I had the misfortune to tune in to the BBC Radio 4 Saturday live programme, presented by Aasmah Mir and Richard Coles this morning. Here is a flavour of the discussion..

“Sir Professor Geoff Palmer came to Britain from Jamaica aged 14. Described as educationally sub-normal is he now an expert in cereals and Professor Emeritus of brewing at Heriot-Watt University, Edinburgh. He was the first black Professor in Scotland and is a prominent anti-racism campaigner.

We meet the former class mates who campaigned for a fairer deal for asylum seekers in the city (based on the case of a Kosova Roma Gypsy)…”

Get the drift? It’s all about fighting whitey’s racism and intolerance.

We know that Hamas has stored weapons in UN schools, we know that Hamas have military command centres in hospitals, we know that Hamas missiles fall short back into Gaza, we know that Hamas intends to wipe out Israel.

All essential context for any report into what is happening in Gaza.

We know that a UN school was hit by a missile of some description.  We don’t know who is to blame yet.

We know Hamas was firing from locations either in or around the school.

Here is a video from 2009 that shows a Hamas mortar team operating from the exact same school:

Here is a video that reminds us just how much Hamas cares for Palestinian kids:

It might be relevant for the BBC to remind people of such events and that…

‘Israel uses rockets to protect its civilians, Hamas uses its civilians to protect its rockets’

Or of this from the BBC in 2006…that ‘non-existent’ human shield:

Palestinians’ high-risk human shield tactic

Alan Johnston
BBC News, Gaza

The boys on the roofs, armed only with Palestinian flags and facing down war planes, are a David and Goliath image for the modern age.

But nobody should imagine that the likes of Hamas are suddenly being won over wholly to the strategies of pacifism.

If they possessed anti-aircraft guns, they would surely blaze away at the circling planes.

Fathi Hammad, a Hamas member of the Palestinian Legislative Council:

“For the Palestinian people, death has become an industry, at which women excel, and so do all the people living on this land. The elderly excel at this, and so do the mujahideen and the children. This is why they have formed human shields of the women, the children, the elderly, and the mujahideen, in order to challenge the Zionist bombing machine. It is as if they were saying to the Zionist enemy: ‘We desire death like you desire life.’”

And yet Jeremy Bowen claims this:

I saw no evidence of Hamas using Palestinians as human shields

Bowen’s misleading claim has spread across the world:

BBC’s Jeremy Bowen: Hamas is not using Palestinians as human shield

The algemeiner doesn’t think much of Bowen’s reporting though:

BBC’s Bowen Tries to Persuade TV Audiences That Hamas Does Not Use Human Shields

Bowen’s inaccurate and partial reports – which increasingly give the impression that he has self-conscripted to the Hamas media campaign – are coming in thick and fast. As long as the BBC continues to allow that, it breaches the public purpose remit which obliges it to “[b]uild a global understanding of international issues” and that is a problem that BBC management should not be allowed to ignore.

The Media’s Selective Reporting on Gaza Deaths Incites More Violence, Anti-Semitism

Who can say how many attacks on Israelis around the world can be traced back to BBC reporting as a febrile anti-Semitic atmosphere builds in Europe every time Israeli is demonised by the Media:

‘Gas the Jews!’: European anti-Semitism during the Gaza crisis

‘I Thought It Was 1938’ Israeli Ambassador’s Fear Of Rising European Anti-Semitism

What the BBC chooses not to publish is just as telling about its stance on any subject as what it does choose to publish.

The Daily Mail has decided that it will support Hamas by inventing history, the BBC has chosen the other path and airbrushes out of history inconvenient facts that detract from Hamas’ image….Jeremy Bowen misleading the readers of the New Statesman about Hamas’ human shield policy just being one example.

Here’s a couple more……

The Times of Israel reports this:

150 Palestinians surrender to IDF in Gaza

The operatives, who came out of hiding spots with their hands raised above their heads, were taken into Israeli custody for further questioning.

