X
xane
Guest
As an avid news follower I'm a bit dismayed at how the Hutton Inquiry is being reported on all sides, this is one of the few examples of an issue where the truth is rapidly being dissolved under a sea of misinterpretation, delusion and spun out ideals.
The BBC, normally a fairly reliable and unbiased source (in comparison with others) is completely off the rails as far as I am concerned, primarily with their support of Gilligan's role in the and their initial argument with the government, they obviously have some agenda to play out.
Consider this piece which is a confusing article if ever I saw one.
It was quite plain to me that Gilligan was a hack of dubious quality and I feel the BBC made a fundemental mistake in standing by him, only coerced on by the argument they had with the government at the time.
The Guardian used to be a quite factual newspaper, despite its left-leaning views, but since Gulf War II it has been a staging ground for all sorts of anti-war stances, as a result you can't really get a clear picture any more, same applies to a lot of the other independent newspapers.
The mainstream newspapers are either blatantly anti- or pro-, and have too great an influence from their proprietors, who are either sucking up to the government or moving away from it. None of them can ever count on any issue.
Outside the UK the Hutton Inquiry has little coverage, and you can only take those "interested" parties, like the French or Irish, with a pinch of salt.
So there we have it, the conspiracy theorists are going to have a field day with this one due to the complete lack of intelligence and the sheer volume of FUD generated, it's quite depressing.
Cue: angry Mail reader spouting off about government in 5, 4, 3, 2, 1 ...
The BBC, normally a fairly reliable and unbiased source (in comparison with others) is completely off the rails as far as I am concerned, primarily with their support of Gilligan's role in the and their initial argument with the government, they obviously have some agenda to play out.
Consider this piece which is a confusing article if ever I saw one.
It was quite plain to me that Gilligan was a hack of dubious quality and I feel the BBC made a fundemental mistake in standing by him, only coerced on by the argument they had with the government at the time.
The Guardian used to be a quite factual newspaper, despite its left-leaning views, but since Gulf War II it has been a staging ground for all sorts of anti-war stances, as a result you can't really get a clear picture any more, same applies to a lot of the other independent newspapers.
The mainstream newspapers are either blatantly anti- or pro-, and have too great an influence from their proprietors, who are either sucking up to the government or moving away from it. None of them can ever count on any issue.
Outside the UK the Hutton Inquiry has little coverage, and you can only take those "interested" parties, like the French or Irish, with a pinch of salt.
So there we have it, the conspiracy theorists are going to have a field day with this one due to the complete lack of intelligence and the sheer volume of FUD generated, it's quite depressing.
Cue: angry Mail reader spouting off about government in 5, 4, 3, 2, 1 ...
