I only had half an eye on Peter Taylor’s Generation Jihad last night – and also, until I noticed it on the website, I didn’t realise it was only part one of a series of three. So my impression that he was more sympathetic to his Jihadi interviewees than strictly necessary may be premature. He may have been coaxing them into letting their fanaticism speak for itself. But this episode strove to convince us that Islamist extremism wasn’t the real Islam, but as chalk to ‘moderate’ Islam’s cheese.
I was horrified to see him perpetuating the discredited tale of the Al Durah shooting at the hands of the Israelis, when the veracity of that has been exposed, at the very least, as dubious.
If Peter Taylor is sufficiently ignorant about the controversy surrounding that case to use it to illustrate justification for Jihad how does that make the rest of his programme look?
Yes, I was puzzled why his series was being welcomed with open arms in a previous Contribution.
This journalist is not ‘without form’, although not one of the worst offenders.
Peter Taylor is one of the best of the BBC’s journalists, and it is a step forward in understanding that at least he does usE the accurate word ‘jihad’, and not the loose word ‘terror’ in the series’ title.
But, Mr Taylor, did -and I agree with DV -give too much uninterrupted time to the two convicted Muslims interviewed to propagandise for jihadist aims. It’s not adequate for Mr. Taylor to merely say something to the effect, ‘most British people would disagree with that’.
Two basic weaknesses of analysis in ‘Generation Jihad’ were:
1.) the usual BBC presumption that the Islamic jihad threat in Britain only involves a ‘tiny minority of Muslims’. There is evidence that the problem is growing, and that would-be jihadists have considerable support among Muslims, as was suggested by the ‘feting’ of convicted and imprisoned Muslims interviewed.
2.) as usual, the political line was that we are dealing with the individual problems of some socially isolated young Muslim males.
There is no suggestion in ‘Generation Jihad’ that there is a strong anti-infidel, pro-jihad message in key Islamic texts which provide an ideological basis for violent action; even though jihadists themselves often state explicitly that it is Islam which inspires them.
Next week, the series apparently takes a more global approach, and includes reference to the jihad threat to the United States.
Taylor did some interesting work during the troubles in Northern Ireland and wrote some books on the subject. I would be surprised if he would deny the Maoist dictum that terrorists are like fish in water: the “water” in NI being the large number of passive supporters (whether motivated by positive conviction or fear of reprisal) of the PIRA in the Catholic population of NI. Similarly, I think he’d be hard put to deny (but highly reluctant to mention – this is the BBC after all) that the “water” of Islamist terrorism in the UK is probably a substantial number of passive Muslim supporters of jihad here.
Most Muslims believe that 9/11 wasn’t the work of Bin Laden, you only have to hear these halfwits on the radio phone-in’s. Not only that but most Muslims are at least sympathetic to Bin Laden AND all Muslims would like the UK to be an Islamic state.
1% willing to be Jihadis
10% willing to help Jihads
And the rest? Sitting on their hands.
“And the rest? Sitting on their hands.”
All the better to keep them being chopped off.
He’s aware of the controversy surrounding the Al Durah video. He just doesn’t buy into it. As far as he’s concerned, it was the truth.
He’s not alone, of course. The BBC still has that bit of blood libel on the website.
Good Grief. It was dated October 2000, maybe they’ve got something more later, reporting Philippe Karsenty and the court cases?
Yes they have. Here and here and here.
“Even if Mohammed al-Dura was killed by a Palestinian bullet, if it hadn’t been for the Israeli occupation in Gaza, he would be still alive today.”
That argument, “it doesn’t matter if it was staged or not, it represents the sort of thing that we know goes on.”
Unbelievably Charles Enderlin was reported to have said something like that. France 2. Spokesman for France’s National T.V. Suitable motto for the BBC ?
So you’re probably right that he knows but doesn’t buy in. But he might just have mentioned that its authenticity was the subject of a long running dispute.
