Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

BBC Official Admits Network 'Got it Wrong' on Fogel Murders
Arutz Sheva ^ | 24/6/12 | Rachel Hirshfeld

Posted on 06/24/2012 2:49:45 PM PDT by Eleutheria5

The British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) “got it wrong” in its reporting of the massacre of the Fogel family by Arab terrorists in the Jewish community of Itamar, the broadcaster's outgoing director-general admitted at a parliamentary committee hearing.

The BBC’s Mark Thompson acquiesced on June 19 while being questioned by Conservative member of parliament Louise Mensch, the London Jewish Chronicle reported.

In complaining about the insufficient coverage of the event on BBC radio and television programs, the newspaper reported that Mensch said, “I only found out, after the event, from an American blog, called ‘Dead Jews is no news,’ and the more I went into it, the more shocked I was.”

“There was a feeling that the BBC just didn’t care and that if a settler had opened the home of a Palestinian family, slit the throat of their children, that the BBC would have covered that,” Mensch asserted.

Thompson responded by claiming that the story occurred during a “very busy news period,” including the fighting in Libya and the tsunami in Japan and that “news editors were under a lot of pressure.”

“Having said that, it was certainly an atrocity which should have been covered across our news bulletins that day,” he added.

.....

(Excerpt) Read more at israelnationalnews.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Israel; United Kingdom; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: bbc; fogelmurder; itamar; meaculpa
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-59 next last
I can dig why the BBC ignored the story. Arabs massacre Jooos! is dog bites man. Baby pics were not cute, because of blood. So they back-paged it. Stiff upper lip.
1 posted on 06/24/2012 2:49:53 PM PDT by Eleutheria5
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Eleutheria5

BBC is pro-Pali terrorist groups, anti-Israel.

Britain blocked Jews in the 1930’s and 1940’s going to the Holy Land.

She is no longer a world power.

Betraying the Jews brings payback from God.

America is following a similar stupid path.

Now the Muslim Brotherhood won in Egypt.

We have our own Muslim Brother- in the -hood, err in charge.


2 posted on 06/24/2012 3:28:06 PM PDT by F15Eagle (1 John 5:4-5, 4:15, 5:13; John 3:17-18, 6:69, 11:25, 14:6, 20:31; Rom10:8-11; 1 Tim 2:5; Titus 3:4-5)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Eleutheria5

When does biased BBC ever get it right?


3 posted on 06/24/2012 4:08:35 PM PDT by Milagros (Y)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Eleutheria5
Britain is in financial straits at the moment.

I respectfully suggest the privatization of the BBC.

The sell of the networks should net a billion Euros or more.

4 posted on 06/24/2012 5:16:58 PM PDT by Pontiac (The welfare state must fail because it is contrary to human nature and diminishes the human spirit.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pontiac
Britain is in financial straits at the moment. I respectfully suggest the privatization of the BBC.

Aye. Sell it to Rupert Murdoch.

5 posted on 06/24/2012 5:27:07 PM PDT by okie01
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Eleutheria5

Brits have always hated Jews. That’s why they didn’t let any into England or Israel before WW II, and let Hitler slaughter them.


6 posted on 06/24/2012 5:28:05 PM PDT by MuttTheHoople (Obama doesn’t have the work ethic to be Anti-Christ.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MuttTheHoople

I don’t get that sense at all with the Britons I’ve met, nor those that post here on Freep. But the BBC, known to some as the Bloody Bleepin’ Communists, is another matter. It’s of a piece with the London Guardian, the New York Times, CNN, and Haaretz. Just how they came to loudly say mea culpa before Parliament is probably an interesting story, and on its face puts the lie to that accusation.


7 posted on 06/24/2012 11:41:29 PM PDT by Eleutheria5 (End the occupation. Annex today.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: MuttTheHoople
Brits have always hated Jews.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benjamin_Disraeli

The United States of America has yet to elect a Jewish president.

A jack mooselimb commie traitor is the farthest we've ventured from the conventional.

8 posted on 06/24/2012 11:59:05 PM PDT by cynwoody
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: MuttTheHoople

Utter rubbish.

Firstly, the British have not ‘always hated Jews’. There is NO history of antisemitism in Scotland, Wales or NI. And English antisemitism historically has been much, much less than mainland Europe. Modern anti-semitism has been confined to an upper class group in the 1930’s (the Cliveden Set) and a tiny minority of working class white far-right groups (like Mosley’s British Fascists of the 1930’s, and the BNP today). As well of course as a minority of Islamic extremists.

The British did reject and have continued to reject the anti-semitism that gripped Europe for a generation. The British simply have never cared (bar a minority) about people’s Jewishness. In fact, the tenets of Judaism and Jewish life (education, respect for law and order, hard work, morality) are greatly admired. The newest primetime documentary on British TV this week, which will be watched by about 10-15m people, is about the Jewish community of Manchester.

Some of Britain’s most admired and much beloved businessmen, entertainers, politicians over the years and now are openly Jewish. And some of our most iconic companies (Marks and Spencer’s, Odeon Cinemas, Burton’s) are Jewish.

Britain has had a Jewish Prime Minister, in fact the current PM has Jewish blood, and so many prominent Jewish
politicians over the years, I dont have the space to write them all. Where’s the American Jewish President btw?. You cant even elect a white anglo-saxon woman!.