In total, 150 Palestinians were arrested, but only 70 of them who were suspected of carrying out terror attacks were transferred under tight security to IDF Intelligence and Shin Bet facilities for interrogation, an IDF spokeswoman told The Times of Israel, adding to 28 operatives already captured. The remaining detainees were later released, Army Radio reported.

The BBC has refused to publish a report on this significant story with its eyecatching photos, at least on its website, whilst the Mail reports this story in a bizarre way presumably designed to generate some ‘outrage’:

Suspected Hamas militants rounded up chain gang-style by Israeli soldiers during Gaza offensive

The Mail tells us that:

• One photo shows them chained together in two lines with hands on heads
• Another picture depicts four of them walking in chains while blindfolded

Here are the photos:

See any chains?  The second photo shows men with their hands zip tied, a standard procedure for any army…the problem for the apparently pro-Hamas Mail is that ‘zip tied’ just isn’t emotive enough…whilst ‘chain gangs’ and ‘in chains’ is far more emotive and redolent of slavery.

Why might the BBC ignore the story?  It shows Hamas failure and Israeli success…and there are no dead or injured women or children in the picture which seems to be the thing that catches the eye of BBC journalists most these days as they flood Gaza with journalists…more there than they send to most other conflicts or battles apparently.

The BBC also didn’t report the supposed shooting of an unarmed Palestinian, usually the bread and butter of any BBC journo wanting a guaranteed slot on the news…neither reporting the original story nor investigating what is a blatant piece of ‘Pallywood’ which would have had an enormous impact on people’s impressions of the war as it went viral on the web and major broadcasters and newspapers all published the story as fact.

The Mail once again tries to generate as much anti-pathy, anger and rage towards Israel as possible with its choice to report that Israel had deliberately shot an unarmed civilian…not once but three times……

A Biased BBC reader writes;

“On 24 July 2014, the BBC website had a headline (together with a large picture) “Pro- Palestine Protest Halts Maccabi Haifa Match.”

The picture shows a “Pro- Palestinian” delivering a martial- art style kick into the chest of an Israeli soccer player. Unlike other news sources which described what happened as an attack, the BBC called it a “protest”. Nowhere in the report is the word attack used.

I would suggest that by downgrading what was clearly a violent assault into a mere protest, the BBC is very possibly legitimizing such actions in the eyes of those who would wish to carry out similar violent acts.

Surely this kind of biased and even incite-full reporting undermines the credibility of the BBC which is publicly funded and even possesses its own “heavy mob” in the form of the TV Licensing authority to bring in the “BBC tithe” from those who might very well just simply want to detoxify their minds from this kind of yellow journalism by receiving news and culture from other channels.”

Given the BBC’s current pro-Hamastan viewpoint and it’s hysteria over the Commonwealth Games, and the prevailing good weather, I have cut back on my consumption of bias but extend an offer for you to detail what you see here!

Nick Casey, The Wall Street Journal’s Middle East Correspondent, posted a photo to Twitter of a Hamas spokesman being interviewed on camera at Gaza’s Shifa Hospital, which Hamas uses as a base. Photo: Nick Casey / Twitter.

WSJ Reporter in Gaza Wonders How Patients in Shifa Hospital Feel About Hamas Using it as Base

Posting a photo to Twitter of a Hamas spokesman being interviewed on camera, Nick Casey, The Wall Street Journal‘s Middle East Correspondent, wondered how patients there might feel about Hamas using the hospital as a “de facto headquarters for Hamas leaders, who can be seen in the hallways and offices,” as reported by The Washington Post last week.

On Monday, Casey wrote: “You have to wonder [with] the shelling how patients at Shifa hospital feel as Hamas uses it as a safe place to see media.”

Journalist Describes Interrogation at Hamas Headquarters Next to Emergency Room at Gaza’s Al Shifa Hospital

Radjaa Abu Dagga, Gaza correspondent for France’s Libération, told the newspaper‘s readers on Tuesday how Hamas refused his requests to leave Gaza and how he was interrogated by Hamas members from their headquarters inside Gaza’s Al-Shifa hospital, a violation of international rules of war.

