January 23, 2009
A truely disgraceful article on BBC Online.
I have written a complaint as follows:
I am writing to complain about a disgraceful article published on BBC Online. Mark Doyle compared Israel to a state founded on genocide, this being the implications of the statement “The ethnic Tutsis of Rwanda experienced their genocide in 1994 but a Tutsi-dominated government then came to power and has ruled ever since.” To an uninformed reader, it would appear as if it were an unchallenged truth that Israel had massacred or expelled its Arab population in 1948. This article attempts to relativise the racist and planned mass-murder of between 500,000 and 1,000,000 Tutsis with the founding of the State of Israel. No such factual link can be made. Rwanda existed prior to 1993-94; Israel did not. The Hutu leaders openly admit that they planned to exterminate the Tutsi; at no point did the leaders of the Jews in Palestine ever consider even the explusion of Arabs. The continued presence of Israeli Arabs inside Israel should contradict these points – neither can Israeli Arabs be pointed to as examples of second class citizens when they enjoy the same rights as all Israelis. Compare this to the active demonization and dehumanization of the Tutsis by Hutu media, politicians and even churchmen. This article is misleading and untruthful. I would like the BBC to publish a correction and apology for poor standards of journalism.
Let’s see what the response will be.
December 7, 2008
Via Little Green Footballs, from here.
I’ve heard quite enough media pundits desperately trying to link the terrorist carnage in Mumbai to Western “issues”, whether Gaza (what starvation?), a mysterious failure to reach out to the Muslims of Afghanistan and Pakistan (sorry, does WD mean not fight against the Taliban and their allies?) or the usual hobby horse of the traitors anti-war groups, Western troops in the Middle East and the liberation of Iraq.
Read the account from above. It’s from the perspective of an Indian family caught up in the attack.
Once you’ve read it, remain open minded and ask yourself this: how do any of the above issues actually relate to the crimes committed in Mumbai? Does “secular political outrage” (the implications of WD) motive two young men to machine-gun a line of frightened civilians against a wall? Does “anger against the occupation” motive them to open fire on a crowd in a railway station or seek out tourists and murder them? Do any of the above motivate normal people to go and seek out a tiny house in Mumbai, which happens to be only Jewish centre in Mumbai, which houses a young rabbi and his family engaged on an outreach mission – a mission of charity? And then to torture and murder them?
If you’re still engaged with the diseased thinking of relativism, you’ll probably accuse me of being Islamophobic to suggest that this was an Islamic agenda, inspired by the relevent verses in the Koran (Mohammed eagerly murdered an entire unarmed Jewish tribe – highest example of conduct to Muslims) that was being carried out on the streets and in the buildings of Mumbai. This is the same agenda that is played out against Israelis time and time again.
The disease of relativism is to ignore the reasoning of the terrorists and to dehumanize the victims by implicity accusing them of complicity in their governments “crimes”. It would not matter a jot what crimes had been committed against you if your response was the animal and barbaric agenda played out on the streets of Mumbai.
Perhaps the correct response might be the avatistic feeling that begins to emerge in one’s breast when this has happened again: revenge.
July 13, 2008
At this moment, Israel is about to cave into Hezbollah and Hamas on virtually every demand made by those two groups in return for the bodies of two soldiers (and probably Gilad Schalit’s body too). There is a malaise of defeatism in the West that has been spread by the left-leaning intelligensia and sourced back to the religious pacifists, the collaspe of cultural identities (see Natan Sharansky) and the continued efforts of the communist and fellow-traveller groups in western academia to demoralize and disempower the west in favour of an assumed “revolutionary” movement from Islam.
The model for the current time can be found in the late 1970s and the collaspe of Iran from a forward looking state (admittedly a tyranny) to a backwards, anti-progressive Islamist tyranny that outdid the Shah’s regime for physical and mental butchery. At the time the western elites refused to believe what the Islamists led by Khomenei were both writing and proclaiming in public speeches, prefering the safety of their own assumptions and wishes. Michel Foucault slobbered over a man who would have put him to death faster than if one could say “Jack Robinson” if he had been an Iranian subject. Why? Because they were following what they wanted to see, not what was in front of them.
Now we find the same path being trodden again. We have a growing Islamist movement in the west that is emboldened by appeasement and accomadation, a left-leaning intelligensia whose imagined enemies are the working class, the right wing and apostates from a pseudo-communist correct line of thought (mulitcultural political correctness) and who see virtue as inherently located outside of their own culture. A negative, plaintive attitude has emasculated and embarressed the west and left it soft and weak.