I undertstand you are angry about this story, but to claim that Britain and the British people are anti-semitic is utterly wrong. Your ignorance of history and British history is utterly wrong.

Secondly, you are again so wrong about ‘Britain not letting Jews in’ its laughable. Everyone knows that Britain took in tens of thousands of German Jewish refugees in the 1930’s. 100000 to be exact. More than America, btw. So you are ignorant not once, but twice.

Lastly, to suggest we ‘let Hitler kill the Jews’ is so pathetic I almost think you are being funny. Where was America in 1939, 1940 and 1941?. Who fought Hitler and the Nazis the longest?. Who fought them alone when no-one else would?. Who took in more Jews than America?.

We British were the only people brave enough to stand up to the Nazis and the Italian fascists, whilst America cowered 3000 miles across the ocean.

And you have the ignorance and nerve to attack us?.


9 posted on 06/25/2012 1:39:05 AM PDT by the scotsman (I)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: dennisw; Cachelot; Nix 2; veronica; Catspaw; knighthawk; Alouette; Optimist; weikel; Lent; GregB; ..
Middle East and terrorism, occasional political and Jewish issues Ping List. High Volume

If you’d like to be on or off, please FR mail me.

..................

10 posted on 06/25/2012 5:22:41 AM PDT by SJackson (As a black man, you know, Barack could get shot going to the gas station, M Obama)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: the scotsman

Fine. The BBC hates Jews and hates Israel. BBC has a large number of Muslims on staff when it comes to Asian and Mid East news. How many Jews work at the BBC Mid East news departments? Chis Hitchens found improvised Muslim prayer rooms at BBC London

You have a huge liudmouth leftist establishment in the UK. In England at least, that hates Israel and is always trying to sneak in academic boycotts of Israel and boycotts of Israeli products

But, as you say, the British people are not anti-Semitic


11 posted on 06/25/2012 5:36:24 AM PDT by dennisw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: the scotsman

Disraeli was born a Jew, but was baptised a Christian and was an Anglican all his life. When it came to nut-crunching time, the Brits left the Continental Jews at the mercy of Hitler and his national Socialists.


12 posted on 06/25/2012 6:02:38 AM PDT by MuttTheHoople (Obama doesn’t have the work ethic to be Anti-Christ.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: MuttTheHoople

I am aware of Disraeli’s life. Still, at least a PM who at least was born a Jew and had Jewish blood and background is more than America has put in the White House.

Nut crunching time?. It was Britain who took in 100000 Jewish refugees. It was Britain who stood in 1939 against Hitler and the Axis. And it was Britain who stood alone in 1940 and 1941 against the Nazis and Fascist Italy. Whilst America was nowhere to be seen.

You sneer about what Britain did at ‘nut-crunching time’, frankly what the **** did America do to help the Jews of Europe?. Or do to stop the Nazis?.


13 posted on 06/25/2012 6:11:07 AM PDT by the scotsman (I)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: MuttTheHoople

If we Limeys ‘let the Jews die’, god knows what the level of moral culpability of America 1933-1941 is then.


14 posted on 06/25/2012 6:12:33 AM PDT by the scotsman (I)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: the scotsman

“what the **** did America do to help the Jews of Europe?. Or do to stop the Nazis?”

Really? But for our friends the Americans, I would not exist, and you would be, at best, a Nazi serf.

That said, I do agree the British anti-semitism is almost uniquely an upper-class phenom. I’ve been swept up among EDL football thugs accidently, and they treated me squarely all right, even respecftfully, and I have a kippa, beard, etc.

In contrast, at upper class parties (we lived in Knightsbridge for a year), we were shunned when they discovered we were Israeli and our children suddenly not invited to play dates.


15 posted on 06/25/2012 7:30:43 AM PDT by Jewbacca (The residents of Iroquois territory may not determine whether Jews may live in Jerusalem.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Jewbacca

‘Really? But for our friends the Americans, I would not exist, and you would be, at best, a Nazi serf.’

Yawn. History not your strongpoint, I see.


16 posted on 06/25/2012 8:00:56 AM PDT by the scotsman (I)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: the scotsman

I’ll just put it into perspective, the USA lost roughly 450,000 men defending your homeland, while all of the United Kingdom, put together, lost 300,000.

I’m thinking whatever Scotland-centric history you read is as accurate as the Soviet version of the Great Patriotic War.


17 posted on 06/25/2012 8:16:05 AM PDT by Jewbacca (The residents of Iroquois territory may not determine whether Jews may live in Jerusalem.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Jewbacca

The US lost 450000 men helping to win the war and defeat Nazism and Fascism, as well as Imperial Japan. They did not die to defend Britain. If you think America saved Britain, then you make my point about your skewed notion of what happened in WW2.

BTW, I am a qualified historian, so the history I know is the real history. Not the Hollywood/America-centric rubbish you clearly think you know.

America helped win the war. And those 450000 men and women should never be forgotten. And I respect and honour their sacrifice. Pity you treat the immense British contribution and sacrifice with utter contempt.


18 posted on 06/25/2012 8:55:45 AM PDT by the scotsman (I)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: the scotsman

“BTW, I am a qualified historian”

LOL. That’s explains your silliness.

“They did not die to defend Britain.”

That’s actually funny. The UK was on the ropes, and but for US industry and men would have lost.

