 We must admire a fanaticism that inevitably leads to the demonisation and destruction of its foes:
The Taliban can be admired for their conviction to their faith and their sense of loyalty to one another, the new Bishop for the Armed Forces has claimed.
The Rt Rev Stephen Venner called for a more sympathetic approach to the Islamic fundamentalists that recognises their humanity… “There’s a large number of things that the Taliban say and stand for which none of us in the west could approve, but simply to say therefore that everything they do is bad is not helping the situation because it’s not honest really. ”The Taliban can perhaps be admired for their conviction to their faith and their sense of loyalty to each other.” Venner is, of course, just channelling Lyse Doucet, a BBC apologist for the Taliban: A BBC presenter has attacked coverage of Afghanistan’s ongoing war, claiming TV reporters are not covering the humanity of the Taliban. AP today reports on what the admirable and humane Taliban is up to at the moment in Pakistan: The Taliban has routinely attacked schools, particularly ones attended by girls.... In one month in Peshawar, 221 people were killed and nearly 500 wounded in bombings. A single truck bomb in a market that sells mostly women’s clothes and children’s toys killed more than 100. The latest attack was Monday when a bomb went off outside the courthouse in Peshawar, killing 10 people… Dr. Arif Attaullah says he does not cry easily. But when the truck bomb killed 112 people in Peshawar’s Mena Bazaar he could not stop the tears. “A father came in and he was holding a small boy. The boy’s body was burned black and his father was crying: `I sent you to school to learn, not to die,’” Attaullah says. “That made me cry. I am a tough person — a surgeon — but day after day we are seeing these things that are too horrible.”
Praise the fanaticism that can inspire such barbarity. So the bishop of Britain’s armed forces instructs. Andrew Bolt 
 With today’s horrific bombing in Iraq, the BBC has posted a piece asking if al Qaeda is bouncing back in Iraq. The reason it’s a question is because no, it’s not. After every large bombing now, there are articles claiming that Iraq is descending into hell. Fortunately it appears that there are many factors which prevent this. - Iraq is more economically stable than perhaps any time in the last twenty years. Its currency is stable and appreciating while oil flows increase government coffers.
- Iraq’s security forces are still growing, now numbering over 600,000. Compare this to when it was under 100k in 2004.
- Iraq’s largest detractors, the Sunni Arabs, have largely accepted the new government and will be voting in the upcoming elections.
 Reliably sympathetic to non-Western lies, the BBC reported yesterday that a prisoner in Pakistani custody knows a guy who saw Osama bin Laden in Afghanistan last January. Headlines! Now, Osama may, indeed, pop over the border into Afghanistan now and then -- but this report is a shameless Pakistani Inter Services Intelligence agency concoction. Why? Because the Pakistanis have taken a lot of heat recently over suspicions -- including those raised in The Post -- that they know where Osama is but shield him for their own benefit. Even party-line US government officials have grown skeptical about the Pakistani government's deaf-and-dumb show. The Pakistani solution? With remarkable luck, you suddenly discover a captive who knows somebody who recently dusted Osama's slippers -- in Afghanistan, not Pakistan. As long as Osama's at large in the AfPak border area, the aid keeps flooding into Islamabad. But after we locate Osama's lair, the porkbarrel goes bare. When the Pakistanis handed the "scoop" to the BBC -- which is only skeptical of Western claims -- they knew just what they were doing. Without pausing to raise a single question, our "mainstream" media rushed to report the "breaking news." Score a major victory for Pakistani information warfare. Of course, we shouldn't be surprised: They learned the value of media manipulation from the Taliban and al Qaeda. Again, I'm not claiming that bin Laden never slips across the border into Afghanistan. I wouldn't be surprised if he traveled with a protective escort provided by Pakistan's intelligence mafia. But as a former intelligence officer, I'd stamp this report "Bogus." Another reason the Pakistanis "leaked" this now was that President Obama's statement that we'd start exiting stage left in July, 2011, shocked them. They want us to leave Afghanistan eventually -- but not before they've milked us dry and rebuilt "their" Taliban sufficiently to seize power. Make no mistake: The only "take-away" from Obama's West Point speech for Pakistanis, Afghans, the Taliban and al Qaeda was "July 2011." That's all they heard. And it doesn't matter how many US Cabinet officers, generals and admirals backtrack and claim that our president didn't really mean it, that any troop withdrawals will be "conditions based." Forget it. The Taliban's new recruiting slogan is simply, "July, 2011. Join now, or pay later." And how Obama thinks he's going to attract more young Afghans to join the Karzai government's (in)security forces is beyond my mental faculties. They weren't joining in adequate numbers before, so why would they sign up in hordes after our president sent them an advance bye-bye note? Meanwhile, 25 percent of the Afghan army we've already trained deserts rather than fight. It's disheartening to see how much smarter the Taliban spinmeisters and even the Pakistanis are than our president's inept speechwriters -- who focused purely on the US audience, never asking how Obama's West Point soliloquy would play in the war zone. Of course, the Obama crowd spins everything as a