Melanie Phillips has written an unusually optimistic article “Decency Fights Back.”
Her first topic is Robin’s department, and I’m ill-equipped to comment, but I do happen to have read, through links on the socially inadequate, pimpled , unmarried, slightly seedy, bald, cauliflower-nosed-run blogosphere, two of the other articles she highlights.
The first was by Peter Hitchens (Daily Mail) about being imprisoned in David Cameron’s “prison camp”, and the second by Nick Cohen (Observer) on the mind(boggling)set of the authorities at UCL who can’t understand how Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab got those silly ideas.
The other hopeful sign Melanie mentions is a pro Israel demonstration that took place in Rome last week.
Peter Hitchens is no apologist for Israel, so if the BBC turns a blind eye to his personal account of Gaza and the West Bank, defending the impartiality of their Middle East staff will look even more of a travesty. As for the University College London, I despair.
Tiny slivers of light are begining to shed isolated shafts of light that pierce the MSM constructed gloom around the topic of Israel and the REAL intentions of the Palestinian Arabs.
All we want is the truth, the unvarnished untainted truth and is that really too much to ask? Well yes it is in fact because if we were presented with the bald truth the manufactured and fabricated sympathy for the ‘plight’ of the Palestinian cause would evaporate.
This fabricated ‘plight’ is self imposed like a hair shirt and a tool to prolong and incubate race hatred of the worst kind. There is no deal because in truth the Palestinains do not want or desire a deal as an end but rather as a means to an end and that end is the extermination of Israel.
The appeasers and the Jew haters would have you believe that if only Israel gave in and made crippling concessions then peace would reign, those with a secret agenda are utterly determined that we must not be shown the truth of the tragedy and the real intentions of those involved.
You have all seen with your own eyes and heard with your own ears the lies and cynical manipulations coming from the BBC, they are in this fraud up to their necks. When you realise the true intentions of Abbas and his hamarse comrades you see that Israel should be building her walls higher not knocking them down and we should be helping.
It doesnt take a psychic Cassandra to see the future being crafted right now in front of our eyes does it? The future is clear and plain for those with eyes to see and if Israel makes the kind of peace the Arabs wish for then Israel will not exist in five years.
Rage and jealousy and bitterness and hatred are simply a motivating tool for the islamists, they thrive in this filthy mixture and cannot live without it. As long as they can foster and nuture and grow this poisonous brew they have a hope of winning HOWEVER if the islamists stop fomenting and peddling this poison in the people under its sway then their cause is LOST. No wonder then that the islamists cling so desperately to the darkness.
Here’s another glimmer. Someone to keep an eye on is Mudar Zahran, a Jordanian of Palestinian heritage, currently a researcher at the University of Bedfordshire.
I found this through a link on socially inadequate, pimpled , unmarried, slightly seedy, bald, cauliflower-nosed Elder of Ziyon’s blog.
At last someone from the moderate Muslim world who ‘gets it.’
With people like this emerging in the (etc etc) blogosphere, and, maybe, socially inadequate, pimpled , unmarried, slightly seedy, bald, cauliflower-nosed Shireen Qudosi of the Qudosi Chronicles around, maybe there is some truth in the existence of that ephemeral phenomenon the moderate Muslim, after all.
People like us O:-) sticking the truth down the necks of people like them :-$
and we are winning and they bloody well dont like it do they?
People like us on the outside and people like them on the inside and I would rather be on the outside with people you and DV and all the other posters on this wonderful site.
When you think about it, those who used to have the monopoly on mass media news communication have lost their monopoly now, their breed and ethos dead tired and dying and they have become lazy and stupid. They used to be the voice of freedom and democracy didnt they? But they are now just an establishement mouthpiece unable or unwilling to challenge the orthodoxy, speak the truth to power or even be arsed to investigate a story properly.
They used to be the future once didnt they? The sooner these jerkoffs get the message the better for all of us.
Cass
you and I must have been forged in the same mould
you say what I am thinking on so many topics
Many many thanks for the kind words my friend 😀 .
Its funny You should say that because I feel the same way, its almost as if many of us are linked closely by ideals and ideas and its the new medium acting as an enabler.
