Gaza appeal
On occasion, an issue arises where I prefer to ventilate your views rather than proffer my punditry. This, I feel, is one such.
The issue? Whether broadcasters, specifically the BBC, should show the appeal by the Disasters Emergency Committee (DEC) of charities with regard to aid for Gaza.
There have been a couple of developments over the weekend and today.
Firstly, the issue was brought home to BBC Scotland, literally, via a demonstration.
Secondly, Sky News has now joined the BBC in declining to broadcast the appeal.
Sky's head of news, John Riley, comments: "The nature of an appeal is that it sets out to provoke a specific response from the viewer.
"We don't believe that broadcasting such an appeal on Sky News can be combined with the balance and context that impartial journalism aims to bring to the highly charged and continuing conflict in Gaza."
Earlier, the BBC had attracted substantial adverse comment for turning down the broadcast.
Here is what Mark Thompson, the BBC's Director General, has to say on the subject.
"We concluded that we could not broadcast a free-standing appeal, no matter how carefully constructed, without running the risk of reducing public confidence in the BBC's impartiality in its wider coverage of the story.
"Inevitably an appeal would use pictures which are the same or similar to those we would be using in our news programmes but would do so with the objective of encouraging public donations.
"The danger for the BBC is that this could be interpreted as taking a political stance on an ongoing story.
"When we have turned down DEC appeals in the past on impartiality grounds it has been because of this risk of giving the public the impression that the BBC was taking sides in an ongoing conflict."
Herewith the alternative view.
Douglas Alexander, the Secretary of State for International Development, says: "My appeal is a much more straightforward one.
"People are suffering right now, many hundreds of thousands of people are without the basic necessities of life.
"That for me is a very straightforward case and I sincerely hope that the British people respond with characteristic generosity."
The First Minister Alex Salmond has also commented, saying: "This is the time when people across the world are celebrating the legacy of Robert Burns, who wrote 'man's inhumanity to man makes countless thousands mourn'.
"The sole purpose of the DEC is to help innocent people who are suffering through no fault of their own.
"I can't help feeling that the BBC are running scared at the present moment and they should reconsider their unfortunate decision not to allow the DEC to screen their appeal - especially now that other broadcasters have confirmed that they are showing it."
The Liberal Democrat leader Nick Clegg has also strongly criticised the BBC.
There has been discussion, on either side of the argument, with regard to the issue of whether aid would get through. However, the core question centres upon impartiality versus aid.
In essence, the alternative views are these:
• This is a purely humanitarian appeal, designed to assist a suffering people. It goes ahead without the broadcasters but their involvement would enhance it enormously. Viewers are well able to distinguish between news coverage and a charity appeal.
• This is an ongoing - and highly complex, politicised - conflict. Every day, broadcasters have to tread carefully, balancing competing views. If those same broadcasters then publish images which are designed to evoke sympathy for victims on one side of the conflict, then their impartiality is jeopardised.
Over to you. Given the gravity of these events, I would strengthen my now habitual appeal for even-tempered contributions.
I'm 
© MMX~RS~q~RS~~RS~z~RS~26~RS~)
Comments
Sign in or register to comment.
Brian
While this is a serious issue, and on balance I think that the BBC are wrong not to broadcast a humanitarian appeal to help innocent people I think that in a Scottish context there is a much wider issue.
Mark Thomson said "The danger for the BBC is that this could be interpreted as taking a political stance on an ongoing story.
I take it from that comment that he has never seen Newsnight Scotland, The politics show et al.
Glaring case in point from last week, do you Brian think that no one was ever left for hours on a trolley in a hospital during the eight years of Labour/Lib Dem government?
Most right thinking people would know that, regrettably there would be many. Question for the impartial BBC, how many of these incidents were the first item of Scottish news two nights running.
Impartiality on the BBC, Thomson is having a laugh.
Complain about this comment
Brian
As the BBC here in Scotland has already lost its reputation for impartiality, there is no reason withold airing the DEC appeal from Scots.
Also, IMO, it is condescending to suggest that we the people are incapable of making our own minds up over matters political.
Complain about this comment
I have listened and watched news items about the refusal of the BBC to broadcast this appeal and would like to make two points.
The first is that by constantly keeping the refusal to broadcast the appeal in the media spotlight, it highlights the existence of the appeal more often than actually broadcasting it. It is also easy to find out where to donate.
My other point was highlighted by an item on Channel Four news which featured interviews in Gaza itself. This seemed to show how Hamas is in control of the aid in Gaza. A spokesman for Hamas said they were coping, but still needed outside aid. One interviewee made the point that he was not in a position to criticise Hamas as he was in need of aid, but would normally support the opposition.
I would also like to point out that if all aid must be channelled through Hamas, what guarantee have we that some of it will not be used for arms rather than aid?
Complain about this comment
Brian
Your summary of the 2 positions is succinct (as always).
However, the argument against broadcasting the appeal is morally weak. Since all military conflicts are political, that stance suggests that no civilian victims of a military conflict should ever be the subject of charity appeal.
The suffering of the civilians is real, regardless of whether Hamas or Israel (or both) are to "blame".
What on earth does it matter whether people suffer because of a natural disaster or a tank shell?
Complain about this comment
As always it seems politicians have an opinion on matters - regardless of the matter.
They have a point though. Airing a fundraising appeal doesn't technically mean they are taking sides. It would in essence be representing the truth of the matter - that money is needed urgently to help people in dire need of it.
We have gotten to the stage in the UK where fear of a backlash is seriously hindering our abilities to function normally - the politicians might be right in this instance - but I doubt they will ever address the reasons for the BBC's reluctance - or act on it.
Complain about this comment
Oh dear. Instead of "What would Jesus have done ?" from the religious fundies, we now get "What would Rabbie have said/done ?" from everyone else. Was that the sound of several bandwagons being jumped on ? I saw PS Scotland yesterday with each of the parties claiming him for their own....
However.
First Point : Rights and Wrongs of the whole Israel/Palestine thing aside, there is a fundamental question.
As a Public Service Broadcaster, Should the BBC be airing charity appeals at all ? We see and hear charity appeals every week on the BBC. The most recent being The Princes Trust, Action Against Hunger, The Teenage Cancer Trust and Gingerbread.
All worthy, all in need of funds and publicity.
Who decides who gets "our" airtime ?
Surely, as a Public Service Broadcaster, the BBC must either give all charities equal access to the airwaves or none at all.
Second Point: The DEC is an "umbrella group" of charities that include charities that one personally may or may not agree with.
It also excludes a number of charities.
Could it be said the the BBC is actively promoting the interests of these charities in airing a "DEC Appeal" at the cost of other charities ?
My Point of View: The BBC are right on this one. As Brian says, this is a highly complex and politicised situation. It is not a natural disaster like the Boxing Day Earthquake and Tsunami.
It is a conflict that has been brewing for years, aided and encouraged by external influences.
Is Hamas Wrong ? Yes !
Is Israel Wrong ? Yes !
Anyone who listens to or sees the news knows what is going on through the BBC. We must be able to trust its impartiality and the world must be able to trust its impartiality.
The BBC can not show this appeal without being accused of Bias by one side or the other therefore it Must Not.
We The People know of the humanitarian side of the disaster in Israel/Palestine.
I'll give what I can to a non-political, non-religious charity directly and not through the DEC.
I urge all readers to do the same.
Complain about this comment
It was ok for the Congo (War Torn)...
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7739110.stm
It was ok for East Timor (War Torn)...
http://www.asserteasttimor.com/news.htm
...So whats the difference with Gaza?
The BBC are Israeli sympathisers, that has been the obvious truth through all this sorry saga.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Sky News = Rupert Murdoch. I doubt if John Riley had much say in the matter and I further doubt if it had anything to do with impartiality.
I'm disgusted at the BBC for taking the stance it has and I think Mark Thompson needs to find a little perspective.
Complain about this comment
The BBC is taking a political stance on an ongoing story; by not broadcasting the Gaza appeal the beeb has shown that it is - in reality - far from impartial.
Complain about this comment
Very difficult I think to get a clear answer.
