writes to say that you can read an interview with three prominent Iraqi citizens here.
Part way through, Nasir Flayeh Hassan is discussing the pluses and
minuses of the American occupation, and remarks:What I think is definitely an American failure is the inefficiency of their media, comparing with the anti-American media, like Algazira and Alarabia, BBC (especially the Arabic department), Radio Monte Carlo, etc. This was a very serious point which gave a wide free space for all those who hate the Americans to ruin the deeds, changing continuously the scales of things, especially in such a critical period. This point cost us and the Americans much.
The allied occupation of Iraq was one of the most incompetent ever undertaken. Compare and contrast allied occupation of Germany or Russian occupation of Eastern Europe.
Firstly they never even imposed a curfew – which should have been 24 hours at the beginning.
Secondly, they never got a monopoly on the media to begin with.
Thirdly, they never got a grip on the clerics who, whether Shia or Sunni have pursued their own agenda throughout.
They didn’t even have a puppet government ready to be put in place. Absolutely pathetic.
They didn’t give ordinary Iraqis any incentive to support the new order. There should have been guaranteed jobs and shares in a national oil company for everyone who co-oeprated.
This isn’t hindsight by the way. I wrote all this on another site.
David Field
You’re seriously suggesting the Soviet occupation of Eastern Europe as a contrast to ours in Iraq?! As a basis for demonstrating the benefits of liberty and freedom your are somewhat lacking.
O/T
Being away for the weekend in Cardiff I haven’t been wholly in touch with the news. Did the BBC cover the demonstration outside of the US embassy in London? I mean the one with the usual chanting (‘death to America’ … ‘death to Israel’ … death to the infidel running dog Christians’ .. blah blah) and the demonstration with the burning cross and Stars and Stripes. I can’t find anything about it now. Did it happen?!
Talking of Cardiff, I was indulging in a bit of 5 star luxury at the Celtic Manor Resort. Also there were Gary Lineker, John Motson and the rest of the Match of the Day crew. Just thought you’d like to know where your money goes.
Pete
If a tree falls in a deserted forest does it make a sound? If the BBC doesn’t report something, did it actually happen?
Not sure about the forest, but the BBC certainly believes it’s the final arbiter of what and what isn’t news.
OT – (D)HYS
Should BBC staff strike over cuts?
“Their timing is correct, after the Hutton whitewash and Blair’s re-election, to defend the BBC’s values
Dylan, Dijon, France”
How come Dylan gets a say? – do the French pay the telly tax too?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/talking_point/4571269.stm
o/t
skit on blogs from link via lgf,
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2005/05/11.html#a2879
click “the daily show and blogs”
Pete,
I read David’s post as ironic. You know, sarcasm?
Very well done, too.
StinKerr
That did cross my mind but I thought you just can’t be sure with some people.
Pete London –
Demo was covered on London TV news on BBC but strangely it was referred to as a peaceful demo and no mention was made of the “Bomb New York” chants audible on other channels. Probably a technical fault.
As to my mentino of the Soviet occupation I merely refer to that to point out it was conducted with maximal efficiency. There was no way we could simply go into Iraq and “declare a democracy”. We had to get control of the country first. We failed.
o/t
Newsweek vows not to quote “sources” perhaps BBC could do the same
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7937042/site/newsweek/
SLIGHTLY OFF TOPIC
Has the BBC STRIKE (sic) made any difference to the life of the nation?
Getting shot of 4000 JOBS (sic) is decidedly too little! Sack the lot of them and open up the free market as might happen in a real democracy. State broadcasting! Whose idea was it anyway?
OT
BBC self obsession. Front page main, headline item in the Wales and Scotland sections.
Meanwhile in the tickertape thing at the top we have:
Blair meeting with Bush and Putin ahead of G8; Camelot have increased sales; 5 teenagers attack police officer; trial of three accused of being a terrorist group.
On the rest of the page, considered lesser stories than the Beeb lefties getting a day off:
“Iraqi rebels kill security chief”;”Abigail to see suspect’s picture”;”Sisters give birth at 12, 14, 16″ (see my blog for a rant on that one!!!)
Good job we don’t pay them to keep us informed.
John Simpson’s back:
“France and the EU constitution”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/4572939.stm
Apparently, to vote against the Constitution for Europe you must be from the far left or far right. Not just the left or right, but far left, or far right.
However, some centrists will vote against it also:
“The ‘No’ campaign also includes various members of M. Chirac’s own party who – for one reason or other – have fallen out with him.
Nothing unusual in that: I don’t suppose a big vote on the EU has happened in any European country without opposition from the far left, the far right, and some disgruntled centrists.”
So that’s it, in all previous votes the nay-sayers have been extremists or the disgruntled.
