The Guardian/BBC symbiosis has produced a cuddly pledge from Hamas to the effect that they would not help Iran militarily in any conflict with Israel.
The BBC’s Jon Donnison and Harriet Sherwood of the Graun have been speaking to Mahmoud Zahhar, a senior leader of Hamas. He has told them that Hamas are not, to coin a phrase, “ideologically wedded” to Iran.
But according to FARS news agency and Haaretz, Mahmoud al-Zahar has “strongly rejected the BBC claim as unfounded and a lie.”
“………any Israel or US attack on Iranwill be reciprocated by Hamas’s crushing response to the Zionists.”
Someone’s gone wrong somewhere.
H/T Bio and Elder of Ziyon
As the BBC seems to be acting as the Taliban’s PR (sourcing quotes on ‘pride’ in mass murder directly, see Open Thread), that they are also acting on behalf of such as Hamas in propaganda is hardly a shock.
Just… not sure why I am forced to co-fund what seems to be efforts by folk elsewhere to harm me and mine, or those I hold dear, with the active support of my national broadcaster.
Someone is going very wrong indeed.
I have dropped my best buds a line…
“The Taliban told the BBC that they had carried out the attack and were “very proud of it”.
Explain please, the circumstances by which ‘The Taliban’ came to tell the BBC this, and how it was substantiated.
Then, please explain how this, at best poorly sourced and identified quote came to be rushed out in this manner, at this early stage in the investigation and follow-up to the incident, such that it has already become established in the media?
Does the BBC really want to be associated with this phrase at this juncture in the news gathering and verifying cycle?
So yet again a Palestinian leader speaks out of both sides of his mouth, depending on what he thinks his audience wants to hear. And the BBC expects you to trust what he tells them implicitly anyway.
Also, this bit shows just how naive or willfully ignorant Donnison is:
Although both Hamas and Iran are hostile towards Israel, which regards the Palestinian group as a terrorist organisation, Hamas supporters are Sunni Muslims while Iran has Shia Muslim majority.
This makes it much closer to Hezbollah, a Shia Islamist movement which operates in southern Lebanon.
“I don’t like the Iranians and the way they try to use their influence in the Arab world,” commented the Hamas official to whom I spoke.
Yet Iran founded Hezbollah and supports them in Lebanon to this day. The enemy of my enemy, etc. Is there anyone at the BBC we can trust on this issue at all?
‘Is there anyone at the BBC we can trust on this issue at all?’
No, on most issues.
And for a most trusted news purveyour that only gets custom on the back of compulsion, a worry.
“Although both Hamas and Iran are hostile towards Israel, which regards the Palestinian group as a terrorist organisation”
Yet again failing to state that not ony Israel, but also the US, the EU and the UK also “regards” Hamas as a terrorist orgaisation.
They love to make it appear that it’s only those nasty Israelis who think cuddly Hamas are terrorists.
The BBC is like one of those liberals who say – “I am not anti-semitic – but…”
I’m wondering how long it will take the BBC to amend their own report, and what difference it might make to future accounts given to them by the likes of Hamas.
My guess is they will let it run as is, without amendment, and it won’t make any difference in the future. That’s what Hamas wanted to tell them, and that’s good enough for the BBC – whatever the agenda. In fact, the BBC still have their original article featuring 4th on the order of importance for Mid-East events as I write.
If anything, the bureau chief figured that when Zahar was denying it to the Arab press, that’s when he was lying and just telling people what they want to hear. The Beeboids believe what he told them. All part of the mindset.
The left in the 30s only heard what they wanted to hear, peace in our time, swords into ploughshares, never again blah blah.
The left in the 70s only heard what they wanted to hear, the USSR only wants peace, unilateral disarmament would impress the USSR, give peace a chance, mutual respect make love not war blah blah.
And now they are doing it again, for generations making the wrong choices and the worst predictions and siding with Stalin and the Nazis when they were friends and opposing rearmament until Hitler turned on his former ally.
One thing about the left, two actually. They are always wrong about everything and they have a perverted love of despots and mass murderers.
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again; I’m convinced that part of the deal to release Alan Johnson when he was a hostage in Gaza was that the BBC would speak no ill of Hamas… or else they’d kidnap another Beeboid.
I’d agree with you except the BBC weren’t speaking ill of Hamas prior to his kidnap. I’ve no doubt it was a complete surprise to him to be taken like that since the BBC were and are a powerful ally to the Palestinians, no matter how wretched their actions.
I doubt even the BBC would trust Hamas to keep their side of that deal.
I don’t think BBC needs any incentive, they do it for nothing.
Jon Donnison is virtually a Hamas hostage as it is.
Spokesman, if you like. *DONT_KNOW*
You may remember these statements made by Johnson’s father at the time
“This holding Alan is not doing the Palestinian people any favours, quite the opposite,” he said.
“It is no way to treat a friend of the Palestinian people, and all I can say to the men who are holding Alan is: please let my son go, now, today.”
More on BBC Friends of Hamas, today:
Hamas assaults journalists from BBC, Sky News
Palestine Press Agency and Wafa report that Hamas beat three journalists today, and abducted one.
According to the story, the beaten journalists were Mohammed Mashharawi from Sky News, Adnan al-Dorosh from BBC Arabic service, and Amer Abu Omar. They were covering a mass wedding in Gaza.
Mashharawi was reportedly abducted by Hamas.
There is nothing on this in the media yet.
Ironically, Adnan al-Dorosh said last year that he and other Palestinian Arab journalists would never abandon their desire to report on the truth and support the cause of their people – no matter how much Israel intimidates them. It will be most interesting to see if he reports on his own little run-in with the people who control the place he works.
In fact, it will be interesting to see which, if any, Western media and human-rights organizations make a stink over this.
By the way Sue, the Jerusalem Post also has the story:
‘Hamas denies it would stay out of Israel-Iran war’
Iranian report directly contradicts BBC quote by Zahar, saying the group wouldn’t get involved in any regional conflict.
I’m not sure I know what i’m talking about here, but I’d guess that Hezbollah is a bigger threat to Israel than Hamas.
If Israel (or America) attacks Iran militarily, Hezbollah and/or Hamas might strike Israel. Hamas might be somewhat deterred for fear that Israel will retaliate heavily in Gaza – but would Hezbollah care if Lebanon bore the brunt of a retaliation by Israel? I think not. It’s like a game of chess.
If Israel or the US do decide to disrupt Iran’s nuclear progress, presumably they’d do it as surgically as possible. The longer they wait the harder that would be. Israel is in a lose – lose situation it seems, unless they could achieve what they reputedly did in Syria – and even Syria didn’t admit it — or of course unless they merely disrupt Iran’s progress by cyberwars.
What do you think? anyone?
The BBC have been framing their reports on Iran’s nuclear ambitions in their own inimitable way. Likewise, the meeting between Obama and Netanyahu has been subjected to the BBC’s own Israel-bashing interpretation. The idea seems to be that Netanyahu is making a great big fuss about nothing, and straining on a leash like a mad dog, while peace-loving Obama struggles to keep us all from armageddon