“Not the Hollywood/America-centric rubbish you clearly think you know.”

I am not American, nor did I learn my history from Americans. My father, and all of my grandparents were victims of the Nazis in one way or the other, fleeing or dying in either France or German, depending on which story.

“Pity you treat the immense British contribution and sacrifice with utter contempt.”

I did no such thing. You’ve got me confused with another poster.


19 posted on 06/25/2012 9:33:16 AM PDT by TheThirdRuffian (I will never vote for Romney. Ever.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: TheThirdRuffian

Sorry, but the reply you have quoted was a reply from me to Jewbacca, I have had no conservation with you in this thread.

I am quite happy to do so though.


20 posted on 06/25/2012 9:37:00 AM PDT by the scotsman (I)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: the scotsman
Britain has had a Jewish Prime Minister, in fact the current PM has Jewish blood, and so many prominent Jewish

Churchill was very pro-Jew, but many in his own party were not....part of the reason Churchill was "in the wilderness" in the mid-30s regarding Hitler.

21 posted on 06/25/2012 9:37:25 AM PDT by dfwgator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: TheThirdRuffian

‘LOL. That’s explains your silliness.’

Pointing out that America did not ‘save’ Britain in ww2 (or ww1) and that such notions are simply bad history is silly?.

‘That’s actually funny. The UK was on the ropes, and but for US industry and men would have lost.’

Crap.

Firstly, whilst Britain without America (and Canada) could not have landed in Normandy or Italy/Sicily, neither could Germany and the Axis defeat the British.

The Battle of Britain had been a failure, the British had mauled the Italians at sea, in the air and on land, and the Germans had failed even by 1941 and American entry to ww2, to have won the Battle of the Atlantic (which was btw a mostly British-Canadian battle, and the initial USN tactics in 1942 by Adm King almost lost the allies the battle....)

Secondly, are you aware that 79% of all ships and 50% of all planes on D-Day were British?. That American troops on D-Day were landed by the Royal Navy?. As were most American troops in Algeria in 1942 and Sicily and Italy in 1943.

So the Americans, who supposedly ‘saved’ us, could never have defeated Hitler if they hadnt had the damn Limeys to land them there in the first place.

And I havent even mentioned PLUTO, the Bailey Bridge or the Mulberry Harbours, again all British.

Lastly, even IF Britain had been ‘saved’, your reply shows the usual astonishing American arrogance and ignorance about the allies that Britain had in WW2.

Far from relying on America, we had Canada, Australia, New Zealand, India, South Africa, and the whole of the British Empire. White, black, brown and asian. From Canada to Australia, Hong Kong to the Caribbean. From Malta and Cyprus to the Falklands.

You didnt forget that we still in 1940 had an empire that spanned the globe, and had hundreds of millions within it, did you?. Over FIVE MILLION of whom fought with the British in WW2.

Our biggest supplier of arms and material in WW2?. America?. Nope. CANADA. Who also gave the UK six BILLION dollars in ‘Mutual Aid’.

And most of our imports came from the Empire. Rubber from Malaya, lamb from NZ etc.

America HELPED Britain.
BUT it didnt ‘save’ it.


22 posted on 06/25/2012 9:57:46 AM PDT by the scotsman (I)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: the scotsman

I would make the case that Poles may have saved Britain even more than the US, since their pilots played a crucial role in the Battle of Britain.


23 posted on 06/25/2012 10:04:19 AM PDT by dfwgator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: MuttTheHoople

I think the Brits hate that a tiny rag tag ill armed group of Jews chased out a large British military force in pre-State Israel. The Israelis humiliated the Brits.


24 posted on 06/25/2012 1:04:56 PM PDT by dervish (ABO)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: dennisw

The BBC has a revolving employment door with Al Jazeera.


25 posted on 06/25/2012 1:10:59 PM PDT by dervish (ABO)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: dervish
I think the Brits hate that a tiny rag tag ill armed group of Jews chased out a large British military force in pre-State Israel. The Israelis humiliated the Brits.

Some of that is going on. It is human nature to despise your former colonials that booted you out. The British lost India too but have no resentment against them. I think because India is too big to hate while the Jewish numbers were small in 1948 but succeeded.  And are still small. There are 14 million Jews worldwide and Mormon numbers are about the same

26 posted on 06/25/2012 1:35:59 PM PDT by dennisw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: dervish

Spare me the romantic tosh.

The Irgun and the Stern gangs were terrorists. End of.

They bombed and shot innocent men, women and children, including Jews. They blew up the King David Hotel, killing and maiming many of their fellow Jews. They tortured two unarmed British off duty soldiers (Sgts Martin and Paice), then boobytrapped their bodies. They murdered any Jew they suspected of opposing them and being sympathetic to the British administration.

For ffs, they even murdered Count Bernadotte in 1948, a true hero who has spent WW2 SAVING thousands of Jewish lives!.

Abraham Stern was such a diseased Zionist fanatic, in 1941, he met with Nazi representatives to discuss an alliance where the Stern Gang would keep attacking the British in Palestine, in reply the Nazis would agree to deport all European Jews to Israel and allow the Zionists to set up Israel. All Jews would be out of Europe, which is what the Nazis wanted.

Think I am kidding?. The meeting happened.

The British could have wiped them out, and been brutal in doing so, but after 1945 and the concentration camps, the whole world was watching Palestine and Britain could not and would not incur the wrath of America and the world.