From a humanitarian view, anything possible should be done to relieve the suffering.
But, if Hamas are in control of the aid, we have the potential (not necessarily the outcome) that some aid will be diverted. We have seen what happens to aid for Africa.
The Gaza situation is a highly complex and long affair that cannot simply be resolved.
Perhaps the protesters who occupied the BBC buildings should also consider the rockets being fired into Israeli territory. This is not to condone the Israeli response, but there are always two sides to a conflict.
Please keep unionist/love for the USA etc arguments out of this.
Sky have also joined the BBC.
I suppose the worry is that if the aid gets diverted, then the BBC and Sky would then be accused of supporting a terrorist government.
Once again politics screw everything up.
People's lives are at stake here. It is important to ensure that the aid gets to those who require it.
Complain about this comment
Shame on you BBC. You reject the DEC Gaza Appeal because it is partial. I for one would be happy to have my contribution to the DEC distributed pro rata between the thousands in need in Gaza and the handful in need in Israel both affected by the recent conflict. A once great institution cowed and afraid to make what we all know is the right decision.
Complain about this comment
Brian,
What many forget is the charities have sprung into action already.
Their supplies of food, tents, blankets, medicines are en route. Their aid workers have packed and are travelling to Gaza.
Money donated via an appeal has to go through many processes before it arrives in the streets of Gaza in the form practical aid.
The money raised by a DEC appeal goes to replenish the charities funds: Save The Children, ActionAid and Oxfam.
The BBC's refusal to facilitate fund raising is a major blow to the cash flow of the charities involved.
Complain about this comment
#1 dubbieside &
#2 handclapping
Spot on - impartiality should begin at home.
#4 oldnat
For once we disagree fundamentally. Sadly the UN have politicised this from the beginning and in the absence of Egypt trusting Hamas enough to open their border I fear that little practical help can be given without lending succour to Hamas.
#6 Chiefy1724
Brave and well said.
Complain about this comment
BBC impartial, you are having a laugh!
BBC supports the union slavishly.
Its leading broadcasters seek to go on holiday with leading Scottish regional labour politicians.
Leading Ex Scottish regional labour workers appear on TV and radio as poliitical pundits promoting a labour bias to Scottish affairs.
Until Scotland looks after its own press and media, we will have outside interference promoting unionism and denegrating Scotland.
Why should someone Scots have never elected tell us what we can and can not watch?
Sad state of affairs!
TDBs
Complain about this comment
I can understand the BBC's position on this, though it leaves a sour taste in the mouth that it's likely the result of Zionist lobbying. I bet they'd have broadcast an appeal for Sudan, or Sri Lanka.
The claims that the BBC is biased against the SNP would seem to be contradicted by their relentless promotion of Homecoming. Would it hurt to have a detailed criticism of the concept, for balance?
Complain about this comment
Both the BBC and Rupert Murdoch are at one on this issue, and both are completely out of touch with public opinion.
The sooner the management at the Beeb are sacked the better. This is no way to run a Public Service Broadcaster.
PS Brian how does feel to be supping from the same spoon as Murdoch?
Complain about this comment
Surely by not showing it, the BBC has opened itself up to being impartial towards the opposite side. Mainly due to the fuss it has thrown up.
If it had been shown, I very much doubt there would have been many claims of 'pro palestinian bias' at the BBC..
It a sad case, it should have been shown in my opinion. The charity appeal was not for a political point in the region, it was to help those caught in the middle.
Unwise choice by the BBC.
Complain about this comment
The issue for the BBC is to decide whether or not the humanitarian appeal contains elements of copy that present potential for misrepresenting the actual situation in Gaza.
All too often in the middle east, civilian injuries have been heavily exploited for the sole purpose of political bias. In fact, whenever periods of calm have ensued, it has almost been guaranteed that a new situation will be created in order to keep the pot boiling. Whether that is a suicide bombing or civilian rocketing or an atrocity elsewhere in the West.
There are parties on both sides with agenda's consistent with conflict. In the case of the humanitarian aid appeal, it surely could be broadcast as a ''advertising'' statement without accompanying horrific film editing.
This present attempt at ''forcing '' the BBC to broadcast the type of film propaganda usually only available on U-tube, should be seen as it truly is: a sordid attempt to exploit the Palestinian situation for political gain.
This is why the BBC have refused to broadcast the appeal and I support their stand.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Timothy,
Or a new Job! Watch him squirm:http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/2009/01/bbc_and_the_gaza_appeal.html
Sad days for the world's most highly regarded broadcaster
;-(((
Complain about this comment
Brian,
The idea that being impartial, means that the BBC can refuse to give support to a humanitarian crisis is absurd. Of course we should also respond to any humanitarian crisis in Israel – however, at the moment, there isn't one! Impartiality doesn't mean trying not to upset a particularly influential group of 'the public'. The situation in Gaza is very different from that in Israel – the scale of the damage is a hundred times worse. Impartiality doesn't mean that the BBC should pretend that the devastation on both sides is equivalent. This has nothing to do with the rights or wrongs of the situation – we should be allowed to make our own judgment in the light of the facts, which the BBC in the past has always been good at establishing. Mark Taylor (Director General) needs to say very specifically why the situation with regard to this appeal is different from Darfur or the Congo. I am afraid that the BBC no longer seems to understand what the word impartial means - it is a very sad day.
Complain about this comment
This is a difficult one. I don't agree with what Israel is doing to its neighbours but in the same breath I don't agree what is happening to Israel by its neighbours. From what I have read about Hamas I would be concerned about any donations to the people of Gaza for fear that the money given by well meaning people may fall into the hands of Hamas to continue their military attacks on Israel.
If it can be guaranteed (which I most sincerely doubt) that all the donations will go solely to the benefit of those non combatants in Gaza then I would back it 100%. Therefore, on that point alone, I would have to agree with the decision by the BBC.
However I do agree with most of what #1 Dubbieside was saying. The BBC is not famed for its impartiality, more the pity.
Complain about this comment
The BBC are correct NOT to show any Gaza "appeal" due to the bullying and politically motivated actions of those behind the demands for any appeal to be aired.
Any appeal would ergo simply be pro-Hamas propaganda and unacceptable to any fairminded person.
Hamas controls Gaza so any monies raised will go through them first to buy arms and other weapons and not for any humanitarian purposes. Stay strong BBC in the face of hectoring and unwarranted yobbery.
Complain about this comment
afternoon , my issues here are not about the Gaza situation.
comparing the BBC with sky is ludicrous. lets not kid ourselves on if sky could make a bit more profit in sales, then they would carry the appeal. they have worked out it would damage their bottom line profit so they won't bother thank you.
Mark Thompson is kidding himself on because he certainly is not kidding the viewing and listening public of Scotland .
as far as the BBC in Scotland are concerned Scotland is still a one party state and impartiality is not on the agenda. the controllers of radio Scotland and BBC Scotland TV should be congratulated on continually finding journalist,s , experts , newspaper reviewers & presenters who only represent the views of one party , constantly ignoring every other party in Scotland.
i look forward to see what kirk does with this post.
Complain about this comment
Why the BBC is wrong over the Gaza appeal
"An alternative interpretation, and one that is ultimately much more damaging to the BBC's reputation, is that any humanitarian intervention in Gaza, by definition, expresses a political position in the long-running conflict between Israel and the Palestinians. In other words, collecting charity for Palestinians is a kind of hostility to Israel.
r/Burma tsunami aid had to go through Junta no difference. Just adds more evidence to the ever increasing lack of impartiality from the BBC.
By that logic, there can never be victims in a war zone, even among civilians, since to designate anyone as such would offend one of the combatant sides. That is patently absurd and inhumane."
Myanmar/Burma all aid had to go through the ruling unelected Junta, Hamas was democratically elected. This just adds more evidence showing that they are not impartial in their all of there actions.
Complain about this comment
I would agree with the BBC stance if the aid raised by the appeal was a blank cheque being given to the Hamas administration in Gaza but it isn't: this is a legitimate appeal made by independent charities.