We also have this pearl of wisdom:
“The basic problem with the European ideal is that it has been too successful. Europe is vastly bigger, and a good deal richer than any single nation on earth; who wouldn’t want to join it if they could?”
Nurse!
His piece also links to this priceless report:
“French media in referendum ‘bias’ row”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/4568819.stm
“A group of journalists from French state TV and radio are so angered by what they see as one-sided propaganda campaign being broadcast on the airwaves on behalf of the government and the Yes campaign that they have set up an online petition, signed by more than 15,000 people since 1 May.”
“This is a grotesque situation,” says Jacques Cotta, a well-known TV correspondent for France 2 who is one of the leaders of the campaign for fair coverage in the lead-up to the referendum.
“Publicly-owned media in France are broadcasting sheer propaganda to the public, and this absence of any pluralism or any attempt to represent and discuss the point of view of those who want to vote No to the Treaty is profoundly undemocratic”
However, it is the role of publicly-funded and publicly-accountable state broadcasters which angers them most.
“These are broadcasters paid for by the public, and they should be reflecting both sides of the debate fairly,” Jean-Marc Surcin tells me.
Actually our media is very efficient, it’s just on the other side. Members of the American MSM would cut off their right arms before they’d write anything that would assist the policies of the current administration.
I hope b-bbc readers are managing to cope without bbc news for a day – hard isn’t it?
Slogan on striker’s t-shirt shown on the Evening Standard website: “We [heart symbol] our bbc” – says it all.
Shameful – it has taken the tragic news of children killed in bus crash to knock the lefties strike off the No1 UK story…. pathetic.
I h8 the BBC.
BBC parasites need to be handed out p45s by those they’ve jailed.
Talking about your own media talking down your country abroad, this week Newsweek has a brilliant cover on their Japanese issue :
http://www.rickadams.org/
Of course they don’t need non-existent sources for this one – they simply trot out their mindset. But people back in the US are starting to realise how much the magazine slags them off to foreign audiences. (Just like the BBC World Service)
I hope b-bbc readers are managing to cope without bbc news for a day – hard isn’t it?
Yes, as a matter of fact, it is hard to cope without the entertainment value that the dreadfully taking-itself-seriously Beeb provides to my otherwise dull and humdrum housewifey life.
What would I do without Teary Babs, Orla Goering, Haw-Haw Hawley, Justin “Tangled” Webb, Matt “Frei’s with that” and the like, and their hilariously earnest celebrations of their own soft-left moral piety?
Of course, unlike the Brits posting here, I can afford to laugh at the above for free, as I don’t have to pay for them!
David F: “There was no way we could simply go into Iraq and “declare a democracy”. We had to get control of the country first. We failed.”
“Failure” is relative. After WWII, there were snipers and resistance groups in all of the lands formerly occupied by Germany and especially Japan. The fight to stabilize was long and hard. The last Japanese sniper surrendered in 1980.
By comparison, the events in Iraq have been miraculously stable.
I think that the discussion here about the occupation of Iraq mainly points out what a difficult job the Americans gave themselves – I say ‘they’ because the UK’s job is somewhat different.
They didn’t want to pull off a 1945 style military conquest/occupation, because the rationale for going in was to make the Iraqis responsible for their own country.
On the other hand, occupying powers are responsible for security, and a combination of poor planning and bad intelligence has made that a tougher job than it had to be.
Add in the casual brutality of the US Army, and the resulting alienation of the population, and we have a pretty classic failure. The US didn’t intend this, but they are responsible for it.
Iraq may work out, but I wouldn’t put any big bets on it. We may yet see outright civila war there. And yes, I generally supported the war.
Susan,
You miss out some key players. Take Jeremy Paxman (please), true to his principles on strike, not crossing picket lines – and yet, what’s this? University Challenge, 7.30, bbc2, Paxo hosting. So on one and the same evening he’s both on strike and on tv, collecting his fee. Now that’s how it’s done.
With the BBC on strike I really enjoyed the programme aired in place of ‘Today’ this morning. It was all about what a great engineering job the new Heathrow terminal is.
Here`s the deal,I go out everyday and work hard to pay telly tax which fills the Public Trough, Feeders at the public Trough go on strike because the owners of the trough want to limit the number of feeders allowed to feed at any given time, The greedy feeders however, feel that the owners must just keep filling the trough to accomodate any number of feeders. I do not value what the feeders produce (sometimes called “shit”) but must keep paying or go to jail. Why this is unfair is because I cannot withold my contribution to the trough but the feeders can withold thier product (“shit”). Why this is ironic is because I am only happy when the feeders are on strike. The deeper irony is that as long as the feeders are on strike, they do not quit the trough which must continue to be filled. I refer once more to my favorite saying, “if you cannot spot the sucker at the table, that is because the sucker is you!”.