We had to try and fight two terrorist groups with one hand tied behind our back.

The very men who has fought and bled across Europe to liberate Belsen, defeat the Nazis and save what was left of European Jewish civilisation.....what was their thanks?.

To be bombed, shot and murdered by Jewish extremists.


27 posted on 06/25/2012 1:41:13 PM PDT by the scotsman (I)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: dervish

Spare me the romantic tosh.

The Irgun and the Stern gangs were terrorists. End of.

They bombed and shot innocent men, women and children, including Jews. They blew up the King David Hotel, killing and maiming many of their fellow Jews. They tortured two unarmed British off duty soldiers (Sgts Martin and Paice), then boobytrapped their bodies. They murdered any Jew they suspected of opposing them and being sympathetic to the British administration.

For ffs, they even murdered Count Bernadotte in 1948, a true hero who has spent WW2 SAVING thousands of Jewish lives!.

Abraham Stern was such a diseased Zionist fanatic, in 1941, he met with Nazi representatives to discuss an alliance where the Stern Gang would keep attacking the British in Palestine, in reply the Nazis would agree to deport all European Jews to Israel and allow the Zionists to set up Israel. All Jews would be out of Europe, which is what the Nazis wanted.

Think I am kidding?. The meeting happened.

The British could have wiped them out, and been brutal in doing so, but after 1945 and the concentration camps, the whole world was watching Palestine and Britain could not and would not incur the wrath of America and the world.

We had to try and fight two terrorist groups with one hand tied behind our back.

The very men who has fought and bled across Europe to liberate Belsen, defeat the Nazis and save what was left of European Jewish civilisation.....what was their thanks?.

To be bombed, shot and murdered by Jewish extremists.


28 posted on 06/25/2012 1:41:23 PM PDT by the scotsman (I)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: dennisw; dervish

Firstly, the Palestine 1944-48 ‘conflict’ has been almost totally forgotten in Britain. It isnt taught in schools and TV and the media almost never mentions it, even if Israel and the Palestine issue is in our daily media. Most Brits are completely unware that there was a conflict there. Ask 99% of Brits about the Irgun and Stern gangs and youd get a blank look. So the idea we have any residual dislike because of 1944-48 is a nonsense.

Secondly, we were hardly colonial masters. Britain only ‘ruled’ it from 1918 to 1948.


29 posted on 06/25/2012 1:48:01 PM PDT by the scotsman (I)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: the scotsman; dervish

The “Scotsman” clearly has a bad case of butthurt.


30 posted on 06/25/2012 2:39:30 PM PDT by Jewbacca (The residents of Iroquois territory may not determine whether Jews may live in Jerusalem.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Jewbacca; dennisw; the scotsman

I realized the relative sizes of the fighting forces when I visited the Etzel Museum many years ago. Great place. Plus the Brits never fail to call the Jews terrorists , and bring up the King David Hotel neglecting to mention it was military headquarters.


31 posted on 06/25/2012 6:07:14 PM PDT by dervish (ABO)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: the scotsman
“The British could have wiped them out, and been brutal in doing so, but after 1945 and the concentration camps, the whole world was watching Palestine and Britain could not and would not incur the wrath of America and the world.”

You are correct that the Brits could have wiped the Jews out after WW2 but chose not to. The reasons they did not are not the ones you mentioned. Unlike you most Brits were decent people who wanted nothing to do with genocide. They knew that they bore a moral responsibility for allowing millions of Jews to be murdered by not allowing them to emigrate from the European continent to Israel/Palestine during the Holocaust.

“The very men who has fought and bled across Europe to liberate Belsen, defeat the Nazis and save what was left of European Jewish civilisation.....what was their thanks?.”

It is great that the Brits fought the Nazis. But they did not do it to save what was left of European Jews. They did it to save their country after Hitler was a threat to them. Before that they were OK giving him a free hand to do whatever he wanted in Eastern Europe, including with the Jews. You have conveniently omitted Neville Chamberlain's craven capitulation to the Nazis when he gifted Czechoslovakia to them and then declared that he had bought “peace in our time?”

After WW1 Britain was given a MANDATE (that means something they had to do) by the League of Nations to create a Jewish Homeland in “Palestine.” The territory of that Mandate included what is now Israel and Jordan, a pretty big piece of real estate.

Nefariously, Britain chopped off the lion's share of that territory and gave it to a Saudi prince, Abdullah, creating the Judenrein nation of Trans Jordan.

The so called “Jewish extremists” realized that the Jewish people could not rely on the Brits for their survival and did what they had to do for the restoration of of Jewish sovereignty.

You know what they say: “one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter.”

“All Jews would be out of Europe, which is what the Nazis wanted.”

The Nazis did not want that. They wanted all Jews in the entire world killed. You know that very well which underlines the duplicity of your post.

Methinks it fitting that you spare us your romantic tosh.

32 posted on 06/25/2012 8:45:58 PM PDT by DrKay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: dervish

We never fail to call them that because they were. I actually respect someone who says ‘yeah, they were, so what’, than the people who try and argue ‘no, they were freedom fighters’.

Why is it so hard for people to admit Jewish people can be terrorists?. I dosent ‘mark’ Jews anymore than the IRA marks Catholic Irish, ETA marks Basques or Timothy McVeigh marks Americans.