Don't get me wrong, I know that the humanitarian crisis is being manipulated by Hamas but ultimately the international community should do the right thing and aid palestinian/ Israeli victims of all the violence plus apply pressure to the politicians on boths sides to prevent further bloodshed.
Perhaps Palestinians should make a Ross/Brand style radio announcement - I'm sure the BBBC will show that.
Complain about this comment
The BBC has a long history of Humanitarian Appeals for the victims of wars. All wars are by their nature, politicised.
As I heard Martin Bell say on the radio this morning, "Why is it OK for Africa, but not for Gaza?"
It is not the political nature of the Gaza conflict that is the problem here, but the political nature of the BBC.
Complain about this comment
This is an extremely emotive situation, with innocent civilians suffering, but however heart rending the news reports from Gaza are, the fact remains that while aid agencies take care of the civilian population, Hammas, the legal elected government takes little or no account of the suffering of it's people, using civilian areas as military strongpoints and as launch sites for missile attacks on Israel. However well meaning the aid agencies are (and sometimes it appears they are not impartial in these conflicts) the fact remains that they are ,albeit indirectly , supplying finance for the ordnance that Hammas uses to perpetuate the conflict. It is better to force Hammas to feed it's people by denying them the wherewithall to purchase weapons , if this is possible; but considering Hammas' attitude to it's people it's doubtful if even that would make them respect the lives of their own civilian population. The BBC is right in not being a party to giving Hammas' Jihadist intentions credence.
Complain about this comment
Anglophone has just trashed the "Oh, Such Wickedness!" thread. Take a look. Quite a tantrum.
Complain about this comment
Brownedov,
I suspect they are more afraid of Israel on that matter....;-(
ed
Complain about this comment
The BBC impartial? What an absolute nonsense. They treat the SNP appallingly.
If the BBC didn't have the cajones to sack the obviously less than contrite Jonathon Ross then what hope them telling the Israeli Embassy to push off.
I don't think there should be any charity appeals on public funded broadcasting. But the fact that there have been and from war torn areas as well means there's precedent here and therefore the Gaza appeal should have gone ahead.
On a wider note: more reasons why we need an independent Scottish broadcaster.
Complain about this comment
"On occasion, an issue arises where I prefer to ventilate your views rather than proffer my punditry. This, I feel, is one such."
I'd have been intrigued to hear your punditry on this story Brian. Is saying "pass" Mastermind style not in itself a form of loyalty to the Beeb?
Och , what do you expect from us partisan troublemakers.
By the way I think the decision stinks but am not surprised as I recognise the "pressure" the BBC are under.
Complain about this comment
16. Anaxim
Homecoming 2009 is about SCOTLAND try removing the blinkers it's whole different world out here.
Complain about this comment
What gets me here is the talk of impartiality. No news channel or human can claim to be impartial, we are all biased and there is nothing we can do to help that.
If we are to look at t from the complex point of view other issues arise. Would it be wrong to appeal for help for the Zimbabwean people? Wouldn't that show a lack of impartiality towards Mr Mugabe? If we had all the facts of the holocaust at the time it was happening would it have been wrong for the BBC to appeal for its victims?
Impartiality is a screen the BBC is attempting to use to deflect from the fact it does not want to offend Israeli sympathisers in this country. But this deflection has not worked and no matter what decisio it makes the BBC will ot look impartial because it is not.
Complain about this comment
Douglas Alexander was spot on when he said this was a humanitarian appeal and it didn't matter if a hospital had been blown away by bombing or knocked over by an earthquake, the essential fact is people are suffering and need help.
BBC could contextualise the appeal making it clear that it was an independent appeal and not part of the BBC's News programmes. To say that they have to wait until the story sinks into the lower orders of the news before they could broadcast an appeal is to extend the suffering of many innocents.
Would Israel be at all upset if humanitarian help was offered to Gaza?
Complain about this comment
Brian
We must also remember that this decision by the BBC was made by senior editors, one of whom had to resign recently for being so far out of touch with reality as to allow the Ross telephone calls affair. If such a person can get to the "top" of the BBC, one has to wonder about the level of competence of the collegiate who made this decision.
Complain about this comment
My television licence is due at the beginning of April (coincidentally on the first). The BBC doesn't stick to it's charter, and contrary to its claims its the least impartial channel of all the terrestrial channels. If it refuses to show the appeal then I'll gladly send £139.50 to DEC on the BBC's behalf and I would urge others to do likewise.
There is no doubt in my mind that Mark Thompson ought to be thrown out. As Tony Benn has said, people are going to die because of his decision.
Complain about this comment
Regarding Hamas, how many of us realise that it's largely an Israeli creation?
Read and learn (from the Wall Street Journal, no less!)
Slainte!
ed
Complain about this comment
Funnily, I'm now of the persuasion that it would be a mistake (now) for the BBC to back down....
But Americans don't understand irony
Slainte!
ed
Complain about this comment
#16 - the planning for homecoming started under the Labour party, therefore to claim that promoting homecoming is effectively promoting the SNP is just ignorant.
Why do some people fear individuals taking pride in a national icon?
Imagine the English had the same cringe with Shakespeare, and you see how ludicruous this linkage is!
Complain about this comment
Let us all remember that Hamas is the only elected Govt. here, the Israeli one is stand-in till the election (the actual reason for attacking).
The Egyptian Govt would have lost any election in the last decade to the Muslim Brotherhood (Hamas' 'parent' organization) were it allowed to stand.
By the BBC and Sky effectively showing 'solidarity' with the Israeli agressors - what has that done to the pro-Western forces in Gaza? Meanwhile aid flows in via Iran and elsewhere to Hamas, much as happen with Hezbollah in Lebanon. Hamas will now replicate the success of Southern Lebanon by compensating victims personally with fistfuls of cash; while the West is seen to stand by and do nothing!
By refusing to help the ordinary people of Gaza, the BBC and others are partially responsible for whatever 'reaction' follows next (and I don't expect it to be good).
Complain about this comment
DG Mark Thompson, Head of Ops. Caroline Thomson and the remainder of the bbc Executive show great ineptitude. Their decision is wrong and their narrative indicates they have fallen into the trap of partiality. This has spoiled the organisation's reputation far more than the previous publicly noticed clod hoppings.
The Israel lobby influence in the upper regions of the bbc, including the Trust is significant.
Sky/Murdoch's US-rael affinity is unquestionable, so no surprise there.
Complain about this comment
Silliness or downright stupidity? Y'all judge:
My vote goes for stupidity.
Complain about this comment
Whatever the BBC decided they would have come in for sharp censure.
Politicians will always take every opportunity to display their compassionate credentials, even if it means vilifying others.
We may not all agree with the BBC's stance, but let's respect it.
They will have looked long and hard at their options in view of previous criticisms.
Complain about this comment
#29. kaybraes
- It is better to force Hammas to feed it's people by denying them the wherewithall to purchase weapons -
I think you will find that Hammas' weapons are rather of the drain pipe and fertiliser variety than Trident. We are not talking 18bn GBP here, the sums involved for weaponry would hardly feed the population of Gaza for a day. But you would that Gazans starve?
- The BBC is right in not being a party to giving Hammas' Jihadist intentions credence. -
I cannot make out that the airing of a charity appeal is to be giving credence to Hammas' Jihadist intentions. If anything it would show the futility of them.
I'm not sure that the Hammas position is even entitled to be Jihad. The Jews are protected in the Koran as people of the book and Hammas is endeavouring to destroy the state of Israel which is a political construct. But I'm quite open to correction on this.
Complain about this comment
Port Charlotte (36),
It's hard to say for sure, and it's hard to find any evidence that Israel is interested in peace;-((
ed
Complain about this comment
All credit to the BBC for championing impartiality - just a pity it doesn't apply north of the border. I heartily endorse comments 1, 15, 25 and 32. Three against one is fine if all participants are representing the main parties in Holyrood - but where are any non-unionist commentators on the political broadcasts, tv or radio? The drip,drip, drip of the unionist perspective as axiomatic destroys the BBC's claim of impartiality in domestic affairs.
