Search Results for: talk to hamas

What Time is It?

By | |
33 Comments

The shambles hosted by Nicky Campbell that calls itself ‘The Big Questions’ plumbs new depths each time it graces the airwaves. Particularly when the subject is Israel/Palestine. How can people be so opinionated, so vocal and so sure of themselves yet so ignorant? Frantically launching themselves at subjects about which they know dangerously little, they interrupt hysterically, disrupt and misbehave in front of goodness knows who – why, we’re told that even the Queen sometimes watches what everyone calls, with great reverence and awe, ‘National Television.’

Who are they pandering to? Who do they think will admire these childish antics? Sadly, audiences do accept uncouth behaviour, even if they don’t particularly applaud it.

These bearbaiting programmes are simply ratings-chasers. Nothing, apart from hot air is ever achieved. Ray Cook deals with the idiocy of the question. “Is it Time to Free Palestine?” It’s completely senseless.

Nicky Campbell certainly knows more than he lets on. The genocidal content of the Hamas Charter for example. Nevertheless Hasan Nowarah avoids confirming the murderous intent immutably embedded therein, when Janey Godley, the Rab C Nesbitt-alike Scottish stand-up comedienne wonders if it is true. “Is it true?” she screeches, not listening for an answer. Hasan is setting sail on the forthcoming flotilla, to alleviate the plight of the starving Palestinians in Gaza, the largest prison on earth, by bringing them several boatloads of letters from sympathisers and Israel-bashers. Best of luck with that stupid publicity stunt.

Ms Godley is volatile and indignant. Whatever is or is not in the Hamas charter, she *knows* what she’s talking about. “For somebody who hates ghettos” she barks at Raymond Mann of Scottish Friends of Israel, “why did you create another one?” she shrieks, before smugly settling back into her chins. Denis MacEion advises her to Google the Hamas Charter. But you know – and I know – she won’t; and even if she does, she’d find some way of excusing or denying it.
Through the din Margo MacDonald can be heard announcing that Israel is an artificial state.
Sam Westrop is an impressive character. He’s part of the initiative ‘British Muslims for Israel.’ He wasn’t going to be ruffled by the heckling and jeering.
Peter Hitchens has a booming baritone which commands respect by dint of decibels. An air of expectancy descends whenever he opens his mouth. He knows you can get a good beef stroganoff in Gaza, but when the chunky keffeyeh-shrouded individual who had been yelling throughout because he’s palpably seething with hatred, is finally given the opportunity to tell the world that Gazans are starving, Hitchens barely challenges him. So we, the audience, which possibly includes Her Majesty, don’t forget, are left to ponder this misplaced emotional outburst for the rest of the day.
Because of the BBC’s misrepresentation of the Middle East, we must now expect to be confronted with this kind of outrageous hysteria, both on our screens, and in real life, and we’ll be encountering strangers with woefully prejudiced opinions for some time to come. Thanks BBC.

Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.

Complicity in Israel-Bashing Jamboree

By | | ,
31 Comments


Does the Media Aid Israel? Does Amnesty Aid Humanity? Does the BBC Aid Amnesty?
To comply with its charter the BBC needs to convince the world that its coverage of the Middle East is impartial, but you need only glance at certain BBC employees to spot a commonality that belies any such claim. Former BBC Middle East correspondent Alan Hart is a conspiracy nut whose anti-Israel fanaticism crosses the line between rationality and hyper mania. He flimsily camouflages this by producing a faux BBC chat show called ‘Hart of the Matter,’ with a rogues gallery of career anti Zionists as guests. He parted company with the BBC a while ago, but there’s also Tim Llewellyn who worked for the BBC for ten years and knows all about propaganda. At the 2004 book launch of ‘Bad news From Israel’, Mr Llewellyn exposed the tricks used by the cunning Israelis to dupe the BBC into promoting the case for Israel.

“The Israelis appear in studios wearing suits. They’ve learned all sorts of tricks. They are wizards at communication; [….]He added that the tone of complaints against those giving the Palestinian viewpoint was “vituperative, pestering and controlling.”