In the olden days we would have met at uni and gone to all the SWP meetings with Marr and his friends and swapped our miners solidarity and CND badges and denounced Maggie for everything =-O but now look whats happened? The new sweeps aside the old seperations that most have felt upto now. But here is the interweb bringing us all together in a place where we can become a group. Great minds think alike!
Cassie,
Well said ! I meet few people in my personal life with similar ideas then, as I have said before , I come on to this website and “I am not alone”.
Keep up the good work everyone. This site is all that stands between me and the madhouse !
Agree 100001% Grant, we are finding our voice and we are being heard.
We need a network of ordinary people and I hope this is just the start, the seeds of the tea party we so desperately need. Things are happening right now being done without our consent and its destroying the one home our people will ever have.
Hey! I’m not bald!
The Islam-appeasing panel report on University College, London’s role was predictable; that panel is imbued with the same censorship about Islam and jihad as INBBC.
If there were ever an inquiry into pro-Islam propaganda at INBBC, the first two steps INBBC would take to ensure the desired pro-Islam outcome would be: appoint someone such as Bari on the panel, and censor out the use of words such as ‘Islamic jihad’ from the beginning.
After Christmas jihad bomb attempt, UK academics ignore, deny, minimize problem of jihadist activity among Muslim students
Ben Thompson is not by far the most contentious reporter the BBC has sent to Israel. and except for one glaring error which unfortunately is his concluding statement there is only one criticism and one are you sure question..
Dead Sea to be topped up by Red Sea water
One criticism: The headline and the article are unrelated. There is no mention of plans to use the water from the Red Sea.
One question: Look at the area around the abandoned farming village. Does it look like anything commercial could grow there? There are Israeli agricultural enterprises but they use water from the National Water Carrier or natural springs.
One glaring error: Syria doesn’t use water from the Dead Sea unless water flows up. Israel and Syria share some water resources that arguably might be used to fill the Dead Sea but that is about 200 km north.
I read Peter Hitchens peice and really think they guy is still struggling with not being able to blame Israel for everything…even though everything was laid out in front of him.
To me, his article sounds more like an attempt to appease his inner hatred than to really fully examine the facts of the land.
Mind you…he at least isnt half as twisted as some of the haters who posted after the article are!
The simple fact is there could be peace tomorrow if the Arab world would accept Israels right to exist as a Jewish state and live in peace.
I think for that to happen something has to happen to convince the Arab world that there is more in it for them to allow Israel to live in peace and all inhabitants around Israel to prosper and live in safety than there is for them to continue their war of hatred against the juices.
Mailman
Great post mailman and you have made a great point that many miss 😉 .
The Arab world have to be shown in no uncertain terms that the West will support the right of Israel to exist as a sovereign Jewish state and homeland.
Make it known, nail our intentions to the door of the church as it were so there can be no mistaking our intent or will.
people either forget or don’t want to face facts that old yasser fatrat walked away from the 1993 talks even after having got 95% of what he claimed he wanted
what they really want is the end of Israel,pure and simple
well,it ain’t gonna happen
Remember that on the same day Yasser Arafat signed the Declaration of Principles on the White House lawn in 1993, he explained his actions on Jordan TV thus “Since we cannot defeat Israel in war, we do this in stages. We take any and every territory that we can of Palestine, and establish a sovereignty there, and we use it as a springboard to take more. When the time comes, we can get the Arab nations to join us for the final blow against Israel.”
Those who rightly condemn the misery of the camps should ask themselves whose fault it really is.
In one.
Robin Shepherd nails it:
“I know that this is not supposed to be amusing, but sometimes the sheer brazenness of the BBC’s rewriting of history to accommodate the Palestinians is laugh out loud hilarious. To wit: as I was browsing the BBC MidEast section on its website today — 10 out of 14 entries are on Israel, so you get a sense of the level of obsession we are dealing with — I came across a helpful little item explaining to readers the history of peace talks between Israel, the Palestinians and the wider Arab world.”
“Authoritatively entitled History of Mid-East Peace talks, it’s a real gem. First off, it begins in 1967. Now that’s useful, because if you had to go back to 1947 you’d have to acknowledge that the Jewish/Israeli side accepted a UN partition plan, rejected in favour of violence by the Palestinian/Arab side, which would have inaugurated a two-state solution right from the start. But the BBC obviously doesn’t want to torpedo the Palestinian agenda from the get-go. So, as I say, history begins with the dreaded “occupation” 20 years later.
