Having rashly stated that the BBC was even-handed in yesterday’s reporting of the Historic Mistake by at least giving the Rabid Dogs a reasonable quota of space to defend themselves, I now have to qualify that, having watched last night’s Newsnight.
I am of course, referring to the interview by a particularly supercilious looking Paxman, with Daniel Taub. Gurning with more distaste than normal, Paxman parroted some of the BBC’s well-worn memes and tropes.
Googling Daniel Taub the other day, I saw another Paxman/Taube interview and realised that but for the beard, the BBC could easily have replayed it instead, saving all concerned the tiresome chore of going through it over again.
One particular question that the BBC assumes will poleaxe defenders of Israel is: “Why shouldn’t Iran have nukes? (if Israel has nukes)”
Although, to me, this as the same as saying “The warders have keys, so why shouldn’t the criminally insane have them also?” the average viewer might not see things that way because they can’t contemplate the notion that Rouhani is not just a spokesperson for the mad Mullahs, he is on record as uttering viciously antisemitic statements in his own right.
The average viewer may neither know nor wish to know much about that, because it’s easier and more palatable to assume that peace and love are just around the corner.
Jeremy Paxman assumes that this question is his trump card. Pitching it is tantamount to the knockout blow, which, very sadly, in effect it is, because there is always much too little time to explain to a non-receptive audience that there is all the difference in the world between Israel and Iran.
Iran sponsors terrorist atrocities worldwide, practices extreme oppression at home, hangs homosexuals and detests Jews so much that they openly declare their desire to finish them off altogether, whereas Israel is a tiny nation that is threatened with annihilation by most of the surrounding countries when they’re not too busy tearing each other and themselves to pieces; a country, which inexplicably, much of the rest of the world wishes to disarm and deprive of the ability to defend itself.
Why say the Iranians have given up nothing when they clearly have? asks our weary BBC protagonist, referring to the fact that they’ve agreed to temporarily halt the final stage of developing nuclear weapons, which they have clearly boasted they can reinstate at the drop of a hat.
“We don’t know a great deal about the Israeli nuclear programme, do we?” Smirks Paxman, wielding a mighty hammer-blow to the rabid dogs, apparently satisfied that he has clinched the argument, BBC style, once and for all.
|Israel has nukes.....|
Wow. And you think the beebs is wrongheaded.ReplyDelete
Why and how would Iran get nukes ? They have tech support, equipment, scientists and more from Russia - who has essentially said their installations are considered Russian property and will respond to attacks as if they were in Russia itself. So there is your WMD.
Do you think that somehow the nation that responded to US nuke missiles in Turkey with their own in Cuba ( they were there - despite denials ) has forgotten how to play hardball and control a situation ?
Meanwhile Israel has jailed Iranian military up to the deputy minister of defense and assassinated scientists - including Russians - involved in nuclear tech in Iran.
All this fuss over use of a technology designed NOT to go boom.
Nah. The Axis of Evil did not just show up the hypocrites at the Security Council by disavowing nukes and promoting disarmament...they traded in oil in other than a currency whose use was closed to them.