Search Results for: talk to hamas

Just love Hamas, Hezbollah, Mao…whoever next? Trump? OMG Safe place, safe place

By | |
6 Comments

 

I have some advice for the BBC…wait, wait until we can ascertain the good that Trump does…because his legacy maybe that on balance, he does more good than harm.

 

Trump has set the running dogs of the extremist liberal elite running.  There’s wild panic and headless chickens on the continent of Europe as their comfortable existences are threatened much as the Communist Dacha loving elites saw their easy, privileged living coming to an end as the Berlin Wall fell.  The greedy, liberal elites, those for instance in the BBC who feel entiltled to our money and to then preach to us about our immorality and racism, see the Trump bulldozer shattering the foundations of their utopian dream, a dream bought at the expense of all those ‘populist’ workers that the BBC elite so disdain, mock and denounce as racist Nazis.

Paradoxically those burgeoning populist Trumpian forces are small and insignificant as John Humphrys reminded us today when he averred that there is ‘huge concern in many quarters’ about Trump’s appalling policies [he didn’t actually say appalling…but Nicky Campbell has…so fair game] echoing Laura Kuenssberg’s attack on Trump where she grandly and mistakenly said she spoke for Britain.  Why does the BBC not say that there is huge support in the UK for Trump…just as valid if not more so…and in the US he has the majority for his immigration policy.

The BBC of course doesn’t think Trump is a man who we should do business with but can’t seem to keep the narrative straight.  When Farage got his foot in the door first May was criticised for being too slow to contact the new President.  Then when she won a small diplomatic coup and was the first national leader to meet Trump she was roundly criticised for being too quick and for fawning…and then she was criticised for being too slow to criticise his immigration policy…the BBC has often moaned about Politicians using soundbites and off the cuff remarks to grab the headlines…and now they demand May does just that…instead she took her time to consider what the issues were and then spoke about it…she unfortunately isn’t made of the same stuff Thatcher was and has caved in to pressure and denounced Trump’s policy as ‘divisive and wrong’…not sure in what way it is divisive.

The BBC et al are hounding May for maintaining and developing further a close working relationship with one of our most powerful and closest allies….strange that on the continent, in the ranks of the EU apparatchiks, they too demand a close relationship with the US….

“We cannot surrender to those who want to weaken or invalidate the Transatlantic bond, without which global order and peace cannot survive. We should remind our American friends of their own motto: United we stand, divided we fall.”

So whilst Trump may make them quake in their Italian loafers they want to do business with him.

So what’s the problem?  The BBC tells us…

Donald Trump has professed doubts about Nato, admiration for Russia’s Vladimir Putin and support for Brexit. He has also criticised German Chancellor Angela Merkel, particularly her welcoming policy towards refugees.

In a recent interview with Germany’s Bild newspaper, Mr Trump confirmed his view of the Nato alliance as “obsolete”. He has also dismissed the EU as “basically a vehicle for Germany”.

Interesting that the BBC equates support for Brexit with admiration for Putin.  But as with all BBC ‘news’ you have to take it with a pinch of salt.

For instance whilst he may talk of closer relations with Putin he also said…“Well, I start off trusting both [Merkel as well] — but let’s see how long that lasts,” he said. “It may not last long at all.”

Then there’s that comment about NATO being obsolete…well all is not as the BBC tells us…what he actually said…

“I took such heat when I said NATO was obsolete,” Mr. Trump said. “It’s obsolete because it wasn’t taking care of terror. I took a lot of heat for two days. And then they started saying, ‘Trump is right.’”

As for Trump wanting the EU to break up as a policy that’s not true either…he merely thinks that if countries want independence they should have it…

Mr. Trump also said that Britain’s decision to leave the European Union would “end up being a great thing” and predicted that other countries would follow. “People, countries want their own identity, and the U.K. wanted its own identity,” he said.

Not sure he has said anything detrimental about the EU other than that it is a vehicle for Germany…and even the New York Times agrees with that...

His critique of German dominance over the European Union is hardly a novel thought; many Europeans share the same complaints.

