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.
Woah, there’s some dumbass LGFers on this page…
Nobody’s saying that Iran’s not got a powerful military. What the guy IS saying is that Israel being a brave little state fightin the good fight aganst impossible odds is a bunch of crap right out of a Joel Silver flick.
Israel is the superpower of the region: FACT. Israel is aggressive and arrogant and struts around because we back it up with arms and $$$: FACT.
Those ‘arab nutters’ are mostly just pissed at Israel for the way it behaves. Yeah, so there are some bad guys out there too who just hate jews. Well, I got news for you -you ever talked to a lot of Jewish hardline religius types? I have: trust me, they hate arabs just as much and think they are just lower lifeforms. Both sides gotta get past that shit. But that aint gonna happen until Israel packs up and gets behind the green line where it belongs. if does that -and the arabs still keep their shit up, then sign me up for the IDF, I’ll go and fight for them myself.
Israel needs to quit being part of the problem by stopping giving the arabs an excuse to be pissed off. It does that and I figure 99% of arabs will just get back on with their lives and the 1% who really are whacked out will lose most of their support.
Talk on here, you’d think arabs weren’t human being just like us. They arent crazies, the most of them, they’re just real angry at the way Israel can kick em around and get away with it: Saddam pulled up in Kuwait and we kicked his ass right back out again, Israel keeps taking land and water of the Palestiniens and we just keep signing the checks…. it sucks and the world knows it.
Mitchell Pennington, Tx.: Israel keeps taking land and water of the Palestiniens and we just keep signing the checks…. it sucks and the world knows it.
What planet do you live on? Israel completely withdrew from Gaza last year or have you forgotten that which means it is actully giving up land rather than taking it. Perhaps you read your newspaper incorrectly? or maybe you ignore it because it doesn’t fit in with your world view, I mean why let facts get in the way!
Right, and it’s got nothing at all to do with Jihad and the hate of anything Jewish or Western.
Go back to your left-wing blogs, moonbats and spew your anti-Semitic hatred there.
What you’re writing is exactly what we’re getting from Al Beeb. That’s why we’re here. Talk about Europeans being deranged…
Hello, Dumbass?
‘withdrew’ from Gaza? I don’t think so. Israel kept air control; border control; and the IDF continued operations. Check out One Big Prison by BETSELEM (more self-hating jews) or Human Rights Watch reports.
Anyway, the Gaza fake withdrawal didn’t mean squat when Israeli ‘settlers’ keep building on the west bank: where they steal land and water and treat arabs like dogs.
anyway, how come the Palestinians should be grateful to Israel for pulling out of Gaza (even a little) -kinda like telling a rape victim to thank th guy for taking his hand off her throat while keeping hs piece buried inside her.
Both sides gotta get past that shit. But that aint gonna happen until Israel packs up and gets behind the green line where it belongs. if does that -and the arabs still keep their shit up, then sign me up for the IDF, I’ll go and fight for them myself.
Listen up cowboy – Israel is behind its side of the green line with Lebanon, even the UN has certified that. Lebanon has not complied with the UN Resolution that states it must disarm Hezbollah. Hezbollah infiltrated across the border and kidnapped two Israeli soldiers.
Israel unilaterally withdraw from Gaza – the “Palestinians” tunneled under the border, attacked Israeli troops on Israeli soil, and kidnapped an israeli soldier.
You can sign up to the IDF here: http://www.idf.il/
What the lefties conveniently ignore is that the Palestinians are backed by the EU, the US, and their arab neighbours, financially. The fact that they’re still in poverty is a result of their squandering that money on the rancid dreams of terrorists. There are huindred of millions in US dollars going yearly to the Palestinians, not to mention Euros which are even easier to come by. Much of the money the US gives to Israel is in the form of loans anyway. Excuse them for wishing Israel’s continued existence, won’t you?
Mitchell Pennington, Tx.:
Check out One Big Prison by BETSELEM (more self-hating jews) or Human Rights Watch reports.
