Category Archives: Iraq

I see that the BBC have flown the intrepid John Humphrys over to Basra (Never mind those pesky carbon emissions, eh?) to report on the current situation there. I caught his first report this morning interviewing a senior army officer who in true blue military form showed a tenacity to finish the job by getting the Iraqi army up to speed. Humphrys zeroed in on those British soldiers who had lost their lives during the past few years in Basra wondering if their sacrifice had been in vain. How delightful for the next of kin. Why does the BBC have such a defeatist and pessimistic mindset? I always find that BBC interviews with Armed Forces personnel demonstrate the best and worst of British – with our military showing courage and vision whilst the BBC shows unrelenting gloom and doom. The beat of surrender is always close to the surface…

The BBC’s crusade against the war in Iraq and its obsession with impugning the reputation of the US Armed forces never ceases with the latest headline informing us that six people have been killed in a US air strike near the Iraqi town of Samarra, with some reports suggesting they were US-allied anti-al-Qaeda Sunni fighters. The US denied these claims which the BBC says comes from a police source and a militia member.

Mmm..a police source and a “militia” member? Well given that the BBC itself never ceases telling us how heavily infiltrated the Iraqi police has been by terrorists (that nasty word again) and given that the terrorists (“Militia” in BBC-speak) themselves are perhaps not the ideal source for comment on the US military – what credibility has this accusation? None, but that is neither here nor there, it’s the impression that counts. The BBC then goes on to quote some doom-mongering from the Iraq Body Count organisation, I suggest you visit their web site and decide for yourself just how unbiased they are!

The BBC is doing its very best to play down the progress made by the valiant US armed forced in Iraq and at the same time pump up the volume of the allegations made by the Jihadi.

Well, today is the day – the 5th anniversary of the liberation of Iraq and I have been watching and listening to the BBC coverage, have you?

Last evening’s “Newsnight” was a special devoted to the Iraq situation five years on and a more one-sided programme one could hardly conceive. I believe that the BBC aligned itself from the start with the anti-war pro-Saddam rabble and not a lot has changed since. The Newsnight mood music and the tone of the voice-overs was sombre, and even the charts that showed JUST how successful the Surge has been were caveated to ensure that no good news was let out untainted.

There was an interview with Jonathan Powell, the man who is so steeped in appeasement care of his work with the murderous IRA that he thinks we should be talking to Al Qaeda, Hamas et al. Then there was a panel of experts in the studio weighted 3:1 against the liberation, sorry, I meant occupation. (Always best to get the terminology right) There was Charles Kennedy, the uber liberal who wants troops taken out right now , no matter what the Iraqis think. Kennedy got away with blue murder making all kinds of claims suggesting that he was on the high moral ground when in fact he lies in the moral sewer. Then there was a former assistant to the first Iraqi PM who had nothing good to say about the US liberation. He was also a dissembler of the truth, lying through his teeth when he claimed AQ had no presence in Iraq prior to the war. Then there was a “wise old cove” from our diplomatic service, who had been based in Basra, whose insights extended to a complaint that there was no post-victory plan in place and it was all chaos. I wonder which wars he could point to that were on an orderly and bureaucratic basis?

Finally, the only voice in favour of what has been done was Richard Perle. With 3 voices against his, the BBC stacked this to ensure that the anti-war “all is doom and gloom” message got across loud and clear. Was there NO UK commentator that Newsnight could find to both defend the liberation and indeed warmly applaud what has been done by our armed forces?

I laughed when the anti-war panel all agreed that “everyone” knew that victory over Saddam would be quick. Total rubbish. At the time, we were regaled by the BBC over the prowess of the elite Iraqi Revolutionary Guard, and how they would constitute a formidable opposition. Remember? As we know, they scarpered when faced with the US armed forces.

It struck me that this was NOT a debate on the war in Iraq five years on, this was a debate on how the war had all gone wrong. This was a typical pre-determined BBC set-up, and I felt sorry for Richard Perle. Paxman is idolised by some as the tough talking no-nonsense journalist but he let Kennedy and co get away with some outrageous claims.

Questions he might have asked could have included;

• Is it morally right to allow genocidal butchers like Saddam to stay in situ rather than risk military action?
• What was Churchill’s post-war plan?
• With Al Queda declaring Iraq the front-line in its war with us, what message would a sudden withdrawal send?
• With US troops still in Germany and Japan 60+ years later, does that make these wars a failure? What about the failure of the EU and UN to rally behind this liberation?
• Apart from the Ba’athists, who obviously enjoyed patronage from Saddam and have been resentful ever since, how do the rest of the Iraqi people feel five years on?

There IS a real debate to be had here but the BBC is not facilitating it. How about balancing the panel so we can have it? How about starting from the point that Saddam headed up a degenerate tyranny that funded terrorism and propagated genocide. Five years on, we have one less monster in power, an Iraq that is showing signs of improvement, and whilst it may not be a fully functioning Jeffersonian democracy, it is way better than what is was.