I’m hugely entertained by the faux media storm that the BBC is bravely resisting efforts by Government and others to broadcast a charity appeal for schools in Hamastan! International Development Secretary Wee Dougie Alexander has moaned that it was not too late for a reversal to recognise the “immense human suffering”. (Forget about that suffering including that of Israelis, they don’t even count as humans in wee Dougie’s world-view) A protest is to be held outside Broadcasting House in London after the BBC declined to broadcast appeals by the Disasters Emergency Committee. (aka Save Hamas Now) Now then, given that the BBC has spent three weeks faithfully propagating every blood libel possible against Israel, the notion that it is somehow defiantly holding out to maintain it’s impartiality is a joke. The BBC has no right to be carrying any ads for Hamastan and this is making a virtue out of not doing something it should not be doing anyway! That said, I wonder will it be able to resist the cries of all the Jew-haters out there?
BBC IMPARTIALITY UNDER THREAT?
Bookmark the permalink.
*** Biodegradable said:
If the BBC really wants to seem impartial it could air an appeal for Jewish victims of Palestinian terrorism. ***
That’s not a fair proposal, for two reasons:
1. Unlike Gaza, Israel has a very efficient and well-funded primary healthcare service which is more than capable of caring for the victims of Palestinian rocket attacks itself. They simply don’t need any assistance from foreign NGOs.
2. Even if the BBC did an appeal for Jewish victims, the amount of airtime it would devote to such an appeal would have to be 1/100th as long as the airtime it devotes to a Palestinian appeal. As I’m sure you know, 1,300 Palestinians died in the conflict, whereas 13 Israelis died (ten of them soldiers).
As far as impartiality goes I agree 100% that both perspectives need to be presented. But when we’re talking about casualties let’s be realistic: it’s the Palestinians who need help here.
The BBC have got this exactly upside down.
If their reporting had actually been impartial over the last several years they could have advertised the appeal for Gaza all they wanted. But as it is, their bias has been such a major player in the recent antisemitic upsurge that they have no business pretending that running this appeal would compromise some long-gone reputation for impartiality.
The fuss that’s being made makes everything much worse and makes everyone look bad.
If the BBC had informed the public objectively about Hamas, about what happens to aid, about how corrupt and partial the aid agencies are, about how much money is, and always has been, pouring in to Gaza, about the dependency culture that has partially created the obsession with militancy which in turn emanates from indoctrination, is then exacerbated by joblessness and lack of aspiration other than a desire for holy martyrdom; and even if the BBC had told us about the Hamas charter, if they had made even a passing reference to that and many other facts about the way the Palestinians conduct themselves that have been reported elsewhere, then the public would be able to make an informed opinion about whether it was the right thing for them to donate more money. I have no problem with that at all. The wretched thing is all over the press and media anyway. This sudden attack of conscience is a feeble attempt to smokescreen their previous misconduct.
Douglas Alexander dismissed Caroline Thomas’s first reason, then she herself conceded that she was now reassured that there would be no difficulty with aid reaching the intended recipients. So we’re left with just the fear that “audiences will stop trusting us.”
Tony Benn this morning was outraged. “People are Dying!” he proclaimed, choking back a sob. I thought, Oh, no! what are they dying from NOW!
That’s how horrible I am.
The actor Steven Berkoff had something to say today.
“keep your Jewishness well zipped up.”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/mandrake/4323785/The-British-are-anti-Semitic-says-Steven-Berkoff.html
The BBC news department keep claiming that ‘opposition is growing’ to them not running this appeal. But from where? Morons like Galloway and Benn?
It seems to me that the ‘opposition’ is in fact from within the leftist ranks of the BBC News department who seem to be trying to pressure their management into giving in.
Their high profile support and proselytising for trendy left wing causes just pisses me off!
BROWNED_OFF | 24.01.09 – 6:29 pm
and as such one can be sure that they are full of phrases about illegal wars & settlements, human rights legislation & international law. But they can ignore these restrictions when it pleases them, such as Red Cross running the illegal immigration facility at Sangatte.
Martin (riverScrap.com)
Have you been listening to the BBC just a bit?
