show that no 'enemy of israel' even the prez, is safe. Meanwhile, a jihadi terrorist comes to London to try to save the president.

It's unreal, you can almost feel the effort to will reality away.

Only a story of course, but the whole spectrum of the Beeb's output is infected with it's ideology, and the relentless inversion of reality in a series at least notionally set in the real world of counterespionage, where the jews are out to get us, and are manipulators of hapless muslim stooges, is a nasty glimpse into a nasty mindset.

All very sad.

It is a leap of superhero proportions to identify, from one episode of a trash TV series, the characteristics of an 23,000-person organisation - very unscientific and would never stand up in court.

I could point equally to Andrew Neill and conclude that the BBC is full of fawning Thatcherite right-wing apologists of the worst kind, but that would be equally unscientific.
 
ps just like to remind you of my longstanding challenge; it's been running several years now and still no winners. Please let me know next time you see a catholic portrayed as just a normal person, never mind sympathetically, in any BBC drama.

The characters in Ballykissangel. Even the Proddy who played the priest. I claim my 5.

BIG G
 
The characters in Ballykissangel. Even the Proddy who played the priest. I claim my 5.

BIG G
Well done G, although is that not set in Ireland :hmmm

It's still a valid score, and only having to go back a decade is better than the last example someone provided which went back decades.

But I'd really like to see one in the BBCworld version of the UK.
 
well done Dub, i was about to reply to EGB that the balance of this series has been fairly balanced. and thats hes just picking on 1 episode.
You could almost feel the relief when the russians fell out with us in recent years and they could become central bad guys in spooks again. That has allowed them to ease off on explaining islamism away as the product of nasty yanks and yids. As a motif it pops up regularly though throughout the series run. Far too frequently to get away with, given it's the inversion of reality. There are also other bizarre jabs at the kind of groups BBC sorts don't care much for.

Still the best british made tv drama in the world but :banana:
 
Well done G, although is that not set in Ireland :hmmm

It's still a valid score, and only having to go back a decade is better than the last example someone provided which went back decades.

But I'd really like to see one in the BBCworld version of the UK.

You never said it had to be in Ireland , spooks is not in the real world then !
 
It is a leap of superhero proportions to identify, from one episode of a trash TV series, the characteristics of an 23,000-person organisation - very unscientific and would never stand up in court.
In isolation, yes. What I said though, is it's an insight into a mindset that is much more widely evidenced.

Andrew Marr's own description is perhaps the best nutshell definition.
 
In isolation, yes. What I said though, is it's an insight into a mindset that is much more widely evidenced.

Andrew Marr's own description is perhaps the best nutshell definition.

Much more widely evidenced? As seen from the episode thumbnails, it's not even representative of the makers of the programme you have quoted!

It is incredulous to me to make a claim that one episode of a daft telly programme any sort of evidence into the collective 'mind' of a huge organisation.

Marr is entitled to his views and he may be right, he may wrong, but his opinion is representative on 1/23,000 of employees after all and is in no way statistically significant.
 
I don't believe in conspiracies Hibadelic; I've been fairly clear on that enough times. Conspiracy theories are for the lefties and the batshit right. Anyone who operates in the real world knows things don't work like that.

Brilliant! Incredibly and almost unbelievably true to form, you launch immediately into left-right politic bollocks to defend your nonsensical conspiracy theory, but please continue.....

Rather, I believe that the BBC, like other arms of the establishment, is rammed with people with homogeneous world view, and that this comes out in their output; not because they sit down an plot world domination, I expect they think that's a jewish thing, but because such a uniform set of values leads - in the absence of challenges to them - to a set of assumptions that become pervasive.

So, they have a homogeneous world view and think Jews plot world domination? How does that work? You contradict yourself so badly there (or you actually believe the homogeneous world view is anti-Semitic) that I can only assume no one else but me actually reads your posts.

As Andrew Marr would have it, regards the BBC's outlook;

"The BBC is not impartial or neutral. It's a publicly funded, urban organisation with an abnormally large number of young people, ethnic minorities and gay people. It has a liberal bias not so much a party-political bias. It is better expressed as a cultural liberal bias"

I think he's having a laugh with the party political bit (he's yet another poo-bah who has a card carrying labour party member) but I think the point he makes about cultural bias is in any case more important.

Consequently you get all the tropes of a PC metropolitan left recurring; jews, catholics, americans, conservatives etc = bad, muslims, gays, liberals etc = good.

Mmmmm. Marr probably has a point. Ive absolutely no idea what a PC metropolitan left is (or why it's, presumably, so bad) and don't care to even G it but Im not a total idiot so Im guessing its more smoke and mirrors for your anti-anti-Jew agenda? This is so post-modern, I think I'm anti-anti-anti-Jew now...

How is Steven Fry a jew? I thought he has a rather hard core atheist? Can't really see him identifying very strongly with the idea of a jewish nation either. Not sure about Sugar.

I couldn't really give a shit, lets pretend they are full time Jews, going to synagogue every day. Jewish people do that in this country and they don't come out with the insane crap that you do.

As I say, no conspiracies, just a reflection of views; stuff the BBC with nazis and that would be reflected in it's output. Stuff it full of mormons, and likewise their views would come through.

So, your point is that the BBC is full of Jew hating Islamists? Really???
 
Brilliant! Incredibly and almost unbelievably true to form, you launch immediately into left-right politic bollocks to defend your nonsensical conspiracy theory, but please continue.....



