|
« The transatlantic Livingstone
Main |
January 14, 2004
Dhimmi Britain
Great piece by Mark Steyn nailing the terrifying drift in Britain towards dhimmification*, as evidenced by the Kilroy-Silk affair: 'Let me see if I understand the BBC Rules of Engagement correctly: if you're Robert Kilroy-Silk and you make some robust statements about the Arab penchant for suicide bombing, amputations, repression of women and a generally celebratory attitude to September 11 – none of which is factually in dispute – the BBC will yank you off the air and the Commission for Racial Equality will file a complaint to the police which could result in your serving seven years in gaol. Message: this behaviour is unacceptable in multicultural Britain. But, if you're Tom Paulin and you incite murder, in a part of the world where folks need little incitement to murder, as part of a non-factual emotive rant about how "Brooklyn-born" Jewish settlers on the West Bank "should be shot dead" because "they are Nazis" and "I feel nothing but hatred for them", the BBC will keep you on the air, kibitzing (as the Zionists would say) with the crème de la crème of London's cultural arbiters each week. Message: this behaviour is completely acceptable.' But Steyn observes something even more chilling -- although to us long-time observers of institutional BBC prejudice, not surprising: 'So, while the BBC is "investigating" Kilroy, its only statement on Mr Paulin was an oblique but curiously worded allusion to the non-controversy on the Corporation website: "His polemical, knockabout style has ruffled feathers in the US, where the Jewish question is notoriously sensitive." "The Jewish question"? "Notoriously sensitive"? Is this really how they talk at the BBC?' Yup, it sure is - but usually in private. To the Beeb's illiberals, any Jewish protests at incitment to murder Jews are indeed 'notoriously sensitive', as indeed are any Jewish protests against current antisemitism. And of course, Israel is still 'the Jewish question' which for them remains unanswered -- and no doubt still awaiting a final solution. *'Dhimmi' is the status of infidels under Islam who are permitted to live in Muslim jurusdictions but only with restrictions as second-class citizens. Posted by melanie at January 14, 2004
Comments
Rod Liddle in the Times (14th January)also makes some interesting points on this issue. Posted by: Gregory Spawton at January 14, 2004 01:27 PMI almost gawped when I read that citation from the BBC by Mark Steyn. The "Jewish Question"?! The WHATY?! The last time I heard that phrase I think it was something to with the Nuremburg trials. Since the Arab world still has a thumping great bee in in its bonnet about the very existence of the state of Isreal, I'd sooner refer to the Arab-Israeli conflict as the "Arab question", rather than the Jewish one. Posted by: Simon at January 14, 2004 01:31 PMPerhaps the BBC will next start advocating some kind of "Final Solution" for "the Jewish question"? Posted by: Susan at January 14, 2004 03:23 PMJewish question? Anyone with an ounce of historical knowledge knows the echo that "Judenfrage" sounds. Can we now expect the BBC to use an English variant of "Judenrein" to describe most of the middle east? How about "Endloesung" to describe the ultimate goal of Hamas? Posted by: Gabriel M at January 14, 2004 03:29 PMSusan, Well, I fear the BBC a lot more than Dhimmi Carter! But yeah, the choice of wording was extremely weird for such a "peaceful" man. Posted by: Susan at January 14, 2004 07:44 PMAll being well, Kilroy will be offered a show on another station and the BBC will be left with egg on its face. However, I would now like to see a campaign really stepped up against this increasingly vile and unrepresentative media organisation. I am not sure if the odious Orla Guerin is still responsible for reporting from Israel or if she has been moved on, but the BBC's use of Ms Geurin to report on events in Israel/Palestine has disgusted me and for me is the prime example of their hypocrosy. She is incidentally married to a Palestinian yet I know for certain that a Jewish reporter would not be allowed to have her job in the Middle East. How do I know? My wife's cousin is a well known Jewish foreign reporter on the BBC news and he will never be posted to the Middle East. Double Standards, Double Standards. And that's before we get onto Tom Paulin. It is time, the BBC had the wind taken out of its sails. Any suggestions?? Posted by: mark at January 14, 2004 11:10 PMI am stealing this suggestion from another talkboard, but this made as good of sense as any: dress up in identity-covering costumes, take your tellies down to the Thames in the middle of the night, and toss 'em, en masse. Worked for us Yanks, though it was tea we threw, and not Tee-Vee. Posted by: Susan at January 15, 2004 12:44 AMSusan, I love the idea! Perhaps a kind of TV-tossing version of a mardi gras parade might be organised with floats that eject TV sets into the Thames accompanies by roars of approval and fireworks....! ;-) (Before anyone decides to accuse me of encouraging the breaking of the law - I am ONLY JOKING...;-) Posted by: David at January 16, 2004 08:37 AM"the odious Orla Guerin is ... married to a Palestinian" First, it's not true: she isn't. Second, can one imagine the howls of outrage is someone were to claim (even if it weren't a lie, as in this case) that someone is disqualified from doing their job because they are married to a Jew. The author of such a comment would instantly be called an anti-Semite. Posted by: Brendan at January 19, 2004 04:05 PM |
