Author Archives: Sue

Free Marwan Mandela!

By | | , ,
5 Comments

Is the release of one thousand Palestinian prisoners in exchange for one young Israeli soldier kidnapped in 2006 a good deal?
Under the circumstances, and in the long run, maybe. Superficially though, one would have thought it looked a leedle, – how you say? – disproportionate. Never mind. We’ll soon be hearing the outcry about that from the BBC. Or not.

So the imminent swap – Gilad Shalit for Marwan Barghouti and nine hundred and ninety nine others– is good news. We want Shalit to be safe more than we mind returning one thousand criminals who are hell-bent on harming Israel.

The World This Weekend (hat tip Craig) featured a rather splendid profile of Barghouti, straight out of the school of journalism that regards certain terrorist atrocities as audacious, and euphamises certain terrorists as militants. So, to establish some weird sort of moral equivalence, three of Barghouti’s admirers were brought in to sing his praises; Ghada Karmi from the University of Exeter with its Saudi-funded Islamic studies dept., BBC’s useful Arabist Alistair Crooke, and Richard Burden M.P. Britain-Palestine all-Party group. Oh yes, and for balance, Devorah Chen chief prosecutor in Barghouti’s trial.

I forgot to mention that Barghouti was convicted of murdering several Israelis. –But that’s a mere detail of no consequence; in fact it’s quite an asset.

The man’s a hero, clean, honest and a patriot, some say he’s a bit like Nelson Mandela, and an ideal replacement for Mahmoud Abbas. He might unify quarreling Palestinian factions.
All Hamas wants is a little stake in power, yet it is treated as a pariah says Ms. Karmi. How fair is that? Poor Hamas. A pariah.

Brought to you by Brian Hanrahanrahan of the Britain-Palestine let’s all have a party Broadcasting Corporation.

Craig’s bias coefficient analysis thingy:

Ghada Karmi (pro-Barghouti): 2 minutes 9 seconds

Devorah Chan (anti-Barghouti): 42 seconds

Alistair Crooke (pro-Barghouti): 17 seconds

Richard Burden (pro-Barghouti): 1 minutes 3 seconds


Or


Pro-Barghouti: 3 minutes 29 seconds
Anti-Barghouti: 42 seconds

Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.

Our Man in the West Bank

By | | ,
11 Comments

Deegee highlights numerous signs in Jeremy Bowen’s article that indicate he’s not really BBC Middle East editor at all, but a correspondent representing the Palestinians. Like Alan Johnston, Bowen obviously wants to assure his friends that “I’m telling your story.”
The article is riddled with clues as to Bowen’s personal feelings, and is dumbed down by lazy over-simplifications of the sort that invariably get repeated over and over till they become set in stone.
“President Mahmoud Abbas, America’s current Palestinian partner, is so fed up with the lack of progress towards independence that he has threatened to leave his job.“

“Is so fed up!” Is that Bowen’s summing up of Abbas’s political strategy?

Deegee says: “Abbas’s period as president has expired. He would be resigning from a position he no longer legally holds.”
The BBC’s own website publishes a variety of interpretations, which show that Abbas’s threat to stand down is a little more complex than Bowen’s misleading brief – that he is “Fed up”

Having established that Jewish settlements are the obstacle to peace, and that they are illegal, Bowen somehow manages to erase the Palestinians’ refusal to recognise Israel or renounce violence from the equation altogether as though it isn’t an impediment of any significance whatsoever.
Melanie Phillips says, “Let us not forget that it is the ‘moderate’ Abbas and the forces he leads whom America and the west say are ‘entitled’ to a state of their own, to which Israel is unreasonably providing obstacles”

That has now become received wisdom. Bowen ups the ante by calling them “little fortresses.” He then rearranges history by reiterating another myth that has established itself in the narrative. He implies that Rabin’s assassination by a Jewish extremist was responsible for ending the peace process.
In a critique of one of Seth freedman’s Guardian articles, which is similarly economical with the actuality, Israelinurse dispels this myth.

“Freedman descends into the realms of fantasy, stating that “with three bullets, assassin Yigal Amir managed to irreversibly derail the peace process” and claims that the entire region’s political journey abruptly changed course as a result of that tragic event.
In actual fact, the Oslo Accords continued to be implemented. On January 20th 1996 agreements were made regarding the IDF redeployment from areas to be passed over to PA control, the election of the Palestinian Council and the head of the Palestinian Authority. The 23rd October 1998 saw the signing of the Wye River Memorandum and on September 4th 1999 the Sharm El Sheikh Memorandum was agreed.
Just as the peace treaty with Jordan, signed just over a year before Rabin’s murder, did not fall apart, so the agreements with the Palestinians went ahead. But on July 11th 2000, the Camp David negotiations fell through and just over two months later the second Intifada began, shaking Israel to its core.”

