'Arry Barry Batwan

I realise the BBC sees nowt wrong with the PSC, but what with all the recent fuss about extremism and hate and so on, one might think the commissioning editors would  be a little cautious about whom they choose to employ, especially at this-particular-point-in-time.

Over at Harry’s Place atl writer Habibi has posted a damning piece about Dateline London’s most frequently invited panel member, who also happens to be a buddy of the BBC’s Gavin Esler. 

Esler has recently quit hosting the Saturday morning programme, and has officially left the BBC to devote more time to writing books and retweeting uncomplimentary things about Donald Trump.

Yes, we’re talking about our old friend Abdel Bari Atwan. Craig and I have been writing about him for years. (See here and here)

Barry, as he is sometimes affectionately addressed, (or, as John Humphrys once accidentally spoonerised: “Arry Batwan” ) is openly antisemitic and believes Israel is behind all the ills of the world, let alone the mayhem and murder in the Middle East:

“He said the “Jewish lobby” was “extremely dangerous and is endangering the whole planet, the whole world”, and that it “controlled” the American Senate, Congress and media.”

He continually defends Hamas and Hizbollah and even has a good word for Osama Bin Laden. 

Yet the BBC employs him, allowing him to express his inflammatory and racist opinions regularly.

While I’m not a fan of ‘no-platforming’ people whose opinions I dislike, I can’t see any justification for offering him the BBC’s tacit endorsement and the credibility that is automatically bestowed upon Dateline London’s regular panellists. Having him as the ‘top guest’ speaks volumes about the BBC’s institutional hostility to Jews and Israel.

As I said on another thread, the commenters over at Harry’s Place aren’t quite as geeky about the BBC as we are.  After years of BBC-related specialist research we’ve absorbed an unhealthy amount of BBC-related detail, gossip and trivia. It’s the kind of ‘self-radicalisation’ that creeps up on you when you start delving into things. Craig suffers from a worse case of it than I do; that is to say he knows a great deal about matters BBC, and has a particular interest in Dateline London. 

So although there was much btl commentary on Atwan’s duplicity and extremism below the line at Harry’s Place, the realisation about the frequency of Atwan’s appearances on the BBC ’s Dateline London was  a little slow in coming. But now it has. Do go and take a look.  

three wise men

“There are two Atwans.
"The Abd Al-Bari Atwan [appearing] on CNN is completely different from the Abd Al-Bari Atwan on the Al-Jazeera network or in his Al-Quds Al-Arabi daily. On CNN, Atwan speaks solemnly and with total composure, presenting rational and balanced views. This is in complete contrast with his fuming appearances on Al-Jazeera and in Al-Quds Al-Arabi, in which he whips up the emotions of multitudes of viewers and readers."
https://www.memri.org/reports/arab-liberal-writer-blames-arab-media-hatred-us#_edn1

And as H.P. btl comments are deleted after a week, here are a couple that it would be a shame to lose:

Maura Labingi 
Abdel Bari Atwan has been one of the BBC's go-to MENA 'experts' on Middle East politics for at least twenty years despite his long and well-known history of anti-Israel bias, anti-Semitism, extremism and duplicity.
At the same time the BBC have long since sidelined Hazhir Teimourian, the learned Kurdish former journalist from their own Persian service - I guess Teimourian was far too pro-Western and pro-Israel to fit in with the BBC house bias.
That said, we should never underestimate the sheer bloody laziness of news broadcasting producers and researchers. Their stories in every area are mostly sourced from pressure groups, PR companies and so on. Just pick up the phone and go to the same self-promoting and often deeply biased 'experts' you've relied on for years or even decades, it's much easier than actually doing the investigative work yourself or even finding a real expert.
You can be sure that more research goes into one of Habibi's posts than in into most broadcast journalism.
Hence Abdel Bari Atwan, hence Mohammed Shafiq, hence - straying wildly off topic - almost every Arts rentagob you can think of.

sabadennis

 My complaint to the BBC about the use of Atwan on "Dateline London" in March 2008 got this terse reply:

"I understand from your e-mail that you feel Abdel Bari Atwan is an
inappropriate choice of commentator on the BBC. I also note that you
would like to know if the BBC will continue to use Mr Atwan in future
broadcasts.

While I am unaware of any forthcoming appearances of Mr Atwan on the BBC, Editors at BBC News make decisions on the use of contributors based on the BBC's editorial guidelines and as such will continue to use Mr Atwan at present if they see fit."

'Dateline' - Guest of (Dis)Honour

Craig: One of the BBC's regular programmes which has long seemed to me to be among the corporation's most clearly biased is its weekly gathering of journalists and commentators from across the globe to discuss issues of topical importance, Dateline London, hosted by Gavin Esler. 

I have been trying on this blog to be as open-minded as possible, but the evidence has been clear as regards Dateline for ages that the answer to the question 'Is the BBC biased?' is, at least in this case, an emphatic 'Yes!'. 

It got to the stage about four years ago when I started texting the programme each week to complain about the skewed composition of its panels. As that made not one jot of difference (and was costing me money!), I began keeping note of who those guests were each week. I did that from mid-June 2009 to the end of May 2010, give up monitoring it for five months (due to BBC fatigue), then restarted again at the end of October 2010, continuing right up to the present day. 

I'll expand on why I feel the programme to be such a clear example of BBC bias as the blog proceeds, but I want to begin with a list of all the guests who have appeared on the programme over those periods, now totally some three years'-worth of programmes. 

Instead of one long list, I'll break it down into three shorter ones - each covering around a year. This will show the programme's sheer consistency over time. 

