PAEDO BBC ABUSE S KOREAN STUDENTS

North Korean Reaction to News of Paedo BBC Visit

The paedo BBC, has refused to stop another Panorama programme, after a Korean students' union said the BBC has used its students to film. Three BBC journalists sneaked in with 10 London School of Economics students and spent eight days in North Korea up to no good.

LSE students' union's Alex Peters-Day said the programme should be stopped, because students were used and lied to without giving their informed consent, which essentially is a form of rape.The lying criminal paedo BBC has said however, that the students had been properly warned, ahead of the trip about the sort of disreputable paedo BBC company they would be sleeping with for 8 days. Would you or anyone in their right mind, sleep voluntarily with the BBC for 8 nights?

Head of news programmes Ceri Thomas said the North Korean government were the only party the BBC had deceived. Pull the other one BBC,m you have been deceiving the whole world with your sick behaviour of DR Who programmes of suggestive pubescent virgins, with protruding tits, feral censorship and filthy paedo propaganda on your world service.There is a mountain of evidence which out there, which we will be only more than happy to produce in any court even in North Korea who definitely would not tolerate, a paedo national broadcasting service like the Paedo BBC. Nine of the students were aged 21-28 while one was 18, he said. Thankfully there was no one younger.

The BBC spent 8 nights undercovers in North Korea with the poor students, who were deceived.  Three of the students have demanded  "that their images be taken out" and that they would be "pixellated or blobbed" from the BBC filth.

LSE students' union general secretary, Ms Peters-Day who did not go on the trip, told the BBC sux a cox,: "One of the students made it absolutely clear that she was not made aware of what happened.For us, this is a matter of student welfare, students were lied to, they weren't able to give their consent.She said LSE's future research was "now at risk". adding "I think the trip was organised by the BBC as potentially a ruse for them to get into North Korea and that's disgraceful. Usually it gets the BBC into other places as well the sneaky bastards. They've used the students bodies essentially in this situation."

LSE Prof George Gaskell said students had been put in a "potentially extremely dangerous with many wondering about how we were going to get these students out of solitary confinement in some North Korean jail". Prof George Gaskell also said "Some of my colleagues at the present are in Africa, China and various other sensitive countries.

"If their independence and integrity is challenged, they may find themselves in considerable risk."

The umbrella body for UK universities, said it regretted "the BBC's approach in this matter".

"Universities must be able to work with integrity and operate in sensitive areas of the world," chief executive Nicola Dandridge said.

She added: "The way that this BBC investigation was conducted might not only have put students' safety at risk, but may also have damaged our universities' reputations overseas."

Panorama reporter John Sweeney said the majority of the students he had travelled with supported the programme. He described North Korea as a "Nazi state" that practised the "most extreme form of censorship" exactly like the BBC itself.

He added: "It's more like Hitler's Germany than any other state in this world right now. It's extraordinarily scary, dark and evil," just like British Occupied Ireland as any honest Irish person will tell you.

In all seriousness, the bottom line is, that the the BBC is definitely culpable, in the cover-up and in a proper court would be found guilty of knowingly enabling a pedophile ring inside the BBC while also aiding and abetting an unrepentant child rapist. They are further guilty of broadcasting their filth worldwide today with suggestive programmes like Dr Who and their paedo BBC world service.

Pedo Auntie Beeb Rules Hearts & Minds UK ?

The Irish community has plenty of experience, of the BBC infiltrating it both in Ireland, the USA and in their world service with programmes such as Hearts and Minds. How any parent can continue to allow the BBC to penetrate their children's hearts and minds after recent revelations, beggars belief!

 John Pilger article explains it a little better;

Understanding the BBC’s Role Requires More Than Sentiment 

November 22, 2012 "Information Clearing House" -  In Peter Watkins' remarkable BBC film, The War Game,which foresaw the aftermath of an attack on London with a one-megaton nuclear bomb, the narrator says: "On almost the entire subject of thermo-clear weapons, there is now practically total silence in the press, official publications and on TV. Is there hope to be found in this silence?"

The truth of this statement was equal to its irony. On 24 November, 1965, the BBC banned The War Game as "too horrifying for the medium of broadcasting". This was false. The real reason was spelt out by the chairman of the BBC Board of Governors, Lord Normanbrook, in a secret letter to the Secretary to the Cabinet, Sir Burke Trend.