A short scroll up to the post La Cumparsita | 24.01.09 – 7:11 pm will tell you something about the charitable bodies you mention in such glowing terms.
Most of us are pro-Israel, because if you don’t already know this, Israel is very like what we fondly imagine we were here, before we went down the drain; tolerant, cosmopolitan, cultured, self-examining, creative. It is an oasis of civilisation and democracy in a desert of Islamic theocracies and Arabs engaged in a holy Jihad against the west. That’s you, baby. You and me both.
By the way, what is gross impartiality?
This is not about raising funds for Hamas at all. It’s about rebuilding the lives of innocent Palestinian children, who’s only crime was to be born in a bit of sh*te country.
Most of the aid that has been pouring into Gaza for years from US, Europe, including Israel, but not including Arab counties, has found its way into the hands of Hamas.
When children are born into that bit of sh*te country, they soon get the innocence knocked out of them. That’s what needs to change, and aid from us won’t alter that.
Not recognising the BBC’s bias against Israel, and the implication that being pro-Israel is some sort of bad habit does sort of make you a Jew Hater. Sorry to tell you.
mwl
for once the bbc gets it right. maybe people will now question who these charities are, how they spend the money and what their agenda is.
arab league states have already said they will underwrite the aid costs for gaza. their is no need for dim witted uk residents to be fed this bullshit.
Saudi govt has pledged $1 billion. Algeria $200M. Arab league has said they will pay whatever it takes.
So what is the point of the DEC appeal ? It is simply to raise money for the self loving charity fat cats to keep their massive salaries.
One must assume that it is just coincidence by not showing the appeal the BBC has provided so much more publicity for it than if they had just run the ad in the first place.
Why have the BBC not reported the demonstrations throughout the country against the deaths of civilians in the Gaza strip tortured and then killed by Hamas in the last few days?
Great the bBC does as it should and a civil war transpires on these pages.
Me.
All I see is a the Pro Hamas bBC keeping the pressure on the joooos.
Simply by keeping the pot boiling on how nasty the jews are.
I mean does this story warrent the top story on the News Front page.
No
But hey as long as it keeps those idiots protesting outside Ombama house while it is cold and wet I have no problem with the bBC keeping thiss story going.
Oh for heavens sake. This ludicrous posturing by the Beeb cannot be taken seriously. They (very publicly)ban the appeal, thus proving how completely “impartial” they are, and at the same time make sure “the banned” appeal gets maximum publicity on all the news channels. I’ve even seen some Hamas supporters claiming that the BBC was “pro Israel”. Even George Orwell would have trouble making this up.
If in the course of the last few weeks a man from Mars would’ve watched the BBC the impression based on totally ‘impartial’ reports would be of killing women and children and nobody else at all, Indeed it follows from these reports that this was the only purpose of the campaign.
And now this craftily devised red herring adds insult to injury by saying that they also put pressure on the BBC not to help the victims.
Most of us support Israel because it is a working democracy surrounded by a bunch of failed corrupt Muslim dominated barbaric states. Israel isn’t perfect but it is a billion times better than the utter garbage that surrounds it in the middle east.
Jeff,
Well Pro Israel only in the sense that Al Beeb doesnt openly state how much they hate Israel (they do all their hate’n on the sly!).
Mailman
Martin (riverScrap.com),
As Ive already said…the Palestinians already have the means to help themselves. What they lack is the will to help themselves.
Instead of spending hundreds of millions on weapons and the continuation of their hate against Israel…spend it on improving their lives!
They dont need any more help because the more help they are given, the more its squandered.
Mailman
A good read.
http://www.archbishop-cranmer.blogspot.com/
A dilemma for BBC:- whether/how to report- Obama goes Bush:
‘Sunday Times’
“US navy seeks arms bound for Hamas”
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/middle_east/article5581382.ece
*** Biodegradable said:
If the BBC really wants to seem impartial it could air an appeal for Jewish victims of Palestinian terrorism. ***
Martin (riverScrap.com) | Homepage | 24.01.09 – 9:02 pm
I didn’t say that.
John | 24.01.09 – 5:02 pm said it.
What I said is here.
Sue | 24.01.09 – 9:45 pm
Not recognising the BBC’s bias against Israel, and the implication that being pro-Israel is some sort of bad habit does sort of make you a Jew Hater. Sorry to tell you.