A few meters from the emergency room where the injured from bombings are constantly flowing, in the outpatient department, he was received in ‘a small section of the hospital used as administration’ by a band of young fighters. They were all well dressed, which surprised Radjaa, ‘in civilian clothing with a gun under one’s shirt and some had walkie-talkies.’  He was ordered to empty his pockets, removing his shoes and his belt then was taken to a hospital room ‘which served that day as the command office of three people.’

Remarkable how no one at the BBC, least of all Jeremy Bowen, saw any of this Hamas activity whilst they reported day in day out from Al-Shifa hospital.

This is John Reed of the FT:

From Haaretz (paywalled)

Compromised coverage: Can the BBC really report from Gaza?

Can the BBC and other international news networks really provide ‘war reporting of the highest standards’ from Gaza when their staff are threatened by Hamas enforcers?

Reference ‘The World Tonight’  (22 mins)  ‘War reporting of the highest standard’ according to UN bod.

‘UNRWA also acknowledged on Thursday that Hamas fired into the Beit Hanoun area, where the agency’s school was hit, according to Israel’s Channel 2 News.’

But not according to the BBC who didn’t report UNRWA saying that….nor did they report this….

 ‘The Israel Defense Forces has counted at least 100 rockets fired by Hamas as striking within Gaza.’

But of course we all know, thanks to the BBC, that Hamas’ ‘homemade contraptions’ are harmless….so this couldn’t possibly be down to them……..

Some sort of explosive weapon has hit a school in Gaza, the BBC says it was a ‘shell’….only the Israelis use ‘shells’…..

Gaza UN school shelter hit, ‘killing 15’

At least 15 people were killed and more than 200 injured when a UN-run school used as a shelter in Gaza came under fire, Gazan health officials say.

Palestinian families were in the school in Beit Hanoun, fleeing Israel’s offensive against Hamas militants.

Correspondents say pools of blood lay on the ground in the courtyard of the school in Beit Hanoun, and there was a large scorch mark where it appeared a shell had hit.

Chris Gunness, a spokesman for the UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestine refugees (Unrwa), also said the Israeli army had been formally given the co-ordinates of the shelter in Beit Hanoun.

There is a clear implication that the Israeli army did this despite the BBC reporting this:

The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) said in a statement that …….”In the course of the afternoon, several rockets launched by Hamas from within the Gaza Strip landed in the Beit Hanoun area. The IDF is reviewing the incident,” it said.

Not only does the BBC not report that UNRWA confirms Hamas rockets fell short but it doesn’t report that UNRWA also confirmed that it had been warned to evacuate the area…the BBC instead preferring to say UNRWA ‘also said the Israeli army had been formally given the co-ordinates of the shelter in Beit Hanoun.‘   That is clearly meant to imply the Israelis hit the school despite knowing its exact location.

The BBC doesn’t bother with this:

Both the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) and Chris Guinness, the UNRWA spokesman, confirm that the IDF had asked UNRWA to evacuate the Beit Hanoun school (Hamas’ official position on the strike is not yet clear). The IDF was planning to target what it claimed were nearby Hamas rocket launchers.

Others choose to highlight it could have been a Hamas rocket…note once again Hamas prevents evacuation:

IDF Says Bombing, Deaths at Gaza UNRWA School May be From Hamas Rocket Falling Short

“During the afternoon a battle took place between Hamas terrorists and IDF forces in the Beit Hanoun area. Besides that, we indeed have indications that rockets fell in the vicinity, fired by Hamas from within Gaza in the Beit Hanoun vicinity,” the spokesman said.

Later in the evening, the IDF tweeted that “Last night, we told Red Cross to evacuate civilians from UNRWA’s shelter in Beit Hanoun btw 10 am & 2 pm. UNRWA & Red Cross got the message.”

