Israel/BBC Conflict

There seems to be consensus at the BBC that the peace talks will fail solely because of obstacles put up by a Mr Net’n’Yahoo. Something to do with the interweb?
As ever, the obstacles they constantly posit are: Settlements, 1967 borders and Jerusalem. Oh yes, and the right of return. Oh yes, and the necessity of talking to Hamas which Israel regards as a terrorist organisation. Oh yes, and the newly conceived theory that Israel’s existence endangers the lives of the US military.

All obligations on the part of the Palestinians that were formerly included in the roadmap have been airbrushed out like the model’s arse in a photoshoot.

So notwithstanding the inconvenient fact that they have been indoctrinated from the cradle to the grave with a murderous antipathy towards Jews, the Palestinians will submit obediently, with the proviso that Israel has rolled over and acceded to all requisite concessions as demanded by the majority. For example people like Paul Rogers, professor of Peace Studies at Bradford University who was consulted by Jane Little on the Sunday programme R4, for his expertise on peacemaking.

Professor Rogers has come to Peace Studies via climate science and environmentalism and he wears a leather gilet over a sweater for lecturing duties. His analysis of the incorrect way the West deals with terrorism relates to a theory he calls lidism, that is suppressing insurgencies rather than understanding their fundamental causes. That’s a superficial summary on my part, you understand.

Equally superficially, I’d say implementing a strategy informed by his own analysis of the M/E peace process would itself provide a perfect example of lidism, ie ignoring the aforementioned underlying causes of Arab resistance to Israel, and putting a lid on the lot of it by forcing Israel to give in, while not troubling the Palestinians to do some similar fundamental rethinking.

On Friday’s Any Questions programme, Alex Von Tunzelmann, batting for the BBC, kept reiterating that Muslims were not ‘other’ but were just like us. They do indeed arrive just like us in their birthday suits, Ms Von Tunzelperson, but are henceforth hot-housed into a belief system that is anything but just like ours, and wishing it weren’t so is not enough, by a long chalk, to make your wish come true.


The Palestinian Solidarity Campaign has set about summoning the masses to rise up in anger in the form of an Action Alert about the Panorama programme ‘Death on the Med’.

Revised: ‘Death on the Med’ – taking your complaint to the BBC further
Following feedback from members to our email ‘Death on the Med – The Next Steps’; we encourage you to write back to the BBC and go through the three stages mentioned below. (Ofcom has written to members saying it is unable to hold the BBC accountable on issues of ‘accuracy and impartiality’).

With admirable efficiency they have compiled a step-by-step guide about how to complain about the BBC’s complaints procedure which up to now hasn’t been very responsive to their original objections. Deepest sympathy about that.

The PSC appears to be primarily concerned with a multitude of omissions from the programme, so most of the instructions headed ‘points to make during the complaints process’ begin: “no mention of this, no mention of that, and no mention of the other.

However they provide little or no answers for the points that were made, so we’ll wait and see how steadfast the BBC will be in their resistance to this concerted and efficiently orchestrated lobbying onslaught.
Let’s hope the BBC is as intransigent with their allegations of bias as they invariably are with ours.

As some of us have been haphazardly complaining about the BBC’s 60-year campaign to delegitimise Israel for about 60 years, if the BBC caves in under pressure from the PSC, perhaps we can take a leaf out of their book and learn a thing or two about how to organise ourselves. Or, if they stand firm, even if only for disingenuous evidence of impartiality, we can take comfort from the fact that their charter does at least still oblige them to attempt that.

The irony being that for so long the PSC and its ilk has it all its own way with the media. The first sign of the truth and they respond with mass apoplexy. Funnily enough, we know how they feel.

BBC, if you’re out there, don’t let it get to you!

Fatah Chance

Watching the BBC’s blanket coverage of the announcement of forthcoming peace talks between Israel and Fatah, I noticed that requirements for a possible peace deal consisted exclusively of concessions that must be made by Israel.

What has happened to recognising Israel and renouncing violence? Without these, accomplishing any kind of peace seems a very tall order.

At least Mark Regev was given a slot, which is bound to stir up those who see the slightest peep out of him as a sign that the BBC is controlled by the Jewish lobby.