So the hotel was a legitimate target?. Imagine if I came on and argued that the USS Cole wasa perfectly legitimate target. Or the two embassies in 1998, after all they had CIA staff working out of them.

If what the Irgun and Stern gangs did was a-ok, then frankly all terrorism is, so quit whining about 9-11.

OK?.

(YEAH, YOU SEE HOW CRAP THAT ARGUMENT IS?)


33 posted on 06/26/2012 3:13:28 AM PDT by the scotsman (I)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: DrKay

‘You are correct that the Brits could have wiped the Jews out after WW2 but chose not to. The reasons they did not are not the ones you mentioned. Unlike you most Brits were decent people who wanted nothing to do with genocide. They knew that they bore a moral responsibility for allowing millions of Jews to be murdered by not allowing them to emigrate from the European continent to Israel/Palestine during the Holocaust.’

Firstly, I am a decent person. I am pro-Israel and a great admirer of Jews. The only Jews I cant stand are the men and women of those two 1940’s groups and those who would try and justify their murderous activities.

Secondly, if Britain is morally culpable, **** knows how culpable that makes America.

‘It is great that the Brits fought the Nazis. But they did not do it to save what was left of European Jews. They did it to save their country after Hitler was a threat to them. Before that they were OK giving him a free hand to do whatever he wanted in Eastern Europe, including with the Jews. You have conveniently omitted Neville Chamberlain’s craven capitulation to the Nazis when he gifted Czechoslovakia to them and then declared that he had bought “peace in our time?”’

Nowhere did I say we fought ww2 purely to save Jews. My point was more to point out the sad irony of British soldiers fighting the Nazis for six years, at one point alone, and even liberate Belsen, only to have (some) Jews despise them.

‘After WW1 Britain was given a MANDATE (that means something they had to do) by the League of Nations to create a Jewish Homeland in “Palestine.” The territory of that Mandate included what is now Israel and Jordan, a pretty big piece of real estate.

Nefariously, Britain chopped off the lion’s share of that territory and gave it to a Saudi prince, Abdullah, creating the Judenrein nation of Trans Jordan.

The so called “Jewish extremists” realized that the Jewish people could not rely on the Brits for their survival and did what they had to do for the restoration of of Jewish sovereignty.’

They were extremists, they were terrorists. Dont try the noxious idea of putting inverted commas around them to signify that they werent.

And remember that many Jews OPPOSED what they did, inside Palestine and outside. Ben Gurion being the most famous. There were decent and honourable Jewish people and groups who wanted what the two terrorist groups wanted, BUT knew that violence and terror was morally wrong, morally unjustifiable. They worked WITH the British to hunt down the Irgun and Stern groups.

So dont give me the BS that they HAD to do what they did. They could have gained their country peacefully. Through politics. Your argument that they HAD to resort to violence and murder is complete BS.

If you argue that they were justified in their violence, then what the IRA did/does or ETA did/does is also perfectly justifiable. And ergo most terrorism.

‘You know what they say: “one man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter.”’

Yes, I do. And it is the biggest load of bull of modern times. And it is a pathetic moral and intellectual enditement of our times because it was never an actual serious quote. Yet a generation of people who prefer to spout meaningless ‘buzzphrases’ have latched on to it and spout it endlessly with no understanding of what it actually means.

You DO know where it comes from, dont you?. Dont you?.

It comes from the pen of a BRITISH novelist: Gerald Seymour. In his classic 1975 novel, Harry’s Game (later made into a classic British TV drama), the phrase is uttered by an IRA terrorist trying to justify what he is doing.

BTW, even IF it WERE a real and serious argument, its still the biggest load of tripe. An argument any intelligent person can destroy in a few seconds.

‘The Nazis did not want that. They wanted all Jews in the entire world killed. You know that very well which underlines the duplicity of your post.’

No, what the Nazis initially wanted was the expulsion of Jews, Judaism and Jewish culture from Germany and Europe. If you know your history, you will know that the Nazis looked many times at ways to throw all German/Austrian, and later European, Jews out of Europe. Either force the UK, US etc to take them, or to force the British to accept all Jews to Palestine. I assume you know of the famous ideas like deporting all Jews to Madagascar.

Later, with the horrible idea of the Final Solution, they decided murder would be the most effective way. BUT the Germans from 1933 to 1942 also many times considered deportation and mass expulsion of Jews to be an answer to the ‘Jewish problem’. The Final Solution was not an idea thought of in 1933, or 1935 or even 1939. It came as an ‘evolution’ in the line of vile Nazi ideas.


34 posted on 06/26/2012 3:41:49 AM PDT by the scotsman (I)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: DrKay

Good post Dr Kay.... Especially about the British not allowing Jews to leave Europe and go to Palestine during WW2. My guess is 200,000 Jews died due to this policy. But Jewish life was cheap back then and the Brits wanted to placate the crazy Muslims who had been rioting in Palestine during the late 1930’s

Stern and Irgun gangs were nothing and did nothing compared to the death sentence the British gave a few hundred thousand Jews


35 posted on 06/26/2012 4:07:44 AM PDT by dennisw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: dervish

“bring up the King David Hotel neglecting to mention it was military headquarters.”

First, I am not going to excuse the bombing of the KDH. It was an act of war, no doubt about it.

