Where does Mishal Husain get her news from? Al Jazeera?
Mishal Husain, the BBC’s Muslim presenter who thinks that Hamas rockets are pretty harmless and that it is part of her job to improve the image of Islam made a slight factual error this morning claiming that (08:52)
‘The Israeli authorities have reopened access to the Al Aqsa Mosque this morning….closed yesterday after unrest following the fatal shooting of a Palestinian.’
Trouble is that’s just not true as even the BBC reported yesterday…..
A spokesman for Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas has described the closure of a disputed Jerusalem holy site as a “declaration of war”.
The move came amid tension and violence after the shooting of a Jewish activist. Israel’s PM urged calm, saying Mr Abbas was stoking unrest.
The holy site will reopen on Friday, Israel’s economy minister says.
And what of that ‘Palestinian’?
Israeli police later killed a Palestinian suspected of shooting him. Moataz Hejazi, 32, was shot after reportedly opening fire when police surrounded his home.
So the mosque was closed because a Palestinian shot an Israeli Rabbi and then that Palestinian killer was shot resisting arrest.
Not quite the tale Husain cobbled together.
Later in the day we had Kevin Connolly giving us an analysis of the historical context and background to events in Jerusalem….apparently the start of the problem was the Israeli’s ‘supreme conquest’ of Palestinian territory in 1967.
Strange, I thought 1967 had the Israelis routing the massed Arab armies who were ready to annihilate Israel but instead fled the field leaving Israel in charge of the land by default…..they didn’t ‘conquer’ it as Connolly suggests.
Facts and language….the proper use if which determine people’s perceptions and reactions.
The BBC’s mis-use of both is fuel to the fire for the ‘radical Islamist’s’ narrative.
It is interesting that Connolly talks openly about the Muslim reaction to any Israeli incursion into the Mosque….it would set off violent repercussions across the Muslim world.
Connolly mentions the Crusades, no doubt doing the usual BBC thing of trying to suggest that Christians have a history of violence in religion’s name thereby intending that we should not judge Islam for its violence…trouble is…Christianity doesn’t tell you to hate the non-believers, it doen’t tell you to kill them. The Koran does.
But it is that Muslim reaction to any Israeli incursion that is interesting because Muslims continually refer to the Crusades as something that even now radicalises Muslims, just another point in history that Muslims have suffered persecution at the hands of Christians.
Never mind that Muslims attacked and conquered Jerusalem and the Crusades were an attempt to regain Christian land.
Connolly’s admission that Muslims would set the Middle East alight to get the Al Aqsa Mosque area back, Temple Mount to the Jews of course, tells you something of the hypocrisy of the Muslim narrative that feeds their grievance industry and the subsequent terrorism.
They complain about the Crusades and yet would do exactly the same thing should they be excluded from the Mosque.