Imagine being at a dinner party with Sarah Montague.
Despite the decline in standards demonstrated by recent cases of deception and inefficiency, awareness of this downhill spiral still lags behind. Few notice when the BBC is unreliable and unscrupulous, because their outdated reputation for impartiality and integrity is stubbornly resilient. The BBC rests solely on the laurels of a reputation that no longer fits. It’s a has-been. Time to take it back to the library and pay the fine.An example of omission. Something that is out there, but will have no impact on the BBC is Yvonne Green’s report Puzzled in Gaza . It probably isn’t in the MSM either, because the long-term influence of biased BBC reporting places it beyond the pale..
Lorenz Gude comments:
“The MSM unsurprisingly wasn’t interested in Pallywood if for no other reason than it exposes their own betrayal of journalistic standards.”
[….]
“The MSM still succeeds in passing off propaganda as journalism in large part because it is the only voice most people hear.”
Even on the blogosphere, Puzzled in Gaza stands to be invalidated because the author is a Jew. The fact that the BBC hangs on every word from Palestinian reporters, stringers and even Hamas spokespersons is apparently neither here nor there.
The BBC alone could turn things around. Without any change on their part the outlook is bleak.
Come on BBC, you love diversity. Why not give a voice to this ‘diverse’ view?
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/middle_east/article5851182.ece
There’s just been a terrorist attack on police in Jerusalem.
Looking forward to the BBC report
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/7925892.stm
Pretty balanced for the Beeb. Usual not wanting to say ‘terrorist’ and it’s a shame they end with: “Earlier on Thursday Israeli warplanes bombed the Gaza Strip, killing two militants, bringing to four the number killed by Israel in less than 24 hours.” Thus implying that the motive was bombing in Gaza – that’s not actually the case, as the Times article points out, it’s actually being caused by demolitions of Arab housing estates in east Jerusalem.
What would most people think when they see a headline like this?
Jordan charges two in Israel plot
But they’d be wrong:
A military prosecutor in Jordan has charged two suspected militants for a plot to kill an Israeli businessman.
Meanwhile the BBC news international version website still says the bus hit by the bulldozer attack in Jerusalem was “empty”.
The driver of a construction vehicle in Jerusalem is shot dead after ramming a police car and an empty bus.
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1236246868064&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull
According to ZAKA, the bus was full of girls dressed in Purim costumes en route to Hadassah Ein Kerem Hospital to cheer up patients before the holiday.
A number of bystanders suffering from shock were treated on the scene by MDA teams.
ZAKA operation commander Haim Weinrot said that “the girls were hysterical. They saw the enormous scoop heading toward them and saw death approaching, but they were saved at the last minute by the post. It is a Purim miracle.”
Hamas spokesman Munir al-Masri praised the terror attack, and was quoted by Reuters as saying that “this is a natural response to the home demolition in east Jerusalem and to the Israeli aggressiveness in the Gaza Strip.”
Probably the BBC’s first version went something like “Israeli Ford Fiesta of Death attacks helpless Palestinian JCB which was only delivering fluffy pillows for Victims of Israeli Death Terror Group”… Charity volunteer JCB Driver manages to escape vicious assault..
Yep that ticks all the beebs boxes.
The BBCs very own islamist terrorist sympathiser and appologist Aleem Macdrool was his usual sneering and bigoted self fronting a ‘report’ about how Israel is solely to blame for the terrible state of medical services in Gaza, Oh yes Macdrool was laying it on thick, old people,young people, lame people,mad people,premature babies,depressed people, the Israellis are to blame for everything.
No mention of hamas stealing medicines to sell on the black market, no mention of Gazans treated in Jewish hospitals, no mention of the missing aid money that should have been spent on hospitals but got ‘accidentally’ lost en route for some strange reason, no mention of the aid held back by hamas to increase the suffering of its own people to use as propaganda.
No mention of the faked up civilian casualty lists that have been proven to be highly inflated by hamas, most deaths were in fact terrorist deaths and this has yet to be properly reported on the BBC.
So the BBC gives airtime to a lying twisted bigot to spew lies about Israel, I have yet to see Macdrool offer anything that reomotely resembles the truth.
Sue!