triumph. The White House claims of success remind me of Saddam Hussein's information minister insisting that America's military had been annihilated -- as our Army and Marines entered downtown Baghdad. As for NATO's display of cooperation at yesterday's session in Belgium, well, all our strong-arming to get allied troop increases finally paid off -- thanks to the West Point speech. Our NATO partners, too, heard "July, 2011." They figure they can afford a brief show of solidarity, now that they won't be expected to produce results or fight. We'll get 7,000 more NATO troops. They'll show up, but they won't step up. This is Obama's Afghan Farewell Tour, with supporting acts. Seats are going cheap. Afghanistan's over. More splendid American men and women in uniform will die or suffer terrible wounds, but it was over when our self-absorbed president put the 2012 presidential election above our national security last Tuesday. It was over the moment he uttered the words that doomed his presidency: "July, 2011." It's enough to make you trust the Pakistanis. Ralph Peters' latest book is "The War After Armageddon." NYPost
 Mr Griffin said Islam was not compatible with life in Britain, while describing homosexuals as "creepy". However, he admitted sharing a platform with the Ku Klux Klan, which has carried out racist attacks across America’s Deep South, and defended leaders in the organisation as "non-violent". The remarks provoked indignation from other members of the BBC panel and hostile parts of the audience, some of whom booed, calling him "a disgrace". The BNP leader could not explain why he had previously sought to play down the Holocaust and defended his use of Sir Winston Churchill on BNP literature on the basis that his father had fought in the Second World War. He claimed that Churchill would have been a member of the BNP and was "Islamophobic" by "today’s standard". Asked whether he denied that millions of Jews and other minorities had been killed by the Nazis, Mr Griffin would only reply: "I do not have a conviction for Holocaust denial." He was then chastised by David Dimbleby, the host of the programme, for smiling. The controversial statements were made in response to intense questioning by members of the audience from ethnic minorities. BBC Television Centre in west London came under siege as filming took place, with MPs joining hundreds of protesters behind lines of police. There were six arrests as dozens of protesters attempted to storm the studio. BBC studios in Hull, Scotland and Wales were also targeted by demonstrators. The cost of the police operation was estimated to be more than £100,000. The BBC was certain to be questioned over why it allowed Mr Griffin to air such controversial views but executives were hoping that the intensive questioning that he faced would justify their decision to invite him on the Question Time panel for the first time. The BBC, which Mr Griffin denounced on the programme as "ultra-Leftist", had claimed that impartiality rules meant that it had little choice but to invite him on to the programme after the BNP won seats in the European Parliament in elections earlier this year. Read more here,,,, Source: Telegraph
With its reputation for objective analysis on the Israel-Palestine conflict now thoroughly discredited, one might wonder why Human Rights Watch (HRW) still bothers to pretend. Then again, one turns to the BBC website and understands why. The latest screed from HRW has top billing in the section on the Middle East. The substance (for want of a better word) of the HRW report is that 11 Palestinian civilians, nine of them women and children, were killed by Israeli forces in seven incidents during operation Cast Lead while carrying white flags or waving them from the vehicles they were travelling in.
The report concludes that “…at the least, Israeli soldiers failed to take feasible precautions to distinguish between civilians and combatants before carrying out the attack. At worst, the soldiers deliberately fired on persons known to be civilians.” The evidence? Er, there isn’t any, not in any meaningful sense at least.
What Human Rights Watch will accept as evidence is the testimony of obviously biased NGOs or of Palestinians relating such accounts in the full knowledge that whatever they say will get back to the Hamas operatives who run their neighbourhoods. It does not, therefore, take a genius to see the fatal flaw in the methodology.
The BBC, however, was lapping it all up with a story which also used the opportunity to signpost readers to the now infamous report last month on Israeli “war crimes” by Breaking the Silence whose own methodology was as shoddy as HRW’s. The invaluable watchdog organisation NGO Monitor has produced a systematic critique of the HRW report which highlights the following issues: ** “HRW had no presence in Gaza during the conflict. Therefore, the organization’s Gaza ‘reports’, including “White Flag Deaths” are based entirely on unverifiable claims wrapped in a façade of research.” ** “HRW’s publication fails to investigate incidents in which “white flags”, ambulances and hospitals were used by Hamas to hide military activity. Instead, the entire report is designed to provide “evidence” of alleged Israeli war crimes (a term used 15 times).” ** “Six of the seven alleged incidents are based on the unprovable ‘evidence’ from journalists or NGOs with highly biased agendas, including Breaking the Silence, Al Mezan and Palestinian Center for Human Rights (PCHR).” Human Rights Watch’s reputation as an objective observer of events in the Middle East was definitively destroyed after revelations that an HRW delegation had attempted to raise funds from prominent Saudis by highlighting HRW’s ongoing battles with pro-Israel groups.