‘Bad News From Israel’ is a rich source of material from which BBC spokespersons tediously produce morsels to attest to the BBC’s impartiality. (the antidote is Stephanie Gutmann’s The Other War)
Author Greg Philo and his colleague Llewellyn use the technique, much cherished by Arabs, of attributing your own most malevolent inner thoughts, suspicions and shortcomings to your enemy.
To employ one anti-Israel polemicist as Middle East correspondent seems careless; two appears more than mere coincidence. Yet more still …… looks positively purposeful.

When the Arab uprisings began to make the headlines, one of the experts on the BBC’s speed dial was kindly grandfather Kamal Helbawy, spokesman for the Islamist group Jeremy Bowen calls moderate, the Muslim Brotherhood. Moderate in comparison to something in his own head no doubt. Meanwhile, Bowen, himself a man with attitude, has temporarily forsaken his Palestinian pals to support Gaddafi, and Jon Donnison is following in Alan “I’m telling your story” Johnston’s well trodden footsteps, like a kidnap waiting to happen. So Is Wyre Davies. Yasmin Alabhai Brown is on the BBC so often that she acts as if she owns the place. She and Mehdi Hasan are incessantly called upon to review the newspapers. Why?
Abdel Bari Atwan’s eyes bulge constantly from our screens. Thought for the Day regular Oliver McTernan runs Forward Thinking.

“Have a look through Harry’s Place archives and you’ll understand very quickly that this is merely a euphemism for “we support Hamas”.

I could go on, but I won’t.
Tim Llewellyn is consumed by his hatred of Israel. He’s beside himself, a man possessed. He and Mr Philo are continually beavering away alongside other Israel-haters, spreading the word. Amnesty International has unequivocally aligned itself with the Islamists. In the UK the BBC, the rest of the MSM, and probably the global social media network have convinced the majority of the idiocracy that taking an anti Israel stance is cool.
Occasionally the BBC administers Douglas Murray and Melanie Phillips to take the bitter taste away, but that’s just a drop in the bucket of balance. Next time a human rights report from Amnesty headlines a BBC news bulletin, remember the BBC’s charter.
Because of the BBC, Zionism is a pejorative, and the very word Israel has come to embody evil. Heedless that they’re recreating 1930s Germany, the BBC carries on regardless.

Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.

Everybody Draw Mohammed Day – 1st Anniversary

By | | , , , ,
29 Comments

What with all the noise about the US President selling Israel down the river due to a combination of naiveté, wrong-headedness, and a soupçon of anti-Israel sentiment, but apparently still not doing enough to please Hamas and Kim Ghattas, I missed out remembering that May 20 is the 1st anniversary of Everybody Draw Mohammed Day. Yes, I realize it’s officially over in the UK as I write this, but when I started there was still five minutes to go US EST. So there. The BBC is going to censor all of it because they bow to unjust demands of Islam on these things. Mark Thompson himself said that Islam gets special treatment.

I’m recognizing the day not out of any malice towards Islam itself, as I personally bear none (I’m aware that I’m in the minority here, but this blog is actually a pretty big tent). I do this in defense of individual religious freedom, something that is as relevant in the US as it is in Britain, even though my country doesn’t have an official state religion (If anyone tells me that Christianity is the official religion of the US, they’ll need to tell me which version before I start laughing).

The reason I say this is about individual religious freedom and not malice towards Islam is because I take the position that non-Muslims are not required to obey the rules of Mohammed. Why do I bother? Because of the continued pressure to avoid saying anything that offends Muslims. Except the real concern isn’t as obvious as having the freedom to burn a Koran (which is an act of malice towards the religion), but rather the freedom to do things that Muslims wouldn’t do without being told to stop because it’s offensive to their sensibilities. The vast majority of media outlets in the UK and US censored even the most innocent cartoons out of appeasement and fear. Freedom of speech was thus taken away from non-Muslims, who instead were forced to obey the law of a religion not their own.

I’m talking about things like preventing non-Muslims from having a plastic pig included with their childrens’ farm toy set, because pork is verboten in Islam. More food companies are shifting their products into halal compliance, in the US and in the UK, in spite of many non-Muslims’ objections to that particular method of butchering. It’s being forced on non-Muslim children by the school system as well. No option for both choices: only the Mohammedan option on offer, period. Then there’s telling non-Muslims they can’t eat in front of Muslims during Ramadan. Nobody’s going to ban eating a sandwich in any public sector workplace during Passover in order to avoid offending Jews who don’t eat leavened bread during that time, so there is a clear unjust double standard which cannot withstand the scrutiny of the laws of freemen. Nobody should be forced to obey the rules of a religion not their own, or even their own if they don’t want to.