Guests  18 June 2009-29 May 2010

Abdel Bari Atwan 11

Thomas Kielinger 10

Stryker McGuire 9

Janet Daley 8

Marc Roche 8

Mustapha Karkouti 7

Yasmin Alibhai Brown 6

Michael Goldfarb 6

Vincent Magombe 6

Polly Toynbee 5

Annalisa Piras 5

Saul Zadka 5

Laura Lynch 5

Shahed Sadullah 5

Catherine Mayer 4

Mina al Oraibi 4

Diane Wei-Lang 4

Eunice Goes 4

Isobel Hilton 4

Greg Katz 4

Agnes Poirier 4

Henry Chu 4

Nazenin Ansari 3

Ned Temko 3

John Fisher Burns 3

Steve Richards 3

Adam Raphael 3

Brian O'Connell 3

Amir Taheri 3

Ann Leslie 3

Michael White 3

Kate Dourian 3

Ali Bahaijoub 2

Michael Griffin 2

Bernard Burrell 2

Bruce Anderson 2

Johann Hari 2

Tom Fenton 2

David Aaronovitch 2

Jef McCallister 2

Ashis Ray 2

Tom Bemis 1

Stephanie Kennedy 1

Rauf Khalid 1

Daniella Peled 1

Michael Gove 1

Abdul Khalek al Abdullah 1

Mohammed Alnaqbi 1

Francis Matthews 1

Mary Jordan 1

Doyle McManus 1

Uwe Schmitt 1

Sarju Kaul 1

Tyler Brule 1

Peter Oborne 1

Abdullah Homouda 1

Tererai Karimakawenda 1

Hassan Fatah Pasha 1

Abdullah Abdul Khalid 1

Nima Abu Wardeh 1

Anthony Faiola 1

Guests  30 October 2010-29 October 2011

Abdel Bari Atwan 16

Michael Goldfarb 13

Thomas Kielinger 10

Mustapha Karkouti 9

Stryker McGuire 7

Polly Toynbee 7

Marc Roche 7

Agnes Poirier 7

Janet Daley 7

Vincent Magombe 6

Saul Zadka 6

Annalisa Piras 5

Greg Katz 5

Ned Temko 5

Ann Leslie 5

Ashis Ray 5

Eunice Goes 5

Tim Montgomerie 5

Yasmin Alibhai Brown 4

Laura Lynch 4

Henry Chu 4

Michael White 4

Jef McCallister 4

Nabila Ramdani 4

Brian O'Connell 3

Abdullah Homouda 3

Shahed Sadullah 3

Catherine Mayer 3

Adam Raphael 3

Ali Bahaijoub 3

David Aaronovitch 3

John Fisher Burns 3

Mina al Oraibi 2

Diane Wei-Lang 2

Nazenin Ansari 2

Simon Jenkins 2

Bernard Burrell 2

Steve Hewlett 2

Isobel Hilton 1

Steve Richards 1

Amir Taheri 1

Kate Dourian 1

Tonje Iversen 1

Johann Hari 1

Paola Totaro 1

Will Hutton 1

Francis Matthews 1

Bruce Orwell 1

Ashur Shamis 1

Xinran Xue 1

Jonathan Sacerdoti 1

Hassan Fatah Pasha 1

Abdul Aziz 1

Bernard Purcell 1

Nesrine Malik 1

Anthony Faiola 1

Guests  5 November 2011-10 November 2012

Abdel Bari Atwan 13

Mustapha Karkouti 10

Michael Goldfarb 9

Thomas Kielinger 9

Polly Toynbee 8

Marc Roche 8

John Fisher Burns 7

Stryker McGuire 6

Agnes Poirier 6

Greg Katz 6

Ann Leslie 6

Ashis Ray 6

Henry Chu 6

Mina al Oraibi 6

Janet Daley 5

Vincent Magombe 5

Saul Zadka 5

Eunice Goes 5

Tim Montgomerie 5

Michael White 5

Catherine Mayer 5

Dimitri Shiskin 5

Ned Temko 4

Yasmin Alibhai Brown 4

Jef McCallister 4

David Aaronovitch 4

Isobel Hilton 4

Maria Margaronis 4

Nabila Ramdani 3

Abdullah Homouda 3

Steve Richards 3

Nesrine Malik 3

Annalisa Piras 2

Brian O'Connell 2

Adam Raphael 2

Diane Wei-Lang 2

Nazenin Ansari 2

Bernard Burrell 2

Kate Dourian 2

Francis Matthews 2

Anthony Faiola 2

Tererai Karimakawenda 2

Ian Birrell 2

Shahed Sadullah 1

Simon Jenkins 1

Amir Taheri 1

Jake Awagah Addison 1

Benedicte Paviot 1

Hassan Fatah Pasha 1

Cornelia Fuchs 1

Annette Dittert 1

Sultan al-Qassemi 1

The first thing you'll probably notice from skimming these lists is the fact that one man continually tops Dateline's invitations chart, across all three roughly-year-long periods - the London-based Palestinian journalist Abdul Bari Atwan.  

Add the three lists together and you find that Atwan has beaten his nearest 'rival', the charming veteran German journalist Thomas Kielinger, by a large and decisive margin:

Abdel Bari Atwan 40

Thomas Kielinger 29

Michael Goldfarb - 28

Mustapha Karkouti - 26

Stryker McGuire - 24

Marc Roche - 23

Polly Toynbee - 20

Janet Daley - 20

Abdel Bari Atwan is editor-in-chief of the provocatively titled pan-Arabic daily newspaper, Al-Quds Al-Arabi - which means 'Arab Jerusalem'. Bari (as Dateline presenter Gavin Esler usually alls him) is controversial because his critics frequently accuse him of speaking honeyed words (up to a point) to Western ears while speaking vile, poisonous anti-Israel, anti-Western hate into Arabic ears. A flavour of the man can be got from his Wikipedia profile. As is often the case with Wikipedia though, the article has clearly received the 'helping hand' of someone sympathetic to Atwan. 