I’m so glad you mention Human Rights Watch check this out:
http://hrw.org/english/docs/2005/06/09/isrlpa11106_txt.htm
“Mitchell Pennington, Tx.:
Woah, there’s some dumbass LGFers on this page…”
Woah… DUMBASS MOONBAT ALERT. Daily Commkos and Demonic Underground troll flaps across the pond.
Hey Jew hater troll, crawl back into yer Texas cave with the rest of your Nazi pals white supremicist pals and their muslimo-terrorists buddies.
You know All Moonbat’s Eve isn’t till Nov 7 this year.
Mitchell Pennington, Tx.:
Hello, Dumbass?
‘withdrew’ from Gaza? I don’t think so. Israel kept air control; border control;
Border control?
Militants open border between Egypt, Gaza
Gunmen blast hole in Gaza-Egypt border
500 Palestinians storm Gaza from Egypt
Want more?
http://search.news.yahoo.com/search/news?p=egypt+border+gaza&c=
Hopefully Natalie or one of the other B-BBC bloggers will punt all of the off-topic political rants into an off-topic thread, and this one can regain focus on the subject of the post to which it is attached.
[See confession later on – NS.]
Edited By Siteowner
Bit fuzzy here, can anyone help? Didn’t Israel kick the BBC out of the country a couple of years ago?
And if then, why not now?
This BBC piece sounds like it was written by one the recent trolls… maybe it was!
Israel’s Hezbollah headache
By Jonathan Marcus
BBC diplomatic correspondent
The confrontation between Israel and Hezbollah is clearly unbalanced. Israel is a significant military power with sophisticated land, sea and air forces at its disposal.
…
None of these are guided or accurate systems but if the target is an urban area, accuracy is not needed.
Not needed if you just want to kill as many people as possible, but it needs to be accurate if you don’t want to be accused of War Crimes… Ooops, I forgot, only Israel commits War Crimes.
http://hrw.org/english/docs/2005/06/09/isrlpa11106_txt.htm
Any party to any armed conflict is obligated to abide by international humanitarian law (the laws of war). International humanitarian law prohibits direct attacks against civilians and civilian objects as well as indiscriminate attacks and attacks that cause disproportionate damage to civilians. A prohibited indiscriminate attack includes using weapons that are incapable of discriminating between civilians and combatants or between civilian and military objects.
Human Rights Watch said that Qassam rockets, named after the armed wing of Hamas, Ezzedine al-Qassam Brigades, are by their very nature problematic weapons because it is not possible to direct them at military targets with any degree of precision… Because Qassams are not capable of accurate targeting, it is unlawful to use them in or near areas populated with civilians.
knacker, have the BBC been filming Haifa’s oil refineries?
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3276575,00.html
❓
Well, if Elias Karam is an inflatable, portable Rageh Omar…
“Hate to break this to you but, on 2003/04 figures, Israel is ranked 8th in the world in terms of troop numbers and third in the world by the more nuanced ‘combat power’ measure. In both cases, the only NATO country that beats it is, unsurprisingly, the US.”
You use the figures from an article which for some strange reason comes to the conclusion that Israel has more men in uniform than Turkey.
So with that in mind could you be so kind as to explain why the country with a population of over 70 million which still has compulsory military service for all males. Which has the largest standing army in Europe (Larger than the French and British armies combined) is somehow relegated to a spot behind Israel (population 6 million) in that nice little search I presumed you did.
BTW.
That article of yours left out countries like Vietnam, Indonesia or even Egypt.
As for combat power. pray tell how China in second place was stopped at the border of Vietnam in Sept 1979 by the very same rag tag irregulars that forced out of the country American who is at 1st place. Is 3rd place India the same country that was forced to leave Sri lanka in 1990 with its tail between its legs. The same country which has been forced to purchase T90 tanks as its own indigenous tank ‘ARJUN ‘ has been found to be a white elephant. Mighty Russia in 4th place which has seen its most modern MTBs (T80) shown up for the piece of crap it really is in Chechnya.
