Several B-BBC people have commented on the BBC’s bizarre take on the recent horrific murder of an Israeli couple and three of their children. Honest Reporting singles out the BBC’s version of the story as being particularly shocking and callous.
Why would the BBC illustrate Saturday’s article with an IDF soldier?
“Palestinian ‘kills five Israelis’ in West Bank.”
What are the scare quotes for?
“Kills five Israelis?” what, they didn’t “kill” them? There weren’t five? or they weren’t Israelis?
What a pointless and inappropriate use of inverted commas, which are, don’t forget, “to convey irony.”
The headline promises the report is to be about the “killing,” but the article sets off, not with the “killing” but with something Israeli troops have done. They’ve launched a manhunt! So the report is about the manhunt, and the “killing” is relegated to second place, perhaps to provide context for this story about a manhunt.
Of course the victims weren’t just an Israeli family. No, they were a settler family, deemed illegal and subhuman under international law.
The intruders showed generosity because two other children had been spared. Mr Netanyahu on the other hand is less compassionate. He is full of threats of punishments and vigorous actions.
So “Palestinians have refused all direct contact with Israel until construction is frozen.” What about the months when all construction was frozen when the Palestinians still refused all contact with Israel? Where have all the scare quotes gone when you need them? They must have run out. ‘Until construction is frozen’ could do with a pair.
And while they are repeating the tag about settlements built since Israel’s 1967 occupation, why doesn’t the BBC remind the readers about why Israel needed to occupy any areas in the first place? It was because of a war. A war which the Arabs started, and the Arabs lost.
Next, the article last updated 13th March.
“Israel Approves new Jewish settler homes in West Bank”
An act of pure defiance and obstructionism? Handy for the BBC, though. Just the thing to justify the murder of an Israeli family including a little baby.
So the concept of ‘hundreds of homes for Jews’ excuses this compassionate intruder and his pal for an act they had no choice but to carry out?
“An Israeli government official said the construction is to be in settlements that Israel expects to retain control of in a possible peace agreement with the Palestinians.”
When it suits them, the BBC uses the all-purpose Palileaks revelations to show that, much to their disapproval, certain agreements over the allocation of territory were under consideration by both parties. That’s the Palestinians as well as the Israelis. However the BBC habitually regards whatever an Israeli government official says with deep suspicion. No, for the purpose of this particular case we are to perceive Jews expanding into ‘stolen Palestinian land’.
“An Israeli government spokesman said the construction move had been planned for some time but the BBC’s Jon Donnison in Ramallah says it’s hard not to see the timing of the announcement as linked to the killings.”
It may be hard for Jon Donnison; but surely not as hard as seeing Jewish settlements as justification for slitting the throat of a three month old baby.
Most people think that celebrating violence and terrorism by handing out sweets is newsworthy. Most people, but apparently not Jon Donnison.
Small point, but the “kills five Israelis” is known as ‘scare quotes’ to show that the reporter is using someone else’s words – an allegation or rumour or hearsay, unconfirmed. This device is often used when a story is breaking and the facts haven’t been verified. I don’t think any irony was intended.
Except it’s been confirmed now for more than 24 hours, yet the scare quotes are still there.
Richard,
Take another look at the line below and in the middle is the problem, do you see it now?
“Palestinian ‘kills five Israelis’ in West Bank.”
‘kills five Israelis’
Look closely, is the number of murdered in doubt? Is the nationality or race in doubt? Is the fact they were murdered in doubt? Perhaps they killed themselves eh? Perhaps it was an accident of some kind?
It should have read:
A family were murdered, an innocent family of civilians including a baby and a woman and children were brutally murdered. There is no doubt and there is no excuse and there are no possible extenuating circumstances and yet the article rambles on about supposed crimes of a country and a people as though the actions of a people somehow led to the murders and in some way justified them.
