JEW VERSUS JEW

I was shocked. The BBC were actually running a sympathetic story about Jews being attacked. But, hang on, turns out the attackers were...other Jews. Kevin Connolly treated us to the story of how groups of ultra-orthodox Jews have been shouting and abusing children and their mothers on their way to a girl’s school in Jerusalem. Of course there is never an excuse for any such behaviour but I have been wondering why our Kevin has been so reluctant to provide us with gripping stories about how Palestinians abuse children by inculcating the merits of self detonation and killing Jews?

FANNING THE FLAMES

This is worth a little thought;

“Asher Palmer, and hisone year old son…you may have heard of them but not from the BBC. They were killed over a week ago by Palestinians and like the slaughtered Fogelfamily these murders went unreported by the BBC. 


The BBC did however report the burning of a piece of carpet in a Mosque andused that story to denounce Jewish settlers….

 “The words “Revenge”, “Price Tag” and “Palmer”were reported to have been written in Hebrew on the mosque walls. “Price Tag” attacks, carried out against any policy to reduce thepresence of Jewish settlers and settlements on occupied Palestinian land in theWest Bank and East Jerusalem, have increased in recent months.’

Only in this story did the BBC deign to mention the Palmers.

The BBC are also rather coy about the background to ‘pricetag’ attacks…..

Even the New York Times is more honest: 

‘The attack followed a series of similarassaults on mosques in the West Bank by arsonists suspected of being radicalsettlers as part of a campaign known as “price tag,” which seeks to exact aprice from local Palestinians for violence against settlers or from Israelisecurity forces for taking action against illegal construction in Jewishoutposts in the West Bank.’

The BBC does not want you to think the Palestinians are violent in any way.

Note also the phrase ‘settlements on occupied Palestinian land’…..much of the’settled’ land is in fact bought and paid for by Jews from Palestinians. Theexact political status of the land is not clear at all….there is no suchplace as a state of Palestine…..and therefore ‘Palestine’ cannot beoccupied…certainly not illegally….Israel occupied the land after the 1967war and is mandated by UN law to administer it quite legally.”


The BBC cannot resist adopting the vocabulary of the Palestinians. It is so effortless, so natural for them.  

HALF THE TRUTH, ALL THE TIME…

A few days back, the US Congress froze cash to Hamastan. B-BBC reader Edna notes;

Consider how the BBC reports the story. 
The article only gives the view that the freeze is terrible. There is not oneexplanation of why Congress decided to do it. It seems the Palestinians werewarned that this would happen if they reneged on negotiations, and decided toact unilaterally.


Consider how another media outlet provides context.
 It doesn’t take a lot of journalistic powers to discover this, but the BBCdecides to keep it a secret from the public. No mention of any of this:-


“A number of US representatives and senators on both sides of the aisle,however, have been very firm in their determination to block funding to the PA– particularly in the fiscal year 2012, should it continue to pursue unilateralstatehood.

After Abbas formally requested UN membership on September 23 in New York, Ros-Lehtinen said: “Abu Mazen’s speech further demonstrated that the Palestinianleadership is not a partner for peace. There must be consequences forPalestinian and UN actions that undermine any hope for true and lasting peace.”

In June, the Senate approved Resolution 185, which warned that Palestinianefforts to gain recognition of a state outside of direct negotiations wouldhave implications for continued US aid.

Representative Kay Granger (R-Texas) who chairs the House AppropriationsSubcommittee on State and Foreign Operations and committee member Nita Lowey(D-New York) both warned Abbas this summer that such a move would occur if hecontinued to pursue unilateral statehood.”


Odd how those highly paid BBC journalists somehow managed to miss all of this…. it’s almost as if they chose not to provide context lest it interfere with their slavish devotion to Hamastan?.  

BBC MELTING POT

Biased BBC contributor Alan observes;

“The BBC and their ilk are quick to denounce anyone who suggests one race or another may be better at somethings than other races. And yet here we are looking at a whole series of BBC programmes designed to thrill us with the prospect of being ‘mixed race’…..apparently not only are they more beautiful and successful but also more psychologically stable than non-mixed race people.

This is naturally yet another BBC attempt to engineer social change and people’s perceptions regardless of the realities….

“…most of all, the series tells an extraordinary tale of love, of couples coming together to fight prejudice and create a new society.’

 Is Lewis Hamilton successful as a racing driver because he is mixed race or because he is a good driver? It is bizarre to claim he is such a good driver because of a particular shade of skin.
Remind me, what colour was Schumacher? What colour are the Williams sisters? etc etc etc.