Second, and however, the Brits always neglect to mention the Irgun called the Brits REPEATEDLY telling them there was a bomb -— the goal was to destroy the seret police records, not terror or to take human life.

For reasons unknown, the Brits simply refused to evacuate the building.


36 posted on 06/26/2012 7:36:09 AM PDT by Jewbacca (The residents of Iroquois territory may not determine whether Jews may live in Jerusalem.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: dennisw

But Jewish life was cheap back then’

Yeah, it was certainly just as cheap to America. Who took less Jewish refugees than Britain and refused to take in large numbers, despite being having a much larger country and five times the population.

‘Refugees from Nazi Germany

In the years before and during World War II the United States Congress, the Roosevelt Administration, and public opinion expressed concern about the fate of Jews in Europe but consistently refused to permit large-scale immigration of Jewish refugees.

In a report issued by the State Department, Undersecretary of State Stuart Eizenstat noted that the United States accepted only 21,000 refugees from Europe and did not significantly raise or even fill its restrictive quotas, accepting far fewer Jews per capita than many of the neutral European countries and fewer in absolute terms than Switzerland.

According to David Wyman, “The United States and its Allies were willing to attempt almost nothing to save the Jews.”[42]

U.S. opposition to immigration in general in the late 1930s was motivated by the grave economic pressures, the high unemployment rate, and social frustration and disillusionment. The U.S. refusal to support specifically Jewish immigration, however, stemmed from something else, namely antisemitism, which had increased in the late 1930s and continued to rise in the 1940s. It was an important ingredient in America’s negative response to Jewish refugees.[43]’

Britain took in over 100,000 Jewish refugees.
America took in less than Switzerland.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Jews_in_the_United_States#Refugees_from_Nazi_Germany

‘Stern and Irgun gangs were nothing and did nothing’

Uh-huh. Murder and torture is nothing. I will remember your compassion towards the British, Jewish and Arab victims of 1944-48, next time America gets hit.

‘compared to the death sentence the British gave a few hundred thousand Jews’

America could saved hundreds of thousands of Jews. It refused.
America could have fought the Nazis for two years. It refused, and only did so grudgingly after the Nazis declared war on them.

If we horrible Limeys are morally bankrupt on this issue and caused Jewish deaths, I shudder to think what moral gutter America inhabits with what it failed to do.


37 posted on 06/26/2012 9:03:09 AM PDT by the scotsman (I)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Jewbacca

‘Second, and however, the Brits always neglect to mention the Irgun called the Brits REPEATEDLY telling them there was a bomb -— the goal was to destroy the seret police records, not terror or to take human life.’

Pity they werent so loving of human life on other occasions...

As to the warning issue:

‘Warnings

Since the bombing, much controversy has ensued over the issues of when warnings were sent and how the British authorities responded. Irgun representatives have always stated that the warning was given well in advance of the explosion, so that adequate time was available to evacuate the hotel. Menachem Begin, for example, writes that the telephone message was delivered 25–27 minutes before the explosion.[14] It is often stated that the British authorities have always denied that a warning was sent. However, what the British Government said, five months after the bombing, once the subsequent inquest and all the inquiries had been completed, was not that no warning had been sent, but that no such warning had been received by anyone at the Secretariat “in an official position with any power to take action.”[15]

American author Thurston Clarke’s analysis of the bombing gave timings for calls and for the explosion which he says took place at 12:37. He said that as part of the Irgun plan, a sixteen year old recruit, Adina Hay (alias Tehia), was to make three warning calls before the attack. At 12:22 the first call was made, in both Hebrew and English, to a telephone operator on the hotel’s switchboard (the Secretariat and the military each had their own, separate, telephone exchanges). It was ignored.[3] At 12:27, the second warning call was made to the French Consulate adjacent to the hotel to the north-east. This second call was taken seriously and staff went through the building opening windows and closing curtains to lessen the impact of the blast. At 12:31 a third and final warning call to the Palestine Post newspaper was made. The telephone operator called the Palestine Police CID to report the message. She then called the hotel switchboard. The hotel operator reported the threat to one of the hotel managers. This warning resulted in the discovery of the milk churns in the basement, but by then it was too late.[3]

Some Israeli observers have stated that the British had received enough warning but they assumed that the Hotel was so heavily guarded that any attack would be futile. Begin claimed in his memoirs that the British had deliberately kept civilians in so that they could vilify the Jewish militant groups,[16] although no evidence has ever been produced to support this.’

‘Army and police reports

Various government papers relating to the bombing were released under the thirty year rule in 1978, including the results of the military and police investigations.[note 2] The reports contain statements and conclusions which are contradicted by other evidence, including that submitted to the inquest held after the bombing. Affidavits which reflected badly on the security of the hotel were removed from the army report before it was submitted to the High Commissioner and then the Cabinet in London.[3] The police report makes the likely claim that the warning sent to the French Consulate was received five minutes after the main explosion. This is contradicted by multiple eyewitnesses who reported seeing staff opening the Consulate windows five minutes after that happened. The report also claims that the warning received by the Palestine Post was not received until after the explosion. That claim is confirmed by the testimony of two members of the Palestine Post staff, one of who said that she was put under pressure by the Palestine Police to withdraw what she had said.[3]’

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King_David_Hotel_bombing

Also, so what if they warned?. That dosent change the fact they were terrorists who planted a bomb. Any more than the fact that the IRA or ETA used to also (sometimes) give warnings makes what the IRA or ETA did at all morally justifiable. Again, dont try this BS that the two gangs were loving and conscious of human life and tried not to kill people where possible.