Here are a selection of clickable pieces which should give you a feel for why some many people are appalled about Abdel Bari:

Hussein Ibish

Jonathan Sacerdoti

Nota Sheep 

Harry's Place

(and last but far from least...) Sue - of Biased BBC (and, even more, Is the BBC biased?) fame

The decision to invite him to be a guest on the programme is cause enough for many people to complain to the BBC. The decision to invite him onto the programme more than anyone else is surely cause for any reasonable person to complain. 

Incidentally, in the light of all this the following (from may 2011) might well strike you as ironic, to say the least:.

Abdel Bari Atwan, editor of London-based newspaper Al-Quds Al-Arabi, claimed the BBC had scaled down his appearances on its channels because of pressure from the Israeli Embassy.

He said: "These people in the BBC are terrorised by email campaigns [from the pro-Israel lobby]. Every time I'm on there are hundreds of emails. They are biased in their coverage. They don't want our Palestinian voices to be heard. Where is the impartiality?"

Someone at the BBC obviously didn't send the memo to Dateline. Atwan is on that programme more than anyone else, by some margin...and he's still whining! 

The BBC (and its defenders) sometimes say 'Well, pro-Israeli people complain about the BBC's coverage and pro-Palestinian people also complain about the BBC's coverage, so the BBC must be getting it about right'. Well, 40 appearances by the anti-Israel Atwan, 11 more than any other guest. This certainly seems to give the lie to that. Dateline has (has it not?) clearly chosen to favour the pro-Palestinian side. 

Sue: So Abdel Bari Atwan is top of the pops. The BBC is mischievous. They hope sparks will fly so that their programmes are interesting, as a spectator sport, for people with a low boredom threshold. In that vein, they’d have Adolph Hitler on Dateline, or Abu Qatada. But at least the audience would know who those gentlemen are and what they stand for. As it is, the BBC is bashful. Atwan is described as a middle east expert.  That’s like introducing a wily old fox to a fluffy chicken and calling him an expert on rural affairs.

Several people I’ve never heard of are on that list. I like Ann Leslie on Dateline. Anything she decides to say is usually overwhelmed by patterned clothing and glinting accessories,  but I was startled once when her gravelly sixty a day voice suddenly piped up with this criticism of Jews. :”Jewish people mistakenly say Shylock is antisemitic” she opined, knowingly, and Gavin Esler nodded with approval.

Not really, Ann.  It’s  antisemites who use the Shylock character as an illustration of the miserly nature of the evil Jew. 

In case you haven’t seen for yourself, Ann adorns herself with garments of multiple textures and patterns, and bling. Her hair is tousled, wispy and streaked varied shades of blond, and her eyebrows are heavily pencilled in, in the shape of arrowheads. Blue eyeshadow and coral lipstick  battle with a mottled animal-print top worn over a pointy-collared shiny polyester blouse, topped with a straggly fur waistcoat with an extra-furry shawl collar.  Dangly double-drop pearl earrings, a chunky gold chain necklace and several gold bracelets, complete the look. Just right for Dateline.

Craig: In fairness to the dame, she's generally a wise old bird. She makes an honourable appearance in Nick Cohen's New Statesman essay about anti-Semitism, warning him about the deluge of anti-Semitism about to come his way from the Left for daring to adopt the 'wrong' position on ME issues. He doesn't believe her until it happened. 

Talking of Nick Cohen, did you read his impressive Standpoint essay from earlier this year, How the Left turned against the Jews?

Ed and David Miliband's dad gets a good press in that article - which is something you would read about in the comments field of a certain blog! 

Now, there's someone (Nick) who would add a bit of interest to the staid cast-list of Dateline. Nick Cohen v Barry Atwan. If they want sparks to fly, sparks would undoubtedly fly and Atwan might even literally explode with rage (which wouldn't do Ann Leslie's immaculate appearance any good).

Sue: I don’t think it would make much difference. I’m not totally obsessed with people’s appearance by the way. Just a bit. My point was that we don’t get full and frank explanations of who these people really are, so we can view them through our special propaganda reactolite specs.

For example BBC4 World News just gave Mustafa Barghouti  about three minutes of airtime to tell a string of porkie pies -for example that Israel’s assassination of Ahmed Said Khalil al-Jabari was unprovoked, that Israel had constantly broken numerous ceasefires simply because it doesn’t want peace, and what’s more there have been no rockets aimed at Israel from Gaza. When seconds later he insisted that Hamas had no influence over the group that had sent hundreds of rockets into Israel in the last few days, the lady interviewer had little choice but to interrupt. The discrepancy was just too damned obvious.

No platform was given to an Israeli spokesperson.

 

Over on Channel 4, Matt Frei (pudgier than ever) had a chat with Mark Regev. Channel 4 seems to have some sort of special license to be rude to Mark Regev, and Matt made full use of it. He put the most tired, unimaginative “I’m not listening to you’ questions, and then carried through by not listening to the answers, but at least they gave Mark Regev a few minutes on air.

Over on BBC News 24, they did a little better, with a reasonably respectful interview with Jonathan Sacerdoti. He even managed to mention Jeremy Bowen in one of his answers, in respect of Jeremy's annoying innuendo about the relevance of the current escalation in violence to the upcoming Israeli elections, with which Sacerdoti took issue, with, in my humble opinion, justification and quiet conviction.