1. I do recognise the BBC’s liberal bias (realistically, I’d hardly have added this blog to my blogroll if I didn’t, would I?)
2. I don’t know how to have a discussion with someone who labels me a Jew Hater simply for disagreeing with them? If I was a Jew Hater, I’d have said something like “I hate Jews”. Or “Kill all the Jews”. Please re-read my comments and show me where I expressed such sentiments (and incidentally, it would be quite remarkable for me to be a Jew Hater given my ethnic origin…)
Sue | 24.01.09 – 9:45 pm
Most of the aid that has been pouring into Gaza for years from US, Europe, including Israel, but not including Arab counties, has found its way into the hands of Hamas.
I sincerely doubt it’s “most,” but I don’t doubt that misappropriating charity money is a problem in Gaza – just like it is IN ALL CONFLICT ZONES (Sudan, Zimbabwe, Sri Lanka, Afghanistan, Chechnya, Northern Ireland… the list is endless). I’d ask you to show me some statistics from the UN evidencing what degree of misappropriation has gone on, but I doubt you’re someone who places much faith in the UN. Either way, corruption is a problem that aid agencies work hard to overcome – and simply saying “let’s not give them any money” is a pretty backwards way of dealing with it.
Mailman | 24.01.09 – 10:51 pm
the Palestinians already have the means to help themselves. What they lack is the will to help themselves. Instead of spending hundreds of millions on weapons and the continuation of their hate against Israel…spend it on improving their lives!
Um. It’s a little hard to improve your economy where you live in a densely-populated exclave that is surrounded by a much stronger enemy, whose blockades and sanctions completely stifle any trade or entrepeneurship. (I’m not saying there shouldn’t be some kind of blockade – I’m simply refuting your suggestion that Palestinians have the economic means to prosper. That’s bullshit)
Overall I have to say I’m amazed at the vitriol that some of you guys are pouring on the sincere efforts of aid agencies. I can appreciate that you have a political drum to be beating, but stomping your feet and claiming that the likes of Oxfam, the Red Cross & Save the Children are terrorist sympathisers frankly destroys your credibility.
PS apologies for mis-attributing that quote to you, Biodegradable. Honest mistake.
Martin, I accept your apologies but, you’re not the original Martin so please use “Martin (riverScrap.com)” in future. You wouldn’t want to get on the wrong side of Martin, I can assure you.
Haha okay shall do, Biodegradable – thanks for the heads-up 🙂
Overall I have to say I’m amazed at the vitriol that some of you guys are pouring on the sincere efforts of aid agencies.
Why are you amazed? Good God. Haven’t you figured out yet that this blog is written and read almost exclusively by psychopaths?
It’s hilarious watching them desperately trying to spin this situation.
We await the establishment of the Biased ITV blog, Biased Channel 4 blog, Biased Channel 5 blog, and to top it off something called “Biased Reality Blogspot dot Com” which will finally put a stop to the nefarious activities of the Hard Left, Biased Objective Reality which constantly ruins your beautiful group delusions. How about it?
You have to hand it to the BBC, they have drunk deeeply from the well of agitprop(so beloved of leftism)and they are experts,masters even!
Its called ‘muddying the waters’, the BBC is giving maximum publicity to this appeal while creating a storm to cover its arse against valid accusations of bias toward hamas.
The ‘demo’ outside the BBC was tiny, too small to be a mass protest, the EU used the fake mob of protesters outside their climate conference gigs to give an air of a popular movement, the EU morons were easily caught out by the fact that their rent a mob had ID cards issued(ooops), the BBC however are very cunning and their network is smart and their methods well crafted.
The resident hamas sympathiser Macdrool is expert at his reports, lots of crying children, oooh look at what the evil IDF has done etc lots of shots of ruined buildings etc unverified casualty figures taken straight from hamas, no verification needed, this gives the Gaza(hamas) appeal more than enough support, in fact the BBC have done more to peddle the appeal than anyone else!