Why no mention of the celebrations in Gaza? Handing out sweets and praising a psychopath who could murder an infant in such a brutal way. There is no reason for sneaking into a house and murdering an infant, no justification at all whatsoever. The psychopath who did this is not angry or enraged about some supposed crimes of a race, this is insane evil bloodlust yet the BBC freely choose to equate these murders with the supposed crimes of Israel. No normal person however angry could do this, you know this, there is NOTHING, NO PROVOCATION, NO EXCUSE that could lead a normal human being to perpetrate that kind of evil butchery NONE. Yet here we have the BBC determined to use the horror story to convey another message, the two reports should be seperate and yet they are combined to trick the reader into believing that a baby and children were somehow responsible for their own murder.
I am deeply ashamed of a national broadcaster so firmly entrenched in the race hatred of a people that they are blind to the suffering and blind to the most basic of human emotions, that of empathy.
As has been pointed out, even if this was appropriate at the time, in yet another oddly selective example of journalistic rigour on matters of accuracy and quoted remarks, this is well beyond the point the famed BBC stealth editors usually have moved in to remove the night soil of their initial ‘reporting’ so things are squeaky clean come ‘Who, us?’ time.
I also interpreted the quotes as using someone else’s words. This is not an improvement. Typically the BBC uses them on any Israeli claim. Israel says, Army Radio reports, Israeli media reported. Arab claims tend to be reported (at least in the all important headline) as fact.
In a sense constantly reporting other peoples words is BBC drip-drip poison against Israel. It implies they may lack credibility. A BBC ‘neutral’, ‘professional’ ‘journalist’ hasn’t placed the seal of truth.
BTW Is the constant ‘quoting’ an indirect admission that no one from the Jerusalem office thought it important enough to visit Itamar?
BTW the same archival photograph still illustrates the piece, reinforcing the possibility that the BBC didn’t think the story important enough to invest in a photographer or even buy something current from an agency.
Can I just say something about the issue of scare quotes? Inverted comments are obviously used when repeating dialogue verbatim. I always try to use doubles for that.
They’re also used for words, phrases or passages that are ‘unconfirmed’ or ‘unverified?’ (or as I just did, to highlight them for clarity)
Can we agree, at any rate, that the BBC’s uncannily frequent use of scare quotes when reporting matters that concern Israel implies some sort of doubt?
If scare quotes are technically for things ‘unconfirmed’ – well, who would need to confirm something officially enough for scare quotes to be safely disposed of?
Does ‘confirmed’ mean that the writer must witness it with his own eyes? I think not. Jeremy Bowen would then have to surround everything he says with scare quotes, would he not?
No. Practically all news is necessarily hearsay, and reporters need to exercise judgement on its reliability. (Even if it’s ‘captured on camera’ some of it is Pallywood)
So the BBC feels that anything said by an Israeli ‘spokesperson’, must have scare quotes because it’s probably a lie, an exaggeration or propaganda, and needs to be ‘verified,’ confirmed, or corroborated by an authority (such as a Palestinian spokesperson) before the scare quotes can be safely cast off.
It’s difficult for me to blog for a day or two, so anything I say might not make as much ‘sense’ as ‘usual’. 😉
Someone suggested in another forum that the ‘scare quotes’ are incorrectly placed. The headline should read ‘Palestinian’ kills five Israelis in West Bank
Firstly, we don’t know for absolute certain that a Palestinian was responsible. Yes, El Aqsa Brigades have claimed responsibility but Palestinian terror groups have claimed credit in the past for events that either didn’t happen or that turn out to be accidents or the acts of other groups. Hamas has denied responsibility or that they ever deliberately harm children and suggested the Jews did it (shades of 9/11).
Secondly, there may have been more than one Palestinian involved.
Thirdly, the claim of Palestinian ethnicity is so dubious that ‘scare quotes’ should be used whenever the word Palestinian is written.