(Strange how India, Pakistan, China and N Korea use MTBs based on the Russian models)
Pray tell how Britian, France, Germany, Italy and Japan which have some of the most modern armies in the world don’t even rank in that combat power projection. I mean all of the above have blue water navies which means they have the means to project power anywhere in the world if need be. All of the above have moved away from stack and pack em armies and gravitated towards Liddel Harts ideas of ‘Strategy’ and fluidity of movement as opposed to bashing the enemy over the head from opposing trenches. (You know the very same ideas which. Heinz Wilhelm Guderian used to such good effect)
As for saying that the only serious military contender in the region is Iran you kind of leave out Eygpt. Which is not only next door but has a military which is vastly superior to that of the IDF.(M1 tanks, Apache gunships, F16s, M109 SPGs (the same as shown on Al Beeb in use by the IDF) M60 tanks, Mirage 2000 jets, UH 60 Blackhawks)
You also left out Saudi Arabia, little Jordan (which is the only army in the region to have given the IDF a bloody nose in battle) and the even smaller UAE which according to Janes has the most potent armed forces in the region (janes vol 42 issue 46 16/11/2005 page 11)
The IDF is designed to defend Israel. To that end I think you will the vast majority of its weapon systems are designed for defensive purposes and not offensive.
The Merkava (MBT) is the only tank in the world which has its engine at the front rather than at the rear. Why because that engine affords the occupants just that little extra protection.
All of the IDF APCs are designed to protect their occupants from anti tank missile fire. Hence we have the Puma, The Anhzarit and the leviathan that is the Nagmashot.
http://www.israeli-weapons.com/weapons/vehicles/engineer_vehicles/nakpadon/nakpadon1.jpg
Now contrast them with the Russian IFVs and APCs;BMP1/2/3 BTR 60/70/80/90 which we find scatted all around the region. Every one of those vehicles is designed for offensive purposes (i.e. going forward) and offer less protection to the occupants than the Sherman tank did to its crews during world war two.
P.S
I not only own a small library on all matters green I also read Janes on a weekly basis and its sister mag ‘Janes international defence review on a monthly basis.
(Last months (June)has a really good article on how the French army is transforming itself for the future page 44-53)
It may help if you read it too instead of quoting about it then you would know where I gleaned all of the above information from.
Lastly I think you will find that this board is about the BBC and how it has become a propaganda machine for those who would like to kill us all and not about how you somehow presume the IDF is punching above its weight.
Misterminit wrote;
“This level of hyperbole does you no favours whatsoever.”
Hyperbole over how I stated that Al Beeb goes weak at the knees when the Taliban are mentioned.
Here please allow me to show you a few Al Beeb examples of sycophancy towards the Taliban ;
“It was just very, very exciting to be in that room with those men with their huge white teeth.”
Afghan warlords have often formed unusual alliances in times of conflict, but even by their standards holding a war council in the presence of a clearly giddy beauty queen dressed in a pink jump suit and answering to the name of Snowflake was hardly standard fare.
Sitting with her was Gulbuddin Hekmatyar who is now formally designated by Executive Order 13224 of the United States Government as a Global Terrorist.”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/4915692.stm
Afghanistan: Taleban’s second coming
Guest journalist and writer Ahmed Rashid on why Afghanistan is facing a resurgent Taleban movement.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/5029190.stm
Can’t be asked to read.
No problem here’s a link to the AL Beeb video hit list (strange how the Taliban forbid the moving picture format as unIslamic.
http://search.bbc.co.uk/cgi-bin/search/results.pl?tab=av&q=taliban&recipe=all&scope=all&edition=d
CAIR to share your findings?
Graphic (i.e. don’t click if you are easily shocked) Pictures of the attack on Haifa train station.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1666600/posts
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/326653.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/special_report/1998/kosovo/271265.stm
http://www.medialens.org/articles/the_articles/articles_2001/de_marr.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kosovo_War#The_NATO_bombing_campaign
So-called “dual-use” targets, of use to both civilians and the military, were attacked: this included bridges across the Danube, factories, power stations, telecommunications facilities and — particularly controversially — the headquarters of Yugoslavian Leftists, a political party led by Milošević’s wife, and the Serbian state television broadcasting tower. Some saw these actions as violations of international law and the Geneva Conventions in particular. NATO however argued that these facilities were potentially useful to the Serbian military and that their bombing was therefore justified. The alliance also maintained that it tried very hard to avoid civilian casualties during its bombing campaign.
https://www.cato.org/dailys/05-18-99.html
http://www.unobserver.com/layout5.php?id=1549&blz=1
bbc is fit for documentaries made abt africa.in issues like terrorism…..islamic terrorism(obvious one)…they r too biased and appease the muslim group.
pounce: Be aware that when I am PM, YOU, Sir are going to be my Defence Secretary because you have a better idea of what defence matters are about than the CGS, CDS, BBC, assorted moonbats who think one article tells them everything they need to know, and the Tenth Sea Lord!
