Posts Tagged 'Islamism'



Casual anti Israel bias continues on BBC

When it comes to Israeli retaliation for terrorist attacks launched against innocent civilians, BBC journalists either don’t get it, or do get it but have an anti-Israeli agenda to service.

Retaliatory actions by Israel get full coverage from our public service broadcaster as you can see here.

But as always there is only a passing explanation for the action, which is inevitably played down when, by sheer luck, the terrorist attack only causes property damage and fails to kill any Israelis.  There was no report on Friday about the rocket attack.  It was ignored.  Why?  The murderous intent behind the attacks by Palestinian terrorists is completely ignored by the BBC reporter filing the story.

And no opportunity to engage in naked moral equivalence is missed as reports are rounded off with a regular effort to portray the conflict as one sided and position the terrorists as underdogs:

Correspondents say such attacks are almost always ineffective, with rockets mostly landing in open fields.

Oh well, that’s alright then. Presumably that’s why attacks such as these aren’t reported and their impact explained, because the weapons those nice Palestinians use aren’t as effective.

One Thai farmer in Israel has been killed in the past year.

See it’s only one person, so what’s the big deal?

Dozens of Palestinians, some of them civilians, have been killed in attacks from Israel over the same period.

See?  The Israelis are worse.  Those nasty Israelis just launch these raids for fun and kill lots of oppressed Keffiyeh wearing chaps going about their lives.  It’s an outrage isn’t it?  Do you understand?  Palestinians = good, Israelis = bad.  You can trust us on this, we’re the famously impartial BBC for heaven’s sake.  You know that because once in a blue moon we might actually publish an article telling you the Israelis perspective.

That would be the BBC that also fails to put these matters into context for readers.  After all, where was the report about the four rockets and two mortar rounds that were fired at Israel just one week ago?  Or the terrorist team that was intercepted just days earlier as they tried to get into Israel from their supposed ‘prison camp’ to commit another attack?  We have to rely on local media for such information because the BBC can’t be relied upon to present the full picture.

Is it any wonder that we see comments such as these from people whose ignorance of the reality of life in Israel is matched only by their hatred of the Israelis who are determined to hold the line and strike back against their attackers?  People who fail to note that Hamas, which controls Gaza through fear and repression, refuses to engage in direct peace talks with Israel, that even the Arab League supports, citing yet more excuses for maintaining their hateful violence.

Make no mistake, Israel often does things that are wrong or indefensible, things that are rightly condemned.  But it must not be forgotten that the state of Israel has an obligation to combat the continuous threats it faces from people whose only goal is the destruction of Israel and the death or expulsion of the Jews from that land – a land the Jews had inhabited well before the time of Christ.

Cameron courts the Islamic street with attack on Israel

Israel can be excused for thinking that with friends like David Cameron it doesn’t need enemies.  It can also be excused for wondering how a man with an Eton and Oxford education can be so lacking in critical faculties. 

The Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, in his desire to cosy up to Turkey and continue the enlargement of the very EU he tries to claim he is sceptical of, has made not one but two false assertions in his speech in Ankara today. The first concerned the flotilla of vessels that aimed to break the blockade of the port in Gaza, about which he said:

The Israeli attack on the Gaza flotilla was completely unacceptable.

It was not an attack at all. Israeli defence forces effected a boarding of a number of vessels to inspect their cargo. The crew of one vessel, Turkish nationals, decided to attack the boarding party with a variety of weapons. It was only when this violence continued that the Israeli personnel had to use lethal force to defend themselves.  This is borne out by video evidence.  The distinction is important and Cameron’s assertion is wrong and unjustified.  Then he continued on the Gaza theme:

Humanitarian goods and people must flow in both directions. Gaza cannot and must not be allowed to remain a prison camp.

The fact is aid and goods do flow into Gaza from Israel.  Israel has attempted to stop certain materials that can have military application from being channeled to Hamas – a terrorist organisation.  Perhaps Cameron has forgotten that Egypt also has restrictions on goods and people crossing its border into Gaza.  If Gaza is a prison camp, then it is remarkably well equipped if overcrowded.  The latest mobile phones, computers and consumer items are all available – although Palestinian profiteers are controlling supplies of some basics in order to drive up prices and increase their own earnings.

Cameron is either ignorant or he is peddling deliberate deceptions to ingratiate himself with the Turks.  Either way the rhetoric only serves in inflame opinion against Israel, which continues to face aggression from groups such as Hamas, countries such as Syria, Lebanon and Iran and their proxies such as Hezbollah.  Presumably Turkish aggression against the Kurds and border incursions into Iraq to attack PKK targets are fine.  It seems on Planet Cameron only Israel should be berated when it stands up to terrorism.

Notably absent from Cameron’s soft soaping of Israel’s opponents was any mention of Hamas’ criminal and terrorist behaviour.  Nothing was said about the Fatah members who were thrown from rooftops in Gaza by Hamas fighters. Nothing was said about Palestinians who fled to Israel for protection and received hospital treatment after being attacked by Hamas members.  No, the only aggressor and party worthy of vilification in that part of the world is Israel and Cameron has demonstrated he will put expediency before honesty.

According to the official record 10,726,614 UK citizens voted for a Conservative government in May.  Instead they got Cameron’s cabal of conservatives in name only. Forget the heir to Blair line. These political pygmies with their own peculiar brand of schoolboy politics are the heirs to David Owen.