“Hamas prevented civilians from evacuating the area during the window that we gave them,” they army said in a second tweet, adding that “Today Hamas continued firing from Beit Hanoun. The IDF responded by targeting the source of the fire.”

UNRWA also acknowledged on Thursday that Hamas fired into the Beit Hanoun area, where the agency’s school was hit, according to Israel’s Channel 2 News.

An absolutely genuine photo of Hamass leader Khaled Meshaal in exile according to my good mate in Israeli Psyops.

Good though that the BBC gives the leader of Hamas in exile, Khaled Meshaal, plenty of airtime:

Hamas leader Khaled Meshaal told the BBC he wants a ceasefire and end to Israel’s blockade as soon as possible.

“We don’t want to be controlled by a border crossing that makes Gaza the biggest prison in the world,” Mr Meshaal, who lives in exile in Qatar, told BBC Hardtalk.

“People cannot go for medical treatment or to work. Why are the people of Gaza being punished by a slow death in the world biggest prison. This is a crime.”

We know that Hamas published a guide for budding Goebbels in Gaza giving some splendid advice on creative writing but here’s a trick they missed off that particular list:

Snow published that photo in this post:

‘Am I Going to Die, Daddy?’ The Child in Gaza Asked

Even our own translator, cut off from his family, in the south of Gaza, has to listen on the phone as his children weep and his 6-year-old asks: “Am I going to die, daddy”.

Snow then had to apologise for the photo as it was thought to have been taken in Syria:

But now it is said to be confirmed to be from Gaza:

‘Editors’ Note: Getty Images and the Anadolu Agency have verified that the photograph at the top of this article was taken at al-Shifa Hospital in Gaza City on Wednesday. We had temporarily removed the photograph while we investigated complaints about its authenticity that were sent to the author of this article.’

Well so far so good, that is the photo dealt with….but what about the words of the six year old?  Could this possibly be the same six year old whose mother claimed spoke similar words when she was being interviewed by Sheila Fogarty 10 days ago?

Fogarty has a couple of quick comments from Israelis then a long interview with a Palestinian, a ‘Gaza mother’….Fogarty asks, amongst other things, ‘What do you say to your 6 year when he says to you ‘When is it my turn to die’.

Any proof at all that the 6 year old boy said that?  Or is that the invention of Hamas’ media unit?

Are all six year olds trained to parrot this phrase by Hamas or is this sad story just the invention of a uniquely resourceful and exploitative propagandist?

Hamas advised its supporters:

‘You must always cast doubts on this [Israeli version], disprove it, and treat it as false.’

Who could doubt there are many who have taken that advice to heart.

In this post we look at the numerous occasions BBC reporters mislead its audience with claims that the Israelis deliberately target civilians and that Hamas does not have a policy of using ‘human shields’.

This is what the BBC’s coverage of Gaza feeds into:

 
We know that ISIS are sending even blind Jihadis to fight the good fight.  That being so can there be any surprise to know that the BBC has also sent several journalists to cover the Middle East whose eyesight seem similarly limited….Jeremy Bowen in particular needing not just a white stick but perhaps a white flag as well.

It is all too easy to stand there and express outrage and horror at the casualties of war and dodge the abuse you might receive for reporting the truth about the Palestinians…it is a lot harder to take a stand and do what is right…Bowen takes the easy option and cheerleads for Hamas having very selective eyesight…always able to spot an Israeli war crime whilst never able to spot Hamas up to no good.

For example Craig at Is the BBC biased? has noted this from Bowen in the New Statesman:

I was back in London for my son’s 11th birthday party by the time all those people were killed in Shejaiya. But my impression of Hamas is different from Netanyahu’s. I saw no evidence during my week in Gaza of Israel’s accusation that Hamas uses Palestinians as human shields. I saw men from Hamas on street corners, keeping an eye on what was happening.

Remember :

‘You must always cast doubts on this [Israeli version], disprove it, and treat it as false.’