(And archduke is going to the Foreign Office by the way, natalie to culture sport and control of BBC bias whilst Andrew is headed for Home Secretary since he never stands for any nonsense!)
Congrats pounce on reading Janes. I read the Economist so therefore I know everything.
BTW, putting the engine in front does not turn a tank into a defensive weapon. The same could be said of the armor itself. It’s that long pointy tube that blows things up and those very fast tracks that make a tank an offensive weapon.
I give up, what’s the use…..
Murph: putting the engine in front shows that you want to defend your crewmens/womens’ lives more than enhance the offensive capacity of the mobile weapon system…engine at front equals smaller engine less power less range etc! It also makes the tank more vulnerable to being put out of service but increases the survival of the crewmen and the four infantrymen carried in the back of the Merkava for example. Oh and they use the compartment at the back to ferry wounded soldiers OFF the battlefield. What civilised people they are – thinking about their men and women first and not treating them as mere cogs in a machine.
Pounce and many others here don’t just read Janes dear boy we’ve been there done that and got the bloody T shirt….with things like Gulf, Bosnia and “Freezing in Poland on Exercise Again” on them! I would listen to pounce rather than a moonbat who quotes articles which then totally undermine the crap line it (the moonbat) was trying to push…..
“israelly cool” has lots of updates today:
http://www.israellycool.com/
“Friends of the IDF” have an emergency fund raising campaign at the moment:
http://www.fidf.org/news/details.php?noticia_id=36&categoria=1
there are other fund raisers linked on his page – zaka, magen david adom and others.
“thinking about their men and women first and not treating them as mere cogs in a machine.”
they even went as far as trading several hundred terrorist prisoners for the BODIES of three dead Israeli soldiers a few years ago.
“Congrats pounce on reading Janes. I read the Economist so therefore I know everything.”
You’ll be glad to know I have subscribed to the Economist for the past 12 years.
(Mind you I must admit I don’t think I’ve ever read an issue from cover to cover)
In fact I have this Fridays issue in front of me.
Page 59
The Crisis widens is something of a good read.
Tell me what do you think of line 11 second column of that page?
As for your synopsis of the Israeli Merkava I feel it is somewhat flawed
Simply having a huge gun and beating the other guy to the punch kind of omits the fact that Israel is not only surrounded by the enemy, but also outnumbered by them.
(Have a butchers at the tank battles fought between Syria and Israel during the Yom Kippur war. Facing 177 centurion and Shermans were over 1400 T62 and T55, as opposed to Israel’s 11 artillery batteries Syria had 115 and against Israel’s 200 infantry men manning the defence line Syria pitted 40,000. I’m sure that you’ll agree that the 115mm and 100mm guns of the Modern Syrian tanks out punched the WW2 vintage centurion and Sherman’s.)
But going back to your big gun theory. The Merkava when it premiered was armed with the British 105mm gun. (Everybody else at the time had progressed onto 120 and 125mm) But hey size isn’t everything (as my better half keeps on telling me) The first combat loss of the T72 was due to a IDF Centurion armed with that 105mm gun.
As for the tracks up to the Mark 2 of the Merkava the top speed was 46kmh. The M1 and the leopard can touch 72kmh. The T72 hits 60 kmh. So why did General Tal design his tank for such a slow speed.? Because he knew that Israel’s battles would be fought on her borders against invading armies and on ground of their choice. Consequently while it has a very slow forward speed it has the best undercarriage in the world which allows it to traverse difficult terrain (Golan perhaps) at a faster speed than its peers without it throwing a track and smashing its crew into a bloody mess.