Ironically Labour got it right by calling Cameron a chameleon. Unfortunately he changed colour to a pinkish yellow rather than the deep blue conservatives had hoped for. This country swapped one left of centre government for another left of centre government. The Conservative logo was a flag of convenience, nothing more.

One wonders how long the grassroots will stomach this hijack of their party and coup by the Tory wets, whose approach and behaviour handed Blair his triumph in 1997.

Zakir Naik: Cameron needs to grow a pair

He talked a great game in opposition but when it comes to walking the walk, David Cameron is to be found sitting with his legs firmly crossed.  And while he is striking that pose his team at the Home Office are sat down with their arms firmly crossed.

Barely two weeks ago the kitten heeled, tough talking, Tory Home Secretary, Theresa May was explaining to a confused nation why two men considered terrorist risks to the United Kingdom, Abid Naseer and Ahmed Faraz Khan, were to be allowed to remain in this country.  It was their human rights you see.  Being sent back to Pakistan apparently risked their well-being, despite other members of Naseer’s gang happily trapsing back to Islamabad without a care in the world.

Theresa May said she was disappointed, but had no plans to appeal the decision of the Special Immigration Appeals Commission to halt their deportation.

Fast forward to this week and there is a sense of deja vu in the air.  In opposition, David Cameron and other senior Tories led criticism of the Labour government for allowing radical preachers into Britain to stir up hatred on lecture tours.  Yet one of the worst of the lot, Zakir Naik, is being allowed to enter Britain and do the self same thing by the Home Office.  He is guilty of inciting hatred against the United States and while praising Osama bin Laden said that: ‘if he is terrorising America the terrorist… I am with him. Every Muslim should be a terrorist’.

The response of the Home Office?  It has indicated that it was not planning to ban Naik from entering Britain.

How can it be that the Home Office – albeit under the control of Labour – sought desperately to ban a democratic Dutch politician, Geert Wilders, from entering this country because he intended to show a film that purportedly linked verses from the Qur’an to terrorism; yet seeks to take no action to prevent the arrival of Zakir Naik, a twisted Islamist who lauds terrorism and seeks to whip up hatred against non-Muslims with language designed to incite people?  The Home Office, like the police, is only capable of taking on the soft targets and shies away from the tackling the real troublemakers.  It is pathetic.

Perhaps given this evidence we should take it as given that Cameron is just another mouthpiece politician.  Having strutted around with his chest stuck out like a gooney bird, berating the Labour government for its ludicrous decision making, he is following suit in typically hypocritical fashion.

Remember how we were implored to vote for change?  Do you see much difference on display?  For all his showbiz style grandstanding Cameron is showing that he has no intention of protecting this country’s interests from people who seek to harm us.  Maybe it’s ideological, but maybe it’s because he needs to grow a pair.

Jihad Janes are new generation of Anne-Marie Murphys

News of the arrest of two American women dubbed ‘Jihad Janes’ show that Islamist terrorists are going back to the 80s in their attempts to carry out terror and murder.  In seeking to use proxies whose profile would not ordinarily raise suspicion among security services, terrorists are going back to a technique used in the UK by Nizar Hindawi.

Hindawi was a Jordanian Arab who started a relationship with an Irish woman named Anne-Marie Murphy.  In 1986, while six-months pregnant carrying Hindawi’s child, Murphy was duped into believing she and Hindawi would be getting married and honeymooning in Israel. Hindawi bought her a ticket for an El-Al Israeli airlines flight to Tel Aviv and said he would meet her there because he had to travel via Jordan.

On instruction by his Syrian handlers, Hindawi gave Murphy a bag to take with her containing a bomb, which she knew nothing about and that was only discovered in security checks minutes before check in closed.  395 people would have died if the attack had been successful.

These Jihad Janes, Colleen LaRose and Jamie Paulin-Ramirez (who it seems may have been released on bail in Ireland), are enhanced versions of Anne-Marie Murphy.  They were bored.  They were lonely.  They were in search of companionship, excitement, a sense of belonging and desperate for validation.  They were susceptible to the charms of men ultimately intent on terror, who it seems actively sought them out on the internet.  They were chosen specifically because they do not stand out as a potential security risk.

Women like LaRose and Paulin-Ramirez make it possible to put distance between the instigators of terror and the intended victims.  But unlike Murphy, they are not unwitting proxies used to transport bombs.  They are acting in the full knowledge of what they are doing.  They have been groomed to be sympathetic to the Islamist cause and radicalised with a fervour to commit acts of terror.

The big worry here is that if this is happening in the United States, you can be sure it is happening in the UK.  We have in this country, by the government’s own admission, a pool of radicalised Islamist young men who want to see acts of terror perpetrated on the streets of Britain.  We have already seen Islamic converts such as shoe bomber Richard Reid and 7/7 suicide bomber Germaine Lindsay turn to terrorism.

How long before we start seeing British women revealed as Jihad Janes, caught doing the bidding of vicious homocidal maniacs who have sought them out, developed relationships with them and radicalised them to assist in or commit atrocities?

Add to FacebookAdd to DiggAdd to Del.icio.usAdd to StumbleuponAdd to RedditAdd to BlinklistAdd to TwitterAdd to TechnoratiAdd to Yahoo BuzzAdd to Newsvine


Enter your email address below

The Harrogate Agenda Explained

Email AM

Bloggers for an Independent UK

AM on Twitter

Error: Please make sure the Twitter account is public.

STOR Scandal

Autonomous Mind Archive


%d bloggers like this: