Author Archives: Sue

BLAIR’S FRANKENSTEIN MONSTER

By | | , , ,
21 Comments

This is a guest post by Hippiepooter.

One cannot be without sympathy for the upset Alastair Campbell suffered in his interview with Andrew Marr today, both on a human level and as a staunch supporter of the Iraq war myself, but as a committed democrat one does feel the need to state that he and Tony Blair dragged British politics through the mud in coopting the already biased BBC as a propaganda weapon and are now victims of the monster they created.

As a youthful Tribunite member of the Labour Party in the late 70’s it was clear to me that the only real bias at the BBC was towards the Left, and I was against it as it was bad for democracy. When Tony Blair assumed leadership of the Labour Party, this bias went into overdrive. It was patently evident to anyone semi-politically literate that pre ’97 Tony Blair’s office was running an anti-Tory smear campaign in concert with the BBC to get elected, and once elected proceeded to govern with the same appalling contempt for democracy. Mr Campbell certainly wasn’t complaining when Mr Marr in both his Observer and BBC incarnations was doing New Labour’s dirty work traducing the integrity of the Conservative Party in the same manner that he has traduced his own and Mr Blair’s over Iraq.

What our former Prime Minister Mr Blair showed, to me at least, over the Iraq War, is that his heart was in the right place all along. He is, despite all his manifest shortcomings in attaining and retaining power, a personal hero. The Iraq War was just that critical. But if one’s ego is large enough to believe that the means he used via Mr Campbell to attain power were justified, sympathy for their vilification over Iraq has to be qualified. As it is, many of the moral bankrupts who he’d previously exploited to his advantage and who are now vilifying him would be calling for Mr Blair to be strung up for not going to war if we had to suffer the consequences of that today. Saddam could restart his WMD programme at any moment of his choosing. He had given Al Qa’eda leader Al Zarqawi refuge after fleeing Afghanistan. Had we stood down from the threat of war to enforce compliance of UN arms inspection, the marriage between WMD’s and terrorists that Blair feared would have become a reality, with all the apocalyptic consequences that carries.

We dont need another Iraq inquiry into Tony Blair’s decision making. What we need is an Iraq Inquiry into how the BBC acts as a propaganda weapon for the enemy at time of war.

Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.

All Quiet on the Wilders front

By | | ,
32 Comments

Although there was plenty of news on the BBC about Geert Wilders last year when he was banned from entering the UK, now that he’s on trial in the Netherlands, the BBC has gone quiet.

One would have thought there would be much material to interest the world’s foremost news organ in this story. For a start the 15 defence witnesses that the court has disallowed, leaving only three, and causing Mr Wilders’s supporters to wonder whether the trial can have a fair outcome.

Those of us who are hurt, offended or frightened by anti-Semitism should always apply a test whenever negative feelings about Islam overcome us.

We have to ask ourselves whether our negative thought is rational and based on a genuine concern, or just a phobia-like distaste, a tarring with the same brush, a generalisation based on myth and mystery as per anti-Semitism.

While we mustn’t scapegoat groups of people, dehumanise them or blame them for all the evils in the world, surely we can criticise what needs criticising, and not be afraid to make value judgments when necessary.

At the time of writing, most references to Geert Wilders on the BBC website are dated last year; one by Mark Mardell actually puts his case in a reasonably evenhanded manner.
Many people distance themselves from Geert Wilders’s campaign, but there is considerable and undeniable logic in what he is saying, which should be reported and given a fair hearing. So for that reason I think the BBC should not only be reporting the trial, but also discussing the issues it brings up.

Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.

Ash Sends Incendiary Message

By | |
22 Comments

“Hello and welcome to Outlook from the BBC world service.
I’m Lucy Ash.”
A heart-sinking announcement for anyone familiar with Ms. Ash

“In Today’s Programme: The aid worker inside the Gaza strip helping traumatised children there to rebuild their shattered lives.”

Lucy Ash is about to deliver rather more than an interview with the aid worker.
In her introduction she milks the latest revelations by Israel about their own misconduct in Gaza down to the very last drop.