“Each particle of bias inevitably joins forces with every other till they clump together into a massive whole and become the norm. Once accepted and firmly embedded, from there on in everything hurtles downhill”.
Excellently put and core to why this blog is important.I am sure that there were some innocents killed in Gaza – mainly as a result of Hamas cynically embedded within the ‘civilian’ infrastructure. But even among open minded people the perception is such that to opine that some of the reportage looks contrived and rehearsed is met with open hostility. Almost as bad with climate change, US imperialism, etc.
On a lighter note – “Imagine being at a dinner party with Sarah Montague”
A tribute to the shrill harridan in chief and variation on the old Ronnie Scott joke: First prize is dinner with Kirsty Wark – second prize is two dinners with Kirsty……etc
I appreciate that I keep banging on about this but the article is absolute bollocks. British people don’t define the woman by her Jewishness? Surely that’s the ultimate in impartiality and non prejudice, and indeed it’s the norm. People in the UK with one obvious exception don’t define people as Jewish in the same way more recent and/or obvious minorities are separated and patronised/appeased/sometimes vilified.
The comments she raises are so anodyne to be untrue. Someone critices Israel from what appears to be a position of “doesn’t read newspapers” extreme ignorance – f***ing refute him, argue back, put your opposing view, have a conversation… That’s what you do at a dinner party, or in the pub, or wherever. That’s what I do when anyone criticises the white middle classes, or London, or City work culture, or Tottenham Hotspur or anything else I have an emotional attachment to.
If a “friend” in all seriousness asks you to Syria and you happen to be Jewish surely you laugh in his face and take the p*ss out of him for ever more – do New Yorkers not do banter amongst mates?
The anti-Israeli drip drip in the liberal press and expecially the Beeb is serious because it provokes idiotic politics in the guilt ridden classes which could ultimately spill into anti-Israeli government policy (although this looks unlikely at the mo), and “sympathetic” financial support for “victims” which could be channelled into dangerous hands. Most seriously it provokes genuine anti-semitism abd indeed anti-westernism in UK muslim communities. What it doesn’t mean is that Britain is anti-semitic.
Imagine being at a dinner party with Sarah Montague!
Lets see…
She’d interrupt the guests when they’re about to say something interesting, laugh at the wrong moment (pair of ear plugs will come in handy), reduce into a pile of heap at the very mention of the name of the one who walks on water (Obama to you and me) and you’d be lucky to get a word in edgeways!
No thanks.
Biodegradable | 05.03.09 – 2:48 pm
Bio, thanks for posting these two excellent examples. I also wanted to point out how the article on the latest digger attack helpfully explains at the beginning that “tensions are currently very high between Israelis and Palestinians after Israel’s military offensive in Gaza” — just in case we were in any doubt as to which side is ultimately responsible for all the violence.
GaryO
You can book her for that dinner party at
http://www.speakerscorner.co.uk/file/3e4a7ce4c65ab0214e2656151bffe618/montague-sarah.html
She will facilitate you.
Sue wrote: “Come on BBC, you love diversity. Why not give a voice to this ‘diverse’ view?”
Because ‘diversity’ is just another PC scam to shut down freedom of thought.
When are any MP’s going to have the backbone to set up a parliamentary group to investigate BBC and media anti-semitism. The BBC is literally a key player in paving the way towards to second Holocaust.
Oh, .. A fantastic post Sue!
Sue
I’m not entirely clear what Yvonne Green is saying here, particularly when she says Gaza is ‘largely intact’.
Of course it is.
However, around a thousand buildings were destroyed. You can see each one here in pics from the Quickbird satellite.
I think we can trust this as Pallywood doesn’t run to satellite imagery yet.
http://unosat.web.cern.ch/unosat/asp/prod_free.asp?id=120
Have you counted 1000 ?
And 1000 out of how many huildings ?
If 50,000 or 100,000 or more – that would still mean “largely intact ?
Well done Sue! And you are so, so correct on this God-awful institution.
Few notice when the BBC is unreliable and unscrupulous, because their outdated reputation for impartiality and integrity is stubbornly resilient. The BBC rests solely on the laurels of a reputation that no longer fits. It’s a has-been.