So, they have a homogeneous world view and think Jews plot world domination? How does that work? You contradict yourself so badly there (or you actually believe the homogeneous world view is anti-Semitic) that I can only assume no one else but me actually reads your posts.



Mmmmm. Marr probably has a point. I’ve absolutely no idea what a PC metropolitan left is (or why it's, presumably, so bad) and don't care to even G it but I’m not a total idiot so I’m guessing it’s more smoke and mirrors for your anti-anti-Jew agenda? This is so post-modern, I think I'm anti-anti-anti-Jew now...



I couldn't really give a shit, lets pretend they are full time Jews, going to synagogue every day. Jewish people do that in this country and they don't come out with the insane crap that you do.



So, your point is that the BBC is full of Jew hating Islamists? Really???
My claim is the BBC is homogeneous in make up; I'm not sure why you find that contradictory with my point? What I mean is that the BBCs directive and creative people (not the tea boys and girls answering the phones) are, judging by the Beeb's output, in line with the way Andrew Marr describes.

I don't believe you've 'no idea' who the PC metropolitan left are; but to help you out, I mean the ex-Oxbridge sorts who dominate the BBC, the Guardian, and the chattering classes generally; the people for whom new labour was tailored - the champagne socialist, the bien pensant, the establishment.

And while it is of course not possible to say that everyone within that group holds the same views on every point, it is as legitimate to point out the common tropes that go with that political outlook, as it is for any other, whether that be conservatives or BNP enthusiasts.

And those tropes include an antipathy to israel, capitalism, america, conservatism, catholicism as well as a range of other pro and anti prejudices and assumptions.

As for Jews; I think if you read widely you will find that Jews who identify as jews - those who practise judaism and / or identify with the jewish nation as an ethnic group - are indeed widely concerned by the way this media class carries on. Anti semitic hate crimes remain amongst the most prevalent, indeed I think statistically they are the most prevalent. What is more, there is evidence that anti semitic violence rockets up in line during times where the liberal media is in one of it's periodic tizzies over the israelis. I'm not aware of any such correspondence of anti muslim violence with the (by contrast) softly softly way an actual threat to our society is reported on.

With regards to the likes of Fry; I don't see how he is a jew, any more than someone of catholic descent who has renounced catholicism, is a catholic. Those aren't the people I would expect to be concerned about negative portrayal of catholicism, quite the opposite in fact, so I'm not sure how ambivalence from the likes of Fry renders my own views 'insane' by contrast.

Finally, I don't think the BBC is full of people that consider themselves rabid anti semites; I think they are the soft handed fops that give license to the knuckle dragging thugs; a sort that orwell wrote about 60 and 70 years ago and who have always been with us.
 
addendum; what is wrong with attributing the conspiracy mindset to the left and the far right; i think it's almost a defining quality. the left generally sees history unfolding as a plan which (as well as being entirely fallacious) lends itself to the conspiracy world view. the far right, meanwhile, seem historically preoccupied with reds under the bed acting in consort.

I don't believe in any such dynamic, which if you do read my threads as you say, you ought to have picked up on. I believe in fuck ups and coincidences, and like minded people acting in a readily explicable similar fashion. I do not believe those last people, or anyone else, does so in an organised and clandestine way. Anyone who has been involved in any kind of undertaking involved even a moderate number of people knows that human nature would thwart any such endeavour. I think conspiracy theories are entertaining but absolutely without foundation in 99.9% of cases.
 
Much more widely evidenced? As seen from the episode thumbnails, it's not even representative of the makers of the programme you have quoted!

It is incredulous to me to make a claim that one episode of a daft telly programme any sort of evidence into the collective 'mind' of a huge organisation.

Marr is entitled to his views and he may be right, he may wrong, but his opinion is representative on 1/23,000 of employees after all and is in no way statistically significant.
Bossie; I try not to ignore points put to me, I think I have responded to yours in my response to hibadelic so i don't see any point in repeating them ('much more widely evidenced' refers to the beeb generally, not spooks). Please get tore into that post if you feel I'm talking bollocks.
 
Some googling on Spooks just threw up that the first episode of (I gather the roundly considered rubbish) Bonekickers. as featuring a radical christian beheading a muslim.

You honestly don't see a desperate attempt to 'relativise' reality here, by reattributing what is in the real world, one way traffic, into something the great and the good are more comfortable with?

I was also reminded of some of the pearlers spooks (which has also had christian radicals killing muslims) itself has turned up regarding christians. there are a few, my favourite being when the character played by Jenny Agutter some time back, suddenly turned bad, and in doing so, this previously worldly vamp, started spouting 'christian stuff'; the inverted commas being because of another real world inversion I remember chuckling at; her inversion of catholic rhetoric lamenting the secular 'culture of death' as being a pining for when we used to enjoy such a culture in the pre secular age. You don't have to sympathise with the catholic analysis to recognise the inversion in terms of the views she, in character, was supposed to be representing.

No conspiracy hibadelic, just prejudices coming out, frequently in versions of the is / ought fallacy that has been the achilles heel of pc thought throughout the ages.

I'm as insane as the boy who pointed out the emperor had no clothes; such people are often considered bonkers by the consensus around them. While - sorry to say but it is justified in context - the left have historically consistently labelled dissenters as being mentally deficient or plain mad.