Deegee says; “It could easily be said the peace agreement had already failed by the time of Rabin’s death and it was far from certain he would have been re-elected.”

So however sad it is that there is as yet no peace agreement, the Jewish extremist’s act of murder was not the reason.
Bowen even refers to the notorious handshake on the lawn as a kind of ‘finest hour’. Anyone who has read about Arafat’s scurrilous behaviour during and after that and the Camp David fiasco would have to laugh.

Bowen makes no attempt to conceal his contempt for Binyamin Netanyahu, who he depicts as an arrogant bully causing poor Bill Clinton to use the F word No mention of what poor Bill thought of evil old Yassir after he effectively scuppered Clinton’s last attempts at peacemaking by instigating another Palestinian intefada.

In “My Life” written by president Clinton, he wrote that Arafat once complimented Clinton by telling him, “You are a great man.” Clinton responded; “I am not a great man. I am a failure, and you made me one.”

Throughout the article Bowen continually refers to what “the Palestinians want” for their state. He completely ignores one thing. They do not just want a small amount of territory in Jerusalem, because they do not want Israel to have any territory at all. For the Palestinians, one inch would be too much, because there is an inherent and virulent hatred for Jews at the heart of their religion. Bowen and his ilk will never tackle that, maybe because it’s unpalatable, or perhaps it’s because they feel the same.

Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.

Gathering Storm

By | | ,
20 Comments

I am well aware that Peter Oborne’s C4 anti-Jew documentary was not a BBC programme. However, years of biased reporting on the Israeli/Palesinian situation well and truly prepared the ground for Peter Oborne to score his illegitimate goal.
Meanwhile, if anyone was acting as referee, they must have steadfastly withstood the pressure from the mighty Jewish lobby and looked the other way.

The inferior quality of the programme was no secret, and many of the supportive comments that popped up in response seem to be of a similar standard. But the obvious flaws in both provide little reassurance that the groundswell of anti Israel feeling can be disregarded as an aberration of the ignorant; like tattoos.

The insinuations littering the programme were designed to implant the idea that everything ever said in support of Israel was sponsored by wealthy Jews with an ulterior motive, while if any denunciation of Israel remained unsaid, that was only because wealthy Jews with an ulterior motive have suppressed it.

Peter Oborne says anti-Semitism is no longer a racist abomination against Jews, but a weapon used by them to quash protests from victims of the sinister Jewish lobby. The suggestion that Jews cynically use accusations of anti-Semitism as a silencing tool is itself a silencing tool of the first order.

What really is sinister is the media’s suspicion and dislike of Jews and the BBC’s affection for Muslims. Is nobody aware of the gathering storms of 30s Germany? How long before they drop their guard and blurt out that Hitler was right.

See Robin Shepherd’s article in the Wall Street Journal, read his blog. Check out CiFWatch.

Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.

Unreality T.V.

By | | ,
5 Comments

Following the account of procedures attached to the production of The Big Questions, and exposure of the tactics used to ensure car-crash telly (so as not to bore the audience) here’s another example of the tampering that goes into making a programme aimed, above all else, at ratings.

I know the strictest parents series has an agenda. It’s set up to show that delinquents need boot-camp parenting. This theory has as many holes as a sieve, but that’s not my point. It is that most programmes start with a conclusion, whereupon much film is shot, most of it is discarded, and the rest is edited to fit.

I saw an episode that featured strict black Christian parents unconvincingly performing ‘wonders’ on two rebellious British teenagers. We’ve all seen black Americans going crazy in church before, so this lot didn’t seem particularly surprising, but neither ‘parents’ nor teenagers came out of it too well.

The series in question is shown on BBC3 so I don’t expect many people watch it, but the Orthodox Jewish episode was bound to ruffle a few sensitive feathers as it made the strict parents look as bonkers and unreasonable, if not more so, than the naughty teenagers.

A plague on both their houses, one might conclude. I certainly wouldn’t recommend participating in exploitative rubbish like that. But for another inside story see this JC article and the comment from neighbour Chani.

“Over 100 hours of film was shot that week, including many examples of the neighbors delivering dinner, partying around a lag b’omer bonfire, loaning the teens clothing from the “Clothing Gemach”, strolling with the teens around the neighborhood, and throwing them a good-by party where they showered the teens with personal blessings. None of these clips made it in. What did make it, unfortunately, was a line that Tzippy was “fed” by the director regarding “the community authorities.” Taken out of context, it leaves an incorrect and imbalanced representation of a community that smothers and rejects, but does not embrace and accept”

It’s not this stupid series that worries me. I fear that everything we see on the BBC is, to one degree or another, similarly manipulated. With their access to the media, programme makers and producers are in a uniquely powerful position, and in any other profession exploiting naïve people would be regarded as a form of abuse.

Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.

Solihull Sojourn

By | | ,
23 Comments

Bio has already linked to this article by Israelinurse, everyone’s favourite contributor to blogs Harry’s Place and CiFWatch. She describes appearing on The Big Questions, in the third and last topic on the show, antisemitism. The format of this programme is bound to lead to frustration all round, and true to form, this one ended just at the point when they were getting down to some delicate nitty gritty.
Israelinurse’s original post might be a tad too long for the sensitivities of this site, but here are some of the juicy bits.

“[I]in my initial telephone conversation with the programme’s assistant producer I raised the subject of the BBC’s suppression of the publication of the Balen Report at an estimated cost of some £200,000 so far to the license-fee paying British public. Despite this, they decided that they wanted me on the show. Then, a couple of days before the journey to Birmingham, I received a further phone call instructing me that I must not mention The Guardian on air. My protests that this rather Fawlty Towers-style ‘don’t-mention-the-war’ restriction was absurd were met with the explanation that as no representative of The Guardian would be present at the time of broadcast, and therefore that organisation would not have the right of reply, there was a danger of legal action being taken against the BBC which they were keen to avoid.

I decided that there was in fact no need to mention the ‘G’ word, and so decided to go ahead despite the gag-order.

Upon arriving at the broadcast venue early on the Sunday morning, I considered it prudent to check with the assistant producer exactly under which ‘tag’ (the potted description under one’s name when one appears on screen) I would be appearing. Yet another moment worthy of the Fawlty Towers script writers ensued when I was informed that they did not wish to define me as being connected to CiF Watch as “the public will not know what that is”. So much for the media’s duty to inform; apparently if the public doesn’t know, the BBC isn’t going to tell them!

Having already sacrificed my weekend, there was nothing to be done at this point but just get on with it. Imagine then my joy, dear reader, when I discovered that the ‘expert contributors’ on the opposite side of the debate were none other than Haim Bresheeth and our old friend Tony Greenstein – the latter complete with a ‘Boycott Israeli Goods’ lapel badge the size of a jam jar lid, which fortunately did not make it into the studio. Interestingly, at some point during the programme, both of the above had their ‘tag’ written as ‘Vilified by Zionists’. Now that you really could not make up!

One does have to ask oneself if a TV programme such as this can in fact make any worthwhile contribution to highlighting the worrying trend of rising antisemitism in Britain. Personally, I very much doubt it. The claim made by the show’s host Nicky Campbell whilst we were in the ‘Green Room’ before the broadcast that the Balen Report is merely a ‘journalistic’ issue serves only to strengthen my view that the ‘group-think’ within the media industry is so well rooted that business – in all senses of the word – will continue as usual until some brave and pioneering producer will stand up and question the commonly held premises which currently prevent the media from tackling the real truths behind the increase in antisemitism in Britain and many other countries.

As long as broadcasters are afraid of legal actions on the part of other media organisations and more concerned about gaining PC credibility by ‘giving a balanced view’ than doing any real analysis …… I’m not holding my breath.“

Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.

Protocols of the Elders of Oborne

By | | ,
40 Comments

I await tonight’s Dispatches programme on C4. with that familiar dread and sinking feeling.
It’s no good saying wait and see before getting upset because there’s plenty there already…

The inevitable baying mob on the C4 website sets the scene. The gist is that the Jewish lobby is a sinister secretive conspiracy influencing political decisions and forcing our trembling government to support the brutal Zionist entity against the interests of the UK. Furthermore, Jews will try silence such accusations with charges of anti-Semitism, so remember to ignore whatever Jews say in their malevolent attempts to shut down this perfectly reasonable and well-intentioned debate.

Peter Oborne has written some explanatory notes, (takes forever to load) which make his position quite clear. He airs his views on Jonathan Dimbleby, Jeremy Bowen and the Balen report, and concludes that the BBC is muzzled by this crippling Zionist stranglehold.

(Take the influential and intimidating words you are reading right now as proof of this. Sense the powerful ominous Jewish threat impliedly lurking behind them and wonder at the unimaginably emasculating effect they are having on the BBC)

So the lobby is uncovered, but wait. There is another disturbing Jewish tactic. People are asking “So what?” “So what if there’s a lobby group? Aren’t there countless other lobby groups?” For example the Muslim, Palestinian, Gay and Lesbian, Hunting/anti hunting lobbies?

Anyone who saw the report Our World by Emily Buchanan on BBC News 24 the other day extolling the benefits of Sharia in the UK, not just for family courts, but for Sharia friendly finance, might have pondered over the government’s keenness to establish London as the World hub of Sharia finance. The film was at pains to point out that the little things we ignorant Islamophobes might fear about this development are mere overreactions to the threatening behaviour of a few unrepresentative radicals and pure racist scaremongering. Surely, if there was anything to worry about, Peter Oborne would be onto it? Fatwa permitting.