Here in a Guardian interview the BBC’s George Alagiah, who presents the programmes on mixed race, oddly refuses to talk about race…..presumably as with Islamic terrorism having nothing to do with Islam, mixed race people have nothing to do with race?….if so why are the BBC doing a whole raft of programmes on mixed…er…race people? Is there some other defining quality that is to be brought out by the programmes that separates them from us non-mixed heritage people?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/theobserver/2011/oct/02/george-alagiah-mixed-race-britain

 ‘You mention the Asian community’s reluctance to “marry out” in the programme. Is that protecting a community’s culture or racism?

I don’t know. I think you’d have to ask them.

In your book Home From Home, you argue that, owing to a lack of integration, too many immigrants are missing out on the experiences that you have enjoyed.

There’s much we can talk about in my book but I think we’re straying from the programme. I don’t think it’s got much to do with the mixed-race relationships.

Well it has insofar as mixed race relationships can be seen as a marker of integration.

Yes, but I certainly haven’t spoken about integration in the programmes. Do I think that in some sense there could be greater integration? Yes, but that’s about as much as I want to say really.

I sense there’s a sensitivity about the issue of race.

It’s exactly what I didn’t want to do, get into a discussion about race.’

George Alagiah probably represents the BBC view on race and Britain…in all his naivety and wishful thinking….’True there were ghettos – but the UK never accepted outright segregation. There were – and are – plenty of racists, but they’ve never been allowed to gain the foothold they did elsewhere.
Somehow – often by default rather than design – we have muddled through to where we are today, a country largely at ease with its rainbow people.’

Astonishing refusal to see life as most of us know it by Alagiah, the real Britain with Black and Asian only areas, Muslim communities that never see a non-Muslim, that don’t accept mixing of non-Muslims and Muslims, that don’t want anything to do with British culture and society…apart from the money and security that derives from that society.

Of course Alagiah comes from a BBC that has an ‘Asian Nework’….why? If they are ‘British’ why do they need an Asian network? Just because they have brown skin do they not like Radio 1 or radio 4? The Asian Network is a BBC ghetto that reinforces alienation and non-integration. “

THE PROVISION OF SERVICES

I’m catching up on a number of issues sent my way in recent days. This one covers the determination by the BBC-approved  European Court of Justice which has stated:

“National legislation which prohibits the import, sale or use of foreign decoder cards is contrary to the freedom to provide services and cannot be justified either in light of the objective of protecting intellectual property rights or by the objective of encouraging the public to attend football stadiums.” ‘

One in the eye for Sky and three cheers for the Pub landlady. HOWEVER…

“Whilst this relates to football and national borders it would be interesting to see if the same thinking applies to the BBC license which prevents you from watching other channels if you haven’t bought it…..shouldn’t there be a ‘freedom to provide services’ for TV commercial companies?”

FOX ON THE RUN

It’s been fascinating watching the BBC get itself worked up into a state of moral outrage over the relationship between Liam Fox and Adam Werritty. To listen to the breathless coverage afforded this tale of business card usage one could be forgiven that this was a major international story rather than just another snide little BBC hatchet job, encouraged by Labour,  on one of those Minister’s that they just do not like. Fox may or may not have made some sort of minor error of judgement but to judge by BBC it is verging on a resigning matter.

CUTS?

It’s that unique BBC mindset at play;

The BBC pledged to become “significantly smaller” by sacking 2,000 staff yesterday, but immediately struck a deal with unions to allow departing employees to return as freelances after three months.

So, that’s alright then? From my own point of view, I don’t really mind how many employees or freelancers the BBC uses to provide output. I just don’t to be fund so much as one penny of it.

Question Time LiveBlog 6th October 2011


On the Question Time panel from where the Conservative conference was held – Salford – tonight we have the inclusivity box-ticking Baroness Warsi, Shadow Junior Minister for Drains Andy Burnham, Charles *hic* Kennedy, Hello! and Sun journalist Jane Moore and, returning to our BBC screens after an absence of at least 25 minutes, Billy sodding Bragg.

TheEye is Back and Beautiful tonight, so will rejoin the Two Davids…Vance and Mosque in the moderator seats.

BBC’s Mark Mardell’s Piece On Palin’s 2012 Statement Lives Down To Expectations..

Mark Mardell, the BBC’s man in the USA, lets the mask slip in a rather unpleasant piece on Governor Palin’s decision not to enter the 2012 Presidential race.