I have counted at least one hundred accusations of war crimes by the BBC against Israel and I have counted NO accusations of war crimes against hamas, at no point has the BBC reported on the war crimes and cruelty of hamas, not once has the BBC reported that hamas steals a large portion of the aid that flows into Gaza, or how it demands that its supporters are given the lions share of jobs in the UNRWA/aid angencies. Hamas opperates a protection racket in Gaza, they allow aid agencies to opperate only within srict limits, hamas minders hover near reporters and if they step out of line they are threatened, Alan Johnston was a warning to journalists in gaza, toe the line or else!
To the BBC hamas is innocent and the IDF are guilty and yet they feel the need to manufacure a storm in a teacup to distance themselves from critisism of collusion with a terrorist organisation.
Why would any thinking person give their cash to charities that we know will actively help hamas in its terrorist campaign, all the billions in aid to Gaza over the last three years has been utterly wasted and a large portion has gone to hamas to be used for its murder and torture and hate campaign, aid to Gaza is a direct method of helping terrorism, every pound you give helps hamas to murder innocent men women and children. The highly emotive pictures from the BBC are designed to push our buttons, dont fall for their lies.
THE BBC: AGITPROP IS OUR AIM, PROPAGANDA OUR GAME,WE ARE THE TERRORISTS FRIEND, AS LONG AS THEY ARE THE RIGHT KIND OF TERRORIST.
BBC resisting pressure over Gaza
At the risk of paraphrasing some earlier comments, not only does the BBC give maximum publicity by placing not one but two links on its International version homepage (More Top Stories and More Top Stories UK) but when you follow the link you reach a page with the following box.
Disasters Emergency Committee Gaza humanitarian appeal:
Launched by UK charities on 22 January to raise money for Gaza aid relief and reconstruction
Participants: Action Aid, British Red Cross, Cafod, Care International, Christian Aid, Concern Worldwide, Help the Aged, Islamic Relief, Merlin, Oxfam, Save the Children, Tearfund, World Vision
Information on 0370 60 60 900 or at DEC website
Reaction to the BBC’s appeal veto
Mark Thompson on Gaza appeal
Send us your comments
It is difficult to see how the BBC could have given more publicity.
BTW and not entirely off topic the UK homepage only links once but the Entertainment section leads with this gem Ross radio joke defended by BBC. The connection between the two is the BBC contention that ‘it’ not the event is the ‘main’ story.
Hubris ❓
Oh heck, I hate it when Haloscan gets all moody and won’t even allow a ‘preview’ much less a ‘publish’.
As this reply was/is important, I hope leaving it overnight* will work (with a few tweaks)..
Nearly Oxfordian | 24.01.09 – 6:25 pm | #
Careful with the editing… I think the ‘in some ways’ I added was enough to suggest I was being more nuanced. I have major issues with many aspects of the BBC, and especially its news output, but my default setting is not to presume a total negative extreme, all the time. ‘They’ (if using such a word to try and describe an organisation of 10’s of thousands of individuals makes much sense) do in my view often get ‘it’ horribly wrong, especially in my key interest area of informed, objective, professional reporting based on fact, checking, balance, etc. Hence my engaging with this site.
In this case I happen to think ‘they’ were trying to get ‘it’ right, at least as I have seen it explained so far. Whether it is been done very well or with immense tongue in cheek skill (see ConcentricCirlces/Jeff/deegee’s takes above) is another matter.
Plus, in this case, I have to say I am hard pressed to see overt anti-semitism in the way this is playing out, other than the silly efforts of a few with rather blatant agendas.
But I do maintain concerns about what should be sincere and well targeted aid efforts being used to provide unwarranted PR and support to an outfit such as Hamas, who I feel have not been exposed by the MSM anywhere near enough for what they have caused the civilian population of Gaza to bear.
The ‘if you are not with us you are against us’ approach I find a tad unproductive, and seems to have served those (from all sorts of ‘sides’) who have tried to apply it poorly.
*As a tech issue, I have found that not cutting and pasting all of NO’s comment seemed to allow it to work.
A quick Google shows 1,210 references from bbc.co.uk over the past week for the words: pressure, BBC and Gaza.
In other the BBC has referred to the story on its own website more than one thousand times, usually giving as much detail as if it had publicised it. Sometimes as well as listing every charity in DEC the BBC obligingly supplies the DEC phone number.
