William Hague’s utterances about enhancing our special relationship with the Arab World which will inevitably mean ditching Israel, together with those images of Her Majesty the Queen decked out in Islam friendly headgear clearly indicate that this government has decided who to befriend and who to dump.
Pro-Israel blogs disagree as to whether George Osborne’s recent speech to a Jewish audience was genuinely friendly to Israel. He was certainly pretending it was, but various cliched references in his speech about settlement freezes and ending the blockade on Gaza suggested otherwise. Either he’s well intentioned but ill-informed, or he’s pulling the wool over our eyes with a superficially friendly gesture to British Jews before his colleagues segue seamlessly into full-on appeasement of Islam.
Relevant news appears on the non-BBC news, but not in the BBC news. If George Osborne must make statements about ‘peace in the Middle East’, he must look beyond the selective morsels BBC sees fit to pass on.
Muslim schools are doing their thing, the Guardian is obsessed with Israel to the point of insanity, the BBC is constrained by its charter, which forces it to express its feelings about Israel mainly in the form of bias by omission. Battling with such a slippery and enormous operation is daunting and challenging.
Robin Shepherd knows that the Palestinians repeatedly and openly declare that they view the two state solution as a stepping-stone. It’s merely stage one in their long-term goal, which is, of course, the elimination of Israel. What they mean by ‘Peace’, is a Middle East, and ultimately a world, without Jews. It is not settlements that are the obstacle, but Israel itself. Appeasing Islam’s inherent hatred of Jews will simply lead to further demands, and the BBC’s egregious omissions are masking this with dangerous, misguided and truly farcical politically motivated meddling.
Robin Shepherd:
”The British public, and the BBC’s tens of millions of viewers, readers and listeners around the world, are just not getting the information they need on this conflict to form a rounded judgement. It is deliberate censorship.
I know I have said all this before. But it consistently bears repeating since the role of the media, and particularly the ubiquitous BBC, in public perceptions about Israel and Palestinians is clearly vital. When it comes to this conflict the prejudices against one party, namely Israel, are so deeply entrenched that what emerges is much less like traditional journalism than the agitprop of political activism.
The BBC needs to be made aware that this is against their own charter and also makes a mockery of a once great institution’s claim to be taken seriously.”
To some of us the BBC looks like a giant self-serving clique of champagne socialists and populist hacks bound tightly together by an incestuous, impenetrable groupthink. They’ve constructed their own blockade on revealing the truth about Islam’s ultimate intentions. But there are chinks. A few items have already been allowed through. This two-part BBC World service programme by Wendy Robbins about antisemitism, for example.
One or two small steps for the BBC, one giant step for mankind. Robin Shepherd concludes:
“In the meantime just pass stories like this around to as many people as you can. If an appeal to basic journalistic standards won’t make them mend their ways, perhaps an appeal to their sense of shame will. It’s always worth a try.”
There is a wonderful article on Daphne Anson’s blog all about Charles Moore. He ‘gets it’. He has a lot to say about the BBC, and I urge you to read it all.
Yes; and INBBC’s political hostility towards Israel may well worsen as INBBC gets full editorial responsibilty for INBBC Arabic and INBBC Arabic Television (a role it takes over from British Foreign Office).
There is no need for the existence for such BBC licencepayer-funded political ‘services’.
Close down the INBBC’s Islamophilic World Service, the ‘Arabic’ sections first of all.
I think we can assume the Queen’s outfit was deliberately chosen by the FO. It says all that we need to know.
Re the Palestinians designs on all of Israel, I refer you to the words of Yasser Arafat on the same day that he 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.”
Also do remember that back on March 31, 1977, the Dutch newspaper Trouw published an interview with Palestine Liberation Organization executive committee member Zahir Muhsein. Here’s what he said:
“The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct “Palestinian people” to oppose Zionism.
For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders, cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa, while as a Palestinian, I can undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva and Jerusalem. However, the moment we reclaim our right to all of Palestine, we will not wait even a minute to unite Palestine and Jordan.”
I know that I do bang on about this but do read more here – http://notasheepmaybeagoat.blogspot.com/2010/11/two-contrasting-views-of-israel-and.html
This morning Paul Waugh Tweeted ‘Just asked No.10 St spokeswmn if Qatar shd now recognise Israel.”It’s a long way to 2022. Our views on Israel are well known.”‘
To which I replied ‘@paulwaugh Unfortunately UK government views on Israel are well-known & they are a stain on it us. Israel is only democracy in Midlle East
This Coalition government is only marginally less anti-Israel than the post Blair Labour party. The problem is the Foreign Office which has been full of ‘Arabists’ for many years – so civilized the Arabs, what a pity the Jews wanted a homeland where we promised they could have one, so inconvenient…
On the subject of Her Majesty the Queen decked out in Islam friendly headgear, here is an essay by Laurewnce Auster oin the subject
QUEEN OF DHIMMIS, EMPRESS OF THE ANTI-EMPIRE, DEFENDER OF THE ISLAMIC FAITH, HEAD OF THE SURRENDER OF ENGLAND
http://www.amnation.com/vfr/archives/018065.html#dec4
There are several comments worth reading, giving an indication how worried some Americans are of the continued Islamisation of the UK.
It should be noted that one country that the Queen has never paid an official visit, presumably on advice of the CFO and/or the Secretary of State for Commonwealth and Foreign Affairs is Israel.
‘Daily Telegraph’ headline:
“Wikileaks: Saudis ‘chief funders of al-Qaeda'”
(Interesting to have it confirmed what some Muslims use the hajj for: see caption to photo.)
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/wikileaks/8182847/Wikileaks-Saudis-chief-funders-of-al-Qaeda.html
In contrast, INBBC’s seriously deceptive Islamophilic headline:
“Wikileaks: Saudis ‘chief funders of Sunni militants'”
(And, of course the words ‘Al Qaeda’ are more accurate and take up less space than do words ‘Sunni militants’.)
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-11923176
(And, of course the words ‘Al Qaeda’ are more accurate and take up less space than do words ‘Sunni militants’.)
Ah, but when space is limited, the unique option will always be embraced, even if it is… er.. longer.
Yet another BBC ‘additional’ standard.