Got a pleasant surprise on Saturday when I turned on BBC News 24 to see the comedian Paul Kaye being interviewed about Gaza.
At first I feared another celebrity sound bite urging "peace" and "why can't we all just get along" when their are far more insightful people out there without a "name".
But Kaye, famous for his brilliant 'Dennis Pennis' character, lives near the Israeli-Gaza border and spoke of his families' fear living through Hamas rocket attacks.
The comedian has apparently been angry at anti-Israeli bias in the UK press, and wished to be interviewed in response to comments by another comedian, Alexei Sayle, who was part of the demonstrations in London.
Sayle told the BBC Israel's response was "massively disproportionate" and although the two countries had a complicated history, the answer was simple.
He said: "Stop killing people, stop killing children and then start thinking about the little things after that."
Kaye contended that the situation was just as "terrifying" for Israelis under Hamas fire.
I felt Kaye gave a pretty honest and balanced interview, and although I don't entirely agree with him that the situation is the same for civilians on both sides.
He also quite rightly added that the dispute can and will only be settled through dialogue, and not violence.
Was quite a bizarre thing to wake up to when the last time I saw him was as Mike Strutter on MTV2.
The video is at the bottom of this news page: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7809656.stm
Monday, 5 January 2009
Israel "planned Gaza attacks for months"
The prominent US academic Norman Finkelstein has rejected claims that Hamas started the current conflict. He says the Israeli's had themselves repeatedly violated the ceasefire and had planned their current attacks for months.
"Shame on you, have my shoe"
Protestors descended upon Downing Street in London on Saturday, where they took the unsusual step (get it?) of leaving their shoes to express their resentment at the British response to Gaza. This act was to symbolize Muslim disgust at the attacks, aided by chants of "shame on you, have my shoe".
Stop Israeli massacres demonstrations in Scotland
Demonstrators took to Edinburgh's streets again today to protest against Israel's continued attacks in Gaza.There are further demonstrations planned for across Scotland on Sat (10th Jan). March through the city centre and to the US Consulate. Organisers have requested that demonstrators bring in-date medicine for Gaza, and spare shoes.
Among the prominent supporters taking part on Saturday is Glasgow MSP Pauline McNeil, who has been campaigning to end the Israeli siege in Gaza for some time, as well as working to send aid packages to the region.
The British response in Gaza
Talk is cheap. David Miliband has had the roar of a poodle in his statements that a ceasefire must be sought in the latest conflict between Israel and Hamas. Gordon Brown said "we must act", a particularly hollow addition from him. Just what exactly are the British doing in the process of brokering a ceasefire?
The French have led the way in that respect, despite their package falling on deaf ears. In the 2006 Lebanon war it was also the EU and not the UK who were unrepentant in their condemnation of Israel and push to stop the killing. Britain supported that war and America's position of support in this case has surely again decided the British position.
Perhaps it was understandable in 2006 that the French defended the Lebanon from the off, after all it became their "backyard" after Middle-Eastern territories were divided up following the First World War.
But then, the British got Palestine. Surely then with our historical links to this geographical mess, we Brits should be the ones in a prominent role, trying to mediate an end to this latest conflict.
However as we know all too well, these days we look to our friends further west before we take any kind of meaningful position when it comes to Palestine and Israel. Whilst our leaders wax lyrical about how "a solution must be found" to "end the suffering", our impotence in world affairs becomes all too apparent as a result of our "special relationship" with the US.
The French have led the way in that respect, despite their package falling on deaf ears. In the 2006 Lebanon war it was also the EU and not the UK who were unrepentant in their condemnation of Israel and push to stop the killing. Britain supported that war and America's position of support in this case has surely again decided the British position.
Perhaps it was understandable in 2006 that the French defended the Lebanon from the off, after all it became their "backyard" after Middle-Eastern territories were divided up following the First World War.
But then, the British got Palestine. Surely then with our historical links to this geographical mess, we Brits should be the ones in a prominent role, trying to mediate an end to this latest conflict.
However as we know all too well, these days we look to our friends further west before we take any kind of meaningful position when it comes to Palestine and Israel. Whilst our leaders wax lyrical about how "a solution must be found" to "end the suffering", our impotence in world affairs becomes all too apparent as a result of our "special relationship" with the US.
A third Bush president?
Former US president George W.H. Bush has told Fox News that he would like to see his other son, Jeb, become a state senator and even president one day. Do this crowd have no shame?
Jeb as you'll recall, was the Governor of Florida who ordered his henchmen to turn away thousands of black voters on polling day during the 2000 presidential elections.
The old boy even had the audacity to joke about the legacy of the outgoing George Dubya when he said: “I mean, right now is probably a bad time. We’ve had enough Bushs in there.” No shit.
Somehow I think a White House challenge from this good 'ol boy is unlikely. Then again, conservative America re-elected G Dubya. If there were to be another terrorist attack on US soil would Obama be the man the electorate would view as a "war president?" After all when the war in Iraq was still an election issue John McCain was ahead in many opinion polls.
But Jeb? Surely not...
Jeb as you'll recall, was the Governor of Florida who ordered his henchmen to turn away thousands of black voters on polling day during the 2000 presidential elections.
The old boy even had the audacity to joke about the legacy of the outgoing George Dubya when he said: “I mean, right now is probably a bad time. We’ve had enough Bushs in there.” No shit.
Somehow I think a White House challenge from this good 'ol boy is unlikely. Then again, conservative America re-elected G Dubya. If there were to be another terrorist attack on US soil would Obama be the man the electorate would view as a "war president?" After all when the war in Iraq was still an election issue John McCain was ahead in many opinion polls.
But Jeb? Surely not...
