Both sides in the north have been testing the opposing side to see how they respond. An interesting subplot in the lead up to a ground invasion where Hezbollah will undoubtedly react with rockets.
Israel - Palestine Discussion | Post Respectfully | Discuss more, tweet less
- Thread starter esmufc07
- Start date
Yes indeed. It is typical of the unfortunate way that almost everything nowadays is either 100% one way or 100% the other.
And if you dare to say anything different to someone else, what you are saying is called Offensive.
It is so infantile in the extreme.
Thoughts on this ? @2cents and others.
Seems to have gone viral and attracted a lot of positive comments from a diversity of global viewers. He debunks the predictable Hasbara claims and says he's actually anti-Israeli government at the beginning.
Seems to have gone viral and attracted a lot of positive comments from a diversity of global viewers. He debunks the predictable Hasbara claims and says he's actually anti-Israeli government at the beginning.
Were talking about a comment that said something like "the BBC coverage of this has been fair balanced". Don't recall if this was before or after the BBC had to apologise for being unbalanced. He's then responded to someone else sharing a BBC article with that relatively childish and sarcastic comment (presumably because tensions are running high in here). To call the BBC coverage of almost anything impartial though is an absolute fantasy and deserves to be called out.
I'm sure someone has made this point before, but the BBC seems to be universally hated both by right and left wingers. Either they are the worst news organization of all time, or everyone is simply unhappy because they aren't easily pigeonholed into being pro this or that.
All it takes is one slant one way or another either way to rile up either side, so I'd say on the balance they probably get it more right than wrong.
There was a clip I can't remember when on Mock the week where Dara was saying people blamed them for making to many jokes about Jeremy Corbyn and not enough about Conservatives and then Conservatives calling Mock liberal agenda comedy, I feel people look at the news the same way as long as fits their own personal feelings it's OK stray to far from that's its a left/right agenda etc
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Looks like Biden got the better of Bibi on this one. For the cost of a plane trip, he gets a humanitarian package into Gaza and delays the ground war by at least a few days so further negotiations can take place. It also at least partially tampers the post attack Israeli bloodlust of obliterating a 2.5m populated area for the purpose of finding a relatively small number of Hamas soldiers and getting all Israeli hostages killed in the process.
Last edited:
There’s also this weird notion that people who have a very clear bias and agenda about the topic being discussed are the best judges of what “impartial” actually looks like.
It's an interesting situation. Simultaneously a show of support and a show of force, reminding Bibi who calls the shots.
Wait until Bibi makes an impromptu trip to Washington and gets the red carpet rolled out for him in Congress
In the meantime the UN and aid agencies were calling for urgent humanitarian aid several days ago. Now it's good news that reading between the lines something might be happening, but these delays due to political brinkmanship between the US and Israel is so aggravating when you consider the scale of the damage being done now.
So US was desperate for another war, I don’t believe the Israelis didn’t see motorcycles, pickup trucks and even tractors coming to the border/fence. They were warned by Egypt and they just ignored….they didn’t expect Hamas would be so violent against women and children that’s my guess. They will try to remove Hamas from Gaza and US will make some people richer selling weapons using tax money and probably printing more money.
I don't really want to interrupt your centrist dad circle jerk, but can we just remember that this originated from someone who attended a protest being upset that the BBC misled viewers about the nature of that protest, they then apologised for doing exactly that, and you've somehow come out of it all thinking that you're right, and everyone else is moaning about nothing.
Nothing unusual about that.
Yes, the US wanted for Hamas to commit this attack.Interesting video but he glosses over things which have huge importance. He's very dismissive of the impact of colonialism; he's dismissive of muslim countries' systems of government (they're all dictatorships, according to him); and he's practically saying that muslims are violent and stupid by nature, whereas Jews are peaceful and intelligent.
Colonialism in the Middle East, as in Africa, has shaped every aspect of those nations' development, and will continue to do so for centuries to come. Some of those nations didn't exist until Europeans started meddling in their affairs. Colonialism has generated hatred, division and distrust. By its very nature, it was all about divide and conquer, since relatively small forces were able to conquer and control huge swathes of land. They did this by turning one native group against the other. I could talk about it forever, but to claim that the middle east is the way it is today but colonialism has nothing to do with it is naive. It's the same mentality that tells a black person in America that slavery doesn't exist today and to get over it.
The second point about the systems of government is also naive. We live in a democracy in the UK. But it's a closed shop. The privileged few control every aspect of society, they control the media, they decide who wins elections. We have a thin veneer of respectability that's it. Democracy is different in every country - ours is different from Italy's, for example - but it isn't necessarily the best system of government. A lot of the negative aspects are hidden from view because we have a higher standard of living than most of the middle east. Why is that? Colonialism. We raped, we pillaged, we got fat off other's natural resources. And that legacy is still playing out today. Again, I could write books about this subject, but I'll keep it succinct. Besides, James O'Brien would be out of a job if I did.