In an entry last month I related an email exchange about the matter between Jeffrey Goldberg and HRW’s director Ken Roth. In that exchange Roth referred to the “lies and deception” employed by Israel’s supporters — as clear an admission of anti-Israeli bias from the head of an NGO as one could ever hope to find. To re-read that entry, click here: http://www.robinshepherdonline.com/landmark-moment-in-debate-about-ngo-bias-over-israel-after-sensational-revelations-are-published-about-human-rights-watch/ To read the full critique of HRW’s latest report by NGO Monitor, click here: http://www.ngo-monitor.org/article.php?id=2547 To read the HRW report in full, click here: http://www.hrw.org/sites/default/files/reports/ioptwf0809web_1.pdf To read the BBC story, click here: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/8198863.stm
As the anti-Israeli atmosphere in Britain intensifies by the day, Britain’s Foreign Affairs Select Committee has now called on the British government to end its policy of not talking to the extreme anti-Semitic terror group Hamas while simultaneously urging the European Union to make its relationship with Israel conditional on good behaviour, the BBC is reporting today. The report was also carried in French and English by France’s top news agency, Agence France Presse. The cross party group headed by Labour MP Michael Gapes — a self-declared friend of Israel — said that the policy of non-engagement with Hamas was ineffective. While criticising Hamas rocket attacks, it condemned Israel’s Operation Cast Lead in Gaza as “disproportionate”, criticised the blockade of Gaza, condemned settlement growth and urged the British Foreign Office to declare openly whether it believed Israel had committed war crimes in Gaza. The committee had recommended reaching out to “moderates” in Hamas in 2007 but said such calls now had new impetus since Britain had begun engaging with the political wing of Hezbollah earlier this year.
Moves in this direction have been widely predicted and it may only be a matter of time before recognition of Hamas by the British government becomes a reality. The ground was laid in May when British Foreign Secretary David Miliband gave a speech in Oxford in which he sought to downplay the distinction between “moderates” and “extremists”. At the time, the Foreign Office denied that this was directed at Hamas. But, in the context of last week’s announcement of a partial arms embargo by Britain against Israel and this latest parliamentary report, it seems clear that a paradigm shift is taking place in Britain’s attitudes to the Middle East. Though famously unenthusiastic about European integration, Britain is perhaps the heaviest hitter in the EU in terms of foreign policy. Moves in Britain to recognise Hamas would undoubtedly strengthen the hand of constituencies across Europe which advocate a harder line on Israel and a softer line on groups such as Hamas. For a broader explanation of why things have taken such a turn in Great Britain see my op-ed in the Jerusalem Post last week which is reproduced in an entry below. To read the full BBC article referred to above, click here: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/8169105.stm H/T Gig British Government
Latest recipient of The Dhimmi Award
7:20 pm: Rally for Iran in Tel Aviv, Israel (June 27) 
I received this report from Boaz Arad from Israel: Pictured taken by Iranian born Farhad Moradian that organised this avant in order to show the Iranian people our solidarity in Israel with their suffering and also to convey the massage to Obama. The BBC broadcast to Iran picked this demo and it was broadcast - Facebook as well was us full tool to send this message. Mr. Moradian said that many Iranian respond to it and some did it by saying: "For 30 years we cursed Israel and made a demonstration for the Palestinians people, despite the poverty in Iran our government send our money to Lebanon and Gaza, but we did not received any support from the Palestinians now even not a demonstration... The Israelis do support us and showing solidarity". Read and see the rest here... Source: Atlas
by Daniel Pipes
June 29 "Iran is the world's most conspiracy-minded country" I declared in my book, The Hidden Hand: Middle East Fears of Conspiracy. An entire chapter of that study focused on the Islamic revolution of 1978-79, documenting how "Regardless of political complexion, Iranians interpret the revolution not as an act of will but as the manifestation of mysterious forces. They debate less the causes of the upheaval than the identity of those forces." Another chapter took up the Iran-Iraq war. In both cases, I showed how the conspiracy mentality had a major role in the evolution of events. And so, as the events of the past month unrolled in Iran – an intense buildup to elections on June 12, the regime's blatant act of electoral fraud, the massive street demonstrations, and the violent crack-down – I watched with special interest the role of conspiracy theories in Iranian political life. To my surprise and delight, their role appeared to be minimal. For once, Iranians were dealing with realities in Iran rather than imagining foreign bogeymen manipulating events in the country. Then, as the crackdown ensued, the authorities resorted to form and, starting with Ali Khamene'i's key speech on June 19, they began blaming perfidious foreigners, and especially the British government, for their problems. Khamene'i described Western countries as "hungry wolves ambushing us and removing the diplomatic cover from their faces. Do not neglect these people." He went on: The outstanding diplomats of some western countries who have talked to us with diplomatic courtesy up to now, have, during the past few days, taken the masquerade away from their faces and are showing their true image. They are showing their true enmity towards the Iranian Islamic state and the most evil of them is the British government. The crowd responded by chanting of "Death to Britain." The regime followed up by focusing on the Persian television service of the British Broadcasting Corporation, as John F. Burns explains in "Persian Station in Britain Rattles Officials in Iran":  The set of the BBC's Persian television service. | As Iran's ruling ayatollahs tell it, the main strike force plotting to end Islamic rule in their country is not on the streets of Tehran but on the upper floors of a celebrated Art Deco building in central London. The propagators of an "all-out war" against the Islamic republic, as Iran's semiofficial news agency has