Yes, the above examples are mostly a couple years old or more, but where’s the evidence that this no longer happens anywhere, all cases are solved and will never happen again?

I fully support offering halal or kosher or Klingon dietary options in an area where that’s what the majority wants, if it’s a commercial decision. If KFC or Domino’s want to have halal-only food in Mohammedan neighborhoods because that’s where the money is, it’s perfectly fine by me. But nobody should be forced by the government to obey the rules of another religion.

It’s in the spirit of continued religious freedom that I mark this first anniversary of Everybody Draw Mohammed Day. Muslims are forbidden from making graven images of people, most especially Mohammed, but non-Muslims can do whatever the hell they like in a free country. That is not an attack on Islam, but a defense of freedom against any form of fascism or oppression.

My contribution is below. Everyone is encouraged to add their own contribution or links to others. It’s not an attack on Islam, but rather a statement of individual freedom. Mohammedans are as free to make fun of me as celebrated artists are for such brave acts as dipping a crucifix in urine or producing a play featuring Jesus as a homosexual. I don’t care. Freedom, baby. Censorship is against the best interests of a free society.

Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.

Targeted Serenading

By | |
22 Comments

We’ve had many surprises this week. One was seeing Mark Regev in the studio, speaking without constant interruptions and contradictions. We had the usual anti Israel tripe from various talking heads too, endlessly bringing up the illusory obstacle to peace, Netanyahu’s refusal to extend the settlement freeze.
Eventually, Hamas’s mourning of Bin Laden’s assassination, or heroic martyrdom, was mentioned. Even the fact that the Arab Spring might not necessarily presage enlightenment and democracy as we know it was voiced, openly, on the BBC.

However, back to normal this morning with Thought for the Day (1:48:06) The Rev Angela Tilby’s words of wisdom addressed the intractable problem of Israel Palestine. Now that those two naughty boys Hamas and Fatah have made friends, she brayed, peace can happen at last. Doves and Hawks, she purred, are both vital to the process. Hawks, though annoying, must be brought in from the cold. We must not treat this as a playground dispute, she warned, unaware that that was exactly what she was doing.
Her two unconvincing reminders that Israel’s fears were rational stuck out oddly, as though they’d been squeezed into the script as an afterthought, having remembered the need for impartiality just in time. The final bit, about Daniel Barenboim’s Gaza gig and the wonderful peace giving properties of Mozart avoided mentioning the tricky subject of Hamas’s aversion to music.
But this isn’t about Today. Most people take its irrelevance as a given, something like being made to swallow a tonic that is thought to be good for you, but isn’t really.
It’s about the item that followed. Are targeted assassinations acceptable? Does Obama’s recent escapade set a precedent? Geoffrey Robertson QC had been listening to Thought for the Day, because he mentioned it to help his argument that targeted assassinations are never justified. What, he speculated, if Sarah Palin as POTUS decided to assassinate Fidel Castro, or Julian Assange? Or what if some Ayatollahs decided to assassinate Salman Rushdie? (What indeed.)

Danny Yatom, former Head of Mossad was on the line. “ Danny Yatom”, says Sarah Montague, authoritatively, “You think it’s better to kill them that remove them alive. “ “No” he replies from some echoing Zionist den, “It’s better to capture alive and obtain intelligence, but we are at war, and in that case, if you don’t shoot, you are shot.”
So our human rights lawyer can’t see the difference between random hypothetical murders of people that a head of state might disapprove of and Israel’s intelligence-led targeted assassinations of terrorists in pre-emptive self-defence in. a. state. of. war.
The USA should have got Daniel Barenboim to play Al Qaeda some lovely Mozart instead.

Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.

Reflections on the Theme of Time Management. or: Me Me Me.

By | | ,
34 Comments

I’ve been writing on this website for a couple of years or more
and it don’t seem a day too much,
but there aint a broadcasting corporation livin’ in the land
as I wouldn’t “swop” for a bit of honest reporting.

