Comments on: News or propaganda?

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Wed, 31 Dec 1969 23:59:59 +0000

Lisa, I agree 100% – which is refreshing because I often disagree with your other views on Israel / palestinians. You are an articulate and eloquant writer – by jeez by jingo you should be on Israel TV (really – not just saying to blow smoke). With your media contacts aren't you able to submit a complaint to the 'right' people in BBC? I know you're busy with other stuff and work, but this one of those interviews (like an infamous one I saw of Saeb Erakat screaming about jenin massacre on Australia's (govt) ABC network…where does a common man like me lodge a complaint against BBC

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Wed, 31 Dec 1969 23:59:59 +0000

They probably called this guy in to talk about the Mumbai bombs, but the news changed overnight and they had no other pundit in the vicinity. As for the anchor, I blame the beady eyes.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Wed, 31 Dec 1969 23:59:59 +0000

Lisa,
This (sadly) is very typical of the BBC. Whilst people can (and do) argue about its accuracy regarding the “situation”, the fact is that almost all their reporters whether studio based or out in the field are severely lacking in any kind of historical knowledge of the conflict and/or a strategic overview of the situation. This significantly hampers their value (to put it mildly). The world service (radio) is a better bet IMO. That said things could be worse as the Guardian is a veritable “hate fest” at present and the talk and comments boards are really ugly.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Wed, 31 Dec 1969 23:59:59 +0000

I used to buy whatever the beeb was selling, too. At least until 9/11. You would have thought that being freshly wounded, we might have found some comfort from the beeb and its quackmeisters, but I witnessed the most appalling hatred toward america on the part of the hosts and audience members of some trite chat show. I just never realized what a nation of america and jew haters the uk had become, til I began watching the beeb more carefully. I am not surprised anymore by the things they say. I only wish they had to live daily with the threat of suicide bombers on busses and subways. Clearly, 7.7 doesn't mean anything to them.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Wed, 31 Dec 1969 23:59:59 +0000

hi dear lisa
only 2 remind u of a friend who actualy lives there….
avi,ex-ginzbourg, kfar hanasee,

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Wed, 31 Dec 1969 23:59:59 +0000

Umm, give me a break? 60+ civilians (most of them children) have been massacred here (for the kidnapping of 2 soldiers and the killing of 8 others) and the entire country blockaded, its infrastructure destroyed, airport completely leveled, and BBC has “Israeli Views” section on this issue. And you still complain??

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Wed, 31 Dec 1969 23:59:59 +0000

Of course there will be no controversy. This guy and his “expert” were just parroting the recieved wisdom of the Mainstrean European Media. My (albeit limited) experience with Great Britain is that it takes a titanic cosmic wave to shift the “story line” from what everyone is expecting to hear. No matter what inconvenient facts exist, it is very difficult to get them to move beyond what they expect the story to be. It's like the Christmas pantomimes, the story is always the same:
“Poor suffering Hizb'allah (or fill in other Arab group), weak, almost defenseless, no room at the inn, etc etc.(plus they wear cool hats)
Big bad Israelis, Jews, Judas, rude heartless etc etc….”

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Wed, 31 Dec 1969 23:59:59 +0000

Dilip Hiro is a well-known leftist who has been posing as an expert on India and the Middle East for at least 30 years and has written 28 highly partisan books.
The issue is clearly that the BBC are treating him as an academic expert rather than a political figure.
Thus if one of the small horde of Islamist militants the BBC regularly invite into their studios had made these comments there might have been some attempt at an interviewer challenge or a balancing speaker.
However as an 'expert' Hiro is there to provide background and the interviewers will just nod sagely whatever he says.
After all this is exactly the kind of stuff they read every morning in the Guardian or Independent – sometimes written by Hiro himself – and it no longer even strikes them as controversial.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Wed, 31 Dec 1969 23:59:59 +0000

“Was there was any controversy at work over that insane interview he did with Mr. Hiro? Seriously, I'd like to know.”
Why would there be any controversy?… It is the BBC after all, and that's what they're known for… I don't tune in to them since it gets way too aggravating.
Be safe.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Wed, 31 Dec 1969 23:59:59 +0000

Thanks for your funny and articulate writing, and your insights about the situation on the street in Israel. As for this post, though, I must say that first of all, it's hard to tell what the context of these comments you cite in the BBC interview actually were — they seem very odd and exceedingly provocative out of context (and from what I know of BBC, rather out of their norm). (Do you know if there's a transcript of the whole interview, by the way?) I'm a bit puzzled by your expression of outrage at the claim that this is an uneven conflict, though. How else would one describe it? This is not a “war” between two armies: it is an Occupation by a state with the 4th largest military in the world, of a people who don't have an army. This does not mean that the Occupied people — the Palestinians — are angels and the Occupiers — the Israelis — are devils. But it does mean that Israel, as the only state power operating in this conflict (since Palestinians don't have a state, and nor can they properly build one when they're under Occupation and siege) has certain responsibilities under international law — most notably the Geneva convention. Does this imbalance “justify” suicide bombings? No, I'd have to agree that it doesn't. But nor do I see any justification for bombing civilians and civilian infrastructure with the most advanced weaponry in the world. And if Israel is indeed to be considered a mature state actor, and a democracy, than it should behave with more restraint than its enemies because it has the *power* to do so. Instead, it is acting like a blindfolded madman swinging wildly with a deadly weapon; or, to be more precise, like a state that's bent on expanding its borders deep into (if not clear across) the West Bank, which makes it difficult to take any of its claims to being interested in “peace” seriously.