"[The War Game] is not designed as propaganda," he wrote, "it is intended as a purely factual statement and is based on careful research into official material... But the showing of the film on television might have a significant effect on public attitudes towards the policy of the nuclear deterrent." Following a screening attended by senior Whitehall officials, the film was banned because it told an intolerable truth. Sixteen years later, the then BBC director-general, Sir Ian Trethowan, renewed the ban, saying that he feared for the film's effect on people of "limited mental intelligence". Watkins' brilliant work was eventually shown in 1985 to a late-night minority audience. It was introduced by Ludovic Kennedy who repeated the official lie.

What happened to The War Game is the function of the state broadcaster as a cornerstone of Britain's ruling elite. With its outstanding production values, often fine popular drama, natural history and sporting coverage, the BBC enjoys wide appeal and, according to its managers and beneficiaries, "trust". This "trust" may well apply to Springwatch and Sir David Attenborough, but there is no demonstrable basis for it in much of the news and so-called current affairs that claim to make sense of the world, especially the machinations of rampant power. There are honourable individual exceptions, but watch how these are tamed the longer they remain in the institution: a "defenestration", as one senior BBC journalist describes it. 

This is notably true in the Middle East where the Israeli state has successfully intimidated the BBC into presenting the theft of Palestinian land and the caging, torturing and killing of its people as an intractable "conflict" between equals. Standing in the rubble from an Israeli attack, one BBC journalist went further and referred to "Gaza's strong culture of martyrdom". So great is this distortion that young viewers of BBC News have told Glasgow University researchers they are left with the impression that Palestinians are the illegal colonisers of their own country. The current BBC "coverage" of Gaza's genocidal misery reinforces this.

The BBC's "Reithian values" of impartiality and independence are almost scriptural in their mythology. Soon after the corporation was founded in the 1920s by Lord John Reith, Britain was consumed by the General Strike. "Reith emerged as a kind of hero," wrote the historian Patrick Renshaw, "who had acted responsibly and yet preserved the precious independence of the BBC. But though this myth persisted it has little basis in reality... the price of that independence was in fact doing what the government wanted done. [Prime Minister Stanley] Baldwin... saw that if they preserved the BBC's independence, it would be much easier for them to get their way on important questions and use it to broadcast Government propaganda."

Unknown to the public, Reith had been the prime minister's speech writer.  Ambitious to become Viceroy of India, he ensured the BBC became an evangelist of imperial power, with "impartiality" duly suspended whenever that power was threatened. This "principle" has applied to the BBC's coverage of every colonial war of the modern era: from the covered-up genocide in Indonesia and suppression of eyewitness film of the American bombing of North Vietnam to support for the illegal Blair/Bush invasion of Iraq in 2003 and the now familiar echo of Israeli propaganda whenever that lawless state abuses its captive, Palestine. This reached a nadir in 2009 when, terrified of Israeli reaction, the BBC refused to broadcast a combined charities appeal for the people of Gaza, half of whom are children, most of them malnourished and traumatised by Israeli attacks. The United Nations Rapporteur, Richard Falk, has likened Israel's blockade of Gaza to the Warsaw Ghetto under siege by the Nazis. Yet, to the BBC, Gaza - like the 2010 humanitarian relief flotilla murderously attacked by Israeli commandos - largely presents a public relations problem for Israel and its US sponsor.

Mark Regev, Israel's chief propagandist, seemingly has a place reserved for him near the top of BBC news bulletins. In 2010, when I pointed this out to Fran Unsworth, now elevated to director of news, she strongly objected to the description of Regev as a propagandist, adding, "It's not our job to go out and appoint the Palestinean spokesperson".

With similar logic, Unsworth's predecessor, Helen Boaden, described the BBC's reporting of the criminal carnage in Iraq as based on the "fact that Bush has tried to export democracy and human rights to Iraq". To prove her point, Boaden supplied six A4 pages of verifiable lies from Bush and Tony Blair. That ventriloquism is not journalism seemed not to occur to either woman.

What has changed at the BBC is the arrival of the cult of the corporate manager. George Entwistle, the briefly-appointed director general who said he knew nothing about Newsnight's false accusations of child abuse against a Tory grandee, is to receive £450,000 of public money for agreeing to resign before he was sacked: the corporate way. This and the preceding Jimmy Savile scandal might have been scripted for the Daily Mail and the Murdoch press whose self-serving hatred of the BBC has long provided the corporation with its "embattled" façade as the guardian of "public service broadcasting". Understanding the BBC as a pre-eminent state propagandist and censor by omission - more often than not in tune with its right-wing enemies - is on no public agenda and it ought to be.