A sole dissenting voice came from an Iranian lady whose apostacy had drawn death threats. She explained that, amongst many other unenlightened principles, under Sharia a woman’s word is worth half a man’s .

Now it seems, under the UK’s newly unenlightened principles, a Jew’s word is worth nothing at all.
It’s the lobby, the evil sinister lobby; it’s in the Protocols of the Elders of Zion and you’d better believe it.

Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.

Daddy’s Girl

By | |
28 Comments

Simmering below the surface at the BBC is the very thing the Guardian practices overtly. What restrains the BBC from outright denunciation of Jews and their shitty little country is the wretched obligation for impartiality written into the pesky BBC charter. The Guardian has no such obligations (other than to remain saleable enough to keep going, which rumour says might not be for long.)

When it was launched I passed on a press release about CiFWatch, the website set up specifically to monitor the antisemitic comments and the moderation policy of Comment is Free at The Guardian online. I took a lot of criticism then, and no doubt I’ll get the same again but this time I know what to expect. I couldn’t resist.

Ever since, I’ve visited it every day, and it’s quite an eye-opener. Collecting all the evidence and pinning it down in its undiluted form is more tricky with the wider ranging but more thinly spread BBC bias, but we all know that the Guardian is closely connected to the Beeb, and familial influences interchange and criss-cross.
If you haven’t seen it already, today’s latest post is a scoop. Not quite cheesy peas, but if you like nepotism, and you like antisemitism, you’ll love nepotintisemitism.

Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.

That Sinking Feeling

By | | ,
37 Comments

If exposure on the telly or the radio wasn’t the most valuable publicity available to mankind there would be no advertising – and authors and publishers wouldn’t spend so much time and effort doing the rounds on the circuit plugging their book.
I’m sure some agents and publicists have to pull all sorts of strings to get a slot on the One Show or Start the Week, but Shlomo Sand wouldn’t have met much resistance.
The BBC doubtless bit his hand off when, as one of their favourite types of people, the Israel hating Israeli, he offered to come and advertise his new book.
I’m not in a position to examine the dodgy science behind it, but others are, and surely for an impartial broadcaster it would have been only fair to mention that his theory was highly contentious, instead of treating the author with the fawning admiration that was bestowed upon him from assorted guests and presenter Andrew Marr, none of whom were in any position to examine or query the content of this book.

A phrase I frequently use myself is cropping up more and more these days.
It’s ‘that sinking feeling.’ That’s the feeling everyone gets when the topic of Israel, the Jews, or Islam comes up in relation to the BBC.

Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.

Not Amused

By | |
14 Comments

For me, humour can overcome certain political views if it’s funny enough.

The assumption that everyone will automatically agree is still irritating , but I can put that aside if there’s a good laugh in there.

Did anyone see how miffed that Mark Steel fellow was when Ian Hislop called him a Stalinist on HIGNFY ? He was definitely bovvered.

The thing I’m not so sure about is the stupid Anne Frank joke from the ubiquitous David Mitchell who I usually quite like. His attempted joke drew a complaint on Feedback which was briefly and peremptorily dealt with, below several letters praising other programmes.

He thought an amusing example of something very ridiculous was the idea that someone whose need to keep quiet was a matter of life or death – would ask for a drum kit. Ha very ha.

The fact that we all know Anne Frank’s terrible fate makes this not one of the occasions where the humor justifies the content.

Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.

Blowing the Whistle

By | |
24 Comments

Did anyone else read Nick Cohen’s disturbing piece about whistleblower Derek Pasquill. He is bringing a case of unfair dismissal (hopeless) against the FCO.

It isn’t true to say that the BBC hasn’t reported this subject, they have. But they focus on the ethics of whistleblowing itself rather than what was ‘blown.’
Things more scandalous than several duck houses and home-flippings put together.

Putting aside the fact that many people are skeptical about whether there can be truly moderate Muslims, if there really are, it would undoubtedly be a good thing. After all, Muslims have fitted into U.S. society without all the difficulties we have here.

Our government recognises the necessity of befriending the Muslims it deliberately brought here. But rather than encouraging and supporting moderates they have chosen to appease and support the likes of the extreme MCB.

It seems Jack “I-come-from-immigrants” Straw was complicit in all this. Sitting there on the QT panel telling us all about that, he looked half deflated; likely to shrivel up altogether at any moment.

Hazel Blears was beginning to get it. She made a stand, then she was sacrificed in the expenses row.

Instead of debating the morality of whistleblowing, shouldn’t the BBC be debating the morality of appeasing, funding and fêting extreme Islamists?

Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.