called them, are a group of 140 men and women who work at the BBC's Broadcasting House, a stone's throw from the shopping mecca of Oxford Street in London. Mainly expatriate Iranians, they staff the BBC's Persian-language television service, on air for only six months and reaching a daily audience of six million to eight million Iranians — a powerful fraction of viewers in Iran, with its population of 70 million. … The government has singled out several foreign news broadcasters for what it calls biased coverage: CNN, broadcasting in English, as well as the Voice of America and the BBC, which broadcast in Iran in Persian, the country's national language. But the BBC's Persian channel has been cast as the main threat, partly, BBC officials say, because Britain's colonial past has earned it a special place in Iran's official demonography. Hamid Reza Moqaddamfar, chief of the semiofficial Fars news agency, has described the channel's coverage as "psychological warfare," and said its mission was "spreading lies and rumors and distorting facts." A pro-Ahmadinejad newspaper, Vatan Emrouz, even claimed that Jon Leyne, the BBC's Tehran correspondent, expelled from Iran on June 21, paid "a thug" to kill Neda Agha-Soltan, the young woman who became a martyr to the protesters after she was shot dead during the demonstrations. State-run television has interviewed protesters who said the Persian channel influenced them to take to the streets. One woman said the channel inspired her and her son to go out armed with hand grenades. Another woman said the channel's report that the riot police had attacked protesters prompted her to go to the streets, where she said she had found that it was the protesters, not the police, who were "beating up people." Comment: It is one thing for the mullahs to raise conspiracy theories and another for the population to believe in them. I don't live in Iran and cannot judge the situation at first hand, but I get a sense from news reports that Iranians no longer suffer under the sway of their historic conspiracist mindset. If so, this would be a huge advance for the country. Source: Daniel Pipes
 An Iranian doctor who claims he tried to save Neda Agha-Soltan, whose death during election protests made her an opposition icon, said today she was apparently shot by a member of the Islamic Basij militia. Arash Hejazi, who is studying at a university in the south of England, told the BBC that the crowd identified the man they believed was the shooter shortly after the young woman died from a gunshot wound to the chest. Footage of Soltan bleeding to death captured in amateur videos posted on the internet and broadcast across the world triggered an outcry over Iranian authorities' clampdown on protests against the disputed presidential vote. Hejazi told the BBC he was visiting friends in Tehran when he heard there were protests nearby, and decided to take a look. When they reached the main street, they saw anti-riot police coming on motorcycles towards the crowd. “All of a sudden everything turned crazy,” he said. “The anti-riot police threw teargas among people and the motorcycles started rushing towards people.” He continued: “We heard a gunshot. And Neda was standing one metre away from me ... We were just standing and all of a sudden I turned back and I saw blood gushing out of Neda's chest. “She was in a shocked situation, just looking at her chest, which blood was gushing out ... We ran towards her and lay her on the ground. “I bent over her and I saw the bullet wound right in the chest below the neck with blood gushing out. My experience says that it was the aorta that was hit and the lung as well.” He added: “Her blood was draining out of her body and I was just putting pressure on the wounds to try to stop the bleeding, which wasn't successful unfortunately, and she died in less than one minute.” The people around her took her body away in a car, Hejazi said. The protesters thought the gunshot had come from a rooftop nearby, but later saw a member of the Basij militia on a motorcycle. They stopped him and disarmed him, the doctor said. “He was shouting, 'I didn't want to kill her'. I heard him,” Hejazi said. But the protesters did not know what to do with the man so let him go, but not before taking his identity cards and taking his photo. The doctor returned to his office to wash off the blood on his hands, but recalled: “I didn't sleep for three nights afterwards. He said he had decided to speak out, despite the potential risks which meant he would probably not return to Iran, because “I don't want her blood to have been shed in vain”. Iran's hardline media sought today to deflect blame over the killing of Neda, saying that someone with a smuggled gun had opened fire in the street. The doctor rejected this version of events.
Time reporter blames Israel and the West for Muslim intolerance.  Pope Benedict’s visit to Israel this week has increased media attention on the plight of Christians in the Middle East and their declining numbers. But while the visit should serve as an opportunity for an honest look at Christian flight, one reporter blamed Israel and the West instead.In an article describing Christian apprehensions over Pope Benedict’s visit, Time magazine’s Andrew Lee Butters calls the presence of Christians in the region “a reminder of the multi-sectarian and tolerant history of Arab and Islamic culture.” However, this tolerance is threatened, he writes, “from the rise of religious extremism.” At this point, one would assume Butters would delve into largely overlooked issues such as
But instead, Butters points his finger in the opposite direction: “Clash-of-civilizations pundits and Western leaders like the Pope often ignore how the West helped spark such intolerance, especially through its one-sided support of Israel.”
Butters would be hard pressed to prove that Europe has been “one-sided” in its support for Israel. More importantly, however, Butters’ statement implies that Muslims are not responsible for their actions because the West backs Israel’s right to exist in peace with its neighbors. In fact, Butters goes even further, calling Israel’s creation “a disaster for Christians in the Middle East.”
Many of the Palestinian refugees who fled or were forced from their homes in 1948 — never to be allowed back — were Christians. The flood of Palestinian refugees into Lebanon helped spark a civil war between Muslims and Christians there. And the ongoing occupation of the West Bank is strangling the life out of those Christian communities that are left.