We need a new idea of ourselves and the best people saying what this might be are the left-wing apostates such as Christopher Hitchens, Nick Cohen and David Aaronovitch. We need to mobilise the huge economic potential in the west and reawaken our shared values of equality before the law, the importance of the individual against the group and the humanisation of our society. What I mean by the last statement is that throughout history, we as human beings, as a species have slowly in parts and places moved from a tribal and group based identity that excluded, punished and was demarcated by taboo, towards a state of awareness that comes out of the fallout from the European religious wars and the Enlightenment.
Today, the Enlightment is under attack and accused of being the root of 20th Century fascism and 19th Century racist ideologies, ignoring the fact that the values at the centre of the fascist and communist movements were anti-modern, anti-intellectual and anti-individual (as opposed to the group). These were movements against the Enlightment and modernity – and today, so is Islamism.
Islamism and it’s left-wing fellow travellers in the west seeks to impose a new order of racism, genocide and tyranny on the world. There is no place in Islamist philosophy for free-thought, free-speech, or the mere existence of difference beyond that mandated in a collection of thoughts and sayings from the 7th and 8th Centuries AD. Why do the left-wing affect to believe more in the virtue of this fascist creed than in their own culture?
Because they have abandoned reason and logic as their own beliefs have attained the trappings of religion, since reason and logic (those gifts of radical Christianity, but above all the Greeks) can be used to question and dismantle those beliefs. By finding nothing but fault in the west for the last half-century, by despising the working classes of the west for not being good revolutionaries or humble new-age serfs, the left-wing intelligensia (and here I use the word in a derogotary sense) have been left with nothing of value inside themselves, excepting their own sense of absolute virtue. They recognise the wickedness of the Islamists, but fool themselves into believing that the wickedness is a product of western mistakes, rather than a poison nutured outside of themselves. Far easier to blame the west for being attacked than to defend it.
So we now have winter solstice festivals, instead of Christmas. We now no longer teach our history, except for those bits where our ancestors can be painted as devils attacking angels out of spite or greed. We blame assaults on us as the result of our political opponants or yesteryear, or increasingly the result of wicked and greed machinations by secret elites, which leads rapidly into conspiracy theories and the revival of anti-Jewish rhetoric.
We have an intellectual culture that is so anti-militarist, that it would deprive us of the means to defend ourselves or prevent harm against others in the world, while the BBC tells us to weep crocodile tears as one tyrant or movement massacres the helpless in the name of fascist ideologies – or sometimes out of greed.
We have become complacent, self-loathing and corpulent. Our intellectual culture has been labelled as worthless by its’ own practitioners and instead of treating the ideas of our enemies as anything like better, we opt for a standard of “difference” that implicitly makes them better while seeming “equal”.
As Lord Lawson put it in another context, I leave the last words with Euripides (or rather his 19th Century admirers). “Those whom the gods wished to destroy, they first made mad.”
June 4, 2008
Growing in nascent form but taking a fuller shape since September 11th has been the refusal of Western intellectual elites, mostly liberal but not exclusively so, to recognize the state of war declared by radical Islam on the West. Counter-arguments on the state of affairs have varied from “It’s not our war”, “It needs a police action, not a war” to “this war was started by the (insert shadowy Jew-related group here)”. All of which betray an essential flaw in the thinking that has come to dominate the mainstream of the intelligentsia, that is to say that the Western intelligentsia cannot bring themselves to recognise an enemy from outside of their own society. Motives other than malign are arrogantly attributed to our enemies in order to remove the possibility from their minds that these people might not have a legitimate grievance against the West that we can safely acknowledge.
The aims of the Islamists are declared and publicly so. The aims are to dominate the West and eradicate the culture of freedom, to spread a fiery and intolerant faith to all corners of the world, and though they differ as to the ultimate timing, the elimination of all Jews (oh, and Hindus, Atheists, Buddhists, Muslims who don’t do exactly as they are told by the Islamists, Sikhs, and any other faith or lack of it or lack of sufficient Muslim piety…). This is not an enemy with which one can reason but rather an enemy that interprets anything other than military action as weakness allowing further aggression.
This does not mean that the Islamists are stupid – far from it. Crazed sadists, yes, but they know how to exploit the malaise of the intellect in the West. Notice that each act of aggression is marketed to the West as an act or revenge or protest, most often dressed up as a “protest” about the “occupation in Palestine” but also aimed at foreign policy, cultural outlook and policy or anything where the appeal will fall to guilt and create inertia or retreat. The Madrid bombings were in reality about punishing Spain both for contributing troops to Iraq but especially to begin the Muslim reconquest of Spain by putting the Spanish on notice as to their fate for daring to be independent in the 15th Century. The Islamist problem is with Israel, not with the location of its borders; in their world, Israel must not exist at all.