Who can doubt that Bowen’s book, War Stories,  was not a ‘Work of remarkable honesty’ as described by the Independent..Robert Fisk perhaps?

Clearly Bowen has not seen this well known video:

Nor has he read his own colleague’s assessment of Hamas’ motivations:

Here Kevin Connolly admits Hamas uses civilian casualties for political advantage….

Hamas’s military leaders might be calculating that the sight of Palestinian civilians suffering under terrifying aerial bombardment will force the Palestinian Authority to show much greater solidarity and prompt Arab governments to show more support.
Hamas might reason that there were few advantages in keeping the peace whereas once hostilities have started it can demand concessions for agreeing to end them.

Connolly then highlights the advantages of the dramatic exploitation of dead children to a cause….

Israel might argue that it’s trying to avoid civilian casualties while Hamas is trying to cause them. But television pictures of civilian dead in Gaza – especially children – will help shape perceptions of Israel round the world.

 
Bowen, and his colleagues, conveniently ignored this report where Hamas are shown to be urging Gazans to stay in their homes and  to ignore the Israeli warnings:

“Urgent call to the residents of the Gaza Strip” in which locals were told to ignore the calls and warnings made by Israel and the IDF. “To all of our people who have evacuated their homes – return to them immediately and do not leave the house.”
 “You must follow the directives of the Interior Ministry. This is psychological warfare, random messages to instill panic in people.””

 
But it isn’t just Bowen whose lack of knowledge or innate prejudices compromise his reporting…here BBC Watch  relates what John Simpson said to Israeli Minister Tsipi Livni:

“I have to say it to you in these terms: are you going to carry on killing civilians – including women and children in quite large numbers – until you get what you want?”

No problem there condemning Israel, in fact almost blatantly accusing Israel of targeting civilians deliberately….despite the accusation being completely false.

How different when it comes to Hamas….then saying such things is ‘controversial’ even when based on the truth…..here yet more expert comment on Hamas’ use of human shields, denied above by Bowen,  the BBC presenter also unwilling to accept this claim……..

Among the subjects still missing from the BBC’s coverage is some in-depth coverage of the topic of Hamas’ use of human shields and the way in which that deliberate policy contributes to the high number of civilian casualties in the Gaza Strip. Without that essential knowledge, BBC audiences will still be unable to reach informed conclusions regarding this particular international issue. One attempt to shed some light on that issue was made by Barak Seener of the Royal United Services Institute in an interview with BBC World News on July 21st – with a remarkable reaction from the presenter when presented with an expert opinion (which is presumably what the BBC sought when it invited the specific interviewee) on the realities underpinning Hamas strategy.

Presenter:
“That is obviously a very…ah…controversial thing to say and many people will refute that the leadership of Hamas want to see their own people, supporters, women and children killed…ah…unnecessarily…”

The BBC though isn’t so censorious when Hamas makes claims that are obviously wrong, such as Israel targets civilians… as above Simpson seems to agree with them…but here are a couple of examples where the BBC reports Hamas’ claims as if they are fact:

Here Yolande Knell not only doesn’t challenge a claim that Israelis deliberately target civilians but accepts it as true (via BBC Watch):

“This is a third consecutive war against Gaza since 2008 and Israel always, I mean, do target the civilians and they are in the eye of the storm.”

Possibly no coincidence that earlier a Hamas spokesman said this:

“There is no safe haven in this place and Palestinian civilians are once again in the eye of the storm and are paying heavily. Israelis.. are trying to pressure militant groups through targeting civilians.” ”

Bowen himself in his New Statesman article continues to peddle the myth and reports such things as fact:

Raji Sourani, the director of the Palestinian Centre for Human Rights in Gaza, told me that Hamas, whatever you think of it, is part of the Palestinian DNA.

I met Sourani first when he was condemning abuses by Yasser Arafat’s men. He has taken an equally tough stance on Hamas. Now he says Israel is violating the laws of war by ignoring its legal duty to treat Palestinian civilians as protected non-combatants.