And of course his criticism of Merkel’s immigration policy as catastrophic was hardly controversial.

So when you actually look at what Trump has said he doesn’t seem to have said anything really controversial unless you are a dyed-in-the wool EU supporter who wishes to hide the truth from the voters….

What is startling is how an incoming American president would make such a statement about a key ally and, in doing so, give succor to populist parties seeking to shatter the European political establishment.

So really we must do what the BBC does…censor the truth and shape the news to reflect what you’d like to happen rather than report what has happened.  Can’t have the cosy cartel of the liberal elite shattered by the inconvenient truth can we?

 

 

 

Jon ‘Hamas’ Donnison

By | |
10 Comments

 

After the attack in Tunisia I looked at Donnison’s Twitter feed to see his reaction…nothing.  I gave him the benefit of the doubt and thought he must be sleeping off his socialising with the Muslim victims of rampant Australian Islamophobia and would start the same sort of tweeting we are used to when he is constantly telling us of his sympathies for Hamas and the victims of Israeli ‘terrorism and war crimes’.

But no, he has all but ignored the murders in Tunisia…this being his sole tweet…or retweet, he couldn’t even be bothered to write his own…..

retweeted
Jun 29

‘Frightening? It was unbelievable’. So powerful to hear a child, Bronwen Midgley, talking to John about the Tunisia attacks

It is noticeable that he has succumbed to government pressure and is calling Islamic State ‘Daesh’…never mind that Daesh means Islamic State…..and of course it is in relation to his old mates in Hamas…

Jun 30

Daesh threatens to topple Hamas in . Hamas & Israel will find common cause and not allow that to happen.

The Guardian report he links to actually calls them ‘Islamic State’…

Islamic State threatens to topple Hamas in Gaza Strip in video statement

Why did he change it?

 

 

 

Imagine The Table Talk!

By | |
23 Comments

 

Not long ago we were told that:

The Muslim Brotherhood are no different to the Greek ‘Golden Dawn’  Neo-Nazi party.

 

Which is why you might wonder when Jeremy Bowen slips back into his ‘aren’t the Muslim Brotherhood just so cuddly’ mode:

The jailed joke-cracking Muslim Brotherhood leader

The core of the movement stayed patient, and non violent, deepening its influence by providing the closest thing poor Egyptians had to a welfare state.

That’s the oldest trick in the terrorists book…providing ‘welfare’…Hamas does it, Hezbollah does it.  It’s a recruiting device….hearts and minds….but it doesn’t negate the essential fundamentalism of the groups…their reason for existing and their methods.

Bowen goes on:

….in government President Morsi and his people were incompetent, alienated too many Egyptians, and the army removed them from power in the coup in July this year.

 

Well….that wasn’t the problem…the problem was trying to impose fundamentalist Islam on Egypt….and it wasn’t ‘the Army’ that removed them from power but a massive uprising by the population.

The BBC’s Middle East Editor should pay more attention surely?

 

He continues….

Essam al-Erian is now back in Tora prison, with the rest of the Brotherhood’s leadership.

Hosni Mubarak is there too, with his sons, and his chief lieutenants, including Habib al-Adly.

I doubt they are all in the same wing, but if they did sit down to lunch together imagine the table talk.

 

 

Yep…imagine the table talk….

‘Here’s Bowen’s phone number…….he’s very reliable…..’

 

 

 

LOVING HAMAS….

By | |
14 Comments

It’s relentless, it’s offensive and it seems to be something that the BBC has taken up as a cause macabre..

“Should Hamas be included in Middle East peace talks? Jon Donnison reports on how Hamas still has a strong influence in Gaza and the West Bank, despite the efforts by the Israeli and Palestinian security services to crack down on the organisation.”

ETA, IRA, Hamas, Taliban, Al Queda – the BBC just LOVE them.

Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.