Because it is utter, utter bull.


38 posted on 06/26/2012 9:10:13 AM PDT by the scotsman (I)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: the scotsman

I have no disagreement with your post. FDR was no better than what Great Britain did but Jews here today still revere him. Because they tilt liberal and love Obama too for the most part even as he praises the Islamic Brotherhood takeover in Egypt


39 posted on 06/26/2012 10:43:25 AM PDT by dennisw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: the scotsman

FDR was just as bad. You will get no argument from me. And just because Jewish life was so cheap back then.... This is why Jews created Israel. A place where Jews can be armed and fight off the anti-Semites. Muslim anti-Semites in this case


40 posted on 06/26/2012 10:47:21 AM PDT by dennisw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: the scotsman

Wow, you ass does hurt, you belittle American involvement in WWII and consider Israelis terrorists.

I guess it’s true what the English say about Scots.


41 posted on 06/26/2012 11:08:24 AM PDT by Jewbacca (The residents of Iroquois territory may not determine whether Jews may live in Jerusalem.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Jewbacca

Firstly, at NO point have I belittled American involvement in WW2. What I DID point out was that far from relying on America, America (who supposedly ‘saved’ us) in fact relied heavily on British men, material and support in order to fight in N Africa, Sicily, Italy and

You are clearly unaware (as are many Americans and increasingly British) of just how much America needed/relied on Britain in WW2, from reverse lend lease and supplies to nuclear secrets and intelligence.

That is simple fact. That is NOT the same as therefore belittling American efforts in WW2. Pointing out that 79% of all ships on D-Day were of the Royal Navy/Royal Canadian Navy (16% American, 5% Free French and Free European) does not equal belittling Omaha Beach or Utah Beach, even the fact we landed Americans on those beaches is nothing more than pointing out a simple fact.

Secondly, the only Israeli/Jews I consider terrorists are the men of the Irgun and Stern gang. I am pro-Israel, pro-Jewish. But where people of your group have done wrong, I will say so.

You either are a s*it-stirrer trying to get sympathy by making me look the big bad anti-semitic Limey or you cant read.

p.s. what do the English says about the Scots?. Actually, given that we have a superior education system, a superior legal system, a higher rate of literacy and numeracy, and that the English historically failed miserably to conquer the Scots (as they did the Irish and Welsh), what they say, most Scots couldnt care.


42 posted on 06/26/2012 2:50:47 PM PDT by the scotsman (I)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: the scotsman

“You are clearly unaware (as are many Americans and increasingly British)”

I am Israeli.

“of just how much America needed/relied on Britain in WW2”

Actually, America needed UK very little. It could have stayed home (or gone and fought the Japanese who are the ones that actually attacked them), let the Nazis regroup and defeat you.

“from reverse lend lease and supplies”

To partially supply americans troops who fought to defend England, yes.

In contrast, 1/4 of all of Englands aircraft, munitions, supplies were delived by Americans, not to mention over 50 US Navy destroyers were transferred to the Royal Navy

“to nuclear secrets”

LOL. Jews without a country did more for the Manhattan project than England.

On 30 July 1942, Sir John Anderson, the minister responsible, advised Churchill that: “We must face the fact that ... [our] pioneering work ... is a dwindling asset and that, unless we capitalise it quickly, we shall be outstripped. We now have a real contribution to make to a ‘merger.’ Soon we shall have little or none.”

“You either are a s*it-stirrer trying to get sympathy by making me look the big bad anti-semitic Limey or you cant read.”

No, you’re just an insignificant idiot.

“English historically failed miserably to conquer the Scots what they say, most Scots couldnt care.”

Talk about getting your history from Hollywood.


43 posted on 06/26/2012 3:55:13 PM PDT by Jewbacca (The residents of Iroquois territory may not determine whether Jews may live in Jerusalem.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Jewbacca

‘Actually, America needed UK very little. It could have stayed home (or gone and fought the Japanese who are the ones that actually attacked them), let the Nazis regroup and defeat you.’

I was and am talking about the American reliance on British ships and material in order to fight in Europe and N Africa.
Just 16% of ships on D-Day were American.

‘LOL. Jews without a country did more for the Manhattan project than England.

On 30 July 1942, Sir John Anderson, the minister responsible, advised Churchill that: “We must face the fact that ... [our] pioneering work ... is a dwindling asset and that, unless we capitalise it quickly, we shall be outstripped. We now have a real contribution to make to a ‘merger.’ Soon we shall have little or none.”’

Oh dear. Your ignorance is laughable. You ARE aware that the British in 1940 gave all their nuclear programme secrets to America?. You ARE aware that Britain had a nuclear programme of its own prior to Dec 7th 1941 and also had America not entered the war, Britain had a nuclear facility in Canada ready to start solo work on a British atomic bomb?. Tube Alloys ring a bell?.

And if you are fond of quotes, I much prefer the one from Leslie Groves, the head of the Manhattan Project who stated the bomb would never have been built were it not for the British contribution.

‘No, you’re just an insignificant idiot.’

That’s MR Insignificant Idiot, MA in History from Glasgow University 1995.

‘Talk about getting your history from Hollywood.’