Blaming Israel for the civil war in Lebanon ignores the complex political arrangements in Lebanon at the time and the destabilizing effect of the PLO inside Lebanon’s borders. He also neglects to mention what might be strangling the life out of the 2,000 Christians living in Gaza. But Butters doesn’t stop there. He also holds Israel responsible for Muslim abuses of Christians in Egypt:
The ongoing Israeli occupation of the Palestinian territories has also helped fuel the rise of Islamic extremism, especially in countries that have unpopular peace agreements with Israel. In Egypt, the Muslim Brotherhood, the main opposition to the American-backed Mubarak dictatorship, waged a small-scale terror campaign against both the government and the country's Coptic Christians during the 1990s.
According to Butters, therefore, the Muslim Brotherhood isn’t ultimately responsible for “small-scale terror” against the Christians it carries out. It’s really Israel’s presence in the Palestinian territories that is behind it all.  The BBC’s Tim Franks also covered the decline of Arab Christians in Bethlehem. In his article, Franks quoted several Palestinians who claim that Christians are leaving the city because of Israel’s security barrier. However, Franks also acknowledges that there could be another reason for the exodus. Privately, some Christians in Bethlehem say another factor sometimes motivates their decision to leave - concern about the rise of radical Islam - but they are unwilling to put such views on the record.
Indeed, Frank’s admission is consistent with finding from Justus Reid Weiner, who has researched the plight of Christians in the Palestinian territories extensively. According to Weiner, Arab Christians rarely speak about their situation in public: The human rights crimes against the Christian Arabs in the disputed territories are committed by Muslims. Yet many Palestinian Christian leaders accuse Israel of these crimes rather than the actual perpetrators. This motif has been adopted by a variety of Christian leaders in the Western world. Others who are aware of the human rights crimes choose to remain silent about them.
The media has an obligation to report the truth. Insist that reporters tell the whole story when they cover the plight of Christians in the Middle East.
Andrew Lee Butters
Time
Latest recipients of the Yellow Rag Award
 Kurt Westergaard said he was disappointed 'on behalf of freedom of speech'
if the BBC did not show his interviewBy Paul Revoir The BBC has been accused of appeasement of radical Islam by the artist behind one of the infamous cartoons of Mohammed. Kurt Westergaard claims the corporation's decision not to air a recent interview with him came because they are petrified of upsetting Muslims extremists. Westergaard was one of the 12 cartoonists commissioned by the Danish Jyllands-Posten newspaper in 2005 to produce caricatures of the Muslim prophet. Islamic tradition says no image of him should be produced or shown. Read more ...Source: Daily MailBBC
Latest recipient of the Yellow Rag Award
 27th March Those who are regularly left open-mouthed at the way in which the British media puts across an overwhelmingly Arab narrative about Israel and the Middle East, transmitting lies and distortions as facts and reversing victim and victimiser to present Israel as the regional aggressor and the Palestinians as their targets, may well also scratch their heads at being told with monotonous regularity that ‘the Jews control the media’. Well now Arab Media Watch lifts a curtain to show us the real lobby at work. It boasts: Some 200 guests gathered at Kensington's Royal Garden Hotel on 21 March 2009 to attend Arab Media Watch’s fifth annual fundraising dinner, and to mark its ninth anniversary. Among the guests were almost three-dozen senior journalists from the BBC, Al Jazeera English, Financial Times, Reuters, Daily Mail, Independent, Asharq Al Awsat, Al Quds Al Arabi, Al Hayat and others. The evening began with a welcome speech by AMW chairman Sharif Hikmat Nashashibi, who outlined the extensive work done by the organisation during and since Israel's invasion of Gaza, including: - forcing the media to correct factual errors
- meeting with editors and journalists
- providing them with information
- being interviewed by them or arranging interviews for them
- getting letters and articles published
- being quoted and cited in articles
- publishing studies, press releases and Action Alerts
- organising and speaking at events
- helping university students and researchers ‘All this was done,’ Nashashibi reminded the audience, ‘while continuing our work on media portrayals of the entire Arab world, a huge but vital task undertaken on a budget that’s dwarfed by that of the pro-Israel lobbies.’ He added: ‘We've proven the sceptics wrong for the last nine years, establishing ourselves as a credible, professional, dynamic organisation with the recognition, respect and support of much of the British media, and high-level contacts in every news organisation…AMW is making a considerable and invaluable difference, and wants to continue doing so.’ Here are some of the ‘factual errors’ that on its website AMW has tried to correct: - The ‘myth that Hamas is out to destroy Israel
- The ‘myth that Palestinian rockets are a grave threat to Israeli civilians’
- The ‘myth that five Arab armies tried to wipe out Israel in 1948: ‘Strictly speaking, therefore, the Arab states did not launch a war against Israel, but undertook an armed intervention which was both lawful and justified.’