However for all my efforts, and those of David Vance and the others, nothing changes at the BBC. In fact, things have taken a turn for the worse now that the chair of the BBC Trust happens to be a known pro Palestinian advocate.
The situation seems to be this. The BBC, and therefore the liberal unintelligentsia, have given special status to Islam by conferring a unique religious diplomatic immunity upon it. By qualifying as a religion, Islam as a whole is awarded sanctity which exempts it from being criticised. This applies in varying degrees to other religions and holy things. For example, in order to give vent to one’s antisemitic urges, one must stick to Israel-themed criticism. You’re not supposed to admit that this has anything to do with your distaste for Jews.
Christianity is an open target, and Catholic misdemeanours have made it acceptable to condemn the entire religion, whereas similar unmentionable Islamic practises are given a free pass or regarded as unrepresentative.
However, desecrating something holy is still thought not nice, particularly setting fire to it. So if Nazi ideology were elevated to the status of a religion with Herr Hitler as its prophet peace be upon him, it would immediately be distasteful to point out the racist, supremacist and murderous proclivities therein, and Mein Kampf would be a holy book, the fire-resistant immutable word of God speaking through the prophet. Can you imagine, post WWll – “It’s their culture, innit” ”Only an extremist minority” “Not inherent to the ideology”
and it would then have to be “ because of the Jews” rather than “because of Israel”

Being an atheist, I don’t see why anything should be given a free pass, or absolved from accountability, yet, perhaps inexplicably for some, I still have values which encompass what is loosely called right and wrong, and I don’t ask for God’s backing to justify them.

The BBC is a crazy mixed up place. In a good way, viz: On one hand it is all patriotic, with the most unlikely celebrities performing Royal Wedding-themed antics, and talking about ‘the big day’ as if the ordinary viewer regards it as such, and on the other, it’s giving air space to staunch republicans. I like that in principle, although I am more than indifferent about the topic. Or should that be less than indifferent. (Meaning I couldn’t care less) like when people mistakenly say something can never be underestimated when they mean overestimated.
But crazy mixed up in a bad way is when they eulogise about the uprisings in the Arab World without a care or a thought about the rise of Islam, and what this will mean for Israel, and the Jews and others who are trying to live there.

If you look back at my incontinent output, just click on the anti Israel tag in the label cloud, you’ll see that I’ve covered a myriad of variations on the theme, and not made one iota of an impression on the BBC.
Call me an idiot and knock me down with Louise Bagshawe, but how’s that for a waste of time?

“An Israeli teenager wounded when a Palestinian rocket hit a bus has died of his injuries.
Daniel Viflic, 16, was on a school bus in southern Israel on 7 April when it was hit by an anti-tank missile fired from the Gaza Strip.
The driver was slightly hurt in the attack, which happened just after the other children had been dropped off.

Nineteen Palestinians died in the ensuing wave of Israeli air strikes and Palestinian counter-attacks.
It was the most serious violence since Israel’s conflict with Hamas in Gaza in December 2008 and January 2009.
About 1,400 Palestinians, more than half of them civilians, and 13 Israelis, including 10 soldiers, were killed.”

This hideous example shows that the BBC cannot report the death of a boy at the hands of terrorists without adding gratuitous references to previous unverified and disputed death-toll statistics; and by various weasely words, making light of the attack itself.

Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.

Ken Cons The World

By | |
16 Comments

A Website called “We Are For Israel” is shocked that the BBC refers to the late Vittorio Arrigoni as a peace campaigner. H/T Daphne Anson.
This may seem like a trivial matter. For one thing, he was, in a way, a peace campaigner, that is if you define peace as a Middle East without Jews.
The BBC may or may not be aware of Mr Arrigoni’s reputation, but to take even the slightest interest in his murder at the hands of Ultra Islamist Salafist terrorists is to know that he was not popular in the pro Israel blogosphere.
Any news outlet that pretends it hasn’t noticed that the interweb has been ablaze with obituaries detailing the exact nature of his ‘peace campaigning’ must be blind.
However, when you take into consideration that Ken O’Keefe, the deranged cartoon baddie who became a spokesman for flotillas was repeatedly invited to disgorge his bile on the BBC, well what can you expect? He was even given a whole Hardtalk. I’m all in favour of giving ridiculous people a platform on Hardtalk – I’m sure Sarah Montague deserves every minute of it – (joke) But giving Ken, or Kenneth as he is respectfully entitled here, the credibility of appearing on what is meant to be a serious vehicle for debate beggars belief.
The whole point is that the BBC has lowered our expectations to such an extent that we have to assume that they have abandoned reason, and we must learn to live with it.
So we have every right to complain when the BBC describes this person as a peace campaigner, but we know that nobody at the BBC will see that there’s anything for us to make a fuss about.

Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.

Broken Promise

By | | ,
31 Comments

After watching the first two episodes of “The Promise” on Channel Four, I was sure Peter Kosminsky’s advertising-savvy, cinematographic trickery would whip the audience into a passionate frenzy of Israel bashing ferocity in no time. A few prematurely written rave reviews from predictable sources reinforced this probability.
However, halfway through the third episode confusion set in, and last night’s finale degenerated into farce, with what looked like a guest appearance from the bedridden old lady out of “’Allo ‘Allo,”(Will nobody ‘ear the cries of a poor old woman?) along with a risible Rachel Corrie moment as Erin bravely faces a Caterpillar as it demolishes an already blown-up house. “Oh no!” I thought, “she’s going to be martyred!” But no luck.

Left-wing Paul’s pensive soliloquy, something like: “We can do anything we like to the Palestinians; beat them, rape them, pat them and prick them and mark them with B; disembowel them, blow their houses down – and we Israelis just carry on swaggering, like the dirty European Jewish interlopers on Muslim lands that we really are” – evidently reflecting the director’s personal politics. I assume Paul’s ominous “Come back soon Erin, there’s work to do” has further significance. A sequel perhaps?

As if all that wasn’t enough, consider the interactive Q&A debriefing with the great man himself. Winsome looking Kosminsky reveals that he and six others spent eight years talking to Combatants for Peace and Breaking the Silence, consulting experts from the Jenny Tonge school of thought, reading the Guardian and watching the BBC so that his film could give a true picture.
An interactive participant called Leia, possibly some sort of comedienne, asks insightfully: “Do you expect a backlash from the Jewish community?”
There was I, thinking his wistful expression was due to stress from being on constant lookout for a targeted assassination by terrorists from the Jewish community. But no. Kosminsky was philosophical. I paraphrase. “Unfortunately we’re not allowed to criticise Israel without being accused of antisemitism.”

After the Tweets on the Twitter thread, further indications of imbecility amongst Kosminski’s fans crop up in questions such as: “What is ‘The Promise’ in the series?”
Instead of answering “The gigantic key, you moron!” Peter writes: “Hi Aisha. Thank you for your question. It has many levels, including I Promise to provide you illiterate cretins with a focus for all your pent-up frustration. Go forth and vent your spleens!! ….. promised land, Jews, nakba, catastrophe, etc etc.” (My paraphrasing again.)

‘Iman’, wonders if Kosminsky found it hard to put aside his preconceptions. “What a great question Iman!” No, Iman, it wasn’t hard to put them all aside because I didn’t have any in the first place.”
“Hi Peter, I’m Jewish and I thought it was one-sided.” Says Lucy from London.
“Hi Lucy. You would say that wouldn’t you. But it wasn’t, so there.” (I paraphrase.)

“What is your favourite bit?” asks someone else. “Gosh, so hard to choose – a Palestinian woman tries to prevent the IDF using her child as a human shield.”
What is he talking about now? He’s cherry-picked an incident where two IDF soldiers were convicted by an Israeli military court, and turned human shield-dom on its head. In fact the entire charade was made from a crudely tacked-together patchwork of things turned on their heads.
So we wait, with bated breath, for Mark Thompson to confront us with “The Other.”

If anyone doubts that the programme was an incitement, or to use the popular term a “recruiting sergeant” for antisemitism, they should simply read the warm review in the Palestine Telegraph. A resounding thumbs-up from “Journalist” Sameh A. Habeeb, with one small reservation.
Like the BBC, it was still too biased in favour of the illegitimate rogue Zionist entity.

Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.

Making Allowances

By | | , , ,
11 Comments

Often you have to make allowances for things you see or hear, especially when the topic is you-know-what. For example, when you suspect that English isn’t someone’s first language, or in certain cases, that human isn’t their first state of being.

