I guess the innocent seeming have to die a horrible death the catch some marginally sympathetic attention from the BBC.

Oh! wait a minute! - they only do that SOMETIMES... such a display of humanism when the Beeb mainly believes that a busload of Jewish civilians dont matter!

I consider the BBC, The Guardian and The Independent to be something of an axis of evil in this country.

While I can avoid the latter two, its disgraceful that having paid a license fee, I'm left with listening to a bunch of socialists referring to Judea and Samaria as Palestinian territory and constantly quoting ridiculous lies from "Palestinian sources".

Perhaps, given the lack of balance in the BBC, it could be said that Greg Dyke has laid a wreath on Reith.

Clearly, Ms. Phillips, you need a refresher course in history.

Middle East history began on June 11, 1967. Nothing happened before that, and therefore it's mistaken to consider anything going on today in light of anything that happened before that.

Furthermore, Palestinian history began this morning. So anything the Palestinians have done, anything they've failed to do, any opportunities they've failed to take up, and in particular any grotesque savagery they've engaged in, have no relevance.

It's also hegemonic to question anything the Palestinians say. If they say that the only obstacle to peace is Israel's occupation of the territories, then that's the only obstacle to peace.

Historically, radio 4 often takes a pro-terror perspective. It likes to romanticise armed struggles, its libertarian journalists are often in awe of charismatic freedom fighters. Unromantic leaders of democratic states who are trying to fight terror with terror are sometimes treated with contempt. I wouldn't take the radio 4 people too seriously - the world has moved on - you will find more balanced and fair-minded coverage on bbc world service - much more worldly.

On a different topic, the silent actor in the Middle East always seems to me to be Iran. Since 1979, there has been a cold war between the US/Israel and Iran. In fact, many influential business people in the Middle East are often Jewish or Iranian - this seems to me to be a hidden axis of power in the Middle East that is rarely discussed in the West. For example, Israel has the bomb, why shouldn't Iran ? Are they not the two regional superpowers ? I would appreciate any views on this.

Clive;

A few possible reasons come to mind:

1) Israel is an liberal democracy with a free press, while Iran is a repressive theocracy.

2) Iran has high ranking politicians openly pondering nuclear genocide as a plausible policy.

3) Iran is a leading sponsor of terrorism.

But other than those, no, I can't really think of anything.

James Naughtie's edgy prosecutorial style with Israelis is well established. Just as his over respectful and light weight questioning of Palestinians is well established .
In fact I'm heartily sick of the whole Radio 4 establishment. The coverage of the war in Iraq , the bias implicit in its middle east reporting, the political correctness that means you can always safely assume what any report will conclude before you get to the end.
The BBC is beyond redemption.

On the subject of Iran, its quite ludicrous for them to suggest that a country with 10% of the worlds oil is seeking nuclear energy. Iran are seeking nuclear bombs. But Iran is committed to the destruction of Israel and openly supports terrorism, it gives funding to hamas for example. So if Iran did get a nuclear warhead there is a large possibility of it finding its way to some terrorists. My point is that if America can't tackle Iran through whatever means its using now, then Israel will be forced to bomb Iran's nuclear facilities as it did with Iraq's. Not just to eliminate a risk, but because Israel's very existence will depend on it. However can you imagine the worldwide reaction to that?

On a seperate issue, while normally a mail reader I bought a telegraph yesterday and discovered a small article pouring criticism on the BBC for its anti-Israel reporting of the suicide bomb. In particular the telegraph expressed much dismay at the BBC's refusal to call terrorists terrorists. I was pleased to find some commen sense prevails.

I was really pleased to read your aside about Orla Guerin. How much is your sentiment shared? I was wondering if I were the only one to find her so hateful. I do not see her any more on the BBC here in the US. Has she been banned from the country? I hope so.

Clive:

As it happens, a few days ago the Financial Times had a letter from Gabriel Kolko, who is a leading Cold War revisionist historian asking that very question--if Israel already has nuclear weapons, why the brouhaha if Iran gets them?

One possible response is that no Israeli leader has suggested that Israel would use nuclear weapons to wipe out Iran, whereas Iranian leaders have made that very threat against Israel.

It's just another assertion of moral equivalence in a situation without moral equivalence.

Clive, IIRC Iran has signed the non-proliferation treaty, Israel has not.

Yes Ed - we all deplore OG too, and I recall an incident that she got quite shirty when lots of Honest Reporting people emailed her to tell her what they thought of her. She just can't do a report without 'balance', however dastardly the Palestinian crime or how justifiable the Israeli response. Her favourite comments seem to be reserved for the use of modern weaponry against the terrorists. She seems unaware that the terrorists are flouting the Geneva Convention in their cynical use of civilians as cover without any thought for the safety of non-combatants. One can only surmise how she would cope if Israel really went after the terrorists in Judea, Samaria in the style of a conventional war. And if they did? Why - the civilians would have to join their relatives twenty miles away in Jordan, the result of which would equate to the only sensible solution - already proposed by Benny Elon and predictably ignored by the BBC.

Israel extends nuclear weapons capability - useful article here on Israel's WMDs :
http://news.ft.com/servlet/ContentServer?pagename=FT.com/StoryFT/FullStory&c=StoryFT&cid=1059480514111&p=1012571727085

Virtue never stands alone. It is bound to have neighbors.