On and on its goes, lie after smear after brazen lie. And now just look at how, as AMW goes on to detail, the British media fawned over these purveyors of gross and inflammatory untruths: Ian Black, the Guardian’s Middle East editor, was unable to speak at the dinner due to illness, but he wrote a statement of support that Nashashibi read out. ‘I'd like briefly to pay tribute to the work of AMW,’ the statement began. ‘For anyone in the British media writing about the Middle East or the wider Arab world, AMW - very ably run by Sharif Nashashibi - has become a force to be reckoned with. It has served notice that inaccuracy, misrepresentation, half-truths and prejudice are simply not acceptable - and has done much to monitor and combat them.’ Black continued: ‘AMW has played an especially important role on Iraq and Palestine. Its work on the Gaza war was both combative and effective. Its letters to editors, op-ed articles and complaints about biased or misleading coverage have become part of the landscape.’ He added: ‘To some extent AMW has filled the gap left by the failures of the Palestinians and Arab governments to state their case as effectively as they could and should've done. That's especially true with regard to the Arab Peace Initiative, which surely remains the only workable basis for a just and comprehensive solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.’ Black concluded: ‘The work of AMW is necessary, courteous and professional. I commend it to you wholeheartedly.’ The next speaker was Barbara Serra, presenter for Al Jazeera English (formerly with the BBC, Sky News and Channel 5), whose introduction was followed by projected footage of her heated interview of Israeli government spokesman Mark Regev during the Gaza invasion. ‘It's easy to forget, when one works closely with and in the Middle East, how little knowledge the general public across the world often has about the issues behind the continuing tensions, from the illegal occupation in the West Bank to the continuing expansion of settlements there,’she said. ‘That's why the work of AMW is so invaluable. They don't just fight against prejudice and distortion in the media, but also highlight inaccuracies which, if left unchecked, would only reinforce the misconceptions many hold towards the Arab world.’ A performance by comedian Ian Stone was followed by the presentation of AMW's annual award for excellence in journalism to world-renowned reporter, author and documentary filmmaker John Pilger, whose daughter Zoe accepted the award and read out a statement by him. ‘This is an honour I very much appreciate, and I send warm thanks from Australia to all of you at AMW, ‘he wrote. ‘I pay tribute tonight to AMW, and to Al Jazeera, and to all the courageous Arab journalists who have brought us the truth...’ Attendees watched clips of Pilger’s documentaries ‘Breaking the Silence: Truth and Lies in the War on Terror’ and ‘Palestine is Still the Issue.’ A three-course dinner was then served, with Arabic music in the background, quotes from the night's speakers projected on screen, and a raffle and auction which included five-star holidays, paintings by renowned Arab artists, and antique Arab furniture. Peter Oborne, political columnist at the Daily Mail and contributing editor at the Spectator, was unable to speak at the dinner because he had to travel unexpectedly to Afghanistan, but he wrote a message of support that Nashashibi read out: ‘The most noble purpose of journalism is to tell the truth and expose falsehood. Too often, British journalism achieves the exact opposite. It tells lies and glorifies falsehood. That's why the work of AMW is so important. It sets out to combat the climate of deception that dominates too much of our reporting.’ And here is more feedback from AMW’s grateful media client base:
‘Thank you…We did enjoy it.’ - Financial Times / Reuters
‘Many thanks for inviting me. I enjoyed it.’ - The Independent ‘I enjoyed the programme and the company of your nice guests.’ - BBC
‘Thank you very much for the invitation. I wish you all the success you deserve.’ - BBC ‘Thank you very much for the invitation. I really enjoyed the annual dinner. It was refreshing. It was, as before, perfectly organised…’ – BBC ‘Thank you so much for your generous invitation…The event was wonderful and the presentation was flawless…Best wishes for continued success…’ – BBC. Source: The Spectator
Our latest analysis reveals more BBC anti-Israel bias. Previous Charges of BiasLast year, we released an in-depth report analyzing one year of the BBC's coverage of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. We found that the BBC has a consistent record of portraying Israeli actions in a negative light while increasing sympathy for the Palestinian point of view. Rather than respond to the criticisms in our report, the BBC chose to accuse us of bias: HonestReporting has a particular view of the conflict and cannot be seen as an independent arbiter of our output. That previous analysis examined the BBC's reporting, based not on subjective opinion, but on the very journalistic standards that the BBC claims to uphold. We presented hard facts but our work was summarily rejected by the BBC, which has failed to provide its own analysis as to why HonestReporting should be considered an unsuitable judge. Read more ...Source: Honest ReportingBBC
Latest recipient of the Yellow Rag Award
If you chose "No," please consider providing your solution to Gaza crisis in the comments.
|
Dear BBC,
It was like seeing a TV programme showing what possible good fascism might have given Britain. BBC One entertained us with 'Celebrity Lives - Sharia Style' on Monday evening March 9th. It showed what possible good Sharia Law might bring Britain. It was nauseating.
Ajmal Masroor, a London imam and often described as a moderate Muslim, presented the programme. He (inadvertently) showed near the end why the introduction of Sharia Law in Britain was a bad idea. 'Was', as some Sharia courts are already active. One (Muslim) woman argued that there are several versions of Sharia Law with various levels of strictness and therefore cause for dispute among Muslims themselves. Which version should be introduced?
Actually, I think 'dispute' puts it rather mildly. As so much in the programme was. Favourable examples of positive influence by Sharia Law had been carefully put together. A few women of fame and infamy passed by. Selective examples from selected parts of selected Sharia Law made things look good. Or not too bad.
What the natives thought about the idea was rather absent. A few ignorant natives in the street were asked if they knew what Sharia meant and all but one had no clue. Those who did probably got lost on the floor of the editing room. Most of the 'British' you saw in the programme looked as if they were living in a faithful part of Pakistan or similar devout place. Most women that passed by in the background during the programme wore the freedom bringing head-to-toe full black with small 'don't walk into the wall' top-slit. Most were black zombies, enslaved by Islamic madness. And they were supposed to show Britain?