I would suggest the BBC change its style guide so direct speech uses “double quotes” and irony uses ‘single quotes’ but I suspect, at least when concerning the BBC’s favourite enemies the confusion is deliberate.
The BBC’s editorial policy deliberately demonizes Israel at every opportunity, although the BBC disputes this.
They could release the Balen Report if they wanted to prove that they were not biased against Israel, couldn’t they?
I’m not sure on what grounds they can possibly dispute or defend their stance. It is crystal clear where their loyalties lie. It is shocking.
“Palestinian”
made up name to kick off with anyhow
Truly a disgusting low-point in the history of BBC reporting of the I/P conflict.
Great post Sue. Truely sickening anti-semitism by the BBBC. I even screen captured the article just in case someone there realised the bias was a bit too overt and decided to tone it down. But no. They’re operating brazenly in the open now. Think I can almost hear the sound of jackboots and Cartman’s chants of “Es ist Zeit für sauberen, Wir müssen die Juden ausrotten” – coming from Portland Place.
This isn’t really anti-Semitism at the BBC, but it does contribute to an environment which encourages it and tolerates it. They know it does, too. And just like they did here, they blame the victims for it instead.
Does anyone else not find that the complete lack of empathy toward the victims and the lack of the usuallly included condemnations by religious leaders a litle scary?
It is usual to see at least some greater humanity showing itself, some kind of grieving and relatives interviewed. It was as if the entire report was washed clean of normal humanity. The report is somehow unhuman and cold.
A democrat politician and six are gunned down and it is spread across the BBC, all kinds of comments and condemnations and opinions are sought, explanations of the state of mind were aired even before the gun smoke had cleared away yet here we have the grotesque murder of a family and the few dispassionate cold lines are dwarfed by a supposed motive and excuse. Something is very very wrong at the heart of the BBC, do they not have children themselves?
They mightdo but their children are not ‘settlers’ or ‘Israelis’. The BBC have crossed a line with this report but their past years of brainwashing have been so successful that few other than us will notice or care. Congratulations BBC you may well have won!
John 16:33
Cass, the BBC have been paving the way to the second Holocaust since at least the second Intifada.
This report is just a very good example of the genocidal evil festering in their hearts, just waiting for the first excuse to unleash itself joyously into the open.
Good post Cassandra and an excellent comparison with the Arizona shooting. I think that part of the lack of empathy is down to the fact that the BBC have very little to go on in order to draw their narrative. If they were to dig any deeper, it would expose their report for what it really it is. As we’ve already seen on these threads there are several questions.
Why no covering of the celebratory sweets being handed out and the reasons cited for them? Why no reporting of the claim by the Al Aqsa brigade that they were responsible? Why no reporting of Hamas calling the attack herioc? Why no reporting of the vacated security posts undertaken by Israel under pressure from the West to bring the PA to the negotiating table? Why no reporting of how attacks increase on Israeli’s whenever their security forces move out of an area and how this withdrawal is a precusor to virtually every spike in attacks on Israel.
If they want to reduce it to an argument about settlements and their legality why do they summarise so easily that the settlements are illegal under international law without referencing that this is less than straightforward and that scholars and experts are quite divided on this. Why does reporting on this not reference the fact that settlements were agreed by the Palestinians to remian in place within the Oslo accords until their status could be permanently agreed during later meetings which the Palestinians now repeatedly refusing to attend because they have attached pre-conditions to such meetings?
This is not an issue of settlements and the BBC knows it and all the side events of the celebrations demonstrates that. But to report that they could not hold their narrative. This was a murder borne out of a particular hatred of a people wherever they may be. If they reported any deeper than this they would have to expose that for many the peace agreement is a non starter, because they know that once they have the settlements demolished, they will want all of Jerusalem and then they will want them out of Israel and then the real evil will rear it’s head when it gets laid bare that they simply want them of the planet.
they hate jews Cass
pure and simple
unless they are useful lefty ones,that is
DP, Acquiesance with anti-Semitism equates to it.
