Despite representations from the Board of Deputies, Amnesty went ahead with this Israel hate event: http://www.thejc.com/blogs/jonathan-hoffman/no-hate-amnesty-next-monday-...
About 15 of us demonstrated before the meeting. Well done to Campaign4Truth for organising this.
I guess that in one respect the meeting (which was largely about the BBC) was music to our ears. The pro-Israel lobby was incessantly said to have cowed the BBC into parroting its own output.... (If only!)
[Professor] Greg Philo, for example, said (in so many words) that the advocacy manual published by The Israel Project has become the BBC’s Style Guide on Israel. Would that it were so …. The question I wanted to ask was just why was the BBC so much in thrall to the few of us who actively support Israel.
She never called the other pro-Israel person in the audience (of about 250) either. That's how powerful we are …
Reality check: The BBC will never refer to Hamas as “terrorists” – always “militants”. BBC journalists are instructed to say “regarded as illegal under international law" whenever the settlements are mentioned. And Jeremy Bowen, the BBC’s Middle East Editor, was ruled by the BBC Trust’s Editorial standards Board to be in breach of the organisation’s guidelines on impartiality and accuracy. The notion that the BBC is biased in Israel’s favour is about as absurd as saying that Harold Shipman [the mass murdering physician] was kind to old people
Here is what Mike Brennan (Warwick University) had to say in his review of Philo’s book:
"Ultimately this is a rather tendentious and agenda-driven book in which the researchers set out to prove their own politically-inflected views. Its claims are based upon data generated by the selective use of historical material and flawed research methods. The net effect of the book will be to reinforce perceptions of Israel as monolithic, and will give succour to those who claim that the western media are controlled by ‘Zionists.’" http://www.dissentmagazine.org/democratiya/article_pdfs/d3Brennan-2.pdfAccording to Philo, Israel has “a very sophisticated propaganda system” (I wish).
“All their speakers are organised to give the same message …. BBC journalists “wait in fear for the phone call from the Israelis”
The level of Llewellyn’s bias became clear when he said that the BBC should be supervised by an independent body, not by the Trust. The truth is that the BBC has a “dual key” regulatory structure involving both the Trust and OFCOM. Then Llewellyn – unbelievably – told the audience members they should complain that Labour, the Conservatives and the LibDems have no “Friends of Palestine” organisations (they all do of course).
Has he considered that it might just have something to do with the fact that he is an extremist who says that he will “dance in Trafalgar Square” if Iranian missiles hit Israel?
This meeting was uncomfortably redolent of the thesis in the forgery The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, which claimed that Jews controlled the press. Shame on Amnesty for hosting it. It is about time that Amnesty members made their voice known against this racist garbage.
For more on Atwan see:ReplyDelete
Amnesty is, in my opinion, a cousin of the virulently anti-Semitic UN, and not a too distant cousin either. I have long stopped supporting them financially and make it a point to tell them why, when they ask me for money in the streets. In my opinion they have become just another guilt-distributing leftist bully.ReplyDelete
Yes, Rita. Amnesty started life most honorably, and has done wonderful work, but I agree it has been hijacked by the usual suspects.ReplyDelete