“Dear Aunty, I am considering opening a business. Please refuse to advertise said business as least as vigorously as you refuse to advertise DEC. Phone number and website details on request.” 😉
Video of Azzam Tamimi taken yesterday. Listening to him, with his hotline to Hamas, it’s pretty clear who the aid money will really help.
He begins with: “Didn’t I tell you we would win?” The crowd cheers. This sums up the mindset (Islamist and leftard alike) – the more people who die, the greater the victory.
Later: “Allahu Akbar! Allahu Akbar! Now that that round is over, there is another round. Prepare yourself for a more ferocious battle that has already started. Now they want to subdue the Palestinians in Gaza. They are blackmailing them in the name of rebuilding Gaza, in the name of reconstruction, in the name of lifting the siege and opening the crossings. [Voice off – “Can you, er, wind up please?” A leftie useful idiot, not liking where this is going, perhaps?] Please let me continue my message. I have a message to say to these people who are so wonderful that they contributed to this victory. [Cheers]. They contributed to the victory! The message to you is that our brothers and sisters in Gaza will not be blackmailed! They will not submit!”
He ends: “The war is not over! The war is continuing and it will continue for many weeks, probably months, to come! Allahu Akbar! Allahu Akbar! As-salamu alaykum.”
What the BBC would like everyone to believe by their refusal is “We’d love to broadcast this appeal but them damn Jooos will complain. So don’t blame us blame the damn Jooos for not allowing us to carry this humanitarian appeal!” So you see where this is going.
I rarely send my comments into the BBC because I regard it as a waste of time. I suspect I have a better chance of having them read by someone in authority if I send them into this blog. However I was curious how readers were addressing this particular HYS Should broadcasters show the DEC appeal.
This is how the BBC frames the question. Formatting from the original. My comments as footnotes.
Should broadcasters show the DEC appeal?(1)
The Archbishop of York has joined the criticism of the BBC for refusing to broadcast a charity appeal for the Gaza Strip. What do you think about the decision?(2)
The BBC says broadcasting the appeal could undermine public confidence in the corporation’s impartiality.(3)
But, Dr John Sentamu accused the corporation of taking sides in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.(4)
Rival broadcasters ITV, Channel 4 and Five have agreed to broadcast the appeal.(5)
Does showing the appeal affect broadcasters’ impartiality? Should humanitarian issues override concerns about impartiality? Should politicians pressure broadcasters to show emergency appeals?(6)
This is not a debate about the licence fee.(7) Any comments which do not attempt to answer the questions in this debate will be rejected. If you are unsure please check the house rules.
(1) Shouldn’t this be phrased, should the BBC broadcast the DEC appeal?
(2) Are we responding to the question or to the Archbishop’s criticism? Some readers may hesitate to criticise as it would be seen to be disrepectful.
(3) I wonder why. Couldn’t the BBC has included a brief disclaimer?
(4) Does Dr John really think the BBC has been supporting Israel in this conflict? In any case an opponent of this ban gets a second bite of the cherry and no independent supporter HHS.
(5) Yet more weight to unbanning.
(6) No objection, except shouldn’t this be the first paragraph?
(7) Ladies and Gentlemen of the ‘no license fee’ brigade. You are getting to them. :+:
Slightly off topic (forgive me – but it’s still relevant):
Do al-Beeb have any idea that Islamic Relief has proven connections to the Muslim Brotherhood and that funds donated there often end up directly in Hamas’s coffers?
I suspect they do – and I would go further and suggest it is the reason they have been given the massive amunt of coverage they have. Instead of getting the developed world to dig deep again for more guilt Jizya, how about getting Hamas to account for the billions that have been foolishly donated to them over the years – and let them prove to us how much the ‘Palestinean’ people mean to them?
Directly Supporting Terrorism- Doing Da’wa. It’s what we do.
Former BBC Middle East correspondent Tim Llewellyn in the Observer:
Reporters of the calibre of Jeremy Bowen, David Lloyn, Lyse Doucet, experts in their field and brave people all, will be appalled by the directions they are being given. Edward Stourton and the Today programme rightly produced Tony Benn yesterday morning because they knew he would articulate what their bosses have failed to: reason and humanity.