Which senior BBC journalist said this?:
‘We cannot get across the view that Palestinians are a displaced people who are fighting to overthrow, as they see it, a brutal military rule.’
 
Who are ‘the many’  senior BBC journalists who say that:

‘They simply cannot get the Palestinian viewpoint acoss, the perspective they cannot say is that Israel is a brutal apartheid state.’

I’d say they are doing their utmost to get the Palestinian narrative across…shame they don’t bother with  the truth.

Here is Charles Moore in the Spectator:

Large parts of the Arab world — Egypt, the Arab League and so on — are fiercely critical of what Hamas is doing. This is hardly mentioned on the BBC, which can cope only with a simple story of Palestinians versus Israelis.

And here’s one we did earlier on Fatah’s opinion of Hamas:

Not All Palestinians Support Hamas…’Merchants of War’

The Open University examined the BBC World Service in 2010:

Little is known about why and how certain diaspora groups connect with their home countries via the BBC World Service (BBCWS).

Its authoritative reach across national and diasporic boundaries may seem paradoxical, given that is funded by the Foreign and Commonwealth Office and has a remit to build Britain’s reputation and influence abroad. Nevertheless, despite its international profile, astonishingly little research exists on the historical and contemporary work of cultural brokerage and diplomacy performed by BBCWS.

From the prewar Empire Service on shortwave to the tri-media World Service of today, Tuning In documents how the BBC has, over eighty years, been a pivotal contact zone for diaspora engagement.

This could explain the BBC’s approach to the Middle East and the Palestinians in particular revealing that impartiality is not a valued commodity…what is needed instead is a ‘voice’ that resonates with the audience..ie tells it what it wants to hear.  We  get to see confirmation that the BBC speaks with a different voice depending on which audience it broadcasts to…BBC Arabic providing a different narrative to the BBC in English.

Memory, Participation and Resistance in ‘Global Conversation’: Discussing the 60th Anniversary of Al-Nakba on BBC, Al-Jazeera and Al-Arabiyya Arabic and English Language On-line Forums

‘The language of impartiality misses out on a key dimension of the ‘battle for hearts and minds’ in the Middle East – the role of social memory, loyalty and solidarity in the public sphere of Arab societies, and the need for any broadcaster to resonate or articulate with this to attract a popular audience.’

In 2014 you may recognise the approach taken in 2009 whilst reporting on ‘Cast Lead‘ in Gaza:

‘BBC Arabic TV focused on the rescue operations for civilian victims, and many appreciated this.‘

Impartiality?  The BBC seem to have ditched that…what about ‘factual accuracy’?  Seems that that too is disposable, replaced with ‘narratives and world views’:

Perhaps we should ask critical questions like what value does factual accuracy carry in a media environment where facts have become so widely available and commoditized? In the context of the battle for hearts and minds being played out over the airwaves of transnational Arab news networks overt discourses, narratives and world views have gained renewed importance. How will the BBC confront these narratives and offer alternatives to the dominant narratives of the Arab public sphere, which perceives the Arab nation as the victim western neo-imperialism, illegitimate and authoritarian leadership and the object of multiple designs to ensure it remains paralysed, occupied, de-Islamised and conditionally democratised. The incident of the commemoration of the 60th anniversary of the Nakba and the creation of the State of Israel is arguably a vital testing ground for evaluating the BBC’s role of presenting the grey areas to a polarised audience.

Here we get to see the infamous different emphasis placed on reports by the various BBC news servies catering for different audiences:

BBC Arabic seems to have navigated the controversial waters of the 14th and 15th of May 2008 quite well.  The BBC global website contains an “Israel at 60” portal which contains interactive features and maps and testimonials from both Israelis and Palestinians on the contradicting celebrations and remembrance. However, the portal was not translated into Arabic or made available on the BBC Arabic website. Instead BBC Arabic’s coverage of the coinciding events was composed mostly of its own Nakba orientated TV news packages, along with a limited number of translated articles from the BBC World Service Middle East website.  The former spent on average one minute on Israeli celebrations and two minutes on the unresolved plight of the Palestinians. The stories clearly contrasted Israeli and “international” celebration of the creation of the State of Israel with the ongoing costs of 1948 to Palestinians.

