BBC’s Panorama video: Violence aboard the Mavi Marmara (Gaza flotilla)

  • Original Home Page – And another very early post from this blog
  • Current Latest Page
  • All Contents of Site – Index
  • Sign the Ban Blair-Baiting petition here
  • Comment at end

    21st August 2010

    Congratulations, for once, to the BBC.

    The videos below of Panorama’s “What happened on the Flotilla to Gaza” have been uploaded to the YouTube channel of Douglas Murray, who describes himself as BritishNeoCon

    So that’s lost me one reader. Come BACK, Peter! You’re supposed to be of the right too!

    These are videos of a recent Panorama programme. As far as I can tell they have not been doctored or edited by Murray. All the BBC’s own work. Must be worth an open-minded look.

    1/2 – Panorama – What happened on the Flotilla to Gaza

    2/2 – Panorama – What happened on the Flotilla to Gaza

    BritishNeoCon | 16 August 2010

    Who is really to blame for the embargo? Israel that left Gaza peacefully, and was thanked with over 6000 rockets into Israel before finally giving in and responding, or Hamas that kills its co-religionists, places its civilians at military targets, and provokes Israel into finally stopping the barrage of missiles on civilian targets.

    Who should we condemn though? Hamas that deliberately targets Israeli children and civilians, or Israel that enforced its own law of an embargo that was itself placed as a result of 6000 rockets, after the so-called peace activists broke Israeli law and attacked those soldiers attempting to enforce the law.

    Was it pre-meditated? Was the result deliberate? Irrelevant, they were breaking Israeli law, and Israel enforced such. It’s especially laughable that so many liberals are so quick to condemn George Bush for overthrowing the tyrant Saddam Hussein, because he threatened multilateralism and international law, and these same people will support these so called peace activists who express an even clearer disregard for the law.

    It’s so obvious that even the BBC recognised that these aims were completely disingenuous and embarrassingly and predictably large portions of the west fell for it nonetheless.



    I missed this programme on the night. The Beeb’s present current affairs approach, and to be blunt the level of “opinion” and political comprehension of their contributors, questioners and commenters, such as on Question Time and Radios 4’s Any Questions has dulled my expectation of ever hearing anything approaching balance from the BBC.  Apart from that the political bias of some of their reporters has been blatant and not exactly light-casting. Or not in the way they hope it will be.

    For instance, there was TV superstar Laura Kuenssberg.  Less than a month ago she was in trouble for misrepresentation during her coverage of Tony Blair at the Iraq Inquiry. This reprimand from the Complaints Department followed a complaint by a regular commenter at KTBFPM, reported here.

    They call it “lying” when a politician misrepresents. But it’s still only “misrepresentation” when a journo does it.

    The day Pat Condell appears on Any Questions, Question Time or Newsnight I will know a corner has been turned. (See video from Pat Condell in following post.)

    Still, this Panorama programme is a small step in the right direction.


    From Fresno Zionism (Hat tip to them for their article below and the video heads-up; with useful links):

    The BBC breaks out

    Excerpt from Fresno Zionism:

    ‘Despite the anti-Israel culture of the BBC, some journalistic blood apparently still flows in their reporter Jane Corbin, who presented a documentary about the Mavi Marmara affair called “Death in the Med” on the Panorama program this week.

    Although the program gives far too much exposure to the repulsive American psychopath Ken O’Keefe, the facts of the events that transpired on May 31 are more or less correctly presented. Video of the ‘activists’ cutting up the ship’s rails for weapons, and of course the attack on the soldiers was shown. Near the end, Corbin says,

    At the end of the day the bid to break the naval blockade wasn’t really about bringing aid to Gaza. It was a political move designed to put pressure on Israel and the international community. The price was high — nine people died — but the outcry assured that the flotilla achieved its aim: the IHH presented the dead as martyrs for the cause of Gaza.

    Heavy stuff for the BBC!

    Corbin allows Israeli Gen. Giora Eiland, who led the IDF investigation of the incident, to suggest that the Turkish government was well aware of the violent plans of the ‘activists’. She mentions the UN investigation, but does not draw the reasonable conclusion from the evidence in the program that the Turkish regime should be investigated — and held responsible for the deaths of the nine IHH ‘activists’ as well as the serious injuries to several Israelis.

    Although one doesn’t normally congratulate someone for doing their job, the BBC is more like a drug addict that has been screwing his up for some time. It deserves credit for breaking free.

    Of course, the usual suspects are absolutely livid. How dare Corbin and the BBC stick up for the Jew Among Nations, whose function is to be beaten bloody (like the naval commandos) for their satisfaction! You can see the comments here (the BBC has removed the usual obscene ones). Although  I didn’t count them, about 90% of them refer to the ‘shocking pro-Israeli bias’ of the show, etc.