Sacerdoti was introduced as “Director of Public Affairs at the Zionist Federation that campaigns on behalf of Israel.”  I didn’t catch how they introduced Barghouti, but I’m pretty sure they didn’t tell us he was a pro-Palestinian purveyor of (Halal) porkie-pies. 

Craig: Talking of whom....Jonathan Sacerdoti makes just one appearance in the lists above. My comment on Biased BBC at the time (January 2011) ran as follows:

At least there was also Jonathan Sacerdoti, making his first - and doubtless also last - appearance. He did well, but faced regular interruptions from Atwan, Polly Toynbee and Gavin Esler (and a couple of "I'll come back to you in a second"s from Esler to boot).  

That guess proved correct. He's never been back since. (Unlike Abdel Bari Atwan.) His face obviously does't fit. Maybe he should grow a Saddam-style moustache. That might get him on. 

Silencing “the truth”

A few days ago I read this online article by one of the BBC’s favourite ‘experts’ on the Middle East, Abdel Bari Atwan. Or 'Barry', as Gavin Esler likes to call him.

It’s entitled “A culture of Silencing”, and it begins as a self-pitying response to the cancellation of an event he was to chair at the British Houses of Parliament, no less, and continues as (the usual) diatribe of anti Israel hate-speak.

(Labour groups seem to be experiencing a spot of trouble recently, though I have no idea if Atwan's particular cancellation had anything to do with this particular row over antisemitism.) 

“The session was cancelled at the last minute under extreme pressure from the Labour Friends of Israel parliamentary group and a campaign waged against me in the pages of the Jewish Chronicle. This is not the first, and I am certain it will not be the last, time I have been prevented from offering the Palestinian point of view by the powerful machinations of the Zionist lobby and the propaganda department of the state of Israel known as Hasbara (‘explaining’).”

As Bari acknowledges, he is a frequent guest on TV, but he attributes the times when bookings have been cancelled at the last minute “for no apparent reason”, to the “powerful machinations of Jewish Zionist lobby and the propaganda department of the state of Israel.”

If Bari can’t see the irony in this, he’s even more blinded to reality that he at first appears. Do I need to spell it out? 

Whose propaganda department? Your propaganda department is bigger and more pernicious than my propaganda department? 

And, for what it's worth, any fule kno that last moment cancellations are par for the course where the BBC is concerned. They’re notorious for dumping speakers mercilessly if they’ve secured someone more interesting on the guest list.  Actually, I lie. I once read a piece by someone (other than Abdel Bari Atwan) who was furious because he’d wasted a whole precious day on stand-by, and was eventually unceremoniously dropped.

In any case I’d have thought Bari's ubiquitous appearances on Dateline would have more than compensated for the occasional cancellation. As far as some of us are concerned even one appearance is one too many.  That’s how powerful we are.

As far as the Palestinian point of view is concerned, well, does Bari not think it is offered sufficiently? Or is Bari one of the pro-Palestinian activists who think it is perfectly reasonable to expect the BBC to BDS all references to Israel? 

Yes. Apparently so.

“Readers may recall that during the invasion of Gaza in 2009 – in which 1600 Palestinians were slaughtered whereas Israel suffered nine casualties – broadcast commentary on the atrocity (in Britain at least) came mostly from Benjamin Netanyahu’s spokesman, Mark Regev, rather than Palestinians.”

Apart from the cheap casualty-toll reference, this is absolute tosh. And deluded and irrational. Yes, the Israeli PM’s spokesman Mark Regev was indeed seen and heard at that time, and although the BBC is supposed to be impartial (someone should tell Bari) he (Regev) was constantly subjected to (almost exclusively) utterly hostile interrogation by anchors from all British TV channels.

Bari complains that he was disadvantaged by Regev’s dastardly ability to lie and smile, whereas poor Bari’s powers of persuasion are hampered by his uncontrollable passion and volatility. Confusingly, he then seamlessly brags about the size of his following including the millions on Twitter.

“I am only one of hundreds, if not thousands, of media figures the Israelis seek to contain. Sites such as BBCwatch and CiFwatch (referring to the Guardian’s ‘Comment is Free’ pages) routinely blacklist people who criticise Israel.” 

What? What on earth?   He proceeds to cite an assortment of Israel-haters, antisemites and BDS advocates to back up his claim that he is being victimised and that the anti-Israel, antisemitic views of his own and of the persons he lists are somehow being silenced by the Israel lobby. 

If only.

He goes on to discuss “terror” as if he doesn’t advocate it himself. Oh, oh! pants are on fire!

Excerpt from Wiki: 

“Following an October 2003 article in which Atwan claimed that the U.S. is to blame for the Arab world's hatred of it, a Yemenite journalist and columnist for the London Arabic-language daily Al-Sharq Al-Awsat, Munir Al-Mawari, stated: "The Abd Al Bari Atwan [appearing] on CNN is completely different from the Abdel Bari Atwan on the Al Jazeera network or in his Al Quds Al Arabi daily. On CNN, Atwan speaks solemnly and with total composure, presenting rational and balanced views. This is in complete contrast with his fuming appearances on Al Jazeera and in Al Quds Al Arabi, in which he whips up the emotions of multitudes of viewers and readers."^[22] 

In response to Atwan's legitimization of the Mercaz HaRav shooting in March 2008, Lior Ben-Dor, a spokesman at the Israeli Embassy in London, said: "The problem is that when addressing the British public, he tends to hide his true opinions and ideology - his support for terror and the murder of civilians. This article reveals Atwan's real colors, a supporter of fundamentalism and terror, and hence he should be treated accordingly."^[1]

I know, I know. We don’t much trust Wiki. But...who you gonna trust? Wiki or Bari? 

