Nigel writes:
‘Shooting D-Day through a lens’ is an interesting story about US photographer Marty Lederhandler and how some of his photos ended up being published by the Germans. (It’s to do with knackered carrier pigeons. No, this is not part of an ‘Allo ‘Allo script.)
Anyhow, the interview wanders onto the subject of Iraq. Wouldn’t you know it, the BBC even create one of their little highlight boxes for the following quote: “It’s a place where we don’t need to be. It’s a waste. We had no reason to attack Iraq. They didn’t do anything to us. There were no weapons of mass destruction.”
Full article at link
I can’t help thinking his views about the Iraq war would not have merited a quote box if he had been in favour.
For instance, despite the intrinsic newsworthiness of the views of the the last surving military leader of the Warsaw Ghetto uprising, Marek Edelman, don’t expect to see him quoted by the Beeb when he says, “Who defeated Hitler and saved Europe from fascism? The French? No, the Americans did. We thanked them then because they saved us. Today we criticise them because they’re saving somebody else.”
In fact it seems to me that the BBC are going all-out to ensure that no one thinks undesirable thoughts when remembering the war against fascism, and in particular the US role in it. In Radio 4’s Today programme this morning the announcer said the Americans thought the Europeans should “act a bit more grateful.” No doubt some do. There are lots of Americans and they think many and various things. But it was typical (a) that this unattributed speculation was presented as news, and (b)that the form of words should be that most likely to arouse resentment. I’m not holding my breath waiting to hear someone in the Today programme saying that Americans think that Europeans should remember that war can sometimes be less terrible than a peace that leaves a megalomaniacal dictator in power.
A minute later he said that Europeans thought that “gratitude for events then does not mean no criticism now.” I quote from memory, and I may not have got it exactly right, but it was far more neutrally phrased than what he said about Americans.
>>”We had no reason to attack Iraq. They didn’t do anything to us.”
This declaration is ignorant and racist. Ignorant because “they” (the Iraqi people) were held in colonial and totalitarian servitude by an internal clique. Racist because the statement expresses no outrage at the oppression of the Iraqi people at the hands of its government.
If Saddam’s Iraq was bordered by Poland and France, or if Saddam had been the head of a colonial regime imposed by a European power, one imagines good Caucasian Europeans might hold different views and that BBC would focus on the suffering of the Iraqi people.
All that is typical of the anti-democratic forces that have coalesced around the war. Truth is, if the U.S., the UK, and others, had done nothing about Iraq, they’d very likely have switched to the other side of the argument. Their intent is to thwart the spread of democracy. The fate of the Iraqi people concerns them not at all.
Yes – a very interesting post. The highlight box was of course very significant: nothing happens “by accident” on the BBC or indeed in national newspaper.
Any unbiased observer would of course immediately see a connection between the D Day landings designed to dislodge a dictator who invaded neighbouring countries and oppressed his own people and the Iraq war which can fairly be said to have done the same.
The BBC is determined to prevent people making any such connection either by (a) trivialising the event or (b) distracting people from making the connection or (c) publicising anti-Iraq war comments.
David Field
BBC are the new voice of the modern lord Haw Haw! they make me sick 🙁
It is all part of the continuing dhimmification of Europe and its recognition of the US as the great Satan.
When hundreds of thousands cna be made to march against democracy throughotu Europe and in support of fascism by the propaganda of madia , the islamofascists and the Marxist left, we have perhaps stepped back in time to the Nuremberg rallies, only this time We are becoming the Nazis.
Oh dear, Oh dear! SkyNews has employed old BBC staffer Keith Graves & taken him to Normandy. He uses a lull in the ceremonial to pedal anti-US & anti-Iraq war views.
e.g.
Soldiers don’t like UK to start wars (He ignores, or is ignorant of, the fact that WW2 started much as the Iraq War. Both Hitler & Saddam ignored our ulitimata & we declared war.)
Graves declares that US would drop UK at their whim, but at moment we are valuable ally as US wants to keep UK split from “Europe” (ie France & Germany) to avoid creation of Euro Army. Graves obviously thinks that a Euro hippy army would be a threat to US miltary power.
How sad that today’s event are used for the BBC agenda – & propagated without even watching the damn channel!
The BBC certainly has an agenda…was listening the the World Service a bit ago…2:40 A.M. EST, USA (about 6:40 gmt i think)…a Palestinian “refugee” living in Damascus presented a rant about the evils of Israel…but not a word of the 800,000 jews who were expelled from Arab countries during and following the establishment of modern Israel. I’m neither Christian, Jewish or Muslim…but I was raised to believe that the Beeb was the standard to which all others were measured. I am sadly disappointed that this isn’t so.
Personally I’m undecided on the Iraq war until we see whether something better and permanent emerges but comparison with D-Day is ridiculous, both in terms of the military risk of the actual operation and the context of the overall threat which was faced.
‘WW2 started much as the Iraq War. Both Hitler & Saddam ignored our ulitimata & we declared war’?? Surely most wars start on a similar basis – this doesn’t mean a moral equivalence – depends on the nature of the ultimatum.
Also, I suspect that the BBC would be delighted to interview the last surviving member of the Warsaw ghetto uprising but failure to pick up Polish media interviews is hardly a crime.
No doubt if he had been interviewed biased-BBC regulars would have rabidly criticised the BBC for quoting such historically dubious views as ‘Who defeated Hitler and saved Europe from fascism? The French? No, the Americans did’. Brits and Russians might feel that that underplays their role a bit (not to mention Poles).
Pretty vomit inducing that some people can’t bring themselves to praise the BBC’s magnificent D-day coverage. Scrabbling around trying to find tenuous examples of anti-Americanism or trying to make Iraq links is pathetic.
For all it’s faults the BBC has shown again what a source of national pride it should be.
Care to make an actual argument, THFC? Or, like the BBC, is that beneath you?
see comments above in the thread, esp:
‘Any unbiased observer would of course immediately see a connection between the D Day landings….the BBC is determined to prevent people making any such connection either by (a) trivialising the event or (b) distracting people from making the connection or…’
Maybe the BBC’s trivialising of the event by concentrating on those old blokes rather than the ‘Iraq parallels’ was a sinister Anti-American plot.
“For all it’s faults the BBC has shown again what a source of national pride it should be.”
That is the most “vomit inducing” sentiment that I’ve seen this month. And I’ve recently been forced to sit through a film by Micheal Moore so that’s saying something.
The BBC should be a source of national pride in the same way that Andrew Gilligan was a source of national pride.
He was the standard bearer of everything the left wanted to go wrong in Iraq till he was forced to resign in disgrace for lying.
I’m still waiting for the other shoe to drop on the BBC…..