    O’Keefe, apparently a celebrity in the UK (he would be considered a clear nutcase in the US) plans to demonstrate at the BBC this Sunday.’


    Back to top

    Sign the Ban Blair-Baiting petition here

    A recent comment from an Albanian, Mr Leonard Dedej from Tirana – “It takes big leaders to make the hardest turns in peoples life…mr Blair is a big leader and a great man for millions of people in Balkans!!!for stopping a savage war!about Iraq I believe that the press wherever it is has not the right to judge on this issue because it simply is to small to judge!!history will judge mr Blair!as long as it is an ongoing war no one can blame mr Blair,after all he started something for a big reason..the press its often wrong because it fights for audience!!!”

    Free Hit Counter


    Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

    22 Responses to “BBC’s Panorama video: Violence aboard the Mavi Marmara (Gaza flotilla)”

    1. Peter Reynolds Says:

      So where’s the definition of a “BritishNeoCon”? I’d like to see that.

      I don’t understand the link. It takes me to a Youtube video witha disgusting tiled background of shots of the pubescent DougieMugs. Yeeuuggh!

      And now I’ve just dipped into the drivel in the BritishNeoCon quote, I can tell you. I’m not one. Not ever!

      When it comes to “MY THOUGHTS ON THIS” I am very, very disappointed in you. This is not up to your usual standard. It is snide mud-slinging but I suppose you redeem yourself with a grudging admission.

      I thought the Panorama programme was excellent. I think everyone, from whatever point of view they started, will have found parts of it uncomfortable and difficult. It was balanced.

      Now is the time for you to open your mind to some information I have for you.

      This is an excerpt from a book written by Philip Weiss and Adam Horowitz, co-editors of a news website written from a progressive Jewish perspective.

      • keeptonyblairforpm Says:

        And I am disappointed in you, Peter. Plus ca change it seems. Goldstone’s report was biased and simply wrong.

        As for this Aternet report – so what? There are many on both sides who don’t see things as most others on their side see things.

        I made no grudging admission, btw, in my “My Thoughts” portion.

        I have a link or two for you too, if you can be bothered:

        Leading to here:

        Btw, I have seen countless accounts and opinions on Gaza and Israel. I make up my own mind, as must you.

      • Peter Reynolds Says:

        “Still, this Panorama programme is a small step in the right direction.”

        I thought that wasa grudging admission but maybe not.

        You seem cynical and world weary today John. Methinks Pauline has been giving you a hard time. In answer to your question, I am twice divorced. I discovered some while ago now that if you want true love, get a dog. If you’re greedy like me, get two. Sex? Well there’s loads of options there. All of them much cheaper and less complicated than a wife – and never boring!

        “If I can be bothered” ???

        I thought there was an unspoken agreement between us to be bothered with each other’s thoughts and referrals. Of course we both make up our own minds but based on myraid and diverse sources of information. Surely?

        I shall look at your links and respond in due course. Please try to keep cheerful and keep your mind open John.

        • keeptonyblairforpm Says:

          P, the sentence you quote meant that it is a small step in the right direction towards understanding that Israel (alone) is NOT to blame for all the troubles in that region.

          Even the optimists among us have our world-weary days. But I’m not THAT low. Though the video of those kids being killed didn’t help. The refusal to join the dots in response by some, doesn’t help.

          I suppose as far as you and I are concerned I thought you were coming round to realising that Israel is, perhaps, just perhaps not THE bad guy in this mixture. But then you make your facile statements against Israel even after seeing the evidence. And I think WTF! Why bother? My mind, btw, is as open as yours.

      • Peter Reynolds Says:

        I don’t think that Israel alone is to blame for all the troubles in that region. I am certain that it is mostly to blame and that the primary responsibility for change rests on its shoulders. I think that much of the rest of the world sees that too and Israel even tacitly acknowledges it itself. I think there is slow progress being made.

        That’s my opinion but, I emphasise, I do see blame on both sides.

        You are tetchy today aren’t you?

        • keeptonyblairforpm Says:

          I don’t feel all that tetchy, P. It’s just that this Israel/Palestinian issue highlights our differences. And I can’t avoid telling it as I see it. As, I note, neither can you. I suppose it is true that the “primary responsibility for change rests on its shoulders.” ONLY because the rest of the world sees it as the aggressor, which I think is WRONG. Very wrong.

          To illustrate this it seems that Fatah/Palestinians keeps laying down pre-conditions for SERIOUS talks. Israel hasn’t laid down ANY. But does it get recognition of that? Not on your life.

          I do not see how you can say that Israel tacitly acknowleges its primary responsibility. Why should it? Why would it? Where’s your source for that?

