Bishop Hill Those lovely BBC journalists
Jan 13, 2015 BBC Most of the presenters on the BBC News Channel are a bit of an unknown quantity to me - anonymous, featureless, characterless. The exception was one particular guy, whose casual use of the d-word at the time of the Fifth Assessment Report marked him out as a campaigner rather than a journalist. I noted his behaviour and I have recalled it when he has appeared on my screen but that was the extent of my interest. The BBC is full of people who are campaigners rather than journalists.
That was until this morning when I learned that his name is Tim Willcox and he facing calls for his resignation, after some outrageous behaviour during the march for free speech in France.
A BBC reporter has faced calls to resign after he told the daughter of Holocaust survivors in Paris: 'Palestinians suffer hugely at Jewish hands as well'.
Journalist Tim Willcox sparked anger during his coverage of yesterday's rally in Paris, held in memory of the 17 victims of last week's terror attacks, including four Jewish people in a siege at a Kosher supermarket.
Potty mouthed, bigoted, biased. He's probably due for promotion.
Reader Comments (171)
johanna
Silly wee right wing girl thinks the BBC and Wikipedia are conspiracy theorists.
A Logical Fallacy that Obama&the dunces (there are some here) make is calling Islam a "religion of peace", without actually first explaining what
1. A religion is
2. Peace is
3.Religion of Peace is, assuming "peace" cannot "have" religions..
hmmm
dangling references, much?
First a religion should be concerned about how people -think- about "god", "life after death" etc.
It should NOT be toomuch concerned with : beheadings, making news states, kidnapping girls, stoning women, pestering gay couples out of your neighbourhood, grooming teenage girls, etc etc (the list is long)
Peace: if they mean that nobody is allowed to express his opinion anymore , has to shut up and listen to the benign coordinator, then peace certainly rings a bell. When "peace" means that people are free to sing, play, work where they want, tell offensive jokes to each other, paint and write whatever they want, erase their beards,keep all sorts of pets also dogs, swim naked in rivers etc. then I would very much invite O&the dunces to give an elaborate list of the "peace" they refer to with respect to islam.
Esmiff,
there's nothing more stereotypically right-wing than describing a woman you are scared has bested you in a fight as a "silly wee girl". Well done.
Is it not the case that some Palestinians are suffering at Israeli hands?
[Snip -venting]
TheBigYinJames
That's actually true. You haven't lived until you've been shouted at in the street by Paisley 'yobs' for being politically incorrect. At that point I realised how horrible sneering at people actually was. One of them sneered at a supermarket checkout girl for being an agent of neoliberal capitalism. I blame that idiot Rusbridger at the Guardian.
I was very aware of what I was doing.
{snip - O/T]
Apologies if you were offended.
Maybe I should join UKIP ? Do they take anarchists ?
Trevor
Is it not the case that some Palestinians are suffering at Israeli hands?
Yes they are
and some Palestinians are suffering at Palestinian hands
and some Palestinians are suffering at Arab hands
and some Palestinians are suffering at Hamas hands
But while the first is consider 'important ' the others are not . If the real concerns was about the Palestinians suffering it should no matter whose hands where involved . But for some 'concern' is not based on the nature of the victim nor the nature of their suffering but on who can be blamed for it. Has it not about who they are for but who they are against.
For example 70,000 dying in Syria in a year has less 'concern ' value than 9 dying on a boat , while for the Guardian an argument over awarding honorary degree is worth 6 articles and hundreds of post for the 'concered ' but 149 people being killed in Africa for taken part in a peaceful protest , is worth one article and less than 40 posts for the 'concered '
Want to guess why the argument over awarding honorary degree had such a high 'concern value ' ?
A lot of Israelis have suffered at the hands of Palestinians over the years: bombed bus stops and restaurants.
It's all good for lefty scum to waffle about "the wall" and "the suffering" it brought, but lets imagine bombing the BBC canteen and their office of exclusive internal promotions, and see how THEY would feel about security then.
KnR says
"Is it not the case that some Palestinians are suffering at Israeli hands?
Yes they are
and some Palestinians are suffering at Palestinian hands
and some Palestinians are suffering at Arab hands
and some Palestinians are suffering at Hamas hands"
You missed out the thousands bombed recently in Gaza;
The massacre in the Sabra and the Shatila refugee camp In June 1982,Israel invaded Lebanon.