It’s interesting to look at the comments below this piece though. One or two Harry’s Place regulars have contributed, which helps to take the nasty taste away from having read the wretched thing.

The enduring question remains. Why does the BBC see this duplicitous person as worthy of a platform they have in it their gift to bestow or withdraw at will?

Atwan is still 'Top of the Dateline Pops'

You may recall that, in the early days of this blog (November 2012), I tallied up the number of appearances made by all the guests who have appeared on Gavin Esler's globally-transmitted Dateline London [BBC News Channel here in the UK, BBC World everywhere else]. 

I'd kept a list of every panel from 8 June 2009 to 29 May 2010, and then from 30 October 2010 right through to 10 November 2012 and, through the magic of simple addition, found that the guest who had appeared most on the show throughout that period with 40 appearances (compared to his nearest rival, Die Welt's Thomas Kielinger who had made 29 appearances on the programme) was left-wing Palestinian editor Abdel Bari Atwan - a man with a long history of extremist statements [especially against Israel]. 

The top of the charts in November 2012 looked like this:

Abdel Bari Atwan 40

Thomas Kielinger 29

Michael Goldfarb - 28

Mustapha Karkouti - 26

Stryker McGuire - 24

Marc Roche - 23

Polly Toynbee - 20

Janet Daley - 20

It seemed to both me and Sue that by making Atwan 'top of the Dateline pops', Dateline was rather showing its hand. And it wasn't a pleasant hand.

Well, I've continued keeping meticulous records of every guest who's appeared on the show, and the top of the charts now looks like this:

Abdel Bari Atwan - 54
Thomas Kielinger - 44
Michael Goldfarb - 39
Mustapha Karkouti - 38
Marc Roche - 36
Stryker McGuire - 29
Janet Daley - 30
Polly Toynbee - 28

Little change then, especially at the top and, yes, Abdel Bari Atwan is still Dateline London's most-invited guest...

...which calls for a 'WTF!' and a 'FFS!' 

P.S. If you were wondering - on the strength [if 'strength' is the right word] of her appearance on today's edition -  where that bundle of joy and reasonableness, Yasmin Alibhai Brown, stands in relation to this chart, well, she's got 20 appearances to her name to date. 

Dateline Bari

For those wondering how Dateline London's bizarre obsession with Abdel Bari Atwan is going, well, he was on again today - for the fourth time this year (one more than Steve Richards of The Independent). 

His commanding lead as the programme's most-invited guest is still growing. The top of the Dateline leader board when we last looked at it (in August 2014) was as follows:

Atwan, Abdel Bari 45

Goldfarb, Michael 34

Kielinger, Thomas 34

Now it looks like this:

Atwan, Abdel Bari 53

Goldfarb, Michael 40

Kielinger, Thomas 38

For any passing Martians who may be unaware of Dateline's 'Bari', here's a sample of the kind of things he says (courtesy of The Times of Israel - which is unlikely to be among his favourite newspapers):

- In March 2008, he was quoted justifying a terrorist assault by a Palestinian gunman on Jerusalem’s Merkaz Harav Yeshiva in which eight students were killed, since the religious seminary was responsible for “hatching Israeli extremists and fundamentalists.” 

- During a TV interview in 2013, he said he considered Al-Qaeda mastermind Osama bin Laden only “half a terrorist” due to his positive engagement with US forces in Afghanistan. 

- He was famously quoted as saying that he would dance in Trafalgar Square if Iranian missiles were to hit Israel.

- On the fifth anniversary of the 9/11 attacks, he wrote that the worst terrorist attacks in US history will be remembered as the end of the US empire, since “all empires collapse when they pursue the arrogance of power.”

Can you see why the the BBC News Channel/BBC World's flagship international discussion programme chooses to send far more invitations to Abdel Bari Atwan than to anyone else?

Just what is it about the Israel-hating, anti-American, Palestinian leftist that the makers of the BBC's Dateline London like so much? His fabulous Saddam-style moustache? The twinkle in his eye that wows the ladies? His friendship with Gavin Esler?

Still, at least today's Dateline included a strongly pro-Israeli guest, Jonathan Sacerdoti. He's made three appearances since first appearing in 2011, a round fifty less than Bari.

The BBC is a perverse organisation at times.

'Dateline' - Guest of (Dis)Honour (Update)

Here's an update to the post Guest of (Dis)honour, which listed all the guests on Dateline London, and revealed that the controversial Palestinian (extremist) journalist Abdel Bari Atwan was the programme's most regular guest by some margin.  

That post appeared in November 2012. Many editions of Dateline have passed since then. Who's top of the Dateline pops now? Well, here are the total number of appearances of all Dateline's guests since 30 October 2010 (with apologies for the list's untidy look). 

It shows that Abdel Bari Atwan keeps his crown as the most regular Dateline guest:

Atwan, Abdel Bari 45

Kielinger, Thomas 34

Goldfarb, Michael 34

Karkouti, Mustapha 33

Roche, Marc 29

Poirier, Agnes 28

Toynbee, Polly  24

Daley, Janet 23

Oraibi, Mina al 22

Katz, Greg 21

Fisher Burns, John 19

Ray, Ashis 19

Zadka, Saul  19

Chu, Henry 18

Maguire, Stryker 18

Malik, Nesrine 16

McAllister, Jef 16

Magombe, Vincent 16

Goes, Eunice 15

Aaronovitch, David 14

Ramdani, Nabila 14

Brown, Yasmin Alibhai 14

Leslie, Ann  14

Homouda, Abdallah 13

Temko, Ned 13

White, Michael 12

Deane, Alex 11

Margaronis, Maria 11

Baker, Stephanie 10

Shiskin, Dmitry 10

Birrell, Ian 10

O'Connell,  Brian 10

Montgomerie, Tim 10

Richards, Steve 9

Pepinster, Catherine 9

Raphael, Adam 9

Wei Liang, Diane 8

Piras, Annalisa 8

Mayer, Catherine 7

Ansari, Nazenin 7

Hilton, Isabel 7

MacIntyre, Donal 6

Owen Jones 6

Taranyuk, Irena 5

Karimakawenda, Tererai 5

Burrell, Bernard  5

Sadullah, Shahid 5

Taheri, Amir 4

Dourian, Kate 4

Lynch, Laura 4

Linnik, Dmitry 3

Dittert, Annette 3

Hewlett, Steve 3

Bahaijoub, Ali 3

Matthews, Francis 3

Caliskan, Emre 2

Kofman, Jeffrey 2

Lucas, Edward 2

Timur, Safak 2

Sacerdoti, Jonathan 2

Jenkins, Simon 2

Pasha, Hassan Fatah 2

Faiola, Anthony 2

Bolzen, Stephanie 1

Gordon, Tom 1

Huband, Mark 1

Macleod, Catherine 1

Martin, Iain 1

McIntosh, Lindsay 1

McKenna, Kevin 1

Nekrassov, Alexander 1

Patrikarakos, David 1

Satwa, Richard 1

Shabi, Rachel 1

Sharafedi, Bozorgmehr 1

Walker, Heather 1

Iversen, Tonje 1

Hari, Johann 1

Totaro, Paola 1

Hutton, Will 1

Orwell, Bruce 1

Shamis, Ashur 1

Xue, Xinran 1

Aziz, Abdul 1

Purcell, Bernard 1

Addison, Jake Awagah 1

Paviot,  Benedicte 1

Fuchs, Cornelia 1

al-Qassemi, Sultan 1

And just to break that down by adding the latest figures, since that 2012 post, which show the recent trends on Dateline. These then are the figures from 17 November 2012 to 16 August 2014. They show that the gap is closing on Bari's dominance of the programme but that, astonishing, he's still the most invited guest on Dateline:

Atwan, Abdel Bari 16

Kielinger, Thomas 15

Poirier, Agnes 15

Karkouti, Mustapha 14

Oraibi, Mina al 14

Roche, Marc 14

Goldfarb, Michael 12

Malik, Nesrine 12

Deane, Alex 11

Daley, Janet 11

Baker, Stephanie 10

Katz, Greg 10

Shiskin, Dmitry 10

Fisher Burns, John 9

Toynbee, Polly  9

Birrell, Ian 8

Chu, Henry 8

McAllister, Jef 8

Ray, Ashis 8

Zadka, Saul  8

Aaronovitch, David 7

Homouda, Abdallah 7

Margaronis, Maria 7

Ramdani, Nabila    7

Brown, Yasmin Alibhai 6

MacIntyre, Donal 6

Owen Jones 6

Goes, Eunice 5

Magombe, Vincent 5

Maguire, Stryker 5

O'Connell,  Brian 5

Richards, Steve 5

Taranyuk, Irena 5

Mayer, Catherine 4

Pepinster, Catherine 4

Raphael, Adam 4

Temko, Ned 4

Wei Liang, Diane 4

Ansari, Nazenin 3

Karimakawenda, Tererai 3

Leslie, Ann  3

Linnik, Dmitry 3

White, Michael 3

Caliskan, Emre 2

Dittert, Annette 2

Hilton, Isabel 2

Kofman, Jeffrey 2

Lucas, Edward 2

Taheri, Amir 2

Timur, Safak 2

Bolzen, Stephanie 1

Burrell, Bernard  1

Dourian, Kate 1

Gordon, Tom 1

Hewlett, Steve 1

Huband, Mark 1

Macleod, Catherine 1

Martin, Iain 1

McIntosh, Lindsay 1

McKenna, Kevin 1

Nekrassov, Alexander 1

Patrikarakos, David 1

Piras, Annalisa 1

Sacerdoti, Jonathan 1

Sadullah, Shahid 1

Satwa, Richard 1

Shabi, Rachel 1

Sharafedi, Bozorgmehr 1

Walker, Heather 1

Is Bari at the BBC no more?

 

Israel today is in a state of confusion, in a state of panic. They know very well that what happened in Kabul Airport will repeat itself at Ben Gurion Airport. But Ben Gurion Airport will be closed, there will be no planes in it…. Israelis should listen to the advice of [Hezbollah leader] Hassan Nasrallah and start learning how to swim, because their only option will be Cyprus, their only option will be the Mediterranean Sea.

Abdel Bari Atwan, Lebanese television station Mayadeen TV, 18/8

Sue and I have spent many years writing, on and off, about Abdel Bari Atwan.

'Who's that?', recent newcomers might ask.

Well, he's a Palestinian leftist journalist based in the UK who sports a fulsome Saddam moustache and loathes Israel and is/was a favoured BBC go-to voice.

My main encounter with him was via watching the BBC's foreign flagship Dateline London and counting the number of appearances of each and every panellist on every episode over several years, and regularly posting an ongoing tally and analysis.

Every single year, without fail, Abdel Bari Atwan - came top of the tree as the most-invited panellist on the Dateline London panellist charts. 

He was the programme's most regular guest, frequently ranting away like an ill-informed maniac on most subjects yet being treated, on matters Middle Eastern, as if he were the expert's expert. 

It was weird.

The main Dateline presenter throughout most of that time, Gavin Esler, called him 'Bari' and even hosted Bari's book launch. He wanted his friend on the programme, he said, because he was ''subversive''.