I am strongly opposed to multi-culturalism and mass immigration. I do not acquiese with BNP propaganda over it.
BBC scum. There is no other word.
Just watched an AlJazeera report on this. Very balanced. Not in anyway biased. Caught the revulsion of a family being killed and the effect of the manhunt on the local Palestinians perfectly. It did lnger a bit on the damage done to Palestinian homes, but didn’t make any opinion.
Why cn an Arab news outlet do a balanced report and yet a ‘liberal’ (I am using the quotes for irony) news outlet can’t.
Because al-Jazeera for all its faults, and it has many, tries to produce as unbiased as news coverage as it can. Yes al-Jazeera is clearly biased towards Islam and against Israel but when a crime like this happens it realises that the only decent thing to do is report it as straight as possible. The BBC has no such compunctions and that sickens me.
al-Jazeera jurnolists actually have some ethics about what they say and also grasp that any out right bias will be picked up and used to beat them and given the number of their staff that have been killed over the years it’s not hard to grasp why ! the BBC however has no such fear as no one can touch them !
An Israeli public figure (Danny Ayalon?) once said he preferred to be interviewed by Al Jazeera (who BTW are quite capable of reporting claim as fact) than the BBC. He knows Al J will report exactly the words he used.
The dehumanization process is well underway and firmly entrenched at the BBC now. The Jews fully deserved their fate, that family got what was coming to them right? These Jews were just asking for it right? If only these Jews had not commited their multitude of imagined crimes then all would be well right?
Nazi Germany in the 30s and Der Sturmer reports an elderly couple beaten to death by brownshirts, it is reported as though the Jews were to blame for their own murder, the brownshirts kicked them to death because they were angry about a war 20 odd years before or about Jewish bankers. Dirty Jews got what was coming to them right? Read copies of Der Strumer and you see the same delegitamization and dehumanizing of a race of people, the steady removal of empathy toward a race of people. The filthy Jew scum got their just desserts right? If the Jews did not commit such heinous crimes then peple would not have go to out and murder whole families of them right?
Watch the film called the ‘eternal Jew’ and notice the scene of rats running through a sewer, this is a natural evolution. The film did not just appear out of nowhere it was a steady evolution of hate. The Gas chambers did not just appear out of nowhere and Der Sturmer did not just one day turn ino a hate publication, it is the steady evolution that is happening again in the 21st century right here right now and it happening under our noses in our national broadcaster.
The BBC is on the road, it is following a well marked out path, a well known path and a well trodden path, they have started down this path that leads to the darkest reaches of the human soul. The removal of empathy, the stripping out of the normal feelings of empathy toward other human beings. The BBC has a long way to go before they could produce another ‘eternal Jew’ film but they are on their way and its only a matter of time unless they are stopped right now.
post of the day for me
Thanks for the vote of confidence.
Love the flag BTW!
The callous BBC reporting of this satanic outrage doesn’t only denote the moral degeneracy of the BBC but the moral degeneracy of our nation that there is no widespread outcry.
The murderers didn’t “spare” two of the children, they missed them.
Hear hear Hippie!
Spared two children? Oooh how humanitarian of them eh? A job with UNWRA is probably waiting for the killer(s).
Cassie, they probably already work for UNRWA … or maybe stringers for the BBC?
Politically, INBBC is lined up with Hamas and Fatah; in intention and in effect, it is their propaganda arm.
“Armchair barbarism”
(Melanie Phillips)
http://www.spectator.co.uk/melaniephillips/6779100/armchair-barbarism.thtml
And, Islam Not BBC (INBBC) confirms that: ‘we are all Hezbollah now’, by censoring this:
“Opposition rallies against Hezbollah” http://www.france24.com/en/20110313-lebanese-opposition-rallies-against-hizbollah-hariri-beirut-mikati
Islam Not BBC (INBBC) retains its censorship of anti-Hezbollah news.
