I am well aware that Peter Oborne’s C4 anti-Jew documentary was not a BBC programme. However, years of biased reporting on the Israeli/Palesinian situation well and truly prepared the ground for Peter Oborne to score his illegitimate goal.
Meanwhile, if anyone was acting as referee, they must have steadfastly withstood the pressure from the mighty Jewish lobby and looked the other way.
The inferior quality of the programme was no secret, and many of the supportive comments that popped up in response seem to be of a similar standard. But the obvious flaws in both provide little reassurance that the groundswell of anti Israel feeling can be disregarded as an aberration of the ignorant; like tattoos.
The insinuations littering the programme were designed to implant the idea that everything ever said in support of Israel was sponsored by wealthy Jews with an ulterior motive, while if any denunciation of Israel remained unsaid, that was only because wealthy Jews with an ulterior motive have suppressed it.
Peter Oborne says anti-Semitism is no longer a racist abomination against Jews, but a weapon used by them to quash protests from victims of the sinister Jewish lobby. The suggestion that Jews cynically use accusations of anti-Semitism as a silencing tool is itself a silencing tool of the first order.
What really is sinister is the media’s suspicion and dislike of Jews and the BBC’s affection for Muslims. Is nobody aware of the gathering storms of 30s Germany? How long before they drop their guard and blurt out that Hitler was right.
See Robin Shepherd’s article in the Wall Street Journal, read his blog. Check out CiFWatch.
“I am well aware that Peter Oborne’s C4 anti-Jew documentary was not a BBC programme.”…but it’s all their fault!!
great post, truly
Bob,
Thank you. Your comment was historic, too.
Peter Oborne talks a lot about the BBC in his film and alleges that the BBC is under pressure from organised campaigns led by HonestReporting. My last complaint to the BBC is still unanswered and the article I complained about its historical inaccuracies is still online unchanged.
Here’s HonestReporting’s response to Osborne’s allegations:
Under Attack: HR Accused by UK TV Documentary
There’s plenty in it relevant to the BBC and its bias.
Quite so.
I think the BBC has set the scene so that the likes of Oborne’s programme are deemed acceptable. Also it has created a climate where all sorts of anti-Semitic feelings are coming out of the closet, and are also deemed acceptable.
Although some people want this site to stick rigidly to documenting individual inaccuracies or glaringly obvious examples of bias some of us can see further than the smaller picture, and unfortunately, others can’t.
All the critiques of Oborne’s programme that I’ve seen mention the BBC, and every one I’ve read attributes a great deal of the current atmosphere to the BBC’s huge influence.
All the critiques of Oborne’s programme that I’ve seen mention the BBC, and every one I’ve read attributes a great deal of the current atmosphere to the BBC’s huge influence.
So in other words, ‘cos everyone else says it, it must be true’ ??
This is getting increasingly desperate.
This is getting increasingly desperate.
So it is. Try taking a cold shower.
No. Because the BBC says it everyone else thinks it’s true, even if it isn’t.
Sue has painstakingly tried to explain to you how the BBC exerts its anti-Israel/pro-Palestine influence (is it a lobby?) and how the respect that the BBC generally enjoys legitimises programmes such as Osborne’s.
One of the examples Osborne uses is the criticism of Jeremy Bowen, which according to Osborne was orchestrated by “The Israel Lobby™”. That’s the same Jeremy Bowen who has publicly stated that he will never forgive the IDF for shelling the car his driver was sitting in. His attitude is manifest in all of his reporting, he his blatantly anti-Israel and makes no attempt to hide it, yet when he is the subject of a complaint it’s discounted as “those pesky Jews whining again”.
The other BBC reporter who Osborne claims was a target of “The Israel Lobby™” is Orla Guerin. HonestReporting criticised her reporting from Lebanon comparing it with the reports filed by… Channel 4. The same Channel 4 that aired Osborne’s documentary!
See here.
* * * *
<img style=”margin-bottom: 15px; margin-left: 15px;” src=”http://www.honestreporting.com/a/images/communiques/upload1/orla%20guerin.jpg” border=”0″/>Perhaps Oborne could have found an example of where HR got it wrong over the BBC’s coverage, in an attempt to embarrass us. Instead it should be Oborne who is embarrassed. Oborne takes HR UK to task, using our criticism of Orla Guerin’s coverage of the Lebanon war (BBC’s Orla Exposed) as an illustrative example. Our critique was based on bloggers and media watchdogs comparing Guerin’s August 14, 2006 report with — of all news services — Channel 4.
Guerin and C4’s Alex Thomson were both in Bint Jbeil on the same day, yet had diametrically opposed descriptions of the scope of the town’s damage. In this case, it was Channel 4’s own coverage that revealed Guerin’s shocking reporting.