And Bari was always a highly controversial figure, having made statements openly rejoicing in terrorist attacks against Israel and fantasising about dancing ''with delight'' in Trafalgar Square if the Iranians attacked Israel - something Gavin Esler and the BBC knew, yet evidently let pass.

Has he been finally dropped? I've searched via various methods and not found him on Dateline London recently.

He's evidently not been quiet though. As ever, he's been ranting away, away from UK television, recently expressing his hope that what happened at Kabul Airport will repeat itself at Ben Gurion Airport, and that Israelis should learn to swim like “rats fleeing a sinking ship".

https://twitter.com/MEMRIReports/status/1429762087950163973

To sum up: The man who the BBC made their MOST-frequent guest on their flagship foreign affairs panel programme over the course of several years - and treated with love and kid gloves - was an Israel-hating zealot, and the BBC knew this and kept him on, continually inviting him on more than anyone else.

So have they finally dropped him though? 

Bad deals

We know certain things about Iran. It sponsors terrorism and perpetuates aggression by proxy, interferes in other countries’ affairs, and calls for “death” to America and Israel. 

We know it has a nuclear programme, which it claims is for peaceful purposes only.

We know that economic sanctions have weakened Iran, and we assume that is what brought them to the table.

Nobody believes Iran’s insistence that their nuclear programme does not involve developing nuclear weapons. Their repeated denials are nothing but a pantomime; experts say all those spinning centrifuges are pretty pointless if they’re not for bombs.

It is possible that some sort of deal between Iran and the US might encourage Iran’s moderates and reformists, but the fundamental justification for brokering a deal is actually the threat of Iran acquiring nuclear weapons, in other words this deal is entirely based on the fact that Iran’s lie is so blatantly unconvincing.

If the denials were believable, negotiations or deals would not be necessary.  As it is, the denials appear so laughable that nobody even entertains the idea that they’re not lies, but nevertheless Obama’s team appears to be  treating the liars of Iran as trustworthy partners. 

Conditions, such as reimposing sanctions at the first sign of non compliance - which would take 60 odd days to implement - seem to be a poor kind of insurance; tantamount to shutting the stable door after the horse has bolted, when by that time much money will have already been released and distributed. 

Obama’s decision to befriend Iran and realign Middle East politics at a time when Iran had undoubtedly been weakened by economic sanctions makes one wonder why on earth  anyone in their right mind would make an unforced offer in exchange for Iran’s promise to stop doing something that in any case, it denies ever doing.

If Iran had been double-bluffing all along, say, if the centrifuges had been spinning away merely to give the impression there was something to hide, then Obama has squandered the advantage of a sanctions-weakened Iran for sweet sod all.

Lifting the sanctions, for any reason, would merely exacerbate the existing situation. It would provide extra cash for Iran’s proxy wars without curbing its inflammatory rhetoric, and weaken America and the west into the bargain. It would further jeopardise Israel’s security by funding and fuelling the (non-nuclear) belligerent activities that Iran is already engaged in.

  

Ring-fencing the negotiations to confront only the development of a hypothetical nuclear bomb, which Susan Rice swears emphatically is precisely what America has done, is completely illogical. Excluding the existing problems and narrowing down the deal to address Iran’s potential nuclear capability alone is the biggest possible blunder Obama could have made. The existing problems represent the wood that Obama can’t see because he's preoccupied with the trees. 

Iran has to convince everyone it is lying for this deal to make any strategic sense. In order to rationalise the deal Iran must - has to be - lying. The entire deal is predicated upon mutual mistrust, and it is assumed that Iran will continue to lie about all the conditions within the agreement, such as they are. It is expected that they will conceal, obfuscate and deceive, and play cat and mouse as Saddam did not so very long ago. Nobody expects Iran to honour its part of the deal without the usual shenanigans. That also doesn’t seem to be very desirable as far as deals go.

If, despite the seemingly unsound conditions that Obama has agreed to, Iran does acquire nuclear weapons - and some say when, not if -even a regime as volatile as Iran might hesitate before using them in a full-scale armageddon scenario, but it’s conceivable that they would attempt to smuggle a catastrophic terrorist bomb into enemy territory through a proxy. 

In that case we’re back to square one. Terrorism and aggression with conventional weapons, which they use with no compunction at all, with perhaps the addition of small-scale nuclear weapons too. And now enough money for a never-ending supply.

Please tell me, what’s good about this deal?

Whether or not everyone believed the Iranians were telling the truth, the only morally justifiable case for offering to lift sanctions would be in exchange for a deal to end all belligerence and inflammatory rhetoric against other countries, putting an end to all human rights violations and the adherence to various human rights principles tied to strictly regulated, enforceable conditions to ensure that any money will be spent in a positive manner, principally for the economic benefit of the Iranian people.

  

The Dateline London that Craig blogged the other day made me wonder all over again, why the BBC continues to give Abdel Bari Atwan a regular platform for his illogical Israel-bashing.

I’ve transcribed the relevant parts of that debate.

Bari: I’m really surprised about all this fuss about an Iranian nuclear bomb. We have Pakistani nuclear bomb. We have Indian nuclear bomb. We have Isra’eli nuclear bomb. so - why Iran shouldn’t have, why Saudia Arabia shouldn’t have one - why Egypt shouldn’t have one.”

Gavin: Would Saudi Arabia want one then?

Bari: I think they will.

Gavin: You know this deal is supposed to stop that.

Bari: You need deterrent with Iran, also deterrent with Israel, so that should be underlined completely. The mistrust - okay - I believe Iran is entitled - not to trust United States, you know for example you know, United States invaded two countries - two neighbours of Iran. Invaded Iraq, and occupied it, and invaded Afghanistan and occupied it... 