Israel's reporting censorship
One notable abscence from Israel's disproportionate attacks in Gaza has been analysis from inside the strip, with journalists such as the BBC's Jeremy Bowen reporting "a mile or two from the wire" (note wire, implying fence, not wall. BBC editorial policy?). Robert Fisk expresses his anger in the Independent today on the denial of international journalists entry to Gaza. Fisk makes the point that these kind of restrictions has a negative outcome for both sides. For Gazans the true extent of civilian casualties is not known, with the UN's very likely conservative estimate the only perceived reliable figure of a third to go on. For the Israeli's, Fisk notes, this refusal has worked against them in the past:
"What is Israel afraid of? Using the old "enclosed military area" excuse to prevent coverage of its occupation of Palestinian land has been going on for years. But the last time Israel played this game – in Jenin in 2000 – it was a disaster. Prevented from seeing the truth with their own eyes, reporters quoted Palestinians who claimed there had been a massacre by Israeli soldiers – and Israel spent years denying it. In fact, there was a massacre, but not on the scale that it was originally reported....
"On the other hand, the Israelis are so ruthless that the reasons for the ban on journalism may be quite easily explained: that so many Israeli soldiers are going to kill so many innocents – more than three score by last night, and that's only the ones we know about – that images of the slaughter would be too much to tolerate."
Though he does make this point:
"But the result is that Palestinian voices – as opposed to those of Western reporters – are now dominating the airwaves. The men and women who are under air and artillery attack by the Israelis are now telling their own story on television and radio and in the papers as they have never been able to tell it before, without the artificial "balance", which so much television journalism imposes on live reporting. Perhaps this will become a new form of coverage – letting the participants tell their own story."
This reflects some issues of citizen reporting that I've been interested in recently. In the recent Mumbai terror attacks, as Western TV crews and journalists scrambled to get near to the action, new media platforms were allowing Indians to tell their own story through online instant messangers such as Twitter. Issues of reliablity obvisouly come into question, however these new platforms suggest a new age in reporting as opposed to the tired "artificial balance" of commercial news providers.
Fisk is pretty spot on as usual. Though it does make one wonder has he finally retired from the coal face?
"What is Israel afraid of? Using the old "enclosed military area" excuse to prevent coverage of its occupation of Palestinian land has been going on for years. But the last time Israel played this game – in Jenin in 2000 – it was a disaster. Prevented from seeing the truth with their own eyes, reporters quoted Palestinians who claimed there had been a massacre by Israeli soldiers – and Israel spent years denying it. In fact, there was a massacre, but not on the scale that it was originally reported....
"On the other hand, the Israelis are so ruthless that the reasons for the ban on journalism may be quite easily explained: that so many Israeli soldiers are going to kill so many innocents – more than three score by last night, and that's only the ones we know about – that images of the slaughter would be too much to tolerate."
Though he does make this point:
"But the result is that Palestinian voices – as opposed to those of Western reporters – are now dominating the airwaves. The men and women who are under air and artillery attack by the Israelis are now telling their own story on television and radio and in the papers as they have never been able to tell it before, without the artificial "balance", which so much television journalism imposes on live reporting. Perhaps this will become a new form of coverage – letting the participants tell their own story."
This reflects some issues of citizen reporting that I've been interested in recently. In the recent Mumbai terror attacks, as Western TV crews and journalists scrambled to get near to the action, new media platforms were allowing Indians to tell their own story through online instant messangers such as Twitter. Issues of reliablity obvisouly come into question, however these new platforms suggest a new age in reporting as opposed to the tired "artificial balance" of commercial news providers.
Fisk is pretty spot on as usual. Though it does make one wonder has he finally retired from the coal face?
The Guardian website's most viewed stories
The Guardian is of course that bastian of intelligent liberal thinking and independent challenging thought.
Its website is truly brilliant and interestingly as much as 70% of its unique users come from abroad, mainly the US. This, one could assume, is because they provide their news from a particular political perspective which is not widely available in conservative America.
It is a site I check on a number of occasions daily, no more so than for world news. This has been especially so over the last few days as the Israelis carried out their devastating and escalating attacks in Gaza.
But as I was reading Chris McGreal's piece earlier today, I couldn't help but notice guardian.co.uk's most viewed for the previous 24 hours. In first place, 'Matt Smith becomes new Doctor in BBC show', and number two, 'Why Israel went to war in Gaza'.
So on the day that Israel troops entered Gaza on a scale not seen since the pull-out in 2005, more online UK Guardian readers were interested in the new Dr Who actor than the escalation of fighting in the most important issue for resolving Middle-Eastern peace around? I really thought this was remarkable.
At least we can safely assume the 70% of world users will have by-passed the intrigue of the new Dr!
Its website is truly brilliant and interestingly as much as 70% of its unique users come from abroad, mainly the US. This, one could assume, is because they provide their news from a particular political perspective which is not widely available in conservative America.
It is a site I check on a number of occasions daily, no more so than for world news. This has been especially so over the last few days as the Israelis carried out their devastating and escalating attacks in Gaza.
But as I was reading Chris McGreal's piece earlier today, I couldn't help but notice guardian.co.uk's most viewed for the previous 24 hours. In first place, 'Matt Smith becomes new Doctor in BBC show', and number two, 'Why Israel went to war in Gaza'.
So on the day that Israel troops entered Gaza on a scale not seen since the pull-out in 2005, more online UK Guardian readers were interested in the new Dr Who actor than the escalation of fighting in the most important issue for resolving Middle-Eastern peace around? I really thought this was remarkable.
At least we can safely assume the 70% of world users will have by-passed the intrigue of the new Dr!
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
Posts