Anonymous | 05.03.09 – 5:11 pm |
The anti-Israeli drip drip in the liberal press and expecially the Beeb is serious because it provokes idiotic politics in the guilt ridden classes which could ultimately spill into anti-Israeli government policy (although this looks unlikely at the mo), and “sympathetic” financial support for “victims” which could be channelled into dangerous hands. Most seriously it provokes genuine anti-semitism abd indeed anti-westernism in UK muslim communities. What it doesn’t mean is that Britain is anti-semitic.
This makes sense to me.
Anonymous | 05.03.09 – 5:11 pm
“I appreciate that I keep banging on about this but the article is absolute bollocks”.
Good job you appreciate it, because no one else would know what you keep banging on about, would they, since you are anonymous. But to call the article absolute bollocks seems extreme to the degree of absurdity. She was expressing her feelings, how could someone’s feelings be bollocks?
What you mean is you don’t understand how she feels. You mean you are in no position to have been on the receiving end of anything like it. You don’t know what she means by: “The moment the icy splinter of fear entered my heart,” If you want bollocks, you’ve got : “Surely that’s the ultimate in impartiality and non prejudice,” That’s what’s bollocks, that is.
Stephen Pollard is no wimp. http://www.jafi.org.il/education/hasbara/headlines/a4-4.html
“I would have stood up in a court of law and sworn these people did not have a racist bone in their bodies.” Stephen Pollard, a well-known left-of-center writer and broadcaster, and a Jew, was describing a group of his closest, oldest Gentile friends sitting together recently at a dinner party.
“Suddenly, one of them said, ‘I’m boycotting Israeli goods.’ I challenged her:’Do you mean Jewish goods?’ ‘No,’ she replied, ‘Israeli.’ I asked: ‘What about Dixon’s [the high-street electronics chain owned by a prominent UK Jewish philanthropist and Zionist, Sir Stanley Kalms]?’ ‘ Yes, she agreed, she would boycott Dixon’s, too. And then it came pouring out. ‘You all stick together – always going on about the Holocaust. Stephen, you’re the same as the rest of them: You only defend Israel because you’re Jewish.’ The others all took her side. ‘Why don’t you leave her alone. She’s only saying what we think.’ I felt nauseated and shocked. I had been living in a dream world.”
You see Mr. Anonymous, it’s not a question of arguing or answering back. It’s nothing to do with telling people to f*ck off or Piss off.
Your remarks imply that Jews are ‘other’ and everyone else is being magnanimous and broad-minded if they pretend they’re not.
Sue, there is nothing new in this.
A quarter-of-a-century ago, when I was still living in London and job-hunting, I was eventually offered two jobs: one in England and another in Israel. The English one was more prestigious but I chose the Israeli, because I was sick to the heart of hearing once too many ‘how come you are all so clever’ and such like.
Graeme Thompson:
”Because ‘diversity’ is just another PC scam to shut down freedom of thought.”
”The BBC is literally a key player in paving the way towards to second Holocaust.”
———————–
Two pretty big statements there, the first is misguided and an exaggeration; yes some abuse the idea of diversity, others use it as a vehicle for their extreme ideas, but diversity in its purest form is good. It shouldn’t be rammed down our throats, but that shows its not the idea thats wrong, its the way it is applied.
The point about a second holocaust is disgraceful and you should be ashamed. Why do people who accuse the BBC of anti-semitism feel the need to mention the holocaust? To tug at their emotions? The BBC might not give Israel a fair shot in your view, but paving the way to another holocaust? What rubbish. Fearmongering and lying. People who hold that view are doing the Israeli cause a lot of harm.
Sorry, Anon was me.
“Your remarks imply that Jews are ‘other’ and everyone else is being magnanimous and broad-minded if they pretend they’re not.”
No they don’t. My remarks clearly state my view that the vast majority of Brits don’t see Jews as “other”. End of.
Gus Haynes,
I don’t think you have a clue of what is going on. Completing the Holocaust has been the stated aim of the Jihadi groups in and around Palestine from Haj Amin al-Husseini during WW2 to present day Hamas, Hizbollah, Iran and, in Arabic only, also Fatah.
Every time the Beeb quotes their propaganda without checking the facts, they aid and abet this aim. For this, there is no doubt in my mind that the Beeb will eventually stand trial, though perhaps not in my lifetime.
Cockney:
Sorry, Anon was me.
Ha! that explains it.