Hard Talk

By | | ,
17 Comments

Insomnia prompted me to watch HardTalk at about 4:30am. Stephen Sackur was TalkingHARD to Nasser Judeh, Jordan’s foreign Minister. The whole point of Hard Talk, Mr. Judeh pointed out helpfully, is that the talk is hard. Fair enough.
If Sackur was interviewing a lettuce he’d have to press home forcefully the argument from the slug’s perspective. If God Almighty was in the opposite chair, Sackur would be obliged to be devil’s advocate. Or, if he was interviewing himself, he’d have to demand, from himself, some answers to the excellent points made by B-BBC.

One can only hope that this was the idea behind his questioning of Jordan’s foreign minister.

He accused Jordan of not being tough enough on Israel, not being sufficiently condemnatory of Israel’s behaviour during the flotilla incident, and asked why Jordan wouldn’t do the right thing and talk to Hamas, and why it wasn’t sending more aid to Gaza. He criticised Jordan for not being friendlier towards its own Islamist political parties. Sackur was trying to get the guy to admit, as though it was something to be ashamed of, that Jordan might want to stop radical Islamists securing a bigger grip on the country than they already have.

I mean. Give hm a grilling by all means. But give him OUR grilling, not Osama Bin Laden’s.
Episode not available on the website.

Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.

BBC FOR THE HAMAS ENABLERS

By | |
62 Comments

I know we expect little in terms of balance from the BBC and hence we are rarely disappointed, This morning, in fine anti-Israeli form, the BBC runs an item entitled “Israel threatens to board Gaza aid ship Rachel Corrie”. Note the use of the word “threaten” when used next to Israel. Also note how the Hate Flotilla farce is given neutral nomenclature…subtext, they only want to bring aid. To Hamas, By sea. Breaching the blockade.

I was on the BBC yesterday morning and tried to discuss the nature of IHH,  the Turkish organisation behind the Hate Flotilla; I tried to discuss Nobel Peace Laureate Mairead Corrigans links to Khalid Meshaal, Hamas leader; Not interested in discussing these key facts. The ONLY issue they wanted to talk about was my comment that Israel MUST ensure the MV Rachel Corrie be stopped and “no messing about”. Of course I was asked to withdraw that comment, I didn’t. The BBC is 100% behind the pro-Hamas Hate Flotillists and it oozes through their every slimy report. In my view.

Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.

Talk Talk

By | | ,
Comments Off on Talk Talk

The BBC is the main source of the misinformation that makes some people call all supporters of Israel ‘foam-flecked fanatics,’ and which makes us in turn think of those people as gullible fools. These wordbattles continue in the face of the mass of evidence piling up before your very eyes, evidence that some of you go to great lengths to avoid acknowledging.
Fanatical Islamists can hold meetings in Kensington Town Hall, people can write books filled with inaccuracies and propaganda, pockets of the UK can sprog radicals and recruits to Al Qa’eda, primitive cultural practices can be turned a blind eye to, and the majority will still fall for the BBC’s lulling reassurances rather than risk mentioning their concerns, and being labelled a phobic racist.

Compare two approaches to the recent activities of Hamas in Gaza. Not the crackdown by the virtue police enforcing modesty regulations upon ladies’ swimwear and shop mannequins, or the new ruling about ‘school uniform’ for girls, but the conflict between Hamas and another extreme, radical outfit that managed to cast Hamas into the absurd role of ‘more moderate.’

Think of this in the context of the BBC’s continual mantra that talking to Hamas will hasten the peace process. The BBC tells us ‘Gaza Islamist leader dies in raid,’ a strangely passive headline for a shoot-out between Hamas and the leader of Jund Ansar Allah, ‘Soldiers of the Followers of God,’ in which several people were killed and a mosque was damaged. What they wanted was an Islamic emirate, which on the face of it is what Hamas wants too. But they wanted it to be their Islamic emirate, and not Hamas’s, and they were keen to fight to the death; which they did. So everyone got what they wanted for the time being, and Hamas continues to fight against Israel which they will never recognise, no matter how much Britain, America, Mahmoud Abbas, or even the BBC, talks to them.