Jon Livensey, the idea that Iraq could descend into civil war is so off the mark it’s untrue.
Civil war requires:
a) Participants
b) A trigger
As far as I can see Iraq has neither.
Here’s some excerpts from Steyn on the matter:
http://209.157.64.200/focus/f-news/1332544/posts
“In Commonwealth countries, of course, we have the concept of Her Majesty’s Loyal Opposition, so called because the Loyal Opposition carries on like a hysterical old queen. Thus, Kim Beazley, back in the saddle and already sore — on the very eve of the Iraqi election triumph, when elementary prudence might have suggested waiting 24 hours before singing another refrain of When It’s Quagmire Time on the Tigris.
But the old new Labor Party leader had barely taken possession of the keys to the executive washroom before he was “warning” the US that it risked being bogged down in — all together now — “a long-running civil war in Iraq”.
How lame do you have to be to be the last guy on the planet to do the old “Iraq on the brink of civil war” routine? Just as “the brutal Afghan winter” that was supposed to mire shivering US forces in the graveyard of empire is now one-third of a decade behind schedule, so Iraq has now been “teetering on the brink of civil war” for coming up for two years. Brink-wise, that’s quite a leisurely teeter. There’s no danger of a “long-running civil war in Iraq”. Instead, we’ve had a long-running hysteria about impending civil war in Iraq.
Indeed, as long runs go, predictions of Iraqi civil war are the Cats of doomsday scenarios — except that, unlike Cats, it’s all previews and no opening night. Tom Clark of Canada’s CTV network was warning that “Iraq could be teetering on the brink of civil war” in August 2003. Graydon Carter, editor of the perfumed glossy Vanity Fair, was warning that Iraq was “on the brink of civil war” a month earlier.
To their credit, both men teetered on the brink of making a laughably inaccurate prediction and then plunged right in. What’s the point of Beazley teetering on the brink of retirement for half a decade only to come back and hurl himself into the abyss of yesterday’s cliches?
To hold a civil war you need two sides. Iraq fails to meet that minimum requirement. Abu Musab al-Zarqawi — not an Iraqi, incidentally — has a few foreign jihadi, some enthusiastic head-hackers and a dwindling supply of suicide bombers, a job in which by definition it’s hard to get people with experience. On election day, his guys bullied a kid with Down syndrome into taking the gig. You can’t have a Sunni-Shia war because Zarqawi doesn’t represent the Sunni. Meanwhile, in the face of his provocations, the Shia have been a model of restraint and discipline and political surefootedness. Beazley might learn a thing or two from them.
Granted, a footling suicide cult with no mass support will still blow up cars and burn buildings, and it’s savvy enough to do so in parts of the country conveniently located so that Zarqawi’s shills in the Western press corps don’t have to stray far from their hotels tofilm it. Or as the internet satirist Scott Ott deftly summarised the coverage: “Iraqi Voting Disrupts News Reports of Bombings.” “
Anyone see this said by Declan Curry, the Business presenter on BBC Breakfast:
“I don’t support the strike at all. The management have made a very strong case in my view as to why these cuts are necessary. It’s other people’s money that we are spending and we have to use it as wisely as we can.
Whatever differences we may have with management, it is up to us to resolve them in a way that does not leave the viewer or the listener suffering.”
Looks like there is a small amount of sense lurking somewhere in the BBC after all! Hopefully he can inspire some of his workmates to his way of thinking too.
it’s interesting to hear a viewpoint from a beebazoid that actually has an understanding of market forces. unlike the 99% of guardian-recrutied anti-british union-militant galloway-worshiping commies that congregate aound ‘white city’. actually, i’m suprised that building hasnt been rebranded.
There seems to be very little public sympathy for the BBC employees. BBC management will not back down – the union will have to back down, or really get people pissed off with Auntie.
Test match cricket again on Thursday – on Channel 4, not the Beeb. The times they are a’changing.
Off Topic
When one looks at the BBC services most impacted by the absence from work of militant activists…
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/4570237.stm
“Hardest hit were live shows on BBC Radio 4, Five Live, the World Service and TV channels News 24 and BBC World.
…
The main news programmes on BBC One
…
BBC Radio 4 cancelled Today, The World at One, PM and The World Tonight
…
Almost all live programmes on news and discussion radio station Five Live
…
BBC News Interactive [website] …”
[and, hey, let’s not forget Newsnight]
…one can be forgiven for perceiving a direct correlation with the origin of BBC output most likely to be mentioned on this blog.