The big question that remains is this: what are the suits scared of? Why do BBC managers try to second-guess our government and even outreach it in grovelling to the United States and Israel?
BBC journalists, extant and retired, not the “usual suspects”, not disaffected radicals and high-octane lefties, are incandescent with rage over this extraordinary piece of institutional cowardice.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2009/jan/25/bbc-gaza-palestinians-appeal
Llewellyn is hard left, anti-American and virulently anti-Israeli, so it is instructive that Bowen, Lloyn and Doucet receive his seal of approval. He also admits that the BBC employs journalists who are “disaffected radicals and high-octane lefties”, not that that’s news to most us here. Perhaps this affair will smoke a few more of them out into the open.
Two MPs have made complaints to BBC Director General Mark Thompson about its “biased propaganda” against Israel.
This is just a stunt to discredit those who complain about BBC anti-semitism. They’ve just spent 3 weeks carrying blogs from the terror linked ‘Islamic Relief’ that is part of the DEC!
He admits nothing of the sort, Read it again.
DB – what an eyeopener. Thanks for those links and your post. We are not merely discussing bias here – we are seeing much worse. Llewellyn is an absolute disgrace.
For once the BBC were correct in stating that (to paraphrase) there were questions about the aid getting through.
But then, they did not report this item from last Tuesday:
“Jordan’s Petra News Agency reported (in Arabic) that Hamas gunmen hijacked Jordanian aid trucks at the Kerem Shalom crossing point.” http://elderofziyon.blogspot.com/2009/01/exclusive-hamas-hijacks-jordanian-aid.html
Seems to me that the newsroom is having a field day with items like the Benn interview repeating the appeal details, taking sides against its own BBC management decision.
And, as for the “demo” yesterday, as I pointed out in a post on Thursday, this was happening anyway under a different title – they just changed it into an anti-BBC event:
From the Palestine Solidarity Campaign website:
Demonstration in London: Saturday 24th January – Israel Out Of Gaza Now: Lift The Blockade
Assemble 2pm, BBC Broadcasting House
Portland Place, London, W1A 1AA
(Nearest Tube Regents Park and Great Portland Place)
http://www.palestinecampaign.org…& Content_ID=374
Llewellyn is a signatory to this recent letter to the Guardian “Israel Must Lose” http://www.iengage.org.uk/component/content/article/1-news/218-academics-write-to-the-guardian-israel-must-lose-
Hardly impartial.
I’m baffled about the alleged “Israeli pressure” on the BBC – do Benn & Co have any evidence of this?
For context, more on some British charities from a pre-Christmas article on NGO Monitor (www.ngo-monitor.org):
“* Through the use of holiday and religious symbols, NGOs such as War on Want, Amos Trust, and Pax Christi are manipulating Christmas to advance a political agenda, and in some cases, may be promoting antisemitic canards.
* NGOs organized an event entitled, “Bethlehem Now: Nine Alternative Lessons and Carols for Palestine,” involving “traditional carols with untraditional lyrics, interspersed with poetry and prose readings, to highlight current reality in the Holy Land.” The tendentious lyrics and themes of the event led to strong condemnations from Christian and Jewish community leaders.
* War on Want is promoting an “Alternative Gift” of donations to Stop the Wall (Palestinian Grassroots Anti-Apartheid Wall Coalition – PGAAWC). PGAAWC focuses on “stopping and dismantling the Apartheid Wall” and supporting the boycotts, divestment, and sanctions (BDS) movement.
* War on Want and Amos Trust are marketing Christmas cards depicting the security barrier and conflating Jesus with the Palestinians.
* On December 2, 2008, Christian Aid hosted a fundraiser called “From Bethlehem to Bristol.” While the fundraiser appears to be a departure from the explicit and extreme demonization of Christian Aid’s previous campaigns, it still provided a one-sided perspective on the conflict.