INBBC is closer politically to Hezbollah than is Al Jazeera.
Even ‘NYT’ has this:
“Thousands in Lebanon Demand Hezbollah Be Disarmed”
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/14/world/middleeast/14lebanon.html?_r=1&ref=world
I have put in a complaint to the BBC with a request for an explanation why the Radio 4 report didn’t explain that 3 of the murdered were children
Thank you. I was going to complain but a) was too angry and b) have three complaints stuck in the BBC system and don’t have the patience and time to chase up another one.
They are always so keen to mention when collateral deaths in Israeli actions include children. Clearly the cold blooded murder of 3 children under 11 including a 3 month old baby has no news value whatsoever.
The Nazi Left continues goosestepping through the news corridors of the BBC.
Not only does the BBC not report on the celebrations in Gaza, they actually go so far as to say this:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-12725487
The attack on the Fogel family has been met with outrage in Israel and has shocked many Palestinians.
Which “Palestinians” have been shocked? Not just “some but “many”?
The BBC’s coverage of this atrocity has crossed a line and shown clearly that the BBC is actually condoning the act and covering for terrorists. This should mark a before and after.
Even the “Palestinian ‘kills five Israelis’ in West Bank.” headline has gone from the RSS feeds and the main Middle East news page – only the headline about new settlement homes remains, and continues to get prominence on the front page.
I see your point, has ANY ‘Palestinian’ been interviewd where they condemn the murders? How does the BBC know that there are “many” I mean have they talked to “many’ ‘Palestinians’ in secret who are so shocked that they wish to be shocked in secret and annonomously?
“The attack on the Fogel family has been met with outrage in Israel and has shocked many Palestinians.“
Its funny how so many are supposedly are “shocked” yet so few are seen to be showing it, I dont suppose the relatives will be getting a call from Abbas anytime soon informing them of his “shock” and sorrow and sending them his condolences.
never have so many “shocked” people been so invisible OR is the truth and reality very different to the BBC version? Perhaps its closer to the truth to say that the only reason why the ‘Palestinians’ are “shocked” is that two children escaped alive?
The BBC’s paper version has now picked up on the shocked Palestinians meme:
Guardian’s bizarre headline on story about deadly terrorist attack in Itamar
These email addresses are of respective Parliamentary ‘Friends of Israel’.
arbuthnotj@parliament.uk, Clappisonj@parliament.uk, Amessd@parliament.uk, Burta@parliament.uk, Scottl@parliament.uk, theresa@theresavilliers.co.uk, timothy.kirkhope@europarl.europa.eu, cheesemagn@parliament.uk, info@berwicklibdems.org.uk, macshaned@parliament.uk, alunmichaelmp@parliament.uk, tilleye@parliament.uk, GALERJ@parliament.uk
Dear Hon & Rt Hon Members,
Please find below a complaint I have sent the BBC via its website. As you will see, it is merely to register a complaint, I have no confidence in their integrity to deal with it. The appalling anti-Semitism of the BBC’s coverage of Israel is something that needs to be dealt with at the Parliamentary level. Despite chinks of light in certain areas the BBC is essentially rotten to the core on this issue. I would respectfully suggest that calls in Parliament for the dismissal of the BBC’s Middle East Editor, the patent anti-Semite Jeremy Bowen, are long overdue. As I discovered during the election, it remains the case that the BBC Online Complaints facility does not generate a registration number, such is the seriousness with which they deal with complaints.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-12721170
There is no need to respond to this complaint. I have absolutely no confidence in the integrity of the BBC to deal with complaints. I am merely registering my abject disgust for the subtle endorsement the BBC gave to the murder of a 3 month old Jewish baby by its manner of reporting. This complaint will be copied to relevant Parliamentarians who hopefully will take action against the BBC for its proto-Der Sturmer anti-Semitism. The genesis of your anti-semitic reporting of these satanic murders is covered in Biased BBC.
http://biasedbbc.tv/2011/03/shocking-and-callous.html
http://biasedbbc.tv/2011/03/open-thread_11.html
(comments from bottom page 2)
What I will note is that nowhere on your site are there photos of the victims of this appalling hate crime. They are readily available. The BBC clearly wishes to dehumanise the victims. One of the reasons these genocidal hate crimes against the Jews are committed is aside from the incitement in PA and Hamas media, tacit approval is clearly seen in the western media, especially the BBC.