When evaluating their choice of Richard Ingrams as guest editor of today’s Today, you have to take into consideration that the BBC is institutionally antisemitic, but even after making such allowances, his particular edition merits a thumbs down.
Even if we were all obsessed with proving James Hanratty’s innocence, the handling of this item, by any standards, was shoddy.
The DNA evidence was flawed because it was kept in a folder with hairs, fluff, toenail clippings and other detritus?
What sort of a folder was this? Cardboard? Even in the days of Dixon of Dock Green it seems odd that evidence collected with surgical gloves and white suits would then be shoved into a hairy old folder and shaken up. Later, someone called it a container. What sort of container?
But most of all, we heard a sound clip in which the rape victim swore the rapist was Hanratty. Why did no-one subsequently refer to that?

Whenever I hear the name Richard (I have developed a habit, when confronted by letters to the editor in support of the Israeli government, to look at the signature to see if the writer has a Jewish name. If so, I tend not to read it) Ingrams I automatically assume it’s crap. In fact I have developed a habit, when confronted by the voice of Richard Ingrams, of finding it pompous, high-pitched and repressed. The poor chap is stuck in the Britain of schoolboys with short trousers.

Talking of voices, another peculiar item that avoided the nub in the way they often do on Today, was the discussion about the pitch and tone of voices we find annoying, which avoided analysing the real reason, which is of course the delivery and idiosyncratic pronunciation as per Robert Peston and Neil Nunes. So never mind that Peston draws out random words like a bleating lamb, and pronounces others with a strange explosive stutter, it’s merely the pitch we find unattractive.
So Sarah Montague and Corrie Corfield get letters telling them to just shut up? Oh hilarity, they frame them and put them in the bog.

And another thing. The man who saw ghosts. He himself was obviously the Ghost of Christmas Past, and Ingrams didn’t spot it because he was too busy going hahahahahahah in an annoying high pitched manner.
Then we had that great orator George Galloway, who has made so many wonderful speeches, who’s to say which was his finest? Could it have been the one he made to the indefatigable Sadaam, or when presenting his generous cash donation to Ismail Haniyeh, or at a rally where he said something like “If anyone dares to touch a hair on the head of a Moslem burka I’ll personally ….something or other blah blah.”

You have to make allowances for the BBC. What variety of racist other than a hate-filled antisemite would they deem a worthy guest editor?

Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.

Don’t Mention the War

By | | ,
10 Comments

“Six months ago nine Turkish activists were killed attempting to break the Israeli blockade of Gaza. The wave of international condemnation which followed led Israel to announce an easing of the blockade, but this week 22 Aid agencies issued a report saying it had made little difference on the ground. “

That’s from the programme information from the Sunday Programme’s website. It immediately reveals where the writer’s sympathy lies. Why? Because despite all the evidence that has emerged since the Mavi Marmara incident, they still present the nine who died as righteous and wronged, and gratuitously mention ‘international condemnation of Israel’ to endorse their own condemnation, and to remind us of Israel’s universal unpopularity.
Hanan Elmasu from Christian Aid said matters haven’t improved for Palestinians in the five months since the blockade was eased. She said the blockade is not necessary as you can ‘lift the blockade and meet Israel’s security needs’. Somehow or other. She was concerned that Palestinian children see their parents standing in line for food vouchers, adding erroneously, by accident or design, that ‘Gaza remains under occupation’.
Mark Regev was given the opportunity to respond, on a bad line because of the fires raging in Northern Israel. He began by thanking us for sending two helicopters. Understandably he sounded tired and distracted. He explained that Hamas is Israel’s enemy, not the Palestinian people. They are the victims of that extreme regime.
It must be tiresome to have to repeat time after time, to people who aren’t listening, that Israel is under constant threat. The BBC’s starting point is the problem. It hinges on their sentimental attachment to Palestinians, whom they naively picture as gentle folk with donkeys and olive-groves; somehow they are completely unwilling to recognise the Palestinian leaders’ visceral hatred for Jews and their unshakeable determination to eliminate Israel.
That, combined with the deliberate suppression of abundant substantive evidence of Hamas’s and Hezbollah’s genocidal intentions.