Sue, all three of those BBC articles you’ve linked to are weighted in favor of Enderlin, full of reminders that the dead boy is still a potent symbol of Israeli nastiness, with suggestions that anyone questioning the veracity of Enderlin’s version is the side of Israel, as opposed to on the side of the truth. And even if it’s nearly ten years old, the blood libel is still on the BBC website, without caveat or correction.
Yes, exactly. I hope my comment didn’t look as though I was disagreeing with you. It wasn’t meant to look that way.
Perhaps we must be grateful that Peter Taylor is tackling the subject at all, and, as someone else said, that he actually uses the words terror and jihad. Grateful for small mercies.
T he BBC’s runs a ceaseless political campaign to close down Guantanamo, and to release many of its inmates, who have turned out to be recidivist jihadists.
One might think that the BBC would question the political credentials of its fellow campaigners, such as Amnesty , and Mr Begg, but NO, not a word from the BBC.
In contrast, the ‘Daily Mail’ has:
“Amnesty chief suspended after attacking group’s links to ‘Britain’s most famous Taliban supporter'”
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1249649/Amnesty-turmoil-suspending-chief-attacked-groups-links-Muslim-jihadists.html#ixzz0f4RYZiAA
The BBC’s coverage of the War against Terrorism and the fight of allies like Israel against the terrorist threat they face should be the subject of a public inquiry.
There is ample evidence that they aid and abett the enemy. I dont think they want Al Qa’eda to win (Hamas and Hezbollah certainly), but at the same time they dont want to see them defeated. They get too much mileage serving their own agenda by subverting the war effort.
The statement on Gita Saghal’s suspension by AI’s ‘Senior Director for International Law and Policy, Widney Brown, is absolutely hilarious.
http://livewire.amnesty.org/2010/02/07/human-rights-are-for-all/
They have a blurb for their new ‘actionzine’ to the right with headline ‘Demand Dignity’. Do these people have no sense of irony? Trying showing some first AI.
Anyone else notice how the BBC have played down the Cadbury’s factory shutting down? Remember how the BBC bigged up Mong and Mandy spouting about how they were “warning Kraft”?
So where is the BBC door stepping Mong and Mandy now asking why they haven’t done something? As usual it was a worthless sound bite, a blatant lie parroted by the BBC to make mong and Mandy seem in charge.
Can we have a new general thread someone?
Oh and what a shock. The other day I commented that Brown has been making all sorts of promises about care for the elderly and Cancer care and not once did the BBC (unlike they do with the Tories) question how Brown was going to pay for this. Well I wonder if the BBC will ignore this story in the Times?
“…More than 70 leaders of social care throughout England are warning that the Government’s plans to provide free home care are flawed, unfunded and will force cuts to current services…”
Of course this doesn’t come as a shock to us here on B-BBC but Labour of course are simply peddling lies backed up by the BBC (just like Brown and Mandelson lied about not letting Kraft cut UK jobs at Cadburys). The BBC really need to be held to account for spouting stories they know are lies.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article7021299.ece
There’s a new Open Thread now Martin, cheers for the prompt…
Islamic Jihad.
What we are up against, BBC:
“Many people love the idea of jihad, you know? And they want to engage in it.”
(inc. Video report)
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2010/02/many-people-love-the-idea-of-jihad-you-know-and-they-want-to-engage-in-it.html
BBC: lost in translation over Islamic jihad in Indonesia.
BBC report:
“Jakarta hotel bombs trial begins”
The report contains this fragment:
“Indonesia suffered a number of bomb attacks – mainly linked to the militant group Jemaah Islamiah”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/8507530.stm
Mmm, a “miltant” outfit, BBC, not what could more accurately be described as an Islamic jihad group?
Check it out BBC. Learn something, even from something as basic as ‘Wikipedia’:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jemaah_Islamiyah
Ahmadinejad’s ‘PRESSTV”s TV channel, is still churning out its propaganda on Sky satellite, 24/7, from its LONDON HQ!
British government (and BBC ) disinterested.
Meanwhile:
“Iran bans foreign media from Revolution Day”
http://www.alarabiya.net//articles/2010/02/10/99990.html