Ambassador Ron Proser (who spoke to John Humphrys this morning,) says of Hamas:

“sections of the media are determined to whitewash and legitimise it. They are joined by various politicians, commentators and activists, who argue that Israel and the West must talk to Hamas, so implying that it is on the verge of a switch to moderation.”

The BBC’s article, apart from a bizarre reference by Ismail Haniya to “Israeli Zionists.” portrays Hamas as reasonable people who ‘one could do business with”, Compare that with Ron Proser’s piece in the Telegraph. It begins:

“Earlier this month, Hamas launched a devastating bombardment of rocket-propelled grenades and machine-gun fire against a mosque in Rafah. The attack killed at least 22 Palestinians, including an 11-year-old girl. Over 100 more were injured and the mosque, which belonged to a rival Islamist faction, the Jund Ansar Allah, was left riddled with bullets. The adjacent building was destroyed. Yet Hamas’s disregard for the sanctity of a house of worship, and its contempt for the lives of neighbouring civilians, is unlikely to be the subject of any probing reports from Human Rights Watch.”

And criticism of them brands me as a foaming-at-the mouth phobic racist.

Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.

Ways of making them talk

By | |
45 Comments
What has the BBC got to say about the M.P.s who are talking to Hamas in Syria? Suicide-bomber sympathiser Jenny Tonge aims to force our government to talk to Hamas, and put pressure on the US to do so too. She said she was aware that her meeting with Meshaal could be considered illegal and that she could face arrest on return to the UK.

“That is one of the risks that you take,” she said, hoping for martyrdom, but stopping short of suicide.
Will they they arrest Clare Short, Michael Ankram and Fianna Fáil TD, Chris Andrews too? He knows all about ‘talking’, what with the NI peace process – oh wait.
The BBC has been strangely quiet about this, unlike several other news outlets, but
Sarah Montague is overtly in favour of talking to Hamas, – can’t wait for Today tomorrow.

Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.

Drinking from Home

By | |
1 Comment

links to a Real Player clip of two BBC types discussing the collapse of Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh at a rally.

One of the presenters says:

If we were talking here about an Israeli prime minister for example one would assume that he would have the best of medical care available just an arm’s length away.

ADDED LATER: The more I think about it, the more I love that “for example.”

Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.

But … you talk like war crimes are a bad thing.

By | |
100 Comments

I was listening to the ten o’clock news with half an ear and I caught Jeremy Bowen saying something like if Israel can’t prove that bombing the bridges in Lebanon was justified “then it’s a war crime.”

I don’t get it, BBC. So what if it is. Why do you care?

Note, I’m not asking why you, the readers of this site, might care – or you, the BBC audience, or you the Lebanese or you the Israelis or you the Palestinians or you the world. You all might have many and different opinions on whether it’s a war crime in law, or whether it’s a war crime in the sight of God – but I’m not asking you.

I’m talking to you, the British Broadcasting Corporation. When Hamas and then Hizbollah attacked Israel you never troubled to tell us the legal status of the acts. When suicide bombers killed Israelis at pizza parlours and bar mitzvahs you never gave us any of this war crime schtick, although attacks targeted at non-combatants are the epitome of a war crime. “Terrorist” is a term with meaning in international law, yet when bombers murdered your own countrymen in London a year ago you were so anxious to avoid being judgemental that you had someone go through what your reporters had written in the heat and pity of the moment, carefully replacing the word “terrorist” with the word “bomber.”

(God, what a shameful job. While they were still scrubbing the blood off the streets and the rails, some hack was scrubbing out any suggestion that the killers might have been bad people. Was it a junior hack under orders or a senior hack doing his own dirty work? Or were you all sent slinking back to your desks each to expunge his own words? I’d really like to know, but whichever it was you were anxious to avoid any talk of “crimes” then.)

“Bomber” not “terrorist”: by your own account your only job is to describe projectiles hitting meat. So what’s up now, with your “war crimes” and your “Israel kills Lebanese civilians”? You don’t need these fancy legal concepts, as if it mattered to you whether they were civilians or not. By your own stated standards moral distinctions between killings are “a barrier rather than an aid to understanding.”

I just don’t get it.

Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.