…….the vast majority of Brits don’t see Jews as “other”.
…….. not invited to many dinner parties then?
Israeli issues and the global warming scare show the BBC at its most narrow-minded, intolerant and bigoted.
Anat ; that may be the aim of the jihadi groups, but the BBC aiding it? come on, conspiracy nonsense and paranoia gone nuts. the BBC do not give these groups an unconditional seal of approval just because they talk to them or report about them. listening to what they say/ reporting it is a completely different kettle of fish to agreeing with it/condoning it.
Gus,
The BBC do indeed give these Jihadi groups unlimited credence and forum. Example (one of many) — in 2006, having amply reported both on the evacuation of Lebanese civilians and the bitter battles between IDF and Hizbollah, the BBC settled on quoting the casualties as ‘mostly civilians’, in blatant contradiction of their own previous reports and with no figures to back it. This is propaganda aimed at vilifying Israel, and by implication justifying Hizbollah. They do this all the time.
Another example — the incessant non-existent ‘humanitarian crisis’ in Gaza, always pointing to Israel as culprit.
There are many more examples. Look up the archives of this blog, Honest Reporting and such like.
This is not paranoia. Thanks to the State of Israel and the IDF, my safety does not depend on the BBC despite their best efforts against it. But they are up for justice some time.
Gus
They don’t CHALLENGE the jihadists with facts – that is the real problem.
How often does the BBC point up the fact that many claims by Hamas etc are lies ? Or that photos are faked – fauxtography examples abound from Hamas and Hezbollah.
How often when fauxtography is proved beyond any doubt does the BBC admit to propagating the original false pictures or story ?
Why does the BBC present biased people (eg the Scandinavian doctor) as if they are neutral observers, when it is clear to anyone that they have an agenda ?
And how often does the BBC point out that children in Gaza are taught from kindergarten upwards that Jews are sub-human ?
John,
To add to your list:
How often does the BBC point out that the UN testimony from Gaza is no different local Pali propadanda, because by their own admission UNRWA staff is ‘more that 99 percent” local? (Google up UNRWA, and also try to work out how much above 99 percent can one get).
When the Beeb quotes the UN on Gaza without pointing this out, they deliberately create the false impression that the UN is neutral in this case. It is not, and they know it. They knowingly lie.
It is obvious from this map that Israel is a huge threat against Islam :
http://muslimsagainstsharia.blogspot.com/2009/03/picture-is-worth-thousand-words-israels.html
Anat you raise a few decent points mate, but you ignored my original question which i will re-phrase now; why do you bring up a ‘second holocaust?’ It seems to me youve done this only to try and accuse the BBC of anti-semitism and youre trying to pull at peoples emotions. I get that you feel they dont do a good job reporting in gaza etc, but that is a world away from them promoting another holocaust.
Gus,
I don’t bring up a second Holocaust. It is still the first one, now kept at bay by the IDF.
As worded by Walid Shoebat: “The Holocaust never ended but the victims have decided to defend themselves.”.
Now look up the real history, the origins of the Jihadi gangs, their Nazi connections, and how the free world appeased them later for the purpose of gainful business with their main supporters, the tyrants of the Arab League. I suggest you start by googling up Matthias Kuentzel.
And by the way, the greatest victims of the Jihadi gangs are the Arabs who are now called Palestinians. With Western and UN support, they have been held as hostages by the Jihadi gangs for four generations now, for the sole purpose of creating an additional weapon against the Jews.
As some say, you don’t need to be Jewish to find yourself a lateral victim of Jew-hatred.
.
”The BBC is literally a key player in paving the way towards to second Holocaust”
that is you bringing up a supposed second holocaust. no, the IDF are not keeping the first holocaust at bay, they are protecting (or attempting to) Israel from its neighbours. and their methods for doing this have created greater instability in the region.
don’t attempt to lecture me on jihadi groups holding their own people to ransom; I’m well aware of it, and I’ve never suggested that it doesn’t happen.
israels situation today has moved well beyond the holocaust – it is not relevant to the current situation in the middle east so stop bringing it up. Israels enemies today are enemies because of events since WW2 that have nothing to do with nazi extermination camps.
the only link that i can see is that without the holocaust the state of israel never couldve existed as it is today. the jihadis today are opposed to the israeli land grabs and the violence that has occurred since.