Baroness Doesn’t Open New Mall

I’ve been watching Baroness Ashton being chaperoned around Gaza by John Ging. He has been showing her the wonderful schools run by UNWRA, which teach children wonderful things not about hatred, and Baroness Ashton has been a good baroness and hasn’t talked to Hamas.
Something about what I said the other day makes me suspect someone’s being economical with the actuality. Could these UNWRA schools be not quite what they seem?
“there are posters of martyrs on the walls of the schools and in the homes of UNRWA staff. Worse still, UNRWA workers are essentially members of Hamas:”

Furthermore, the BBC hasn’t breathed a word about the new shopping mall that has been opened. I thought the Baroness could at least have been asked to perform the opening ceremony, but apparently not.
I guess that might have spoiled the effect of what the Baroness said, fighting back the the sobs. “Although Israel has eased the blockade, it still isn’t enough.

Let Political and media commentator Tom Gross take up the tale.

“UPDATE, Sunday July 18, 2010:
“Some journalists who subscribe to this list have asked me for a quote. You are welcome to use the following.

“On a day when (because EU Foreign Policy Chief Baroness Ashton is in Gaza) the BBC and other media have featured extensive reports all day long on what they term the dire economic situation in Gaza, why are they not mentioning the new shopping mall that opened there yesterday?

“When leading news outlets mention the so-called humanitarian flotillas from Turkey, why do they omit the fact that life expectancy and literacy rates are higher, and infant mortality rates are lower in Gaza than corresponding rates in Turkey? Have they considered that perhaps the humanitarian flotillas ought to be going in the other direction, towards Turkey?”


James Naughtie is baffled. Some bad men have attacked a children’s’ UN summer camp in Gaza. He asks Jon Donnison if he knows anything. “Could it be something to do with Hamas?” he speculates. “Only, it’s the second time this has happened.”
“Why do you suppose Hamas don’t like the UN summer camps?” He wonders.
“They’re jealous, because their own summer camps are rubbish. Also, they don’t like girls cavorting on the beach.”

“oh; well that’s understandable then.” “We’ll be talking to someone from the UN in a minute.”
Can’t wait to see how they explain this one away. Maybe it was Israel’s fault. The illegal blockade, probably

No, you prat. It’s because Hamas is an Islamist outfit who think nothing of tying people up and throwing them off tall buildings, and they aren’t too keen on anything much, especially women’s lib, and fun. You know, a bit like those bad Taliwhassisnames that our brave boys are fighting in Affie.

Update: Surprise surprise. They got our friend, Israel hating John Ging to speak for the UN. “It’s the fault of the conditions Gazans have to live in.” (Israel’s fault.)
I’ll add links ASAP.

Making Israel Toast

Melanie Phillips presents two inspiring pieces today. William Shawcross’s JPost article, and a statement made last year by Spanish politician and journalist Pilar Rahola.

The international press does major damage when reporting on the question of the Israeli-Palestinian issue. On this topic they don’t inform, they propagandize. When reporting about Israel the majority of journalists forget the reporter code of ethics. And so, any Israeli act of self-defense becomes a massacre, and any confrontation, genocide. So many stupid things have been written about Israel, that there aren’t any accusations left to level against her. At the same time, this press never discusses Syrian and Iranian interference in propagating violence against Israel; the indoctrination of children and the corruption of the Palestinians. And when reporting about victims, every Palestinian casualty is reported as tragedy and every Israeli victim is camouflaged, hidden or reported about with disdain.

A comment under Mr. Shawcross’s article in the JPost links to an online article from the US that adds an even more sinister dimension to Israel’s predicament. The US government’s abandonment of Israel and the implications thereof.

I intended to insert a video of a discussion between Jonathan Sacerdoti and Dr. Ghada Fahmi that was aired on Al-Jazeera, but my link wouldn’t upload:
Do see what you can do with it. Or go through this and click on the link “speaking” in the 3rd paragraph.

Dr. Fahmi holds an important position in the Islamic Studies department at Exeter University, the university where Ilan Pappe is Professor of (revisionist) History. I’m told that the Arabic and Islamic Studies department is generously funded by Saudi Arabia.