PJF said, “Hopefully Natalie or one of the other B-BBC bloggers will punt all of the off-topic political rants into an off-topic thread, and this one can regain focus on the subject of the post to which it is attached.”
I’ve got to be frank here – yes, I really ought to do that but it’s already too big. Would take ages to cut and paste. Sorry.
It is the usual claim of the lefty/islamofascist type that Israel has the best armed forces etc. and that they can always beat the muslims anyway. The simple retorts should be:
why do the Jews have to have the best armed forces and, what would be the consequences to the Jews of Israel of a defeat to the muslims?
interesting stuff on the Merkava on wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merkava
“Following the Six-Day War and the French embargo on Israel, the IDF signed a deal with the United Kingdom for joint development of a new main battle tank—the Chieftain tank. In 1969, following Arab pressure, the British cancelled the deal with Israel and expelled them from the Chieftain project.”
in other words, Brits being dhimmis led to the Merkava.
I noticed this on the beeb1 news at 19.35.
They reported the missile strike on Haifa but did not point out (much less emphasise) that hisbolox are targetting civilians. No casualties shown.
Contrast this with the report from Lebanon. Whilst they did say that this was an infrastructure target they not only didn’t report the IDF policy of not deliberately attacking civilians but they then showed civilian casualties in shocking detail obviously meant to appeal to the emotions (by showing an injured child for instance).
In other words they played down the inhumanity of the terrorists and overplayed the accidental casualties of the IDF.
I phoned 08700 100 222 (beeb information) and made a complaint. They said they would log the complaint and the log would go to editors, etc.
I wonder if they will count my complaint as an indicator that their plan is working?
Anyway (as I usually say) at least it made me feel better.
But going back to your big gun theory. The Merkava when it premiered was armed with the British 105mm gun. (Everybody else at the time had progressed onto 120 and 125mm
Yes but the British gun was rifled and others use smooth-bore
bbc news 10’o clock – going on about the “15,000 british nationals” in Lebanon.
are there any British nationals in Israel?
“Would take ages to cut and paste. Sorry.”
No problem, Natalie. Sometimes the moonbat effect is overwhelming.
rgds
Peter
.
are there any British nationals in Israel?
Probably a lot of dual nationality Brit/Israelis, at least half a dozen of my family – like Cpl. Shalit is a dual French/Israeli citizen. In those cases it seems only Israel takes their part of the citizenship seriously.
Rick, rifling isn’t everything. You can have rifling all you want, but when you’re outnumbered 20 to one the odds aren’t really in your favour. Plus, a 105mm gun is probably less useful against tanks that are designed to withstand larger calibre shells. Those russian tanks were built like bricks. Anything below 120mm would often just bounce off them.
What’s the point of this argument? Israel has always been outnumbered, that’s not in dispute, is it? And Israel has never prosecuted any wars of aggression. Every war they’ve fouight has been a reaction to someone elses aggression. Their actions, coupled with the make-up of the armed forces, show a nation more comitted to defence than offence. If they were truly offensive in nature they’d adopt more mobile infantry and light cavalry tanks designed for expeditionary assaults. Remember, to reach any objectives in, say, Jordan, or even Lebanon, they have to travel a *long* way. Much further than they’re traelling now. Much further than their equipment is apparently designed to travel.
Kidnapped Israeli soldiers
While Israel responds with disproportionate collective punishment, let us remember that in July 1947 jewish terrorists kidnapped British Army sergeants Martin and Paice, degraded them and then slowly hung them in an olive grove using thin wire and boobytrapped the bodies, resulting in further injuries to British troops. a year earlier the same group, Irgun, had killed many British soldiers in bombing the King David Hotel in Jerusalem.
The perps ended up as legit politicians.
Will the BBC remember Martin and Paice on the anniversary of their deaths, 31 July? Will Blair order two minutes silence? Will Lord Levy collect donations?
jasonr602 – and your point about BBC bias is… what exactly?
“jewish terrorists kidnapped British Army sergeants Martin and Paice…”
Pay attention Jason … according to the BBC, soldiers can only be “captured,” and not “kidnapped.”