Well, dear BBC, dear Mr Ajmal Masroor, I'm no British native but a native from Holland. The way I see it is this: take it or leave it. Literally. You come to settle over here, settle in Britain or Holland for ever, you want to become British, or Dutch? Fine, although the numbers are a problem. However, if you come, you adept to the ways and laws of the land. Perhaps you bring your spices but that is about it.
You do not fanatically continue being a Pakistani, a Moroccan or Nigerian. You do not enforce your culture, your religious idiosyncrasies, your way of life on the natives. We did so during our colonial past and it wasn't well appreciated. It isn't well appreciated by the natives here either. Then the natives eventually asked us to leave or kicked us out. I hope it doesn't come to that up here.
Laws should be based on a collective common sense and sense of justice. The introduction of laws should be voted on by elected people. In any case, laws should not be based on the presumed uttering of some guy who heard voices fourteen hunderd years ago. That is lunacy.
I see Islam as evil. There is no God, any god. There is no evidence for a higher being. Islam is a horrible manmade doctrine enslaving a billion people. Its Sharia Law -any version- is a perversion, a travesty. It is very personally intrusive and unpleasant at best, sadistic and brutal at worst. If necessary, this native will fight to prevent a single letter of Sharia Law ever to worm its way into our Dutch Law. No matter how flawed our laws may be.
If you don't like the British or Dutch way, if it doesn't go well with your believes, fine. Pack your bags and move to Pakistan, Morocco or wherever you think people are more friendly towards your beliefs. Please stop the enforcing of Islamic crap, stop the Sharia sweet talking and propaganda. That goes for the BBC as well.
Kindest regards,
Michiel Mans Source: Michiel MansH/T: Gates of ViennaBBC
Latest recipient of the Yellow Rag Award
 By Firouz Sedarat
DUBAI - Al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden accused conservative Arab leaders of plotting with the West against Muslims and urged his followers to prepare for jihad (holy war), in a recording posted on Islamist websites.
"The hearts of our rulers are like those of the enemies. Whether in Najd (Saudi Arabia) or in Egypt, they never soften, Pharaohs who have returned to humiliate Arabs," he said, reciting a poem honouring Gaza resistance to Israel's offensive.
He also called for the creation of a body of devout clerics to draw up a list warning Muslims about "enemies, hypocrites, their media such as newspapers ... radio stations and satellite channels, of which the most dangerous are the latter two."
The list, he said, should include the British Broadcasting Corporation, U.S.-funded Arabic-language television al-Hurra in Iraq, and the Saudi-funded Al Arabiya channel in Dubai.
Bin Laden described Israel's offensive in Gaza and its attacks on the Palestinian territory as a "holocaust" and said militants wanting to help Gazans should support Iraqis fighting U.S.-led forces and Baghdad's government.
"It is clear that some Arab leaders have plotted with the Zionist-crusader coalition against our (Muslim) people, these (Arab countries) the United States calls the moderate states," bin Laden said.
"We must seriously work and prepare for jihad to enforce the right and abolish the wrong," bin Laden said in the 33-minute audio recording dated March 2009, that was posted on Saturday.
JORDAN
He made a similar call for jihad on January 14.
"The valuable and rare opportunity for those who sincerely want to free (Jerusalem) is to support the mujahideen in Iraq with everything they need to free the country," he said, adding that Jordan would be the next country to be liberated, giving militants access to the West Bank.
The recording entitled "Practical steps to liberate Palestine", in which the speaker's voice sounded like earlier bin Laden messages, was produced by al Qaeda media arm As-Sahab. It was accompanied by an English translation of its text.
"Gaza's holocaust after the long siege is a historic event and tragedy that underlines the need for a separation between Muslims and hypocrites," bin Laden said.