NB: Roger Gale isn’t a member of Conservative Friends of Israel, but is an ex-BBC man who has been outspoken in the past against BBC bias.
You’ll see in my link above to the BBC story that the headline was changed today from:-
Palestinian ‘kills five Israelis’ in West Bank
to
‘Palestinian’ kills five Israelis in West Bank
Changed today, but the edit information still shows:-
12 March 2011 Last updated at 15:04 GMT
I have the original in case anyone needs it for their complaint. (Not sure if it can be retrieved using google cache?)
Has this attrocity even been reported on BBC TV yet? I haven’t seen it. Seems rather news worthy to me. Certainly more so than the yawn-inducing piece BBC News 24 are running about some bureaucrat resigning from the government’s ‘drink responsibly’ quango. Srsly.
Is this another classic example of BBC steatlh bias by omission? Seems to me the BBC are using the cover provided by Japan and Libya to slit the throat of this story at birth – so to speak.
If anyone else is going to follow the route I’ve taken with this I wouldn’t include Roger Gale in your mailing. He doesn’t share are view of Jeremy Bowen.
Anti-Israel INBBC, and ‘liberal-Left’ silent on this in Lebanon:
Prosecutor expands indictment over Hariri assassination, already reported to implicate Hizballah, Iranian leadership
The BBC’s latest take, Mahmoud Abbas condemns West Bank settler family murders, changes the disgusting “were spared” of the earlier (still-up) article to the less obviously offensive “were not hurt.” This ambiguous form of words, however, still seems likely to give the misleading impression that the two survivors were deliberately not hurt, or “spared”, rather than that the far more likely explanation that they were merely missed (accidentally) by the murderous scum: “Two other children sleeping in another room in the house were not hurt.”
Is this ambiguity just inexcusably sloppy writing, or deliberately ambiguous?
And what about the disturbingly worded opening paragraph?
Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas has strongly condemned the murder of a family of five Jewish settlers in the West Bank.
To describe the settler couple and their three murdered children as “a family of five Jewish settlers” is pretty sick. Was baby Hadas a settler, or little Elad or young Yoav?
Perhaps it was a weird cut-and-paste job, with the wholly acceptable “a family of five” being pasted next to “Jewish settlers”, with the writer/editor failing to check afterwards. That’s the charitable interpretation of sloppiness again. Perhaps though the writer actually thinks of the murdered baby and young children as settlers. Scary either way.
Clearest proof of the BBC website’s anti-Israeli agenda though is the way that the article continues to censor everything about the sick celebrations by “many Palestinians” over the killings, but outrageously uses as its subheadline Revenge attacks and tells us “On Sunday some settlers set fire to Palestinian cars and attacked Palestinian homes in revenge. There are fears there could be more violence.”
There’s no excuse for that.
“He speaks with a forked tongue” was a classic phrase in old Westerns – meaning do not trust this man, he says one thing to you but he is lying.
There are innumerable examples of “Palestinian” spokesmen and supporters/fellow travellers speaking with a forked tongue – often saying one anodyne thing for the US and European market, but something entirely different in Arabic.
Has the BBC ever – ever – pointed out this propensity to mislead ? Or pointed out that it is actually recommended in the Koran ? I believe the word is “taqqiya” – it is permitted by the Koran to lie to the infidels.
What is Abbas and other Fatah people ACTUALLY saying to Fatah supporters ? Does the BBC even care ?