Gus Haynes,
You are missing the point. People with your beliefs are already looking the other way as vandalism and violence against Jews increases. People with your beliefs are already looking the other way when Iran develops nuclear weapons fuel. You all looked the other way when the the President of a UN member state called for the destruction of another UN member state. “Oh, that’s just sabre rattling because he feels threatened by Israel,” people like you said, “No need to take it seriously, and it’s Israel’s fault anyway.”
The BBC makes every effort – openly admitted by the Director General, I should remind you – to respect Muslim sensitivities. The BBC has advocated many causes, including Social Cohesion (which is in their Charter). They’ve done endless amounts of shows, entire series, even, promoting various causes, especially that of telling the indigenous British population that they should respect and accept Muslims and not be afraid of them, and not harm them. They also have basically put the case to the public that Israel’s bad behavior is largely responsible for anything that happens to Jews anywhere else.
Yet, the BBC has been utterly silent on the matter of violence and vandalism against Jews in the UK. Maybe they’ll do the occasional news brief of a cemetery getting vandalized. But do they talk about it on Panorama? Question Time? Today? A Book at Bedtime?
No. When it comes to Jews, the BBC looks the other way, and at the same time encourages tolerance (with large hints of justification) of those doing the violence.
If you don’t see this as a recipe for serious ugliness, you need to wake up. We all know that people like you are sick of hearing about the Holocaust, and that it breeds resentment. After all, why should you feel guilty about it? You’ve never done anything, nor did your family. Jews use the Holocaust to bludgeon anyone who complains about Israel, yes, we know. “And in any case,” as the BBC allows people to say unchallenged on air, “it’s Israel doing the genocide these days, innit?”
So these days there’s almost a Holocaust Corollary to Godwin’s Law. So never mind another Holocaust.
The BBC’s editorial policy and biased reporters are helping to create a public attitude that will, at some stage soon enough given the worsening economic climate, tolerate some pretty massive violence against Jews in the UK. It won’t be Nazi-style, highly organized extermination (we’re talking about Britain, after all). Something like Kristallnacht can happen anywhere, no Nazi regime required. All that’s required is enough people who want to do a bit of ultra-violence, and enough people to look the other way while they do it. All that’s required is for Lord Ahmed’s 10,000 Muslims to be provoked by something like, say, the DEC appeal, combined with you and your neighbors looking the other way because Israel has committed war crimes.
Do you have confidence that your local constabulary can prevent it?
All because of the relentless demonization – beyond criticism, beyond pointing out mistakes – of Israel, and there won’t be any point in arguing about how it’s not anti-Semitism.
If any of what Gus Haynes says on the subject was the truth, he might have a point. But as practically every single word is almost the opposite of historically documented fact, one can only marvel at the depth and breadth of his mis education.
“The MSM still succeeds in passing off propaganda as journalism in large part because it is the only voice most people hear.”
Another ‘dinner party’ gem is the one about exploiting the holocaust. Now, it’s unmentionable. Why? It’s milking sympathy, exploitation of victimhood, an industry, and a vehicle for shutting down debate.
Never mind the fact that saying that is itself shutting down debate, which is okay because that way round, it’s the consensus.
Mentioning the holocaust is about knowing what can happen, what HAS happened, knowing that in pre war Germany things had to start somewhere; it’s a reminder that ordinary people were sucked in, and that there are too many parallels with here and now to ignore. So if people like Gus Haynes are determined to remain ignorant, but still wish to express their opinions, then they get comments like this from people like me, and a fat lot of good it probably does either of us.
Gus Haynes,
I can see from your latest comment that you are beyond repair. Why not go to a Pali hate site, and take all your cos’s with you.
Sue, rather than ‘beyond repair’ I am the sort of person who is ready to be convinced by an argument that shows me I have been wrong. Nothing you posted convinces me of much sue, David P on the other hand wrote a great deal of sense, and ha made me think a great deal. Sue let me ask you a question; can someone be opposed to Israeli foreign policy and not be anti-semitic?
Gus,
If you don’t work for the BBC, you have all the qualifications for it.
For instance, you claim I said ‘The BBC is literally a key player in paving the way towards to second Holocaust”. Can you point out where I said this? You can’t, because I did not.