This wasn’t on the BBC, but Dr. Fahmi does appear on the BBC, and is regarded as a credible spokesperson. I wonder how many people she speaks for, and if her attitude to the flotilla fiasco actually represents BBC thinking, or that of the British intelligentsia. Her theory is that the media unfairly favours Israel. The reason? Because they have the audacity to air, occasionally, Israeli spokespersons. In Dr. Fahmi’s view, this alone constitutes egregious media bias towards Israel.


I was wondering given the BBC’s embrace of the word “Activist” to describe Hamas enablers, should we not produce a new thesaurus to help us translate the propaganda and bias spewed out by the BBC? Late night BBC news proclaiming that Israel was “unmoved” by sight of Irish Nobel Peace Laureate Mairead Corrigan being escorted off the “Rachel Corrie”. Why would this question be asked in the first place UNLESS the person asking it had a bias? Were those who carried out  7/7 “activists” also? Loathsome BBC.


More one way reporting of the Hate Flotilla by the BBC. I listened to Sarah Colborne from the Palestinian Solidarity Movement being interviewed on Today @ 7.50am. She spewed forth a series of allegations about the IDF boarding the Mavi Marmara, denied any knowledge of those on board that vessel seeking martyrdom (even though the families of  at least two of the dead have confirmed this), stated that the Israelis opened up without provocation, and claimed all on board were peace-loving humanitarians. Now, this is all standard fare from Palestinian propagandists, but why did the BBC not try to provide balance by interviewing perhaps one of those Israeli soldiers who came under such vicious attack from the Islamic thugs on board the vessel?


Anyone catch the BBC in full anti-Israel mode this morning on “Today”? I though Humphyrs was particularly hysterical during his 810am rant with the Israeli Ambassador Ron Prosor – at one point denying that knives were weapons. (“You can get them in you kitchen drawer”) Evan Davies did all he could @ 8.47am to confirmt that the blockade  of Gaza was illegal, that the boarding of the ships was illegal and that the use of force against the iron-bar wielding knife stabbing Jihadist-enablers was not “proportional.”

The BBC has entirely failed in its duty to examine the other side of this story. It has wilfully sanitised the role of the IHH in this episode of Jihad-enabling, it has canonised the “activists” on the ships, and of course it has demonised Israel. The BBC refuses to provide any balance when it comes to covering Israel and as such is nothing more than a propaganda arm for Palestinians. Shame on all BBC journalists involved, they lie in the gutter,,,,

Aiding and Abetting Part 2

It seems the revised ‘Free Gaza’ Flotilla E.T.A. is Saturday (tomorrow.)

I hear that someone from BBC radio 4 is on board one of the vessels, but the BBC has been strangely silent on this.

Amongst the online chatter about the situation in Gaza – the abundance of produce, Olympic-size swimming pools, the availability of luxury goods, and the ultimate gourmet experience advertised by Roots Club – the argument goes that all this does not prove that there isn’t real hardship and poverty there too.

There are many other places on earth where extremes exist side by side; where corruption keeps the poor in poverty and the rich in luxury.
They probably have to make do without a flotilla, and presumably without humanitarian aid from countries they’ve sworn to annihilate.

Hamas smuggles various goodies through the tunnels, but nevertheless Israel supplies Gaza with necessities such as fuel, medicine and food despite Hamas’s continued refusal to moderate its hard line stance. Numerous inventories of the goods regularly delivered to Gaza by Israel do little to disabuse Israel’s critics from their persistent allegations of humanitarian crises and deprivation, illogically attributed to Israel. Hamas having been absolved of all responsibility.

The flotilla is less concerned with Human Rights than with carrying out a provocative publicity stunt to stoke up a propaganda coup against Israel. They are such humanitarians that they turned down a request from the parents of Gilad Shalit to plead his case with Hamas.

Tomorrow, if Israel rises to the bait and confronts them, the BBC will probably have the story they are waiting for.

I am not the only one who has noticed the BBC’s bashfulness. Someone from the opposite camp has noticed too, and thinks it would make just the story the BBC likes, so he’s written a letter.
“Hi. As a BBC online viewer, I’d like to alert you…….”