More than 60 messages have been broadcast by bin Laden, his second-in-command Ayman al-Zawahri and their allies since the Sept. 11 attacks in 2001. Source: Reuters
In July 2008, we caught the BBC's shocking first response to a Palestinian bulldozer attack in Jerusalem. Offering a glimpse into the BBC's warped journalism, the initial headline read "Israel bulldozer driver shot dead". While the BBC later amended its headline, this example offered evidence of the BBC's mindset - the initial instinct to portray Israel as an aggressor and a Palestinian as a victim even if that Palestinian was actively involved in a terrorist attack against innocent civilians.Less than three weeks later, another Palestinian bulldozer attack took place. This time, in a virtual repetition of the first incident, the BBC's initial response the second time was a headline questioning whether an attack had taken place at all. The headlines on the BBC's web page went from " New Vehicle 'Attack' in Jerusalem" to "New Digger 'Attack' in Jerusalem," then finally settled on " Israel Hit By New Digger Attack." Fast forward to March 5, 2009 - yet another bulldozer terror attack took place as a Jerusalem Arab rammed a bulldozer into a police car in the capital, wounding two officers before being shot dead. How would the BBC report this? True to form, as the news broke, the BBC's initial headline read: "Tractor driver shot in Jerusalem". We watched as the headline evolved over the course of the next few hours. Bizarrely, in a semantic change, the next update read "Digger driver shot in Jerusalem". A short time later, the BBC finally acknowledged that an actual attack had taken place as the headline was amended to "'New digger rampage' in Jerusalem" before finally settling on " 'New digger attack' in Jerusalem". But why the quotation marks? Evidently, somebody was sitting behind a computer giving some thought to the headlines and how to update the breaking news story. But once again, the BBC has demonstrated a clear trend that reflects negatively against Israel even when Israelis are the victims of a terror attack.Headlines are important because they set the basis for the whole story, are the first thing the reader sees and the last message left in the reader's mind. Typical BBC headlines we found in HonestReporting's past analysis of the BBC were: " Israelis kill militants in Gaza" (The "militants" had been firing rockets into Israel), " Children killed in Israeli strike" (the children were playing next to a rocket launcher), and " Israeli strike kills four in Gaza."On the other hand, in actions carried out by Palestinians, the headlines took the responsibility for the attacks away from those who instigated them. Rockets, explosions,and clashes became the culprits in typical headlines such as: " Rocket injures dozens in Israel," " Gaza explosion kills two children", " Two killed in clash in Gaza Strip," and " West Bank clash leaves three dead." Once again, in this latest bulldozer attack, the culprit is not the Palestinian who carried it out but the vehicle itself. While "Israel" or "Israelis" regularly feature in BBC headlines, the same cannot be said for "Palestinians" or "Arabs" who carry out terror attacks. Source: HonestReporting.com BBC
Latest recipient of the Yellow Rag Award
The segment on Khalid Yasin begins around the 9:40 markBy Patrick Poole
The BBC’s Panorama program on Monday, “Muslim First, British Second,” addressed the growing problem of Islamic radicalization flourishing under the guise of “non-violent” Muslims. What they discovered is that extremist preachers, while nominally disclaiming violence, in fact, are a major contributor to the atmosphere of hate that breeds Islamic terrorism.
So it was no surprise then that one of the hatemongers they profiled was none other than Khalid Yasin, who was in Ohio last year conducting fundraisers in Columbus and Dayton. As we reported here exclusively at COAT last May, Yasin spent more than a week touring a number of Columbus-area mosques and Ohio State, his visit sponsored by the Islamic Society of Greater Columbus.
Sure is nice to see a major media outlet addressing this problem — even if they are 3,866 miles away. Now if only get the media a little closer to home to begin seriously tackling this issue. Not holding my breath. Source: Central Ohioans Against TerrorismKhalid Yasin
Latest recipient of the Distinguished Islamofascist Award
 John Lyons, Middle East Correspondent February 19
A STOCKPILE of unexploded bombs being kept in a Hamas-controlled police compound in Gaza City has been stolen, raising serious concerns about how the explosives may be used.
The BBC revealed last night that the 11 unexploded Israeli bombs that were to be disposed of by the United Nations were found to have gone missing when UN officials arrived to inspect them last Sunday.
The report said that on February 2, the UN team had been given access to a storage site in Gaza City where more than 7000kg of explosives were being housed.
The explosives included aircraft bombs and white phosphorus shells that had been fired by Israel during the 22-day war in Gaza but did not explode on impact. The report said Israel had accused Hamas of taking the stockpile.
UN spokesman Richard Miron said the UN "obviously wants to track down this ordnance for its safe disposal".
He would not comment when asked whether the UN took any responsibility for the disappearance by not having placed its own full-time guards on the stockpile.
"The UN was endeavouring to dispose of this material," Mr Miron said. Three 2000-pound bombs and eight 500-pound bombs were part of the stockpile.
The UN Mines Action Team had been in Gaza since the war ended.
One source in Gaza told The Australian that although the bombs had not exploded, they were still dangerous if somebody placed a charge on them.
"Then basically you have IEDs," he said, a reference to improvised explosion devices that are often buried in roads in places such as Iraq and Afghanistan and detonated when military or other vehicles drove over them.
Talks were continuing between Hamas and UN officials for the recovery of the material.
The source, who asked not to be named, said those running the police compound had been nervous about housing such a large amount of explosives, given that several police stations had been bombed during the Gaza offensive. He said the UN had been waiting for Israeli approval before moving them to a safe site and detonating them -- such approval was necessary because if the Israelis had seen from aerial surveillance a large amount of explosives being moved, they might have thought they were part of a Hamas operation and attacked. The UN had been awaiting approval when the bombs were stolen.
Meanwhile, Israeli President Shimon Peres was set last night to receive official results of last week's election.
He is then expected to spend two days speaking to leaders of the major parties and various factions in Israeli politics before deciding on whom he believes has the greatest chance of forming a stable coalition government. In last week's election, the centrist party Kadima, led by Tzipi Livni, won 28 seats in the Israeli parliament, or Knesset, while the right-wing Likud, led by Benjamin Netanyahu, won 27.
However, the Right-bloc of parties, including Likud and the religious party Shas, won more than the Centre-Left bloc.
Mr Peres is expected to opt for Mr Netanyahu, who appears to have locked in the support of smaller parties. Source: The Australian
 |
|
|
Copyright Muslims Against Sharia 2008. All rights reserved.
E-mail: info AT ReformIslam.org
|
|
|
We must admire a fanaticism that inevitably leads to the demonisation and destruction of its foes: 
Posts
