Daniel in the lion's den

The Today programme announced (several times) that “another strike” had been made by “Israel”  on a UN school. 

The strike they were referring to was the one that happened yesterday and was, yesterday, thoroughly reported and documented on the air. Reported, condemned, explained, condemned.

Was it a tiny bit misleading to keep announcing it as “another” strike,  leaving the impression that there has now been an additional strike? Was it ‘another’ example of the BBC’s mischief-making? Never mind that for now. Let’s call it disputed territory.

Jon Donnison’s report had also been shown in technicolour several times on TV already.

Arguably, airing it yet again in an audio format  could be for the benefit of those without a TV. 

It was a pure ‘aftermath’ account, which entirely consisted of  self-indulgent, voyeuristic rubber-necking. It lacked enquiry, analysis or investigative intelligence. I know journalists claim they’re only there to report “what they see”, but they need also to look beyond the window-dressing and ask why they’re seeing ‘only’ what they (are allowed to) see.

Jon Donnison said an injured 9 year old girl was “dressed all in pink”.   I wonder if she had a teddy as well.

Jon, we get it. It’s sad, it’s brutal, it’s graphic. It’s war. As a supporter of Israel I hate it. I wish it wasn’t happening. I am very sorry indeed for the innocent civilians of Gaza. 

After TFTD at about 7:50 we heard a harrowing account from Michele Beck of Médecins Sans Frontières about the difficulties they face in trying to treat the overwhelming number of patients in Gaza.

I am sorry too for victims of kidnap, blackmail, piracy and other methods of extortion in which rogues and criminals use hostages to exact their spoils.

We are being encouraged by the BBC, and therefore those influenced by the BBC’s pro-Hamas agenda, to pay the ransom demanded by the Islamists of Hamas, which we should and must liken to the ransom demanded by the Islamists of Mosul, the Islamists of ISIS who are dangerously close to establishing an unstoppable caliphate, and we should look at and fear the ever-increasing Islamist savages that are taking over swathes of Africa.

The ransom is in the form of appeasement / capitulation, or else.

If we stop Israel from emasculating Hamas we will indeed save lives in the immediate short term but as a strategy we’re rewarding, thereby encouraging terrorism.  It will come back to bite us. Even you, Sarah.

“Talk to Hamas” is a refrain that is continually being pushed by, in particular, Sarah Montague. She has been doing this for years. I’ve complained about it before, so this really is ‘another’ complaint.

I am complaining about the manner and attitude that Sarah Montague displayed this morning when she spoke to Daniel Taub.

Talk to Hamas

Her manner was  far from professional. She asked a peculiar question. "What would Israel do if it were Israelis in that school?"  Was that a completely pointless question based on an absurd scenario? Or was it loaded with a sinister insinuation, namely that Israel recklessly targets civilians because they are ‘worthless Palestinians‘ and not ‘valued Jewish Israelis?’ 

Once she got going she spat out the words as venomously as one would address a mass-murderer, which is obviously exactly how she perceives Ambassador Taub and wishes the listeners to perceive him, and Israel as a whole, too.

Daniel Taub is an articulate, particularly mild-mannered person. By agreeing to speak on the notoriously hostile Today programme and trying to make a very difficult case about a sensitive issue which, by the way, is not currently “settled”, he knowingly placed himself into the Lion’s den.

Towards the end of the interview, instead of allowing him to make his case, Sarah Montague took the Jeremy Paxman route. Ignoring his replies and repeatedly asking, interrupting and re-asking the same question, “Will you talk to Hamas?” she  utterly disgraced herself and the BBC.