The commission deemed Israel indirectly responsible with Ariel Sharon in command
Do you not think that Israel caused most of the problems in this area by its long and brutal confiscation of land and expulsion of the palestinian people.
Mailman
Is that cherry picking?
Is it not the case that some Palestinians are suffering at Israeli hands?
Of course, but notice how the pea is being moved by the war party advocates. Individuals do not count when we speak of "the Germans", "the Russians", "the Jews", "the Muslims", or "the Palestinians" and confuse a political elite for the society or culture. The average Muslim is not what these people say just as the average Jew or Christian is not what Muslim extremists say.
Over 20000 rocket and mortar attacks on Israel since 2000. And people expect the Israelis just to sit back and take it? Uh? Wiki Palestinian rocket attacks on israel
Jeremy Poynton
If anyone thinks the Jerusalem Post spreads anti Semitic conspiracy theories, you are insane.
The Israeli government created Hamas according to Prime Minister Olmert in the Jerusalem Post.
"Netanyahu established Hamas, gave it life , freed Sheikh Yassin and gave him the opportunity to blossom"
http://www.jpost.com/Israel/Article.aspx?id=51303
Martyn,
You asked for a date and I gave you one. It wouldn't really matter what date I could have provided as ANY date would be considered a "cherry pick" by yourself.
The more important question is why you view Israels annexation of Jerusalem (or more accurately the unification of Jerusalem) as being more vile than the annexation of East Jerusalem by Jordan in 1948.
Anyway, this has been a fascinating thread. Old Lews "conspiracy" twitching noes would be going in to over drive because it does appear that those most heavily invested in Mann Made Global Warming (tm) are also those who the hardest anti-semetic views on this thread.
This simple observation would seem to be in line with the types that also contribute over at CIF.
Now wouldn't that make for a fascinating paper?
Mailman
smurf
the BBC are not conspiracy theorists they are (grotesquely taxoverpaid) conspiring PRACTITIONERS
Mailman your mind plays tricks on you.
Where did I say anything about Israels annexation of Jerusalem being more vile than the annexation of East Jerusalem by Jordan in 1948? Nowhere!
Jan 13, 2015 at 10:14 PM | Martyn
"Is that the same Jewish hands that annexed East Jerusalem in the eighties and then claimed all of it as their capitol"
Jan 15, 2015 at 4:31 PM | Mailman
"The more important question is why you view Israels annexation of Jerusalem (or more accurately the unification of Jerusalem) as being more vile than the annexation of East Jerusalem by Jordan in 1948".
I would also suggest your simple observation is way off target too.
Being anti-apartheid is not being anti-semitic. The conflation seems obvious, deliberate and dangerous. Just as muslims need to actively distance themselves from the extremism of Islamic State, jews also need to distance themselves from the actions of zionist Israeli state.
everybody can adhere or distance herself from actions of a state..
why would this be limited to Jews.
Oh and "zionist" Israel's actions do need to be supported: it is the only reasonable state in the region.
It respects its citizens rights, none of the others do that.
It is a prosperous democracy none of the others is that
It does not harass neighbours when it is not attacked, unlike many of its neighbours.
It does not sponsor shooting at women pushing prams like Iran does.
It does not execute people for crimes like adultery
It does not flog people for drinking alcohol or posting on the internet
When it is attacked it takes out the harm, and yes this comes with regrettable collateral damage.
We'll see how The Left will do it so much better when THEY are attacked by zealots.
[snip - unnecessary]
Bryan,
Your mind most certainly is playing games with you. You never did answer my question.
With the way you dance around reality I have my concerns that you are in fact a climate scientist :)
Mailman
Mailman, don't give up your day job.
It would be pathetically naive to NOT grab land, after a country has been cowardly attacked by a conspiring bunch of neighbours.
There should be a COST for coward attacks.
If there isn't you get aggressively indoctrinated people thinking they can take the edge over you.. Just watch the news if you do not know what I mean.
The world isn't what a bunch of grotesquely taxoverpaid bureaucrat drivelbags in "progressive" media tell you it is.