          I suppose I’m cheesed off with the constant Israel-bashing, as I am cheesed off with the constant Blair-bashing. Israel is the only democracy, as we would recognise one, in the Middle East. It is surrounded by countries who would like to see it disappear. That alone, for all sorts of reasons – some to do with keeping our lights on – not just spreading democracy, should be reason enough for we westerners to wish it well.

          Tetchy enough for you?

    2. Peter Reynolds Says:

      …and does that link run right off the page to the right for you too?


    3. Peter Reynolds Says:

      Further to our discussions about political assassination, this article may interest you:

      • keeptonyblairforpm Says:

        Just read the first page, Peter. I suppose I should read more of it, in case it gets better, but FGS, if you thought I was tetchy before!!!

        The ongoing deaths in that region are NOT assassinations. The whole article is base on a false premise. When countries are working under a UN mandate, as they are in the Middle East, ensuing deaths (mostly, I REPEAT caused by insurgents killing their own) can never be described as the western military’s ‘assassinations.’

        It is war, or post-war, as it is presently evolving in one of those two countries. Arguably hardly stabilisation. But to lump all deaths as western assassinations is bonkers.

        I really find it irritating to continue to debate these things in the face of the glaringly obvious, P. The glaringly obvious being that opponents continually boil things down to the “wicked west”/”innocent others” argument.


        Yours with affectionate tetchiness.

      • keeptonyblairforpm Says:

        P.S. To the earlier.

        This assassination business was also referred to at the Huffington Post. ANYONE in their right mind who accepts their drivel is lost to common sense.

        I had an American soldier on here some time ago. She said something to the effect – “if anyone think all the US wants in Iraq is to take out ordinary people – a kind of anti-Muslim tirade – they should know we could have done that over and over and oh, so easily. If we lose there it will be due to public opinion, the same reason we lost in Vietnam.”

    4. Sheila OConnor Says:

      I tend to agree that things DO come back to the “wicked west”/innocent others” argument. Life is just not that simple. Wish it were, alas.

      • keeptonyblairforpm Says:

        Thanks for the comment, Sheila. If and when they open up the Examiner to non-US/Canada citizens I’d be obliged if you’d let me know. I’m missing the exchange of ideas with more balanced people than we tend to find here in Britain these days.

      • Peter Reynolds Says:

        The Examiner?

        • keeptonyblairforpm Says:

          Well, that was the link it led me to. Haven’t researched it thoroughly, though, only 24 hours in my day, so far. If you know something I should, pls let me know, P. You’re not usually slow to share your knowledge, Peter.

    5. Peter Reynolds Says:

      You misunderstand me here. Broadly, I am in favour of the assassination strategy. There are dangers in it clearly but its potential reduction of other casualties is so huge that it makes a moral case. This is what I have said to you before when suggesting it would have been better had we been able to assassinate Hitler, Mussolini, Franco, Mladic/Radovic, Saddam Hussein.

      Perhaps you find this an incongruous opinion from me but it fits comfortably for me. It is pragmatic. It makes sense

      • keeptonyblairforpm Says:

        I see, P.

        I thought you had linked me through to one of those mad sites which uses the word “assassination” for the deaths of ordinary pople in wars. I clearly did misunderstand you. Unless I am wrong the sites you sent me to, or one of them leading to another, which I also read, were accusing the west (mainly the USA) of having an “assassinate all and any Muslims in Numbers” strategy.

        I’d also be for taking out some of those demonic so-called leaders. Starting perhaps, with Amanutjob. Think of how it could FREE the Iranian people, especially if the Ayatollahs went too.

        And some might suggest that Blair should have poisoned Mugabe’s tea some years ago. I couldn’t possibly comment.

        Have mentioned you in the latest post on THE MAN’S talk in Israel on countering de-legitimizing Israel, btw. Ever optimistic, we Blair supporters.

      • Peter Reynolds Says:

        I’d rather see Mugabe locked up in jail for the rest of his life. If that’s not possible then I think poison is too kind. Can’t we get some nutter to chop him up slowly with a panga. That’s the African way isn’t it?

      • Peter Reynolds Says:

        I sahll be attending to Tone’s words on Israel later today when I have time to give them due reverence.

        As for Amanutjob, Ahmadinejad or Allahshandjob as I prefer to call him, you’re right, he’s first on the list.

      • Peter Reynolds Says:

        BBC just confirmed they want me on air on Sunday morning!

        • keeptonyblairforpm Says:

          Good for you, P. I think. Let me know time and channel and I’ll try to listen, or is watch?

          Update: Just noticed it’s the Sunday morning BBC1 programme. Will watch, of course. Now be a good boy.

    Leave a Reply

    Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

    You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

    Google+ photo

    You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

    Twitter picture

    You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

    Facebook photo

    You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


    Connecting to %s