Here meanwhile is what Hamas is saying – the 2 versions, one anodyne, one evil and virulent :
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2011/03/028596.php
The evil statements serve to worsen the tragedy. But the BBC neither reports the tragedy propely, not reports the filth being spewed from Hamas and its supporters.
How much does Jeremy Bowen and his sizeable team cost ? Probably several million pounds a year all-up. Their remit is to report. They twist and suppress – so they are taking our money by fraud, it seems to me.
………………………………
The stupefying ignorance back at BBC HQ was illustrated here on this website directly after the London Tube bombings. When the BBC initially refused to describe the bombings as terrorism. Outfits like the Muslim Council of Britain said stuff like “The Koran forbids the killing of the innocent”. A major report by the BBC World Affairs editor Paul Reynolds underlined this, suggesting that all Muslims disagreed with the killing of “innocents”. But anyone with the faintest knowledge of the way the Koran is twisted knows that “innocent” in our meaning is not the same as “innocent” to the mujahadin.
At the time, Paul Reynolds had the grace to accept the real ambiguity of the Koran on killing of innocents.
In this latest vile action by Palestinians – we here would all regard the slaughtered children as utterly innocent. But many many Palestinians, and many Muslims generally, do not regard these children as innocent – they are seen as proper targets for murder.
………………………………
Remember when it was alleged that Israel was behind the killing of a senior Palestinian while abroad ? The BBC made a huge fuss about that, criticising Israel day after day – even when it was obvious that the Palestinian was up to his neck in terrorism support/financing. The contrast with the present case is stark. The BBC has shamefully misreported this incident – and is quickly burying it.
As I said earlier in this thread – this matter shows that at the BBC we have scum reporting. Scum is the only apposite word. Scum.
….and as a non-Jew, I am ashamed at the behaviour of our national broadcaster.
Baby Killers Update: BBC Responds to HR Criticism
Sue, even by the BBC Complaints department’s standards that was an inadequate response. As HR say, the BBC can’t be allowed to get away with this. Time to add my complaint to the chorus of complaints.
And let’s not forget what INBBC’s political stablemate, ‘Guardian’ Assistant Editor, Mr Michael White said last week:
“Guardian admits Israel ‘straightforward target’”
http://justjournalism.com/the-wire/guardian-admits-israel-%E2%80%98straightforward-target%E2%80%99/
‘Jihadwatch’:
U.S.-trained forces arrested in brutal jihad murder of Jewish family in Israel
“Dennis Prager On The Significance Of What Happened In Itamar”http://www.newenglishreview.org/blog_display.cfm/blog_id/33144
Good point, John, about the cost of Bowen and his large team.
I often wonder what Al Beeb hacks do in between broadcasts. We don’t see some for months – perhaps even years – and then suddenly they pop up again. Have they been on full pay, half pay, maternity/paternity leave, or what, in the meantime?
What do these featherbedded folk do between assignments? Where’s Jeremy Bowen’s devoted disciple Katya Adler, who has said that Jezza’s her journalistic mentor? Is the licence-payer keeping her at full salary? And where’s Lyse Doucet right now, for example? And that Roland Buerk fellow? Where’s he been – or rather, what’s he been doing since he was last on screen eons ago?
And is he a relative of Michael Buerk? There are so many family dynasties on the hereditary monarchy/hereditary aristicracy hating Beeb.
Let’s see – the Dimblebys, Paul Adams (son of Israel-defaming CAABU crony Michael Adams), Magnus Magnusson and daugher Sally, that nice but inept weekend newsreader (haven’t seen him lately) Roger Johnson, whose pater heads BBC Radio Stoke, John and Mike Sargent … I’m sure there are a lot of others. *DONT_KNOW*
Glenn Beck, ‘Fox News’
See video (for 14 March) from 34 mins:55 secs
http://www.watchglennbeck.com/