Then you say about the IDF: ‘and their methods for doing this have created greater instability in the region.’
Really? What methods are these? The warning of civilians before you go after the combatants hiding in their midst? The great efforts to pinpoint the combatants to minimize civilian casualties? For your information, these are the requirements of the Geneva conventions, which the IDF seems to be the only army in the world to stick by. The same certainly cannot be said of American and/or European forces in Serbia, Afganistan and elsewhere.
That you get the opposite impression is entirely the fault of the likes of the BBC. After all, you know that the other side deliberately targets civilians, so don’t you ask yourself how on earth do you end up with the opposite impression that the one to target civilians is rather the IDF protecting from the terrorists? The answer is of cours: the Beeb, present day Der Stuermer with improved tactics.
Gus Haynes | 06.03.09 – 3:39 pm | #
Gus,
Of course someone can be critical of Israel’s policies and not be antisemitic, as are many Israelis. What do you mean, Israel’s foreign policy?
If you mean their policies concerning attempting to stay alive, then there are many views on the ways their government goes about doing that. But one thing is antisemitic, and that’s denying their right to defend themselves and doubting their right to exist.
If you have been thinking a great deal, what’s the outcome? If you can, define what exactly is convincing about David P’s argument and unconvincing in mine? I can’t see much difference, personally. Is it cos of cos?
Gus,
With Sue’s permission, I’ll try and answser the question you posed for her.
I myself do not always agree with Israeli policies, and I’m certainly not an antisemite; never noticed any self-hatred on my part.
If you criticize Israel for things you let others pass, like falsely accusing the IDF of precisely the crimes perpetrated by its opponents, then yes. You are an antisemite.
.
Gus,
I’ve just noticed your ‘the Jihadis are opposed to Israeli land grabs’?
Well, I suppose this sums you up: Justifying the Jihadis with a false accusation against Israel.
There are no Israeli land grab. Never has been. Israel is now less than a quarter of the original territory allocated to it by the League of Nations, all because of Arab land grabs, at first with British active support and then with the support of others, and even now Israel is still giving up land in the hope of peace. There has never been any land grab except on the Arab part.
.
Anat (Israel) | 06.03.09 – 5:44 pm,
Those who complain about the IDF’s “methods” always fall silent when asked what they would do in Israel’s position. Then, after scratching their heads for a while, come up with the stale old idea of Israel trading land for “peace.” When it is pointed out that Israel tried precisely that by withdrawing from Gaza, only to be immediately attacked again with Kassam rockets from Palestinian terrorists obsessed with murdering Jews, they fall silent again.
Then they scratch their heads a little longer before insisting that there is a “blockade” of Gaza and that justifies the rocket fire. When it is pointed out that Palestinian terrorists never gave any negotiations a chance, but resumed rocket fire at Israeli civilians when the dust from the disengagement had barely settled, they fall silent again. At this stage, they usually give up and find another avenue for Israel-bashing.
Bryan
The Today prog this morning had the Syrian Ambassador to Britain saying that all would be well – if only there was a trade of land for peace.
JohnA | 07.03.09 – 10:16 am
Yes, we hear that line quite often on Today. But can you remember the last time any of the following points were allowed to be aired on Today?
1. Israel has a well-founded fear that a Palestinian State would be used as a base for rocket attacks or terrorist attacks on Israel.
2. That when given a chance to elect their own government, Palestinians elected Hamas, a terrorist group. Fatah, another terrorist group came second. Palestinian Democrats came last. Not encouraging.
3. That Palestinians have never put up leaders with whom Israel could deal. The first, Mufti Husseini, was a pal of Adolf Hitler who spent the war years in Berlin urging the Nazis to kill Jews. The next, Arafat, was a terrorist. The present one. Abu Mazen, is a corrupt old bugger who can’t or won’t face down his own extremists.
4. That 1.5 million Arabs live in Israel as Israeli citizens. So it’s not too much to ask that 200 – 400 K Jewish settlers should be allowed to remain in territory earmarked for a Palestinian state. Why should any Palestinian state be 100% Jew-free?