…………………………………………..
“The BBC agenda here is clear. To go back to 1947 and to note the Palestinian/Arab rejection of peace would be to locate the core blame for the conflict at the door of the Palestinians. To note Arafat’s rejectionism in 2000 and 2001 as well as Abbas’s in 2007 would be to do likewise. Therefore, all mention of such inconvenient truths is cynically and deliberately airbrushed from the picture.
“It is not even as if the BBC could have accepted basic journalistic ethics and quoted someone such as Ross to offer readers a view of the conflict which they could then go away and mull over for themselves. They have adopted the Soviet-era view that even to allow for the possibility of a different narrative is to break apart the rigid ideological uniformity that their position so desperately requires.
“Yes, you could argue that Reynolds and the editorial staff of the BBC simply don’t know about the UN partition resolution; that they have never heard of Dennis Ross; that they do not know about Bill Clinton’s angry denunciations of Arafat’s rejectionism; that they simply forgot about Olmert’s offers to Abbas in 2007. Believe all that if you want to.
“But I ask you: which is the more likely explanation? A group of people so ignorant that basic facts are simply lost on them? Or the sinister machinations of mature and calculating minds who know exactly which facts to leave out to sustain a pre-ordained agenda?
“Not one of life’s most taxing puzzles, I’d respectfully suggest……..”
Come Paul Reynolds you used to post here. Which is it?
Robin Shepherd is a wonderful asset to supporters of Israel, especially under BBC’aria-compliant law where a non-Jew’s word is worth twice a Jew’s 😉
the only way to get the BBC website to publish something approximating the truth would be to hack into it and write it yourself
cause if you waiting for the al beeeb beboids to shake off their dhimmitude and do it themselves,you might as well wait for HamAss to wrap themselves in the star of david and start eating bacon like it was going out of fashion
How Jordanians become Palestinians, at a stroke of the Arab pen.
How about this forced through by the Arab League on Jordan (no doiubt pleased to shuffle off the responsibilty for the 1047 annexation of the West Bank and East Jerusalem.
From Human Rights Watch.
In his speech on July 31, 1988, King Hussein announced the severance of Jordan’s administrative and legal ties to the West Bank, relinquishing claims to Jordanian sovereignty there. Jordan has not passed any law on the details of the disengagement.
Two days before the king’s disengagement speech, the Ministry of Interior had issued disengagement instructions comprising 22 articles. Article 2 of the instructions provides for withdrawal of Jordanian nationality from residents of the West Bank: “Every person residing in the West Bank before the date of 31/7/1988 will be considered as [a] Palestinian citizen and not as Jordanian.” In his speech King Hussein stressed that disengagement “naturally do[es] not relate in any way to the Jordanian citizens of Palestinian origin in the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan. They have the full rights of citizenship and all its obligations, the same as any other citizen irrespective of his origin.”
In this report, Human Rights Watch does not address the legality of the 1988 announcement of Jordan’s disengagement from the West Bank that turned approximately one million Jordanians living in the West Bank into stateless Palestinians. Instead, we document the ongoing and current withdrawal of Jordanian nationality from Jordanians of Palestinian origin living in Jordan.
Question. Why does Human Rights Watch not question the legality of the 1988 decision.?
Was this the birth of the two state solution. At a stroke the ‘Palestinians’ (so defined in the Arab world since 1961) became stateless.
Sorry 1947 annexation of the West Bank.
Using a new Keyboard.
This analysis is off INBBC’s radar:
“Fitzgerald: ‘Palestinians,’ and the need for things to be seen aright” (2007)
[Extract]:
“Only in one case do we permit a certain pseudo-group from handing down, as if in the genes, the quality of being a ‘refugee’ — and this is in the case of the so-called ‘Arab refugees,’ who after 1967 were named ‘Palestinian refugees.’ That word ‘refugee’ can only apply to those who actually moved from country A to country B. It cannot legitimately apply to their children born in country B, and it certainly cannot legitimately apply to those who moved out of the country in 1948, thinking they would soon be returning in the wake of a successful Arab military campaign.”
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2007/07/fitzgerald-palestinians-and-the-need-for-things-to-be-seen-aright.html