Shriekily filled with venom against a president she branded a socialist and suggested was un-American, in love with guns, God and the unborn, apparently ignorant of the outside world, indeed not fully clued up on the lower 48 (the USA outside Alaska)

What a perfect example of well informed, deeply researched political analysis – paid for, I might add, by a poll tax on everyone who owns a TV set in Britain.

Holding true to the definitive snake oil salesman’s code of practice that the best way to present an untruth is to baldly state it as a fact, Mardell goes for broke.

Sarah Palin’s decision will have disappointed some.
Not the American people who clearly didn’t like her as John McCain’s running mate in 2008.

Excuse me? If that was the case why was it that the only time that the McCain ticket led Obama in the polls was in the first half of September after Palin joined it? After September 15th, of course, the ticket was dead in the water – not because of Palin but due to McCain’s deer-in-the-headlights reaction to the Lehman Brothers collapse.

Naturally Mardell ignores policy positions and goes for the personal…

As a result we have Michelle Bachmann in the race. Herman Cain in the race. Rick Perry in the race.
They are all more authentic, more intelligent, more acceptable than Palin

Hmmmm….Mr Mardell – are you saying Camille Paglia is is just some dumb broad?

No evidence to back this up, of course. Indeed what is fascinating is how Mardell is trying desperately to portray Palin as some sort of X Factor “celebrity” without any connection to the world of serious politics. No reference to her years of executive experience in Alaska as a successful city mayor or popular governor. No reference to her fight against corruption in her own party or her triumphant battles against the big oil companies.

But then why in the world would any rational person be at all surprised at this bucketful of poisonous bile?

It’s Mark Mardell..

For years he was paid by the BBC to pimp the EU as their man in Brussels. Then, when the they began to believe their own hope&change crapola about a totally unvetted Chicago Daley machine hack with zero executive experience, Mardell’s bosses decided to send him to Washington as a kind of court correspondent to wax lyrical about the new Camelot. He must have been delirious with joy, foreseeing an eight year stint pimping for Obama.

But it has all gone horribly wrong. The Obamacare shambles, the ever swelling deficit, the lobbyist rewarding stimulus that has failed to dent unemployment, the ATF guns scandal, the Democrats losing control of the house in 2010, the emergence of the tea party (which, characteristically, Mardell ignored for well over a year )…..

Mardell could even be characterised as the Comical Ali of the Obama regime

a cult figure thanks to his wild claims and colourful language

Obama is crumbling and there is precious little reward in pimping a failure. Hence the vitriolic attack on Palin. When the Brooks/Douthat/Frum axis of appeasement was advocating accomodation with Obama and Huntsman seemed the future Palin was the only leading light of the GOP who was calling him out. Her predictions have been vindicated. She was right about Obama – Mardell and his ilk were wrong – and how it must hurt to be outsmarted by someone “apparently ignorant of the outside world, indeed not fully clued up on the lower 48”

Here’s a suggestion for the BBC, supposedly in cost cutting mode. Why not save money by getting rid of Mardell and just giving White House spokesman Jay Carney a few dollars extra to blah blah blah about the Potemkin villages of Obamaland.

The song will be the same as Mardell’s but the price will be much lower…

OCCUPY WALL STREET

On Monday David Preiser contrasted the way the BBC reported the Tea Party movement (“a bit strong for our tastes” as R5L’s Peter Allen put it) with the sanitised PR effort it is producing on behalf of Occupy Wall Street. David headlined his piece: “The BBC Loves Left Wing Protest“. No kidding – check out Paul Mason’s tweets of encouragement to the New Statesman’s lefty activist Laurie Penny:

Here are the sort of characters from the Wall Street protest you won’t see on the BBC’s coverage.

The anti-Semitic college graduate. “Why are you fighting with us? Because you got the money, Jewish man… You can’t even speak English. Are you Israeli? Go back to Israel.”

The Jews Control Wall Street Guy versus The White Anglo-Saxon Protestants Own Wall Street Guy.

The angry anti-white know-it-all hippie. “Maybe if we don’t use currency any more, like, that’d be really awesome. Maybe if there’s no currency a lot of products that don’t need to exist wouldn’t exist.”

Imagine the reaction the BBC would have had to such dickheads spouting equivalent bile and idiocy at a Tea Party rally. There would have been a determined effort to portray them as representative of the whole movement. But as we all know, lefty protest movements get rose-tinted BBC coverage.

UPDATE. More video of angry anti-white know-it-all hippie. “Are you a white man? If you’re a white man then shut the fuck up about race because you don’t know shit other than how to rape and kill.”