Complaint about BBC propaganda

Not so dear BBC,

I would like to complain about Wyre Davies' article. This is one of a large series of articles where the BBC claims that Israel acts only in retaliation for Palestinian rocket attacks.

• Please could you present any evidence that you have for this automatic supposition.
  
  
• Why does the BBC insist every time that Israel acts in retaliation?

In this article, according to Davies, apparently Israelis have only 'retaliated' because of the those nasty Palestinian lobbing rockets. He even has the temerity to compare the suffering of 1.5 million Palestinians in Gaza with 'suffering' of the people who live in border towns like Sderot.

"After months of suffering, Hamas has had to admit the blockade is really hurting.

Over the same period, the people who live in Israel's towns and communities, just across the Gaza border, have been suffering too.

Hundreds of crude, but effective, rockets fired by Palestinian militants have landed in towns like Sderot, killing and injuring several Israelis.

As Israel retaliates, launching air strikes against Gaza, hundreds of Palestinian civilians have been killed."

In another article, the BBC headline focuses on the generosity of Israel in allowing fuel to enter Gaza. The BBC headline ignores the fact that Israel was acting illegally in preventing food and medicines reaching over a million besieged desperate people.

• Why is the allowing of fuel into Gaza considered more important than the denial of food and medicines to Palestinians?
  
  
• Also in this article why is the photo caption used that of an Israeli youth posing behind a broken window?
  
  
• Is this more important than the shootings and vastly greater criminal damage committed by Israel?
  
  
• Why does the BBC side with Israel in propagating such propaganda?

Has Pakistani 'cooperation' outlived its usefulness?

It seems the tide is turning against Pakistan in the global disinformation game. The country is fast turning from being portrayed as a friendly dictatorship dutifully bombing mullahs in the North West Frontier Province to one that is portrayed as actually collaborating with the Taliban to attack Western forces. The recent killing of Pakistani troops by missile from US predator aircraft did not go down well with the new government in Islamabad. It seems that if the obedient dictator is sidelined by a democratic vote then that is unacceptable and the Pakistani government must take note that attitudes in Washington are hardening against it. No doubt the previous links of the ISI as Taliban sponsors will now be trotted out for a fresh airing despite the former being virtually a branch of the CIA in Pakistan.

Teenage delinquent media dirtbags

Watching the wildly different coverage of different types of disasters around the world gives you an insight into the collective mindset of the media. Some disasters simply get little or no exposure because they are not photogenic. They do not provide a worthwhile 'story' to get the media excited.

The media reaction is rather like that of a teenage delinquent who cannot concentrate on anything for long and wants excitement all the time. The less picturesque and dramatic events are simply of no interest to them although millions may die or suffer. However, if there is something like a large earthquake with lots of pictures of suffering, death and destruction, that will capture their attention for a couple of days. Alternatively, if they can find a convenient political axe to grind such as with Zimbabwe or Myanmar, they will harp on about the dreadful reshime that is stopping western aid whilst using pictures of suffering to illustrate their argument.

If 1.5 million people in Gaza can be starved and besieged without the western public realising that this means more than a few road blocks and missiles hitting 'militants', that surely tells us something about the media agenda. The trivial events of reality TV shows and celebrity gossip take precedence over death and destruction (particularly if our governments are responsible).

The appeals for money and charity shows are only to massage away our collective guilt; to show that we are the 'good guys'. Never mind that most of the money never reaches the declared cause, if it fills up a few minutes of air time, then it's good cheap filler 'entertainment'.

If as a nation, we were truly concerned about the plight of the poor people in other nations, our trade terms and economic policies would be radically different. Instead as Mark Steele pointed out recently, we seem to have no problem flooding these countries with western made arms. There is no shortage of bullets, mines or bombs! We seem to have no problem funding political coups at enormous cost. We are extremely big-hearted when it comes to helping 'friendly' nuclear arms nations such as Israel terrorise the indigenous people. We are very generous when helping the oil giant corporations gain valuable contracts in oil rich countries. We are extremely munificent when bribing foreign officials to buy our weapons. Our capacity to fund our nuclear missile program and fund foreign invasions also seems to have no limit.

Headlines never seen vs actual headlines

• First female civilian killed in Afghanistan vs. First female British soldier killed in Afghanistan
  
• Doctors to be rated on being smiley vs. Nurses to be rated on being smiley
• Hizbollah call for peace talks vs. Israel calls for Lebanon peace talks
• Iraq voters told: choose our puppet or you face a bullet vs. Zimbabwe voters told: choose Mugabe or you face a bullet

Dastardly treacherous enemies seek tailor made missiles- gruniad exclusive

Does any of this sound familiar?

"These advanced nuclear weapons designs may have long ago been sold off to some of the most treacherous regimes in the world," wrote Albright.

"These would have been ideal for two of Khan's other major customers, Iran and North Korea."

Albright found the blueprints included designs for a compact warhead that could fit on Pyongyang's medium-range Nodong rockets as well as on the Iranian Shahab-III missile.

Just like the road side bombs in Iraq that are said to be of Iranian origin without any requirement for proof, it appears that these theoretical nukes are an especially good fit only for Iranian and North Korean missiles. Of course, it is only a coincidence that these are our official 'treacherous' enemies. It's not like we would do anything treacherous like bomb a country like Iraq to smithereens and then try and maintain de facto control of it by forcing them to agree to us having permanent military bases, control of their airspace and oil, and immunity from war crimes.