And furthermore, by our refusal recognise their aims, by refusing to recognise them as enemies that must be fought and killed until they surrender, we facilitate that aim. There is no backing away from this fact; the Islamists have been emboldened by each retreat and compromise, each time treating the terrorist movements and states as normal entities and insisting on applying the rules only to ourselves.
There is a saying: We can only bend the rules so far before they come around and stab us in the back.
May 24, 2008
Phillipe Karsenty has won his case against France 2 television. One small step in exposing the complicity of the western media in the propaganda of the Palestinians and the enemies of the west.
Let us bloggers try and get this news into the media and start challenging the dangerous assumptions and corrupt journalists who side with the enemies of freedom.
May 16, 2008
A very useful tool in analysis of either media or political rhetoric on Israel is Natan Sharansky’s Three D’s, which when present alert the reader or listener to the presence of anti-semitic content.
Demonisation, Deligitimisation and Double Standards.
This week’s coverage of the birth of Israel was of course morally neutralised in the mainstream media by the inclusion of the “Naqba”, the narrative of Palestinian Arab loss in the War of Independence. Yet this stream of reporting is in itself taking an anti-semitic slant.
The demonisation comes from the myths and lies and comparision with genocidal regimes, the Double Standards stem from the continued regard of the Palestinian Arabs as “refugees”, even over several generations. The Deligitimisation comes out of the “Naqba” narrative itself, indeed it is central to the narrative.
One cannot say simply that the Arab states and religious leaders, backed by a majority of the population launched a war of genocide against the fledging state of Israel aimed at the annihilation of the Jews and that they were backed by ex-Nazi soldiers. No, Israel has to be responsible for the Arabs choice in fleeing, Israel has to be responsible for the Arabs wishing to murder Jews and ultimately we can blame the Jews for their own misfortunes.
To compare the founding of Israel with the “Naqba” is about as explicitly anti-semitic as you can get these days.
March 18, 2008
News so far: Manchester United on top of the Premier League (hooray!), Newcastle United heading for relegation (hooray! Hubris is rewarded with Nemesis.) The BBC completely fabricate a report from Israel…
No, I am not joking. Head over to CAMERA to find out for yourself. The report stated that the house of the terrorist who killed eight Israeli boys and wounded many others was demolished. That is a problem as a statement, if the house is still standing… Wouldn’t that be called – a lie?
Ah well, this is the BBC news department. We all know how anti-semitic they are…
December 2, 2007
The IDF today killed twelve terrorists attempting to “progressively” launch Qassam high-explosive “protest” rockets against the “wicked apartheid-loving” women and children of southern Israel.
Now note the response from Hamas.
“During the Weekend of the last week, the occupation forces shelled some
official sites for the Palestinian police and some other places in the Gaza
Strip, killing at least 13 Palestinians and injuring tens others, claiming
that these attacks are against the Qassam rockets which were fired at the
Zionist settlements and outposts around the Gaza Strip.
Hamas warned on Thursday that all options were open for the mujahedeen
against the Zionist forces and settlers after killing 12 Qassam men with
some other civilians.
“All options are open to answer any crime, expecially after the Annapolis
conference, which gave the Zionists a green light to commit more and more
crimes against our people,” said a statement from the Ezzedine Al-Qassam
Hamas also warned the Palestinian leadership to implement the roadmap plan ,
which was purely security plan to end the Palestinian resistance and to
strengthen the occupation in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip.
The first phase of the roadmap called for the Palestinians to undertake
“visible” steps against resistance responses to the occupation crimes in the
“It is not acceptable to implement the steps in the first phase of the
roadmap, especially if they arrest our mujahedeen or take our weapons,” the
“If this happens, it will mean a declaration of war between us and any side
which implements the roadmap steps.”
Note carefully the import of their words. Israel struck at forces attempting to attack Israel. That is what outrages them, not that people were killed, but that the “kuffar” didn’t lie down and take it like a good dhimmi.
When will the West get it into our collective heads that groups like Hamas do not have a progressive “root cause” or “grievance” that can be addressed by concessions or negotiation? The issue is about racial and sectarian supremacism – they are BETTER than you or me and have the right to dispose of us as they deem fit.
Also Nick Cohen has just published a postscript to his excellent book, “What’s Left?” I cannot recommend the book or the postscript highly enough. The postscript can be found here.