The BBC is content to approach the situation in Gaza as though a state of war did not exist. They continually push the idea that the blockade is wrong. Although we encourage the use of sanctions against our own enemies before resorting to the use of force, they have decided that Israel must use neither force nor sanctions.

The Sunday programme ended with two items on its favourite religion. A celebration of the East London Mosque. ‘A cultural centre and an integral part of community life’. We are told that the Mosque educates the community and brings it together. Hosting radical Anwar al-Awlaki who supported the Fort Hood shooting was an ‘administrative oversight,’ a spokesperson assures us. There has been some criticism of the strain of conservative Islam perpetuated by this mosque, but Islam is an ideological matter. They decide whether you should have photos in your home, and whether Muslim children should be protected from ‘UnIslamic’ matters such as music, art and school trips. How sweet.

Immediately after this generous portrayal of the East London Mosque, we hear that a hard-line muslim cleric in Pakistan, during Friday prayers, has offered a reward to anyone who will kill a Christian woman who is already facing death for blasphemy.

These three items are, apparently, unconnected.

I caught Yvette Cooper telling Andrew Marr that she had been to the Middle East, as shadow foreign secretaries are wont to do.
“Did you learn anything new?” asked Marr.
“What is important,” she replied sweetly, “are the personal stories. The Palestinian families separated from their olive trees by The Wall. and the children deprived of their football pitch.”
“I don’t know why they must build these beastly walls, “ she seemed to imply, “it’s so spiteful”
“Oh, yes, and I talked to the parents of a Jewish soldier who was kidnapped by Hamas.” she added, remembering balance. A Jewish soldier, kidnapped? Was she implying that as a combatant, he was asking for it? And was she assuming that the audience had not heard of Gilad Shalit’s four year incarceration by evil terrorists Hamas? Perhaps she herself had not.

Fires are raging in Northern Israel, and Israel’s enemies rejoice.

“Muslim.net, owned and operated by Aljazeera Publishing, published a series of posts about the fire raging through Northern Israel which can only be described as a celebration of the death, carnage, and misery caused by the blaze. “
Should the BBC report this?

Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.

BIASED FRIDAY

By | | ,
86 Comments


I’ll post a new Open thread shortly but the BBC has been biased beyond belief on Today his morning and I wanted to cover a handful of these items.

It all kicks off with the news that BBC DG Mark Thompson had been spotted going into Downing Street and photographers had been able to take images of the papers he was carrying. The suggestion was that Thompson could be trying to collude with the Coalition over the coming cuts. Oh no! As if to make up for that horrible thought, Today went into pro-Labour overdrive….

Ed Balls was given a slot just leading up to the prime-time 8am news slot to rant and rave about how he would save the economy. (Ignoring how he had been there as it ran into the bumpers. Remember Year Zero – all troubles started when the Coalition came to power)  He was allowed to serially criticise and misrepresent George Osborne and then talk economic gibberish. No Coalition come-back, naturally.

Then, straight after the 8am news, we have Lord Prescott on to attack the evil  “Murdoch Press”, quoting favourable from those organs of reason, The Guardian and the New York Times. There was a distinct air of bonhomie between Humphyrs and the fat oaf who was our Deputy PM.  No opposing voice allowed, naturally.

Just when I thought this was going to a Conservative-free zone, up pops Bercow to pontificate on the Hague sideshow. Ah, but it’s SALLY Bercow, that well known Labour enthusiast. Given the BBC’s embrace of the gay agenda in almost every other walk of life, I find their sniping at the Foreign Secretary revolting.

Then, to finish, in all fairness the BBC moved away from Labour for a minute. Time to talk about Hamas. There was yet ANOTHER apologist for Hamas being given free rein. Yet again he was allowed to get away with spouting the most obnoxious pro-Islamic terror propaganda with no voice of opposition. Why does the BBC have SUCH a love-in a for the vicious Islamic killers from Hamas?

This was a thoroughly disgraceful programme from start to finish, an example of why the BBC needs axed. They must not be allowed to broadcast their bias at OUR expense. Maybe when they are stripped of our License taxes, they can turn to the Trade Unions for funding, like their pals in Labour. That way we can see them as the bought and paid for whores they so transparently have become.

Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.