Overview
In advance of Christmas 2008, several British NGOs have returned to previous theological offensives against Israel by combining emphasis on Bethlehem, stories of Palestinian suffering, and false allegations of Israeli cruelty. Through Christmas cards, carols, and charity fundraising, War on Want, Amos Trust, Pax Christi and others condemn Israel’s security barrier and erase the Palestinian terror campaign that necessitates it. As in previous years when NGOs used Underground station advertisements and greeting cards, these campaigns capitalize on holiday sentiment and Christian religious symbols to declare that “the wall must fall” and present a biased view of the conflict.
more at: http://www.ngo-monitor.org/article/_hijacked_by_hatred_british_ngos_
use_christmas_for_anti_israel_attacks
mikewineliberal | 25.01.09 – 10:27 am
The sentence can be read in two ways. I took it to mean that the anger is not just from the BBC journalists one might expect to be angry, ie the disaffected radicals and high octane lefties (eg Paul Mason), but on re-reading I can see it’s probably not what he’s trying to convey. My point about Bowen, Lloyn and Doucet stands – approval from a radical, Israel-hating leftie such as Llewellyn is instructive.
mikewineliberal | 25.01.09 – 10:27 am | #
It would be helpful to pop a time reference or link in to assist in putting your personal opinion in the proper context.
As would explaining in more detail why you think your view is correct, as many here devote the time to do.
Whilst you can have interesting points, I fear such brief dismissals and demands to comply, and confusing what you think with what may or may not be, are edging your nickname to my skip list which, by your frequent engagement, I am sure is not your intention.
Understandably, the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs maintains a ban list of ‘Islamic Charities’ (who wouldn’t?), with proven links to Hamas and other terrorist entities. The Hamas link is via an umbrella organisation known as the ‘Union of Good’ (Orwelliansim certainly isn’t lost on the Muslims).
Hamas is a proscribed organisation within the meaning of the Prevention of Terrorism Act 2000. Islamic Relief is effectively a branch of Hamas (with additional links to the Muslim Brotherhood.
So how come one of our State Broadcasters is being allowed to support and promote this Hamas-linked funding channel, unchallenged by the Government or the Police? And come to think of it, how come it’s a member of the DEC in the first place?
Something else which could be viewed in more than one way:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/planewalker001/3224109346/
http://i42.tinypic.com/2zedr47.jpg
DB | 25.01.09 – 10:53 am
Tim Llewellyn may well be anti-Israel. He is certainly pro-Palestinian. But by no measure could he be described as a radical leftist.
I know this after meeting TL many times – he’s a member of the same gentleman’s club in st james’s as my father (who would kick a leftist as soon as look at one).
archie | 25.01.09 – 11:44 am
Tim Llewellyn may well be anti-Israel. He is certainly pro-Palestinian.
From what I’ve read there’s little doubt about his being anti-Israel.
But by no measure could he be described as a radical leftist.
His views are certainly championed by the radical left, but I’ll take your word for it. (Wasn’t Kim Philby a member of the RAC in Pall Mall? Not that I want to create any suspicions at your father’s club or anything.)
Returning to yesterday’s protests, here’s some video taken outside the BBC. Check out the contingent with the “Workers Power” banner @ 1:35 chanting: “Baghdad, Beirut, Kabul, Gaza. Victory to the intifada!” The moronic left • firmly on the side of Islamofascism and terrorism.
And don’t you just hate middle-class white people adopting the terrorist chic of the keffiyeh? Someone really should tell them what a bunch of tossers they look.
-Peter | Homepage | 25.01.09 – 10:59 am | #
sorry, fair point. I thought my comment would follow the comment, but it didn’t ultimately.
DB | 25.01.09 – 10:53 am | #
I agree his views stink, wherever he’s from on the political spectrum
A continuing reason for opposing licencepayer-funded, free propaganda for Hamas-supporting ‘charity’:
“Hamas: Politics, Charity, and Terrorism in the Service of Jihad,
by Matthew Levitt” (a review):
http://www.meforum.org/article/936
Philip | 25.01.09 – 11:03 am |
Hamas is a proscribed organisation within the meaning of the Prevention of Terrorism Act 2000.
No it isn’t. Follow your own link and you will find only the Hamas Izz-al-din Qassem Brigades, its military wing, is proscribed.
only the Hamas Izz-al-din Qassem Brigades, its military wing, is proscribed.
Yes, anonymous, whoever you are – I can and do read fully any articles I may link to. Hamas is Hamas.