Instead, Osborne simply dismisses the critiques and responses of organizations such as HR to the BBC’s reporting. Hasn’t he, in fact, produced the evidence that our work is necessary, valuable and legitimate?
The C4 Nazi phoenix from the ashes programme had everything to do with the BBC. Without Herr Oborne and Herr James meaning to they directly admitted that the BBC flouts its duty to impartiality with and editorial policy against the State of Israel:
“Meanwhile, a parallel operation is carried on against media organisations that criticise Israel’s foreign policy. In particular, the Guardian and the BBC suffer from a barrage of complaints and emails, many from outside the UK. The BBC has proved unable to cope.”
6 months ago anti-semites the world over suffered the anguish of seeing it’s most potent and insiduous anti-Jewish propaganda machine, the BBC, partly stymied by a partially upheld complaint against it for Jeremy Bowen’s bias. Is it a coincidence that after this blow to the BBC’s hitherto unhindered anti-semitic output Herr Oborne and James, by their own admission, started putting their ‘Der Sturmer Revisited’ programme together?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2009/apr/15/bbc-trust-jeremy-bowen-middle-east-editor-complaints
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/nov/16/israel-friends-lobby-uk-politicians
Firstly, let me be perfectly clear, I am suggesting that there is an anti-semitic conspiracy against Israel and this programme was clear evidence of it.
This point will be thwarted in the mainstream media, but the question must be asked, ‘exactly who is acting against Britain’s interests? Those who lobby in defence of Britain’s democratic ally, the State of Israel, or those who lobby as a propaganda arm of the tyrannies and terror groups who are Britain’s enemies who which to destroy our democratic ally and complete Hitler’s Holocaust?’
Sorry, above ‘guest comment’ is hippiepooter
Sorry, above ‘guest comment’ is hippiepooter
However, years of biased reporting on the Israeli/Palesinian situation well and truly prepared the ground for Peter Oborne to score his illegitimate goal.
I can’t quite believe I read that sue….
Is that the same as US foreign policy that consists of lobbing cruise missiles into various arab countries well and truly preparing the ground for 9/11?
Are you really suggesting that the 9/11 attacks were the US’s fault… just like you blame Jews for antisemitism?
Meanwhile I’m having fun with this.
Fat Face,
If only Oborne’s programme were as unacceptable to its audience as 9/11 was to most of the world.
You see, 9/11 was an act of terrorism and roundly condemned by all except supporters of Al Qaeda, and some Islamic fanatics. Citing foreign policy to justify it is illogical and disingenuous for many reasons.
Oborne’s programme was insinuation and tittle-tattle histrionically presented by someone with an obvious axe to grind, and he ground it loud and clear.
It should have been roundly condemned as inflammatory and defamatory, but instead it was praised. The reason it was praised was that its admirers had been persuaded that Israel and Jews are a legitimate target for vilification. Why? Because of years of both subtle and blatant bias from the nation’s trusted Broadcasting Corporation.
I hope you can believe you’ve read this.
“Is that the same as US foreign policy that consists of lobbing cruise missiles into various arab countries“
Ask Bill Clinton
al beeba would secretly love another holocaust
its time we all revolt and stop paying our lisence fee
Sorry, I know it’s O/T but at the Scotland-Australia rugby match this evening the commentary team consisted of 3 Aussies, 2 English, 1 Irishman and only 1 Scot. All we needed was that wee, squeeky voiced, Welsh git.
OUT NOW AT A CINEMA NEAR YOU…
THE OSBOURNE CONSPIRACY…
OSBOURNE Peter Osborne
ARAFAT Sir Ian McKellan
GOLDA MEIR Megan Fox
OSAMA BIN LADEN Sir Ben Kingsley
Our intrepid hero OSBOURNE battles the successful worldwide Jewish conspiracy to keep Israel as the globe’s most popular country.
Facing incredible odds, assassination plots, dirty tricks OSBOURNE tries to get at least ONE story in the BBC that is critical of the evil Jewish empire.
In a race against time, and working with the good Taliban, OSBOURNE blah blah blert
Megan Fox? Otherwise quite believable.
Yeah on reflection Megan Fox would have to play Leilah Khalid.
Vanessa Redgrave would be perfect. I’m sure she would use artistic licence and adopt a large hooked prosthetic nose, and twirl a mustache,laughing maniacally as she controlled the BBC and British media.
thanks mate for this usefull informations
we hope more and more from your nice blog
العاب حب
العاب تنظيف
لعبة محطم
العاب فلاش بنات
بن تن
العاب بن تن
العاب أكشن
العاب فلاش بنات