“While Israel responds with disproportionate collective punishment.”
Says you Jason — and who are you again?
Jason seems to be forgetting about those ‘home-made’ rockets.
Go Israel Go!
PS: Jason also doesn’t mention what if anything the British did in retaliation.
I see why Gerbil has chosen that handle, he has the intellect and memory of a Gerbil.
Remember Camp David when Yasser Arafat turned down a Palestinian State and went home to start a new infitada?
Remember how the Palestinian people elected a terrorist Group with the stated purpose of destroying Israel as their government.
Remember how Gaza became a launching ground for rocket attacks on Israeli territory?
Your beloved Palleys are murderous thugs who have no interest in the two state solution or any solution that includes Israel’s continued existence.
Now that might be okay by you but there are a few people outside of Israel who object to genocide.
I hate to say it but I agree with Gerbil001. It’s always been my personal opinion that the US, UK and its Commonwealth and Israel could together take on and defeat the rest of the world – and may have to.
Granted the Italians seem to be looking up militarily speaking but *France* wining a war against *anybody*?? Get real!
I had never come across any of Jeremy Bowen’s “reporting” until I read his book on the Six Day War recently.
I will not bore everyone with the details, but essentially, he would have us believe it was all the Jews’ fault. Any reasonable nation, 22 years after someone attempted to wipe people of their religion off the face of the earth, would have laughed off the radio broadcasts from Cairo, and all that stuff about liquidation and genocide stuff. It was obviously not to be taken seriously, see? If only Israel had had Mr. Bowen’s pragmatism and insight back in 1967.
Instead Israel did wicked things like bombing machine-gun positions in built-up areas, killing civilians in doing so. Bowen has nothing to say about why the Palestinians has machine-gun positions among houses. As far as he’s concerned it’s perfectly reasonable to put a machine-gun position in a built-up area and any deaths caused when it is destroyed from the air are the fault of the people who destroyed it, not of the disgusting people who tried to hide among civilians.
The whole book is in the same vein. Bowen is completely bought into the idea of der ewige Jude and I would no more trust a “news” report from him than I’d shake hands with Julius Streicher.
Jeremy and Julius would get along just fine, however.
Jason’s point, I guess, is that it’s OK for the BBC to hate Jews.
Well it’s fairly obvious that despite the rhetoric http://memri.org/bin/articles.cgi?Page=archives&Area=sd&ID=SP86705
Hassan Nazrullah doesn’t mean what he says and is actually seeking a dialogue with Israel. Accordingly MEMRI must be distorting the translation and only Bowen and Thorpe know the real truth.
I heard the coverage on Radio 4 this morning on Today.
Rarely do I have a moment to congratulate Margaret Beckett, but when Naughtie spoke about “disproportianate response”, she retaliated that Hezbollah had also given a “disproportionate response”.
Naughtie lost his cool, and really threw his toys out of the pram, while Beckett responded calmly.
Then, one of the BBC reporters spoke of the “terrorism” of Israeli bombs, a word not used to describe what Hezbollah has been doing.
Placentinian Perfidy
http://www.freeman.org/m_online/aug02/beres1.htm
It’s what should be blairing from all the news media. The UN and EU should be screaming for it to stop. But instead they defend and enable the perps, and blame and thwart the victims.
‘I will not bore everyone with the details, but essentially, he would have us believe it was all the Jews’ fault.’
And yet the BBC think he’ll give unbiased reports from the Middle East. At least he hasn’t cried over dead terrorists…yet.
One major (and probably only major) error for Baronness Thatcher was not to eliminate BBC funding.
Mr. Blair? Anyone? BBC today is pretty much the same as the old Soviet Pravda.
Time has changed. BBC has not. I trust I wil live to see the day when BBC is no more.
Andy
“I trust I wil live to see the day when BBC is no more.”
You have so lived, Andy. The once proud and unbiased BBC has long since vacated the airwaves,and retired to it’s comfortable cottage in the Cotswolds. Their wavelengths, their hedonistic headquarters and their well equipped studios, even their very logo, have been insiduously taken over by a far more sinister broadcasting organisation – Al Beebeezeera Television.
Only the funding remains the same.