Although Israel’s celebrations were acknowledged and pictures celebrations from around the country on the 15th of May were published on BBC Arabic there was no celebratory or congratulatory tone to the coverage despite national celebrations in Britain and congratulatory messages and events in Europe and North America, and there was no sense that BBC Arabic would attempt to rebrand the Nakba narrative in a way that recognised the legitimacy of Israel and the redemption of the Jewish people.

Instead there was a clear emphasis on the Nakba in the Arabic service’s coverage which began around the 5th to the 18th May 2008.  Some would argue that the “BBC” did not speak with the same voice in its Arabic and English coverage, but this would suggest some kind of political inconsistency which would not accurately reflect the editorial independence of the numerous services within the corporation and importantly their different mandates.  

Whilst the BBC didn’t want to go so far as to ‘recognise’ Israel it does recognise the ‘Nakba’…a Palestinian political creation that tries to put themselves on the same level of ‘victim’ status as the Jews and the Holocaust…..

In contrast, BBC Arabic’s coverage and clarity in terms of recognising the Nakba went far further than Al-Arabiya

As for peace in the Middle East based upon the recognition of Israel?

Check these Arab views out…Nationalist, Islamist and Liberal:

المرجع القومي    The nationalist repertoire:
إسرائيل ورم سرطاني    Israel is a cancerous tumour
إسرائيل اغتصبت ارض فلسطين    Israel has raped the land of Palestine
ما اخذ بالقوة لا يسترد إلى بالقوة    What has been taken by force can be returned only by force
المجتمع الدولي منحاز لطرف إسرائيل    The international community is biased in Israel’s favour
السلام مع الكيان الصهيوني الاستعماري مرفوض    Peace with the Imperialist Zionist entity  is rejected
ضعف و عدم شرعية الأنظمة العربية    The weakness and illegitimacy of so called “Arab” regimes

المرجع الإسلامي    The Islamist repertoire:     
الصراع مع إسرائيل صراع عقاﺌدي    The conflict with Israel is religious
الرجوع للإسلام الوسيلة الوحيدة لمواجهة إسرائيل    Returning to Islam is the only means to confront Israel
قيام إسرائيل مذكور في القران الكريم    Israel’s ascendance is prophesised in the Quran
نكبة فلسطين نتيجة التأمر على نظام الخلافة    The Palestinian catastrophe is the result of the abandonment of the Caliphate
كما حرر المقاومة الإسلامية جنوب لبنان ستحرر فلسطين    In the same way that Hezbollah liberated south Lebanon Palestine will be freed
لا فاﺌدة في المعاهدات مع إسرائيل – ف وسفهم الله في القران بأنهم إذا وعدو اخلفوا وإذا أتمن خان    There is no point in negotiating with theIsrael’s – Allah has described them in the Quran as breakers of trust and promises

المرجعاللبرالي    The Liberal repertoire  
دولة إسرائيل أصبحت حقيقة يجب التعامل معها    The State of Israel has become a reality we must deal with        اليهود لديهم حق تاريخي في العيش في ارض فلسطين التاريخية    The Jewish people have a historical right to live in the land of Palestine
لا يوجد بديل للمفاوضات مع إسرائيل    There is no alternative to negotiating with Israel
السلام مع إسرائيل خيار استراتيجي    Peace with Israel is a strategic choice
الحقد والشعارات وتشدد الأعمى لا يؤدي  إلى شيء     Hatred, rhetoric and blind extremism has got us nowhere
مبروك لاسرائيل    Congratulations to Israel

Of the 829 contributions on the forum 93% (or 775) participations correspond to one of the three repertoires identified.

Repertoires
Islamist   87  12%              Nationalist  523  67%              Liberal  165  21%