“Now Israel has revealed that it’s disciplined two senior officers for endangering civilians by firing white phosphorus shells during last years attack on the Gaza strip,” she announces with palpable relish. “The officers, a brigadier general and a colonel, were found to have exceeded their authority in ordering the use of the weapons, which were fired in the direction of the main United Nations warehouse in Gaza City,” she continues, emphasising their ranks lest we might think lesser beings were responsible. “Use of such munitions near populated areas violates international law. White phosphorus sticks to flesh and burns for many hours causing appalling injuries.”

But what has this got to do with the aid worker? Does white phosphorus relate to the forthcoming tale of psychological healing she promised us?

“ More than 1100 Palestinians were killed during operation cast lead,” (We’ve got the white phosphorus now, so we’ll stop bothering to exaggerate the body count) “and the devastation wrought by the 22 day conflict in Gaza is still everywhere to be seen. Large areas of the strip were reduced to rubble, leaving thousands homeless. Children are amongst the worst affected.”

“Osama Damo (?), an aid worker with Save The Children has been involved in setting up centres to look after them, and to help them come to terms with the loss and insecurity overshadowing their young lives. Many of them have been severely psychologically traumatised by what they saw in the war.”

In addition to the traumatising effect of being indoctrinated with hatred of Jews then used as human shields by Islamist terrorists, which Ms. Ash omitted to mention.

The interview with the aid worker proceeded to detail psychological damage typical of that suffered by most war victims anywhere, and the incident graphically related to illustrate a particular child’s trauma had nothing to do with white phosphorus so far as I could see.

Lucy Ash’s introduction conjured up the notorious image of the napalm-burnt, running, Vietnamese child. The average listener could only have assumed that white phosphorus was routinely authorised by senior Israeli soldiers and deliberately used as a weapon against civilians, while Operation Cast Lead appeared to have been perpetrated for no other reason than baseless hatred of Palestinians, by aggressive expansionist Israel. Must we now expect the white phosphorus revelations to be added gratuitously to the fluctuating body count that accompanies all references to the Middle East conflict?

Do not assume that I approve of white phosphorus, or that I know enough about it to defend or attack its use. Do not assume that I think Israel can do no wrong. But Israel did one right thing in investigating and admitting this error, and in so doing handed ammunition to its enemies in the propaganda war, so was damned either way.
People who support Israel would rather it didn’t do anything at all that placed it in a bad light in the eyes of the world, but in the scheme of things how plausible is that?

Lucy Ash knew what she was doing, and, I assume, so did the BBC.

Belated Update.
So not only was Lucy Ash’s introduction gratuitous and biased, it was also factually incorrect. The reprimand she was so eager to tell us about was not about the use of white phosphorus at all. The alacrity with which she, and the BBC blurted out erroneous unverified material concerning Israel is telling. It’s not as if this was the first time such a thing has happened. It should be a lesson to them, but it seems they’ll never learn.

Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.

Funny Haha

By | | ,
11 Comments

It looks as though the BBC is going to give lavish publicity to Chris Morris’s film, the one that lampoons incompetent suicide bombers. Morris was treated to a flattering profile on Radio 4. He’s just the sort they like, edgy, dangerous, and as unpredictable as Russell Brand. His controversial paedo programme was overrated, but I appreciated the idea. His take on the public’s groupthink attitude to Paedophilia and the media’s prurient exploitation of it is almost interchangeable with the Israel question. No changes to the format necessary. The same groupthink, and the same media obsession apply to both subjects. Just remove Paedo and insert Israel and Jew wherever appropriate. Only Morris wouldn’t be amused as he is one of the baying mob of Israel denouncers.

On the theme of lampoons and edgy humour, what about Charlie Brooker. His Newswipe holds back just when it seems to be getting somewhere, and frustratingly skirts round things in a PC manner. In his film about Anjem Choudary and the Wootton Basset publicity stunt, he has chosen an easy target. Nobody likes Islam4UK; it’s banned now anyway. The thrust of the piece is that the media is giving, and getting, publicity from Choudary’s efforts. Brooker goes for ITV. The absence of blame allocated to the equally culpable BBC leaves a deafening silence. Of course his programme is on the Beeb, and Brooker is actually another P.C. lefty.

Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.

Early Learning

By | |
6 Comments

The BBC spokespersons that used to grace B-BBC with their presence always insisted that if one or two biased items slipped through, in the long term they would be counterbalanced, because balance was an overall concept, achieved over time. They must have had in mind a timescale of around two hundred years.

Yesterday on News 24, they featured a story that has been on the BBC website for a few days, about the discovery during a raid on a house in Manchester of a video that shows children being ‘radicalised.’
Kim Howells was shown expressing his surprise. If you’re chairman of the parliamentary intelligence and security committee, and you haven’t even heard of the Hamas Bunny, surely something’s wrong. There are hundreds of such things on Youtube, many featuring a nightmarish Mickey Mouse whose voice and appearance alone would surely traumatise any child, never mind indoctrinating it with jihad.

At least the problem was being given an airing. But the Muslim lady featured in the story said ‘the most worrying thing’ was that people might think this sort of carry-on was representative of all Muslims. The actual radicalisation and indoctrination seemed to bother her less.

The website transcript of the words in the vid included “I want to kill the infidels” but missed out the bit where he clearly said “To kill Jews.” If I remember correctly they had it on the News 24 subtitles, so someone at BBC online must have thought it was unseemly, and edited it out.

Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.

Baying For Blood

By | | , ,
14 Comments

The groundswell of hatred and resentment against Tony Blair is at fever pitch, so that anyone who dares to raise their head in support of him or his performance at the Chilcot inquiry will be pelted with dogshit and disemboweled.
The BBC had a queue of talking heads lined up, eager to add their bit. “He showed no remorse, no contrition, no respect for the families,” they bleated. “He took us to war on a lie, he disregarded the legality, he ignored Robin Cook and Clare Short, he promised undying loyalty to Bush, he switched the justification for war from WMDs in 24 hours to regime change” etc etc.
Suddenly Robin Cook and Clare Short are reinvented as heroic martyrs. If only they’d been listened to, albeit resigning making that a little difficult, everything would have been fine and Saddam and Iraq would have lived happily ever after. No one would have needed to be radicalized, no one would have insurged, and Uday and the other one would have mellowed and given out posies of roses.
The BBC’s disproportionate fascination with the new-age under-age protesters ratcheted up the ante; various interviews and analyses consolidated the consensus that Blair was an insensitive self-obsessed delusional war criminal, and an Oscar-deserving actor to boot.

Today ran an interview with the former ambassador to Iran, Sir Richard Dalton. You can guess what he had to say about Blair’s allusion to confronting Iran. It caused James Naughtie to remark, “The Devil Incarnate would like that” – sorry, that should be, “Benjamin Netanyahu would like that” – to which Dalton replied, “That’s not in the UK’s interest.”
Naughtie referred to rogue states with access to nuclear weapons, but was assured that Iran having nuclear capabilities doesn’t necessarily mean it would ‘hand secrets to terrorists.’ After all, Iran has chemical weapons and hasn’t done such a thing and never would. Not counting Hamas and Hezbollah of course. If the former ambassador to Iran says they don’t arm terrorists, well, he would know. Or did he mean to say they don’t harm terrorists?

Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.

Gaza Groaning With Goodies. Israel Still Guilty

By | |
21 Comments

You know when there’s a well-established mantra that’s invariably used to batter one’s adversary over the head with?
A notion that’s repeated over and over till thoroughly incorporated into the narrative, to be produced reflexively each time a certain something sets it off?

Well, when that thing is suddenly exposed as a bit of a myth, but the adversary doesn’t wish to concede or make friends, so they continue beating you with a new stick as though nothing has changed?

I’m talking, of course, about the accusation that follows the slightest mention of Israel; namely that Israel’s blockade has driven residents of Gaza to a state of malnutrition and starvation.

Ed Stourton seamlessly shifts the emphasis thus in his recent reports from Gaza on R4 Today and From our Own Correspondent. Which brings me to Alan Johnston. Reminiscing nostalgically, he says in his introduction :
“In the years when I was a correspondent in the Gaza Strip there was always one steady bleak trend; life there always got harder and harder, and for most Gazans that continues to be true.” (But not for all, as Ed will attest.)
“A major reason for this is Israel’s economic blockade. The Israelis say it’s aimed at weakening the Hamas movement, which controls the strip.”(They’re just saying that)
“ For years Hamas has launched rockets from Gaza targeting homes, schools and offices in nearby Israeli towns, and Hamas doesn’t only oppose Israel’s continuing occupation of the Palestinian territories, it also talks of ultimately seeking the destruction of Israel itself.”
( Hurry that past the listeners and they might think Israel still occupies Gaza and won’t notice the other bit) “So the blockade goes on, and Ed Stourton has been looking at the everyday impact it has on the streets of Gaza.”