Somehow Terry Wogan and Cbeebies made it to air; and it remains to be seen how much the absence of militant activists will disrupt the production or release of EastEnders, Top of The Pops, The Archers, Strictly Dance Fever…
.
O/T
On the protests in London, they did happen. I saw it on Fox News. I don’t know if the beeb covered it, though.
” Jon Livensey, the idea that Iraq could descend into civil war is so off the mark it’s untrue.”
We’ll see. Civil wars are not things you can debate out of existence.
OT
But strangely relavent to current events.
Yesterday I received yet another threatening letter from TV Licensing informing me of the thousands of people who have been prosecuted and fined for failure to pay the licence fee.
However, yesterday the staff at the BBC were on strike so many of its services were unavailable.
Again, yesterday I switched on the radio to listen to LBC the London commercial news & chat station but was unable to do so due to it being swamped by pirate radio broadcasters.
So yesterday I phoned Ofcom the broadcasting watchdog who told me that they were aware of the problem but that lack of resources & legal restraints prevented them from being able to promise an early solution to the problem. They & I know exactly where the offending aerial is situated but ’nothing can be done about it.’
Does anyone remember a program called ‘Tomorrow’s World’?
Natalie, whoever moderates this site.
The day the left-wing bottom feeders decide to slough off work, whilst promising a summer’s worth of skiving, all the while HOOVERING up licence fee cash from people they threaten and imprison, and this is the best you can do…’Robert Ayers writes to say that you can read an interview with three prominent Iraqi citizens here’…?
Caaaaam on, let’s be having you.
**Lady, if you can’t do it, don’t have the time, etc., then step away from the website.
Iraq has always had the potential for civil war – indeed it has had a civil war: Kurds versus the rest for a couple of decades. The Kurds are currently contenting themselves with the opportunities for gaining advantage but their ultimate goal remains, quite reasonably in my view, independence.
The potential for civil war between Sunnis and Shia is also pretty obvious. But the Shia establishment thankfully realise that there is no advantage to them in responding in kind at the moment.
However, civil war is not the real issue at teh moment. The issue is whether a small group of fanatics can dislodge the US backed administration and get the Americans out. I remain optimistic that they can’t and that Iraqis and Americans are willing to pay the price in blood. However Al Queda are
pursuing the right tactics to achieve their ends. One can see how they COULD win.
The terrorists in Iraq might have less confidence if they were not treated so kindly by pusillanimous appeasers like the BBC. The BBC are acting as virtual cheerleaders for these sick maniacs – just like they do for Hamas-type murderers.
If I follow the Left’s reasoning correctly ‘civil war’ is worse than a murderous dictator with designs on his neighbors and the proper response to opposition is retreat. Or am I misjudging them?
Anyone know what Tony Benn was doing amongst the strikers yesterday?
Benn will support any trade union gravy train (except farmer’s unions, of course).
My view on Iraq is that the Pentagon has completely failed in it’s responsibility to American troops, largely because it is run by self-serving civilian politicians. They’ve even managed to make our troop-screwing MOD look good.
While Steyn is often very funny and his attacks on the left are on target, his dismissive attitude to casualties and his unfortunate habit of making incorrect predictions do not sit well with me.
The number of killed and injured soldiers would be much less if the Pentagon and Bush Administration had not been so short-sighted and so focused on political expediency (too few troops, no post-invasion planning).
The MSM’s vile anti-American agenda does not excuse senior officials from incompetence.
Roxana, both civil wars and murderous dictators are undesirable.
Civil wars tend to facilitate the emergence of dictators…perhaps that’s why Hawley and co are rooting for civil war.
Probably. But they also seem to be using the possibility to argue for doing nothingm while you argue what was done wasn’t done well enough, a far more rational stance.
“Iraq has always had the potential for civil war – indeed it has had a civil war: Kurds versus the rest for a couple of decades.”
Yup, the Iraqi state and its borders are outcomes of the post Great-War settlement, and they don’t really correspond to anything natural or stable.
I’m baffled why the US is trying so hard to follow Saddam with a democratic state of the same borders, when the potential for instability is so obvious.
I’m also baffled why the press spends so much of its time on who flushed what down the toilet, and so little on whether present policy is just storing up trouble for the future.
It took a second World War to sort out the mistakes of the post Great War settlement in Europe. I hope it doesn’t take another Middle Eastern War to create new states that can actually hang together.
I was never really that hot on the Iraq war. I struggled with the view that imposing democracy on a foreign country by state intervention is just as wrong-headed as imposing “healthcare” or “an equal playing field” by state intervention.
I was a fence sitter on the war, big time.
That said, I do find the unremitting gloom about Iraq coming from the BBC et. al. to be quite offensive.