And the last point is particularly ugly. It's almost like eugenics or something. There are elements of truth in what he's said. Jews being expelled from muslim countries or leaving because they don't feel safe - all true and all a blight on those countries. However, many Jews left those countries to go to Israel. They were offered land and money to move. Israel, to Jews in the post-war period especially, must have had the allure that America had for immigrants decades earlier. A land of opportunities. A Jewish homeland.
It has to be said, though, that his reasoning for the behaviour of the Israeli government (Arabs have been horrible to us in the past, so tough titty), is reminiscent of what that repugnant Israeli ambassador woman has been saying on UK tv and radio: basically, that civilians were killed deliberately at the end of the second world war, so it's ok for Israel to do the same now. No it's not. And it's not ok for Israel to treat Arabs badly because they've been on the receiving end in the past. Two wrongs don't make a right. And the reason why we have war crimes, courts of human rights, Geneva Convention, etc, is precisely because we, collectively, see that it is unethical.
He does make great points about religion, the affect that various empires have had on the region, and a few other bits and pieces, though.
The crazy thing about this BBC "mistake", is the following sentence. "Which many countries, including the UK and the US consider a terrorist organization.".
It wasn't a mistake, they meant to say Hamas and even wanted people to know what Hamas was.
Yes, it's completely disingenuous to act like it's nothing, it's borderline agenda driven, which @Pogue Mahone seems to be rallying against in the first place.
While a faster response would obviously have been better, getting a sitting US President into (what is essentially) a warzone is no small feat. If he's able to get focus on the humanitarian crisis, delay Israel ground actions then it's only an upside. Imagine what Donald would be doing right now if he'd won. Some guy that complimented his hair at Mar-a-lago last month would probably be the ambassador, the Secretary of State would be MTG and we'd all be so, so f*cked.
That's a well-written, measured post.
Welcome to 2026...
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
It's like Manufacturing Consent was never written.
It's mad that we have debates over things which have been proven over and over again.
...
Missing the point a bit, I feel.
I wouldn't mind, but they didn't even apologies, they just corrected the record.
I'd say it's stretch to say that Switzerland, Finland, Norway, The Czech Republic and so on have a high standard of living because of colonialism. Technological and intellectual advancement was already underway in the high middle ages and certainly in the 1400s, long before European powers were sailing around the world colonizing left and right (if you don't count the crusades, that is).
I agree with the general point though, that video glosses over a lot.
Not sure if that's aimed at me but my point was that an organisation which voluntarily and publicly corrects errors in their coverage of any situation is clearly doing so because they are at least trying to be as impartial and accurate as possible. Worth noting that they are also under fire for not referring to Hamas as a terrorist organisation.
I would also be curious to know which news organisation people feel is 100% unbiased and impartial. Where is the bar being set here?
In a dishonest way. It wasn't a mistake nor was it poorly phrased. It was a blatant lie and on purpose.
Edit: I don't have any opinion on BBC's bias because I'm not that familiar with them but I would say that I have caught them lying or distorting reality and I'm under the impression that it has happened for all sorts of "camps".
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Quite inflammatory but the juxtaposition of the two videos is stark.
Thanks, honestly I gave up after less than three minutes. I don’t know what his definition of ethnic cleansing is beyond “look, population goes down!”, and I’m hesitant to use the term at all at times. But denying it applies to Palestinians in the very specific circumstances of 1948 while broadly applying it to all Mizrachim from Morocco to Iraq across a much longer period of time reflects an obviously skewed approach to the history. So I didn’t watch beyond that bit.
I just don't know that that's necessarily true, at all. The original publication of something always gets way more attention than the retraction, so "say something wrong or controversial and then retract it later" has been a thing since newspapers began. Hell, town criers probably did it.
I honestly doubt that it's a deliberate tactic by the BBC in this case, but either way it's valid for people to feel like they're being misrepresented.
Do you really think I’ve spammed this thread? I’ve been posting in this thread, sometimes alone pretty much since I was promoted from the newbies. Check my post history. If you feel like I’ve spammed, feel free to report me.
You’ve joined this thread and your only contribution has been on whether or not people should be annoyed with the way the media has portrayed the conflict. That’s the summation of your contribution. It’s pathetic.
You’re coming across as someone that doesn’t any real view to contribute but feels left out because others are discussing it.
There is no unbiased media, it's impossible. There might be no unbiased journalist either. But that's fine. You just to note the bias or where it might come from.
In the main the BBC do try and as you say, take shots from both sides.
Certainly agree with your closing sentence. I can fully understand why anyone who was at the protests would be pissed off at being misrepresented like that. And I think the correction/clarification is important. What I disagree with is the idea that it was a cynical lie as part of a policy of deliberate misinformation within the BBC.
I've looked at a couple more of his videos and he hammers home the same point again and again: that muslims in other countries are slaughtering each other. He believes it's part of their nature. He's no different from the trolls on twitter who post videos of black people fighting or committing crimes as a way of smearing every black person.
That's not necessarily how or why bias manifests though.