I supopose you think Gerry Adams was never anything to do with the IRA.
Martin riverscrap
I don’t know how to have a discussion with someone who labels me a Jew Hater simply for disagreeing with them?
Martin scrap, it was you who introduced the phrase Jew Hater. We have discussed this point over and over and over and over again. On this blog. We have concluded that Israel is the Jewish state, the only one. People who use the term ‘pro-Israel’ in a derogatory manner are likely to be thought of by some of us as antisemitic.
I don’t have the statistics, and you’re right, I don’t have much faith in the UN, but I contend that as Hamas is “governing” Gaza, all aid does go through their hands. Which is what I said. It is widely reported, maybe not by the BBC, that a considerable amount is indeed misappropriated, be it money, food, ambulances, whatever.
Incidentally, Caroline Thomson has said in several interviews, that while there was initially some concern that the aid may not get to the intended recipients, she was now satisfied that this problem no longer exists and that the only remaining reason not to broadcast the appeal was the issue of perceived partiality. Who knows what on earth is going on there.
If I was a Jew Hater, I’d have said something like “I hate Jews”. Or “Kill all the Jews”. Please re-read my comments and show me where I expressed such sentiments (and incidentally, it would be quite remarkable for me to be a Jew Hater given my ethnic origin…)
Your ethnicity hasn’t got much to do with it, even if you happen to be a Jew. We have discussed this over and over etc. etc. and have concluded that there are many ‘self-haters’ out there. However I would love to ask them what they plan to do when their names come up.
And last but not least, the worst thing one can be accused of, after child molesting, is racism. So, few people are going to admit, sometimes even to themselves, that they are racist. Even fewer are openly antisemitic enough to say “I hate Jews” etc. etc. Except for certain Islamic Clerics. But they still have many other cunning ways to express it.
I certainly haven’t said “Lets not give them any money.” Maybe I should have said any MORE money. Goodness knows they already get plenty.
Archbishop John Sentamu was on BBC News 24 gabbling on about it for ages. At one point I heard him say something that sounded like “The Talibans” (in Gaza)
What is he Like! His pointy hat was decorated with what looked like felt-tip pen and his strange way of talking reminds me of that silly voice they sometimes do on South Park. Mustn’t be rude though.
Philip | 25.01.09 – 1:28 pm
I can and do read fully any articles I may link to. Hamas is Hamas.
Clearly not. Otherwise you wouldn’t have made the factual error of claiming that Hamas is proscribed.
I supopose you think Gerry Adams was never anything to do with the IRA.
No, but Sinn Feinn wasn’t listed as a terrorist organization either. A distinction was made between the political and the military. The distinction may not in all cases be ‘real’ but it is an important legal distinction.
Funny how trying to play the smartarse, you’ve come up yourself with a refutation of your own point.
Whatever logical acrobatics you are trying to demonstrate (and it’s notable that you are choosing to remain anonymous), the fact remains that money donated to Islamic Relief finds its way to Hamas.
Islamic Relief = Hamas. Hamas = proscribed organisation in Britain.
Or are you saying that it is only linked to the ‘good part’ of Hamas? If so, would you care to enlighten user us with the basis of your assertion?
Your pedantry does nothing to diminish the fact that IR is a Hamas front.
You’re long on ad Hom, and short on facts, Mr/Ms.. Anon.
Sue | 25.01.09 – 2:49 pm
People who use the term ‘pro-Israel’ in a derogatory manner are likely to be thought of by some of us as antisemitic.
Did it never cross your mind that some people use the term ‘pro-Israel’ in a derogatory manner, because said people care about objectivity? I don’t consider myself pro-Israel or pro-Arab – so by your logic I must be racist against Arabs as well as Jews? Isn’t this blog suppose to be about objectivity, not ethnicity?
the worst thing one can be accused of, after child molesting, is racism. So, few people are going to admit, sometimes even to themselves, that they are racist.
I’d challenge you to produce one single quotation from myself which supports the assertion that I’m antisemitic (feel free to look through the articles on my blog as well as my comments here).
As an aside: I have to admit that it’s absurd for the BBC to claim that it is not airing the appeal, and then publicise the DEC’S telephone number on its website. That’s pure hypocrisy.