5. That if the Palestinians were to hold an election in which the parties which came first and second were both made up of democrats untainted with terrorism, who were willing to recognize Israel, and live in peace and amity with it, and would make a reasonable deal on settlers and Jerusalem – then there would be NO PROBLEM for 80% + of Israelis.
You just never hear ANY of that.
JohnA | 07.03.09 – 10:16 am
That’s hilarious. Israel could withdraw to the Tel Aviv beachfront and the Arabs would not be satisfied.
Tom | 07.03.09 – 11:45 am,
Yes, it’s an unwritten rule at the bBC that you can’t mention genuine Israeli concerns or point out the hypocrisy and bigotry inherent in the Arabs’ insistence on a Jew-free Palestine.
Classic piece of Jeremy Bowen oin the Today prog this morning – at 08.10 – in the discussion on the diplomatic approaches to Syria. Bowen seemed enthused by the idea of a diplomatic rapprochement, and said this would be better than the Bush days which were seen as very unconstructive “by most people in the Middle East.” He then hastily added “The Arabs, that is”.
Incidentally the 8.10am slot is of course the top slot on Today. What crazy distorted news values says this is the most important item for the British people ? The Syria issue had already been covered at 07.22 – and anyway it is mostly speculative, no-one has a clue what will happen.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/today/newsid_7929000/7929848.stm
(Can someone please check what Bowen’s exact words were, plus context – my PC speakers or sound card are playing up.)
John A,
My quirky old computer really doesn’t like that Today page. It freezes up and I can’t move the mouse. I guess it has something to do with the fact that there are so many audio clips on one page. Last time I tried it took half an hour to eventually access one clip. Same thing started to happen now.
Now I can see all fourteen audio screens with the text next to each but can’t get a result by clicking on any of them.
It’s probably not your sound card or speakers but the way that page is set up, if you can get sound elsewhere.
Can’t be botheed with the beginning, but Bowen gets progressively more child-like and mid-Atlantic.
“……They might certainly wanna do that” ………”The issues are less complicated with Syria”. …..”the way they might think abaht it.” ….”Unless you talk “things aren’t gonna get Bedda” “Liddle bit of a low-hanging fruit.” “Flip! as he pud it. Flip Syria into the western camp…….Because Assad is a secular man”……………….
“I don’t think that Syria will be prepared ……… be friends with us and dump yer old friends! Syria wants to be a bridge. They’d like to be a bridge………. We wanna be friends with America, but we don’t ask the U.S. to dump Israel” …..
Then the bit you mentioned:
…….. “Break with the policies of the Bush administration that most people in the middle east, certainly on the Arab side, believe were not successful ad-all.”
Then, the interview with the evil ambassador for Syria who advises Obama to listen to the aspirations of the Arab people, not to Israel, tells us Hezbolla are a legitimate organisation, and assures us that once “withdrawal” has taken place “we’ll negotiate.”
Sue
Thanks
Bowen really is the personification of BBC bias.
The Today prog this morning had the Syrian Ambassador to Britain saying that all would be well – if only there was a trade of land for peace.
JohnA | 07.03.09 – 10:16 am
You really ought to use the smiley feature of Haloscan if you are being sarcastic. 😉
The Islamic Resistance Movement (Hamas) maintains that the land of Palestine is Waqf land given as endowment for all generations of Muslims until the Day of Resurrection. One should not neglect it or [even] a part of it, nor should one relinquish it or [even] a part of it. No Arab state, or [even] all of the Arab states [together], have [the right] to do this; no king or president has this right nor all the kings and presidents together; no organization, or all the organizations together – be they Palestinian or Arab – [have the right to do this] because Palestine is Islamic Waqf land given to all generations of Muslims until the Day of Resurrection.
This is the legal status of the land of Palestine according to Islamic law. In this respect, it is like any other land that the Muslims have conquered by force, because the Muslims consecrated it at the time of the conquest as religious endowment for all generations of Muslims until the Day of Resurrection. This is how it was: when the conquest of Al-Sha’m [8] and Iraq was complete, the commanders of the Muslim armies sent messages to the Caliph ‘Umar b. Al-Khattab, asking for instructions concerning the conquered land – should they divide it up among the troops or leave it in the hands of its owners or what?
Hamas Covenant
One very serious part of the Palestinians (you may have forgotten who fought the Gaza war) has made it quite clear that nothing less than 100% will do.