Ed Stourton:
“The shops in Gaza City centre are so well stocked that the abundance is almost indecent!” […] “All of this in a place that is supposed to be on the brink of a humanitarian crisis because of Israel’s economic blockade.”
You said it bud. But although the ‘tunnel economy’ has allowed crooks and thieves to prosper, and cars and camels to be brought in, somehow Israel is to blame for the fact that Hamas won’t let poor people acquire the materials to mend their houses. (Because Israel says they might be used for military purposes.) Well, if the need for washing machines and fridges is greater than the need to repair their houses, whose fault is it that they haven’t bothered to smuggle in a few bags of cement too?
Whose do you think?
So the starvation/malnutrition mantra no longer holds water, and the charge against Israel is cunningly transferred from the original one to the updated crime of forcing them into corruption and profiteering. The prosperity of crooks and thieves, the abundance of which could also be described as indecent, seems somehow to be the fault of Israel.
*********

The blood libel that has been doing the rounds recently might have some foundation after all. Clare Short shouldn’t have antagonized those dastardly Israelis. Parts of her have been harvested and reallocated. Jane Corbin got the face, and Alan Johnston the voice.

How neat, alluding to the blood libel as “organ harvesting,” with its connotation of avarice and greed. Why not use the term as a euphemism for acquisitions of any type, not just stolen body parts. Anything one might gather in, so to speak, such as the groaning shelves of Gaza which are a veritable harvest festival.

Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.

Mountains and Molehills

By | |
7 Comments

A relatively minor molehill has made into a mountain by the BBC because it casts Israelis in a bad light.
Robin Shepherd sets out the case against the BBC with his usual eloquence. Seen in conjunction with the BBC’s habitual glossing over of anything that might reveal the extent of Palestinian, Arab and Muslim anti-Semitism and bigotry, this distortion of priorities typifies the prism through which BBC lviews the world, and chooses to feed to us. It illustrates why this website exists.

“I have remarked many times that the BBC continues to run a profile of Hamas which excludes all reference to the group’s Holocaust denial and its Protocols of Zion style anti-Semitism. Despite vast amounts of evidence of the daily assault on the Jewish people from “moderate” Palestinian leaders such as Mahmoud Abbas, who wrote a doctorate denying the extent of the Holocaust, that too is censored out of the reporting. In my recent book, A State Beyond the Pale I also provide polling evidence showing that negative sentiment about Jews even in “friendly” Arab countries such as Egypt and Jordan runs at 97 and 98 percent respectively. Again, such realities are simply not referred to.
Without being aware of such a fundamental issue it is simply impossible to understand the Israeli point of view, which is presumably why the BBC is so adamant that it will not report on it.”

Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.

NAMP Sore Affronted

By | |
29 Comments

Muslim Police Say Islam Not to Blame for Terror Attacks.
Everybody’s talking about it except, to date, the BBC.
They tell us that the anti-terror Police need Muslims.
But the NAMP has, it seems, some dodgy friends.
Discuss.
Update.
That was a bit skimpy, sorry.
The Telegraph report is on the Front Page of the paper (tree version.)
A highlighted quote from the NAMP says: “Hatred against Muslims has grown to a level that defies all logic”

Unfortunately it doesn’t defy all logic at all. What does defy logic is that while the so-called peaceful majority of moderate Muslims fail to explain exactly where their religious faith differs from that of self-proclaimed “true” Muslims like Anjem Choudary or any of the myriad Jihadi martyrs, they expect anyone to accept this ridiculous sounding theory.

It’s all very well to say ‘”that’s not the real Islam.” So what sort of Islam is moderate Islam, and what good does it do?

The veiled threat in their statement amounts to: “If you don’t stop saying we’re violent, we’ll bash yer brains in.”

I presume the government will be suitably intimidated, and issue a statement that it’s the far right they’re really concerned about, and will re engage with the MCB for some more lovely advice. Oh no, they’ve done that already.

So what will Newsnight be saying about all this? Who will they bring in to pacify the NAMP? Or will they ignore it and hope it goes away.

Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.