Gavin: You got rid of, in the case of  Saddam Hussain, somebody that was an opponent of Iran - you could say that American policy extended Iran’s influence in the region.

Bari: Yes it did. Definitely. Iran is in full control now of Iraq and now are building bridges with Afghanistan, the new regime in Afghanistan, and

you know, they have a huge influence in Syria, and in Lebanon via Hezbullah, so the American foreign policy is a disaster for the whole region, Now. I believe Barak Obama realised that. He can’t continue his policy; as Sharan said what’s the alternative? To go and bomb Iran? This will accelerate the Iranian drive towards a nuclear bomb. Now, they have enriched uranium, they have the know-how they have the centrifuge about 20,000, so they have their....

Gavin: The sanctions lifted...

Bari: Why not? Why not? You know, they are entitled to have it. As I said we have three nuclear bombs in the region  [...]

David Aaronovich says something to the effect that we must trust that Iran’s bark is worse than their bite.

Bari: But David you know Middle East. You know rhetoric is part of the Middle East. We used to have this rhetoric during Ahmadinejad. Since Rouhani took over as president of Iran we haven’t had this rhetoric against....

Gavin:What do you make of that?

Sharan: The rhetoric stays there. it was chanted in the street at the time of the negotiations. I take the point about moderating Iran’s politics. The hope - not the belief - the hope is that by negotiating with Iran the moderates will get the upper hand. If not we have to look at it again. Nuclear issue aside there are lots of other issues at stake that have to be dealt with. Iran is threatening the existence of another country in the region. That is not acceptable. That country is accepted by the united nations as legitimate. Iran should not threaten, should not say that Israel is the cancer, that Israel has to be eliminated from the earth. That rhetoric has to be stopped. That should be part of the deal. Then Iran would be trusted more because I agree with Bari that other countries have nuclear power, but those countries don’t want to destroy another country in the neighborhood.

Bari: This is not true. You know Israel is destroying Lebanon, destroyed Gaza that last just summer they invaded Gaza and bombed it so we cannot say ... which country did Iran bomb for example? Give me one example that Iran bombed, any country in the Middle East.

Sharan: Iran hasn’t bombed another country in the Middle East, but Iran is threatening. What I am saying...

Bari: Yes, but threat is different from action.

Sharan: Iran is threatening, and that threat comes from the extreme side of Iran, not from the moderate, from the reformists, that’s why we have to strengthen the reformists’ hands in Iran ...

Bari: But this...

John Fisher Burns (NY Times):  “... Israel is probably the most secure country in the Middle East, in part because it has nuclear weapons, it has extremely effected armed forces and because it has.....

Gavin:I think you’re making Bari’s argument for him.

Bari: But you know, you said, you know, Benjamin Netanyahu, the Isra’eli Prime Minister, has been threatening to bomb Iran for the last seven years....

Sharan: “I don’t...

Bari: Did you hear that? Did you hear about Benjamin Netanyahu? Did you saw him in the United Nations?

Sharan: I don’t accept... Netanyahu is manageable. Iran has to be managed as well.

*****

The deal between the BBC and Abdel Bari Atwan seems as dodgy as the deal I described at the top of the page.  Just because Bari is a friend of Gavin Esler he shouldn’t be entitled to a regular BBC platform for his particular brand of racist animosity towards Israel.

If Jeremy Corbyn can be quizzed about his traitorous friendships, so can the BBC.

Not only is Abdel Bari Atwan allowed to get away with multiple, factually incorrect allegations and accusations against Israel and America, but his reasoning is flawed and malicious. 

For example:

  

“We have Israeli nuclear bomb. so - why Iran shouldn’t have, why Saudi Arabia shouldn’t have one - why Egypt shouldn’t have one.” says Bari.

Reasoning that Iran should have the right to acquire nuclear bombs uses the reasoning ‘The warders have keys, therefore so should the inmates.’

“United States invaded two countries - two neighbours of Iran. Invaded Iraq, and occupied it, and invaded Afghanistan and occupied it...”

According to the twisted rhetoric above, America’s military attempts to stop the Taliban turning Afghanistan into an ISIS-like nightmare state constitutes ‘invasion, interference’ and ‘killing Muslims.’

“Since Rouhani took over as president of Iran we haven’t had this rhetoric against....”

Well, Sharan dealt with that falsehood, but it’s not only during the recent anti-west demonstrations that this rhetoric has made itself known. There are countless examples emanating from the Iranian leadership every day. 

“This is not true. You know Israel is destroying Lebanon, destroyed Gaza that last just summer they invaded Gaza and bombed it so we cannot say ... which country did Iran bomb for example? Give me one example that Iran bombed, any country in the Middle East.”

This entire paragraph is disingenuous, malicious and contradictory. If there was an element of ‘destruction‘ by Israel in Lebanon, it was precisely because of aggression by Hezbollah, Iran’s proxy. So that answers both the first and last falsehoods in that one paragraph in one go. 

 Certainly Israel’s retaliatory activities in Gaza necessitated some IDF ‘boots on the ground’ at great cost to the soldiers involved. That was not an invasion.    

Benjamin Netanyahu, the Israeli Prime Minister, has been threatening to bomb Iran for the last seven years....

That is not the case. In fact the window of opportunity to take out Iran’s nascent nuclear capability, if there ever was one, was frittered away by Obama’s procrastinating, his lack of support for Israel and his ill-conceived attempts to reach out to hostile Islamic states.

In any case, Israel’s interest was never to “bomb Iran”. It would have been directed as surgically as possible at disabling its nuclear programme.

Dodgy friendships, dodgy deals.