Complain about this comment
"Why is it OK to appeal for aid in Africa, but not in Gaza?"
Because of Israel, that's why.
They manipulate the media to give the impression that we should all feel some sort of guilt, that justifies their aggression and murder.
Complain about this comment
Israel's Netanyahu says that West Bank settlements will grow. "I have no intention of building new settlements in the West Bank," Netanyahu was quoted as saying. "But like all the governments there have been until now, I will have to meet the needs of natural growth in the population. I will not be able to choke the settlements."
Clearly though he is more than willing to choke the Palestinians while telling the world that Israel seeks peace.
The office of Tony Blair, the Middle East envoy, refuses to comment.
Complain about this comment
This decision is up to the BBC, and we should respect what they want - despite we agree or not.
However I do not see why people are complaining about the BBC refusal. The war has gone on for almost one month, where have you been? Do you ever read the papers or watch the news?
You should not need this appeal to be broadcasted on the television. If you want to help then you would have sent donations to the appropiate charties and NGO's who focus on the Gaza Strip.
Let's not forget that other channels hesitated over airing this appeal. They were all concerned, or shall we use this time to give the BBC a good kicking?
Complain about this comment
I am struggling to understand how anyone can turna serious issue like this into a rant on the SNP's relationship with the BBC. It really is pathetic beyond belief.
I cannot see how the BBC and Sky can justify this position. The appeal is not a political debate, the people of gaza need help and fast, this is purely a humanitarian issue. Hamas and Isreal are as bad as each other, but the children suffering in Gaza are not responsible for any of this.
We need to help them fast. If Isreal's treatment doesn't radicalise them then the lack of proportion and natural justice displayed by the West certainly will and the whole thing will go on and on.
But as to turning this issue into a rant against the BBC in Scotland is absolutely pathetic. THe world is somewhat larger than Scotland.
Complain about this comment
#28 dear_wendy hit the nail on the head for me.
Is anyone talking about the fact the BBC had a protest in its own foyer on Sunday evening and failed to report it? I found out on ITV's and Sky's websites! I didn't see anything about it on the BBC's website Sunday night or this morning but CNN and CBS had mentioned it.
I think that's as big a blow to the BBC's impartiality and credibility as the original DEC decision the protest was about. It's certainly an embarrassment for our TV channels as Scottish didn't cover it either - they refused to film a BBC building.
Even with BBC staff cuts I find the whole thing incredible.
Complain about this comment
Maybe the BBC is in total denial of the facts as is Gordon Brown: "I called for global financial reform ten Minutes ago"
I corrected the headline!
Complain about this comment
Douglas Alexander, the Secretary of State for International Development should do what's right - in our name...
The BBC similarly should do what's right - in our name...
No matter what 'aid' is despatched it will never be enough, and will no doubt be politicised... Nevertheless DA - get on and do it!
BBC must remain impartial...
Anyone who wishes to donate will surely already have done so...
(Can we reasonably assume that the Palastinians are re-arming already?)
Complain about this comment
patty #
"Imagine the English had the same cringe with Shakespeare, and you see how ludicruous this linkage is!"
If an English person says they don't like Shakespeare, they're unlikely to be derided for not being national enough by mouthy nats.
If someone makes unkind comments about Shakespeare, they won't be accused of 'offending' the English. Quite unlike the bizarre situation with Jeremy Paxman's comments about Burns being sentimental doggerel. Quite a few Scots would probably agree with him. No doubt these people are suffering from your made-up disease, cringe.
You're turning Burns into a Scottish Mohammed.
Complain about this comment
#50 TimothyFClarke
"The office of Tony Blair, the Middle East envoy, refuses to comment."
He's got to consult his maker and decide how best he can increase his personal wealth first, priorities.
Complain about this comment
If England was occupied like Palestine by a foreign power I would fight like the people of Gaza. When my home had been destroyed and my children slaughtered would the BBC help me?
Complain about this comment
Brian
Further to my #37;
it is now 2.5 hours and counting and last time I looked at HYS they were a few short of 6000 posts waiting for moderation. What credence can we put in the BBC's senior staff's decision to withhold DEC when they cannot even arrange to have sufficient moderation for the question they have asked of us.
I don't know whether the BBC are right or wrong but I do worry that they may not have the experience and skill to make the "right" decision.
There is another dimension also to this question. As I do not have TV things may have changed but all TV loves to show us images of war, carnage, etc. and so it becomes just another thing on the telly like Crossroads or any other soap. It is all to easy to see yet more pictures of devastation and say "So what". To see those same pictures with a bye-line, that this is the ruin of someones life as the DEC appeal is likely to do, is necessary to return us to a proper understanding of what these "political conflicts" mean for real people like you and me who get caught up in them.
Complain about this comment
#57 cynicalHighlander
Lol, I suspect St Tony's maker isn't on speaking terms with him at the moment -- what with St Tony claiming God told him that invading Iraq was the right thing to do!
Complain about this comment
Without sounding cold hearted or offensive but does anyone really care about what is happening between Israel and Gaza or the atrocities which both commit upon each other.
What it does do, is make what all news editors happy. They all just love to show death, destruction, misery, no hope , disaster. Wouldn't it make a change if we could have a bit more good news shown.
Complain about this comment
#61 Jake-the-saltire
Yes, very much so. I get very angry about the situation, probably angrier than anything else. Always shouting at the television, monitor or whatever (sadly not that that does any good). Not pretend anger -- inner anger if that makes sense. Nor pretend sympathy with the way the Palestinians have been treated. Actually I'm surprised you had to ask, I have to bite my tongue so I don't get modded out!
Complain about this comment
#56: the single most nonsensical statement these boards have seen since the late lamentable Expat.
Yes the new govt. is continuing the old govt's policy of supporting Scottish tourism. Live with it.
Complain about this comment
Last word on this we are all members of the animal kingdom and when you fence them in restricting their supplies of food and energy then they will show the exact behavior as this. The people of Gaza need space as we all do.
Complain about this comment
#56 Anaxim
From "Doing English" By Robert Eaglestone
"Admiring Shakespeare creates a 'we', a sense of shared identity, and to dislike Shakespeare is seen almost as a declaration that you are not 'one of us' and not 'patriotic'. Teaching Shakespeare, the national poet, conveys (somebody's) sense of 'Englishness'."
You were saying?
Complain about this comment
Brian, I do enjoy reading your blog, honest, but you have never been the most impartial observer of politics .. anywhere. After all, Edinburgh is the Far East :-)
Complain about this comment
So, in order to protect the BBC's "impartiality" they are content to ignore the fact that hundreds of thousands of people living in Gaza are enduring "Holocaust" conditions that are not unlike the conditions suffered by the Jews themselves in the ghettos of Hitlers Germany?.
Mark Thomson, and those others at the BBC who made this decision, should hang their heads in shame.
As for Rupert Murdoch and his Sky network?, we really should'nt be surprised.
Complain about this comment
#56
Only someone who knows nothing of Burns or is unable to understand the huge import and sublime quality of his work could accept the "doggerel" remark from Paxman.
Deeply offensive and deeply stupid it summed up the self-serving, ignorant and smug Mr Paxman to a tee.
Like Kirsty Wark Paxman has decided in his arrogance that he is the story and not the issues he is employed to present to us.
Complain about this comment
Candid Lass,
I think it might serve England right, but Scotland would be a different matter...;-)A parable
Salaam/Shalom/Shanthi/Peace
ed
Complain about this comment
Anaxim,
He's far more important than that, pbuh.Complain about this comment
I know what does it now, .....;-((
Complain about this comment
But have you fixed it Ed?
Complain about this comment
SHAME on the BBC.
It is the Nation’s Broadcasting Service, and such a disgrace to us the License Payers.
When our Government gave the go ahead for Bloody Sunday in Northern Ireland, they made a recruiting sergeant for the IRA, with many years of trouble ahead.
Israel is doing the same, only to a massively greater extent.
Israel has been guilty of breaking UN resolutions for generations now and continues to this day to get away with it. Israel’s bombardment of Gaza is a war crime of the highest order, but because it is Israel and a friend of America it gets away with it.
Not content to having bombed the Palestinian homes, the Israelis sent in the bulldozers to finish the job. Absolute criminality.
Was it just a coincidence that the Israelis decided to attack the Palestinians just before President Barack Obama came to power and stopped just when he was inaugurated.
The BBC speaks of partiality. Where is the partiality of a death rate of 1,000 to 1.
Tanks, warships and jets against metal tubes with fertiliser and AK47’s and stones.
Impartiality is inherent in the BBC, however much they try to deny it. We watch how they regularly roll out the Unionists to discuss all aspects and ignore the SNP.
Just like in South Africa, Israeli goods should be boycotted until peace reigns.
The only way to peace is for the parties involved to sit around the table and negotiate a meaningful peace.
The BBC is refusing to allow a humanitarian appeal for people who have no access to help of any kind in their hour of need.
Gerald Kaufman has got it right and demonstrates the difference between Jews and Israelis when he says that the Israeli Government use threatening and extremely bad tactics trying to defend their position.
Complain about this comment
An interesting post from Curley Bill,
on the Scotsman blog -
"What a nonsense this article is. The Budget passing is a done deal, mainly because Gray's gormless gombeen men (and wimmin) are too scared of the alternative. They know - according to internal polls that have been done - that they are facing decimation at the next election if things continue as is.
(Thanks go to Councillor James Kelly, Lab., of the Ballochmyle Ward for providing this information.)"
Ayrshire first with the news (of course!)
Complain about this comment
Speaking in purely Ayrshire terms: the result in Kilbirnie and Beith by-election (and subsequent events), Labour's internal predictions could well be right. It has traditionally been one of the strongest Labour fortresses in Ayrshire, and not only did it go SNP, but in a big way.
SNP lost in that area by nearly 900 votes in the May 2007 Election for Holyrood – while winning the constituency as a whole by 44.
Contrast that with winning almost half the vote in said local by-election.
Labour MP Katy Clarke has her office within the wards boundaries too. Something to think about when treading the halls of power?
http://www.s1kilbirnie.com/news/kilbirnie-and-beith-by-election---the-result.html
Complain about this comment
It's simple. The BBC are 100% wrong.
The 'impartiality' argument is patronising to viewers.
They are quite capable of seeing that - whatever they think of the issues or reasons - an horrific human tragedy has occurred and the women and children are not responsible for the disaster.
They need help and the Aid Appeal is about THAT.
There are clearly other reasons why Mark Thompson and Caroline Thomson - and maybe one or two other senior BBC types - made this decision but it WASN'T about the BBC's reputation for impartiality and they are frankly gutless towards whoever they thought would criticise them (probably just Israel) if they did show it, and patronising to viewers.
I listened to John Humphry's interview with mark Thompson on this mornings Today radio program. Like Thomson before him, he was appalling - couldn't even string two coherent words together and Humphry's made it quite clear that Thompson wasn't being consistent or rational in what he said.
And what's all this with Thompson calling the full scale Israeli Military assault on Gaza an 'incursion'???? He used that word again on Newsnight! That's a word for a tiny short, sharp raid. He was using the word that ISRAEL demands that the media use!
Complain about this comment
Scottish Nationalists on here haven't attributed impartiality as the reason for the BBC's actions. The BBC themselves have made the claim to have acted in this instance to retain their Impartiality. And since they have I have every right to regard their claims on this as laughable. Month after month, year after year this is how the SNP are treated:
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=556FEKoVd-w&feature=related
Thompson's position is untenable IMO. I also think his position has too much power for one person. But then beyond sentimentality for some programmes I don't care much for the BBC. I certainly don't think people should risk jail for not wanting to pay for it. Why should anyone have to pay for a channel that is nothing less than an instrument for the Southern English middle class to wield power over us in the most condescending yet mildly bullying of ways and all the jobs-for-the-boys public school stuff that goes with it.
The cringe or the swagger is no doubt due to the attitude of many Anglos towards Scots and our culture. We swagger with pride in part because we know self confident expressions of Scottishness will be attacked. Those that cringe fear that attack and act with servility in the vain hope that no harm will come their way. That's why these last couple of days the predictable onslaught against Burns from some quarters has taken place. The fact is Scots don't so readily attack Shakespeare not because they believe him to be superior in some way but because we do not feel the need to attack the representative of another culture, even the representative of a people who are so often unkind to us and about us.
We are paradoxically less insecure in many ways and I think have a more authentic relationship with Burns which is why so many of us express such affection for him. I hope Scots independence will help Anglos celebrate and take pride in their own culture without so readily attacking the other because a precarious often fearful and therefore angry superiority complex is no substitute for a real appreciation and pride for your own culture in the great context of all other cultures.
Complain about this comment
#65
I don't think that Robert Eaglestone is correct. 'You will like what we tell you to like' hasn't yet become rigid dogma in England. Though it's certainly headed that way.
Complain about this comment
#69, #71 Ed Iglehart
Ed, the problems seems to be an unmatched <strong /> tag at the end of the A parable link. The parser doesn't catch it because of the / at the end of the tag which says to HTML "I don't need closing".
I tried to clear it by beginning this post with a </strong /> tag, but the parser just gives an error. I remember some old versions of MS-Word which threw up formatting like that - might be worth trying another HTML editor.
You could complain about your own post and ask them to replace it with the corrected HTML. They have done that for me before now.
Complain about this comment
Oldnat,
It's my own carelessness I'll have to fix ;-)
I have set up a hotkey which gives me a "bare" link, thus:
<a href=""></a>
If I paste the link's descriptive text here<b></b> instead of where it should be <b>here</b>, the parser gets confused and we are all emboldened...
Sorry ;-(((
ed
Complain about this comment
On the silliness of the BBC decision, I feel it necessary to say first that I'm one of the BBC's most dedicated fans. It's far from perfect in many ways, including regarding Scottish matters, but it remains one of the (if not THE best news/information organisations in the world. (my private opinion, of course)
I couldn't have said it betterI understand the sensitivity on the matter of events in Palestine, since any organisation even approaching even-handed reporting is certain to receive a barrage of accusations of anti-Israel bias - so cynical and disgraceful and electorally-minded has the Israeli action been. The BBC has also been accused of pro-Israeli bias for not revealing the horror even more assiduously. Personally, I think it has done a pretty good job in the circumstances.
I understand the BBC's anxiety on the matter, but I think the decision not to air the DEC appeal was a mistake, and has made a mountain out of a molehill, coincidentally (?) producing massive publicity for the appeal. As noted somewhere above (if it hasn't been modded) I also think it would now compound the damage if the BBC were to give in to the storm of pressure and relent. This is especially the case, in the face of Parliamentary pressure.
But Americans rarely appreciate irony, and never understand it...
Now, on the matter of Israel and her service personnel
Salaam/Shalom/Shanthi/Peace
ed
Complain about this comment
The banners of the protestors outside the BBC demonstrate emphatically in my mind that the BBC is right not to air the advertisement. Notwithstanding the point that the decision has provided far more airtime than would otherwise have happened, it is not in the interest of any broadcaster wishing to remain strictly impartial to broadcast the appeal.
besides, it is not the public broadcasters role to ask for support for any special group, no matter how deserving.
I applaud the BBC's decision.
Complain about this comment
Oldnat, Brownedov, and any others even vaguely interested,
My "bare" link looks like this:
<a href=""><b></b></a>
And not as shown in #80. Interesting (to geeks/nerds) that the parser uses <strong> where I use <b>
Meanwhile, try pasting this page's URL here for a laugh
Slainte!
ed
Complain about this comment
The BBC should show the appeal, provided that it is absolutely clear that money raised will be disbursed by NGOs and not simply handed over to Hamas so that they can buy-off Palestinian public opinion.
The poor Palestinian people are the meat in an elaborate club sandwich. They have, in many cases lost their land to right-wing Israeli colonists, who have held the political balance of power for many years. They have lost their livelihoods due to forced isolation. They have been deliberately kept in squalor as a visible cause-celebre by Arab governments keen to get back at Israel. They are held hostage by their own political classes who are ever keen to play up suffering to the outside world. They are the victims of an unusually crass over-reaction by Israel to the rocket attacks...designed to provoke just such a reaction. They are the victims of Islamists who, as elsewhere seem to have the sole strategy of getting their own people killed on TV...anything short of total annihilation being deemed a victory...some victory?
The local political influences (Palestinian and Israeli) at play are near universally contemptible in their self-interest, but the ordinary people need help urgently. The appeal should be broadcast!
Complain about this comment
This is important
Almost every move Obama makes gives me more cause to hope...It is worth reading the entire transcript before making up your mind. Remember:Salaam/Shalom/Shanthi/Peaceed
Those who know do not talk.
Those who talk do not know.
Keep your mouth closed.
Guard your senses.
Temper your sharpness.
Simplify your problems.
Mask your brightness.
Lao Tzu ~450BCE
Complain about this comment
#84 Anglophone
:-)
One very wise post.
Complain about this comment
77 Bluelaw
Another impassioned attack on the "Southern Middle Classes" by a former member I think;-). Gosh how I fear your proud sense of identity...you can always adopt another one to distance yourself from your roots if this one runs out of steam in 2010.
I rather like Burns although, even more than Shakespeare it does require subtitles at times. I quietly suspect though that had Shakespeare been Scottish, Burns would have faded into obscurity. It's the old story, different institutions, different legal system, different Bard..."we've just gorra have one!". There must have been a rush to fill the vacancy by the mid 19th Century when Shakespeare was being rediscovered South of the Border.
Poor William McGonnagel, poet and genius...he arrived just too late to fill the vacancy for the role that should have been his. He would truly have been a worthy Bard and what's more, 2009 is a perfect year for a McGonnagel historical poem, thanks to his favourite and much overused couplet
"Twas in the year of 2009,
That will be remembered a very long time.
A credit crunch fell across the land
Balance sheets were a sleight of hand!
For banks of Caledonian stock
To the English found themselves in hock!
For Edinburgh's finest the Scots heart hankers.
But they turned out to be a crowd of...bankers.
A financial empire, their worthy dream
Was just another Darien Scheme.
Laid low by spivs and speculators
But saved by English taxpayers." (sorry about that bit!)
Complain about this comment
Another aspect of this event is that UK government will give £20M to the Palestinians.
I have no issue with this, they need the money for education, food, shelter and sanitation.
What does distress me is that this government can stand back and let the distruction of one peoples by another and not speak out.
Where is labour's soul and decency, answer, it vanished when John Smith passed on.
Some on here criticise others for relating this issue to Scotland's lack of control over its own media.
Can you name me another country in Europe where the governing party is not supported by one national news paper or treated with parity with other political parties on TV?
SNP won power by other's rule, imagine if the SNP made the rules, this broadcast would have been made, and ...........
TDBs
Complain about this comment
Anglophone (#87) is annoyed about the responses to his howling and barking at #222 on the Wickedness thread and is out to get his own back. What a doggedly irascible response to them in his #238 there. The teasing has got to him, I'm afraid.
The lad is feeling unappreciated, as you will gather, and I am afraid you will have to make allowances . . . as usual, unfortunately. A certain anglocentric lack of self-awareness seems to be at the heart of the matter, combined with some understandable resentment at the Scottish perspective so eloquently given expression to in the BT blog.
So I am afraid he is out to indulge in a bit of Scot-baiting. That's like Jew-baiting, except that you can get away with it. If you complain about it, he will, of course, say this proves that you have no sense of humour or self-awareness. So there is not much point in trying to reason with him. If you could try humouring him and just pretend to be persuaded by what he says, even for a little while, until he calms down a bit, that might help. On reflection, that may be asking too much. Just ignore him then, and he will go away, possibly.
Complain about this comment
86 Aye-Write
Well it's a serious subject for once;-)
Complain about this comment
#87 and #90
I did warn you (#89). He is really really annoyed with you all.
Complain about this comment
Sunday Glasgow protest story seemed to be covered apart from one inconsistency. It gets one paragraph near the end of this UK article: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7849943.stm
"Dozens of demonstrators gathered in the reception area of the BBC Scotland headquarters in Glasgow on Sunday evening, protesting at the BBC's decision not to air the appeal."
It also says "Page last updated at 14:17 GMT, Sunday, 25 January 2009" so I couldn't work out why it didn't come up in my search on Sunday night.
Then I realised the protestors said they only moved into the building around 5pm. So how could the page mention it three hours earlier? I still think the lack of proper coverage, when other UK and US channels were reporting it, is a red neck for TV journalism in Scotland.
Complain about this comment
CBS aired a piece about Israel the other day on 60 minutes (13:10) here.
Daniella Weiss moved from Israel to the West Bank 33 years ago. She has been the mayor of a large settlement. "I think that settlements prevent the establishment of a Palestinian state in the land of Israel. This is the goal. And this is the reality," Weiss told 60 Minutes correspondent Bob Simon.
And for those who believe there really was nothing in Palestine sixty years ago might wonder about[Unsuitable/Broken URL removed by Moderator]these photographs
Complain about this comment
89 Anglo Saxophone/Frankly Francophone/Greetings Alien
I must be on someone's watch list to have got my stalker back quite so quickly. This blog is about the people of Gaza and Israel so I think that the remark about "Jew-Baiting" is at best ill-timed.
I'm not by nature one for baiting people. I do however make an exception for nationalists (note the small "n"). I have a dislike of nationalism and the distorted prism though which it views all events. Nationalism may start with good intentions but always ends in vitriol, hatred and, well just look at Gaza...bloodshed.
The fact that this blog is now almost exclusively populated by people in passionate agreement over their rather limited world view is rather sad. You should be grateful that someone can be bothered to chuck a few rocks into your little pool to shake things up a bit from time to time. Don't try to make out that I'm having a pop at Scots in general.
In the meantime do you have a view on the BBC broadcasting the Disasters Relief Committee's Appeal? I'd be interested to hear it...or have you already done so under another of your numerous pseudonyms?
Complain about this comment
Speaking of Bards,
Chris GhotiSlainte!
ed
Complain about this comment
Poster #1
Are you living on another planet?? Surely you know that the media only report on Bad News stories when it comes to the NHS.
As for political bias, they are totally impartial... when Labour was in power I don't recall there being any less bad news.
SNP are in charge now, if something goes wrong it's their responsibility to do something about it.
Complain about this comment
The BBC should broadcast an appeal for
the suffering people of Gaza.
They are out of touch with public feelings
and wont be forgotten for their heartless
decision.Israel does not need help, but
Gaza after years of oppression is left
broken.
Complain about this comment
95 Ed Iglehart
I bow to your very superior talent! A real gem!
Complain about this comment
The reason "both sides" are given in the article is that BBC journalists were officially told—to NUJ complaint—that if they publicly criticised the decision they faced the sack.
That is the most telling point here. And the reason the appeal wasn't broadcast is for the same reason one had to go to Al-Jazeera and the internet to see the actual scale of suffering as it happened. Mark Thompson's words that the BBC "exhaustively" covered the situation in Gaza is nonsense, they have not covered its suffering for years, including when Alan Thompson was there. The government-Milliband-Blair connection demands the BBC reflect government foreign policy, which is to demonise the Palestinians' elected representatives in favour of the pro-Western "President" Abbas, whose presidency actually terminated on January 9th.
Complain about this comment
#94 Anglophone
Your paranoia is showing, old bean. Freedom of expression when exercised by someone expressing a dissenting view is "stalking"?
As for the topic of this blog, since you ask, my view of the matter is that I am doubtful about the BBC's decision for a number of reasons. However, I know enough about the Middle East and the media to be aware that the issue is a complex one. A perfectly reasonable view, I would have thought, but hardly illuminating enough to justify submission of a post.
Better to share one's vision of what one knows most about. You might consider taking that on board. You might also consider reviewing the tone as well as the content of your submissions.
Complain about this comment
The BBC must apply the same argument to ALL appeals. And, with a bit a luck, we'll finally get rid of the hideous Comic Relief and the like.
CR is a BBC endorsed appeal for humanitarian assistance, for innocent civillian victims, often in many 'war torn' African countries.
So why is that OK, but doing the same for Gaza isn't?
Anyone?
Complain about this comment
#94 Anglophone
There are those who take exception to British nationalism, although you seem comfortable with it. Your assertions about "nationalism" in general are all very well as an expression of your personal view, but I see no substantive argument in your text. As for what "nationalism" can end in, there is, of course, for instance, American independence.
Those who support Scottish independence are, as you very well know, only trying to get their country back and to place it within the supranational framework of the European Union in its own right. What you despise about this is the fact that you perceive it to be inimical to the English national interest, but you dress this up in self-righteous condemnation of "nationalism" as defined by you.
To want to get England off one's back and to be in favour of full Scottish participation in the European project is not to be possessed of "a rather limited world view", however much you may try to belittle and demean the Scots. To argue that it is the UK vison of the European project that is "a rather limited world view" as opposed to the Scottish National Party's one is not nationalistic. It merely opposes the English interest, but only because that stands in the way not only of Scotland but of Europe.
As for the topic of this thread, I am as little persuaded by the arguments put forward by the BBC as I am by your various ramblings on the subject of Scotland and the Scots.
Complain about this comment
People who pride themselves on countering what they regard as unacceptable nationalism invariably ignore their own nationalism which is inescapable in any countering. Many English people who argue against Scottish Nationalism are amongst the most guilty in this respect.
Complain about this comment
#102 Euro-unionist
Anglophone is a British nationalist.
(Ask to examine his foreign policy on how Britain deals with the rest of Europe and the world :-)
Complain about this comment
I'm appalled and disgusted that such a debate has descended into an irrelevant bout of Unionists and Nationalists whinging about the BBC's treatment of them .......
This debate about the fine line between propaganda and media reporting in Gaza NOT a debate about the Union or Holyrood.
Scottish parochial small-mindedness is clearly alive and kicking.
If anyone can be bothered to get back to that topic, Jon Snow in a late night report on 4 about the media coverage of Gaza discussed the difficulty of objective impartiality in such a situation; my view is this - if the DEC appeal was for a blank cheque to be handed to Hamas it would be wrong, but it isn't. This is an appeal by well-established charities and not by puppets of antisemitic Islamists.
Complain about this comment
#100 Frankly Spankaphone
Give it up...see post 246 on the previous thread.
You seem to be an intelligent person so I for one would be very interested to hear your view of the complexities of the Middle East situation
#99 Tom Older
I know that the BBC bears the tyre-marks of few dust ups with the Blair government but it's going some to describe it as a foreign policy mouthpiece of the British government. Alan Johnson was just about the only Western journalist left in Gaza when he was kidnapped...and act that denied the Palestinians any sort of mouthpiece and represents a huge own-goal by the "clan-militia" that abducted him.
When the present turmoil erupted, journalists could not re-enter the area because of an Israeli blockade. The BBC as a result was reduced to taking feeds from Al Jazeera from whom we deduce that all casualties in the conflict were under five years old. I don't mean to be callous here and I'm aware that children do make a much larger than average proportion of the Gazan population but the Beeb was reduced to carrying material produced by people with no objectivity requirement whatsoever.
I think that under the circumstances the BBC did a good job, reporting on both sides of the argument and, in doing so, exposing the total disproportionality in the Israeli response to Hamas's goading.
Therein lies the problem. Hamas are a democratically elected government in Gaza but in foreign policy terms, their refusal to recognise the State of Israel in any form makes it difficult to formally recognise them as a government. Since coming to power they have burnished their democratic credentials by bloodily purging Fatah so I'm not over-confident that they will test their popularity at the ballot box again.
The only hope...and it's a small one now thanks to Israel massive overreaction, is that the few moderates within Hamas who can tolerate a Palestinian/Israeli settlement based around the pre-1967 borders can be nurtured as a means of recreating dialogue. Coupled with the fact that at the moment Barack Obama has considerable moral authority, it might be possible to get some weight behind Israeli moderates , even if this involves quietly telling the hardliners in the Knesset that they may suffer an even bigger credit crunch if they don't start behaving reasonably.
Unfortunately, Benjamin Netenahu looks set to do well at the election. As the man almost singlehandedly wrecked the Oslo Accords I fear that peace will not be coming anytime soon. In the meantime the poor ordinary Palestinians will continue to suffer because the status quo is just too good for most of the players.
Complain about this comment
Ahh the predictable Scots are parochial nonsense. Did you notice where the sit-in at the BBC was staged and by whom? Mainly Scots in Glasgow by the Stop the War Coalition Scotland.
In fact there are many parallels between how Scotland is treated by England and how the Palestinians are treated by the Israelis. Different scale yes but the principle remains.
Complain about this comment
Echoing the remarks of Derek the Grumpy Cleric, I'm not going to get involved in yet another tedious spat about unionism.
I've made my remarks relevant to the Blog topic above so I won't do it again. I still wait with interest for my detractors to say what they think about the situation. Could be a long wait.
I'm not a "British Nationalist" (I take it that the big "N" was a mistake or I could genuinely get upset...that's a nasty accusation). I'm simply not a "uniophobe" and can see the benefits as well as the disbenefits.
I'm now waiting for a posting by a new blogger, writing in a florid and slightly overeffusive style calling himself PositivelyPalestinian or something.
Complain about this comment
#108 Anglophone
Yes, a mistake - maybe should've done inverted commas. Glad you corrected it. Sorry etc.
I should've invented a better name. I meant your favouring Britain is similar to others favouring Scotland,. to me anyway. That's all.
Plop.
Complain about this comment
re #109
Bl**dy BNP, getting in the way.....
I may take a rest.
Complain about this comment
107 Bluelaw
There was me just signing off. I could just take the **** out of you for your crass remarks on the parallels between Palestine and Scotland but that would be insensitive in the extreme.
Just look at what you've written. Have a good think and then work out how you are going to try to restore whatever reputation you think that you have with sane people in this forum.
Complain about this comment
re #108
Gosh, do you see us all as 'unionophobes'? An irrational fear of unions....mmm. I'd better check if I've got it (seriously) :-(
Complain about this comment
The Palestinians want self determination. So do the Scots.
The Palestinians have had their land stolen and their resources stolen. Just like the Scots.
The Palestinian govt is under constant attack from a foreign govt. Just like Scotland's govt.
The Palestinians and their aspirations do not receive a fair hearing in the media. Just like Scotland.
Complain about this comment
#109. aye_write
Actually, if it wasn't on a blog, it's quite funny to have mistakenly assused you of being something as rediculous as that! Like someone calling me tactful/diplomatic! ;-)
Do ignore.
Complain about this comment
109 Aye-Write
No offence taken. I could reasonably be given the rank of Senior Apologist though.
Complain about this comment
You are dissappointed in us all Anglophone.....
Well, that's sad for you - what a lot you have. I'm honest.
Hope you find some really clever people somewhere :-)
That is not cutting. I mean it.
:-(
Complain about this comment
113 Bluelaw
You'd better either go and lie down or get back to work on that homemade rocket.
Contemptible stuff!
Complain about this comment
Anglophone (98), It wasnae me what wrote it. Follow the link.
"disbenefits"? Is that an example of guid Anglish?
;-)
ed
Timothy, Photos galore here
and here
Salaam/Shalom/Shanthi/Peace
ed
Complain about this comment
Mr Mark Thompson, You set yourself up as the minder of the nation, the 'trampler' of human rights, the nurturer of bigotry, the blind man of Jerusalem, the one who walked by on the other side.
I am one who contributes towards your salary. Don't patronise me and be gone with you in the name of those butchered in Gaza.
Complain about this comment
Cheers Ed, I was beginning to believe that the Israelis aren't really claiming there was nothing there but goats and dust prior to their arrival, and that pictures of Palestine prior to 1948 were only a figment of my imagination!
Complain about this comment
#119 Ed Iglehart
Hmmm...on reflection "disbenefits" may be some ghastly piece of corporate-speak that has leaked into my conciousness whilst working in America.
I could make it culturally appropriate to this blog? How about "disbenefitlike"
I realised later that it wasn't you who'd done the Hudson River Miracle. It still made realise that I could never get close to the great man or his imitators. Surely a national treasure above all others.
Complain about this comment
96 deducted3points.
I am happily living on planet Fife thank you. I think you have totally missed the my point.
The news headlines I pointed out pertained in that instance to the NHS, but the week before there was another report first on the news, that education in Scotland had dropped way down a league table and Scotland was now below some third world countries. What was never reported was the time frame of the statistics, which was when the last government was in office. The clear inference was that this had happened during the SNPs watch. If you think I am reading more into this than there is actually there, can you explain why no timescale was given. Can you point me to any other statistics reported on the BBC that do not have a timescale?
105 derekthegrumpcleric
"Scottish parochial small-mindedness is clearly alive and kicking.
If you believe that to want fair and accurate reporting from a public service broadcaster is parochial and small minded that is your opinion, it is certainly not mine.
The part that I objected to was Thomson claiming that to broadcast this appeal would damage the BBCs impartiality.
I do not want the propaganda of any political party on the BBC, I want the facts presented in a fair and impartial manner, so I can make up my own mind.
In any other media if I do not like the product I do not buy or subscribe to that organization. I do not have that luxury with the BBC. If I do not pay the TV tax I cannot legally own a TV in the UK.
Complain about this comment
dubbieside I happen to agree with you regarding the BBC's lack of impartiality in Scottish politics, but if it makes you feel any better there are Republican bloggers in the USA already trying to lay the blame for Iceland's political collapse on Obama!
Complain about this comment
Timothy, Some earlier pictures from 1948....
Salaam/Shalom/Shanthi/Peace
ed
Complain about this comment
Errrrrr ...... I am Scottish and have lived here all my life and I'm still disgusted that the Nationalists are comparing their plight to the Palestinians!
The death of babies and the BBC coverage of Eck Salmond are not comparable: pathetic.
I signed petitions against the invasion of Iraq and am not slagging of all of my fellow Scots .... just Scots who have no perspective and a victim/persecution complex.
Complain about this comment
No-one's comparing the the plight of the SNP with that of the people of Gaza (even if I have drawn some parallels to embarrass the English nationalists on here telling us how good we have it). They were reflecting the fact that the BBC's claims to impartiality with regards IvP were a hypocritical nonsense when one sees how independence is treated for example. That's all.
Complain about this comment
Sand, goats and cactus
Slainte!
ed
Complain about this comment
#125.
Err, hello?
I am a Scottish nationalist. I have not compared the situation in Gaza to Scotland.
Please do not mistakenly take one persons comment to suggest we all agree and take the same line.
Complain about this comment
Actually, I originally wrote that I was disgusted with Nationalists AND Unionists debating BBC impartiality rather than the specific Gaza issue but since then some Nats on this blog ARE clearly equating the middle-east and the Union.
I agree that BBC should be impartial but I said before that the 2 situations are not similiar.
Impartiality of the media is a big issue: compare MSNBC or FOX in the States for example. But as a unionist I feel the Beeb sometimes seems a bit soft on the SNP but if unionists/nationalists are both unhappy may be its a good sign that they annoy us both!
(I have a fiend /work colleague who is a Nat and is a nice bloke so I can't claim to hate Nationalists!)
Complain about this comment
#129
"..but since then some Nats on this blog ARE clearly equating the middle-east and the Union."
I have not denied that some have used the Gaza situation to compare themselves to the situation in Scotland (It can be true to an extent, but I believe they are very different situations completely, just so you know).
The main problem I have was your original comment said, "I am Scottish and have lived here all my life and I'm still disgusted that the Nationalists are comparing their plight to the Palestinians!"
You have placed "...the nationalists" all in one basket.
It does not matter whether or not the person is a Scottish nationalist. Nationalism has nothing to do with their comment and opinion comparing Gaza to Scotland.
Their is no official line that we follow so you can not describe certain people comparing the siutation as they are as... "...the nationalists...".
"(I have a fiend /work colleague who is a Nat and is a nice bloke so I can't claim to hate Nationalists!)"
I should hope so too. Hatred between unionists and nationalists is something we do not need.
No matter what happens, the majority will speak and together we will make the future work. With independence or whatever we end up with.
Complain about this comment
derekthegrumpycleric
I know from my time in America that MSNBC and Fox are commercial organizations and are different politically and are bias towards their own agendas, you cannot however compare them and the BBC. The BBC is a public service broadcaster that has a duty to the public that pat for it existence, in my case very reluctantly.
The issue remains that Thomson claims the BBCs impartiality would be damaged if it broadcast the Gaza appeal. My assertion is that its claim to impartiality in Scotland is a nonsense.
If you want an example think back to Campbells interviewing Alister Darling, where it was so cosy I thought that Campbell was going to sit on his knee. Compare that with Campbells interview with John Swinney, I lost count of the number of times he interrupted Swinney and would not let him speak. Impartiality and balance, I think not.
P.S. If you had a work colleague who was a Nationalist, but who was not a nice bloke would you hate Nationalists?
I know a great many Labour supporting unionists, and some of them are not nice blokes, however I would not hate the whole Labour supporting fraternity on that basis.
Complain about this comment
My point was that the Brian's blog was to debate the BBC's alleged impartiality over Gaza not to debate the paranoia of Nationalists.
I referred to my friend the Nat because I'm aware that not all Nats are as rude, pedantic or parochial as SOME are on this blog.
I'm sure you can all sing "Flower of Scotland" while I ignore this
blog and you ignore the real issue that Brian wished to debate : what is the role of media in raising aid for the horrific loss of life in Gaza. .... If this level of debate is the golden future of the "New" Scotland ...count me out.
Complain about this comment
#58
Well said
"If England was occupied like Palestine by a foreign power I would fight like the people of Gaza. When my home had been destroyed and my children slaughtered would the BBC help me?"
I'm having difficulty understanding quite a lot of this.
Hamas, the elected government of Palestine is not allowed to arm itself.
The Israelies, who have invaded Palestine and stolen Palestine lands. is allowed to arm itself to the teeth. (The UK has sold over £18million worth of arms to Israel in the last quarter compared to £7.5 million in the whole of the previous year. Were we in on this?)
The Israelis are not "defending Israel" when they attack Palestine. They are defending land they have stolen
Hamas is not attacking Israel with its rockets. It is firing them at invaders who have stolen their lands.
The BBC's news coverage has often been courageous , though less so than Channel 4's, but its decision on the Gaza appeal is risible.
Complain about this comment
Type
Should read,
The BBC is a public service broadcaster that has a duty to the public that pay for its existence, in my case very reluctantly.
Complain about this comment
Sneckedagain (133)
"certain aspects of sovereignty", eh?Haven't you seen the Israeli idea of a Palestinian "State"?
Salaam/Shalom/Shanthi/Peace
ed
Complain about this comment
Derek fails to see the BBC-like hypocrisy of telling people to shut up because he says they're paranoid and that he's going to ignore them. Thompson would be proud of you...
Complain about this comment
Test
test
Complain about this comment
#137 - Did it work, Ed?
Test
Test
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Jo (138),
It worked! Soon the post was marked as "referred to the moderators" and everything ceased being bold! Whoopeee!In a word, No. The "test test" post was actually "test <strong /> test" to see if I could turn the bold off. It failed. It seems the software parser writes HTML code which the software can't render properly.
Depending upon your browser, if you press ctrl-U, or view/source, you may get to see the sourcecode for this page. In Firefox, it shows all "self-closing" tags (e.g. <strong />) with the "/" in red, indicating an error....and in my offending post, the parser has substituted <strong /> for my <b></b> ....SO:
I discovered a way to undo the emboldening of some threads (actually worked on the this thread - briefly).
I simply complained about my own comment, to wit:
After a while, I received another emailAnd everything is back to bold
Dearie me, what's a body to do?
Complain about this comment
View these comments in RSS