Your history knowledge REALLY is pitiful. Scotland JOINED the United Kingdom in 1707. Between 1018 and 1640, England tried and failed to conquer Scotland.

How arrogant of you to tell a Scotsman, and a qualified historian Scotsman at that, about the basics of his own country.

Hell, I bet you think Britain and England are the same thing.


44 posted on 06/26/2012 4:15:14 PM PDT by the scotsman (I)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: the scotsman

The bottom line is that if not for the actions of the Irgun and Lechi (aka the Stern Gang), the Brits would not have left Israel/Palestine.
During the 1948 Israeli War of Independence the Brits flew fighter jets for the Egyptians against the Jewish State.
As for your jab at America, America never occupied Israel/Palestine and was never charged with the creation of a Jewish Homeland. Britain had that legal and moral obligation and did not live up to its responsibilities.
Although Ben Gurion initially disagreed with Begin and Shamir, they eventually joined forces and cooperated to oust the British and fight them and the Arab armies which invaded Israel during the War of Independence.
The facts stand for themselves.


45 posted on 06/27/2012 6:21:33 AM PDT by DrKay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: the scotsman

“You ARE aware that the British in 1940 gave all their nuclear programme secrets to America?. You ARE aware that Britain had a nuclear programme of its own prior to Dec 7th 1941 and also had America not entered the war, Britain had a nuclear facility in Canada ready to start solo work on a British atomic bomb?. Tube Alloys ring a bell?”

Yes, I know all that, and more. It was insignifcant work, and would never have been finished before the end of the war.

Indeed, aside from Neils Bors, all England provided to the Manhattan Project was Klaus Emil Julius Fuchs, the British man who turned over the nuke plans to the Soviets.


46 posted on 06/27/2012 6:57:40 AM PDT by Jewbacca (The residents of Iroquois territory may not determine whether Jews may live in Jerusalem.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: the scotsman

In defense of Tube Alloys, Klaus Fuchs did teach the Chinese how to make their bomb, and the Chinese taught the Pakistanis how to make their bomb, and the Pakis taught the North Koreans and Iranians to make their bombs.

So the British did contribute something to nuclear programes.

To the wrong sides, mind you. But something.


47 posted on 06/27/2012 7:13:20 AM PDT by Jewbacca (The residents of Iroquois territory may not determine whether Jews may live in Jerusalem.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: DrKay

‘The bottom line is that if not for the actions of the Irgun and Lechi (aka the Stern Gang), the Brits would not have left Israel/Palestine.’

Rubbish. The British would have left, all the terrorism did was make us leave earlier. Remember, even by 1947, the Empire was decreasing.

Also, your argument basically says that terrorism is ok. So what the IRA or any group does is ok. By that ‘logic’, terrorism against Americans in Saudi Arabia, Africa, the USS Cole and elsewhere is justifiable. After all, you were in a country/countries that are not your own. So these groups had every right to drive you out

Please therefore quit whinin’ about Beirut 1983, the USS Cole, Riyadh, the 1998 embassy bombings.

So terrorism is evil as long as certain groups do it.
Gotcha.
Duly noted.

‘During the 1948 Israeli War of Independence the Brits flew fighter jets for the Egyptians against the Jewish State.’

LOL, what a pitifully selective memory/knowledge you have.

Firstly, the ‘Brits’ did no such thing. The British who did fought in the Arab Legion, not the British armed forces. In fact, ALL British officers in the Arab Legion were instructed to return to Transjordan. ALL officers returned without question. And there were public and press calls for the officers to be courtmartialled and imprisoned for serving in a foreign army.

Secondly, clearly you are ignorant of the Battle of Ramat David, where the British fought WITH the Israelis. RAF planes in the battle defeated an attack by the Egyptian Air Force. So the only official military action taken by Britain in 1948 was to HELP and DEFEND Israel.

You’re welcome.

‘As for your jab at America, America never occupied Israel/Palestine and was never charged with the creation of a Jewish Homeland. Britain had that legal and moral obligation and did not live up to its responsibilities.’

Britain had Palestine for just 30 years. And last I looked the Balfour Declaration was named after a British man (a Scot in fact).

Amazing....

America did nothing to set up a Jewish state and did nothing to save hundreds of thousands of Jews. America did nothing to stop the rise and conquest of the Nazis.

Britain writes the Balfour Declaration and stands longest and alone againat the Nazis.

And yet we are the ones getting judgement passed on us?.
And Americans think they have the right to pass judgement?.

Two words.
And the second one is off.


48 posted on 06/27/2012 8:11:59 AM PDT by the scotsman (I)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: the scotsman; Jewbacca; dennisw; DrKay

My only regret is that Stern and Lechi did not act earlier and spare some of Europe’s Jew.

XXXXXXXX

“Also, your argument basically says that terrorism is ok. So what the IRA or any group does is ok. By that ‘logic’, terrorism against Americans in Saudi Arabia, Africa, the USS Cole and elsewhere is justifiable. After all, you were in a country/countries that are not your own. So these groups had every right to drive you out

Please therefore quit whinin’ about Beirut 1983, the USS Cole, Riyadh, the 1998 embassy bombings.”

XXXXXXXX

You fail to make the moral distinction between attacks on civilian targets and attacks on military targets. You fail to distinguish between Britain’s positive obligations to allow Jews into a Jewish State and America’s passive failure to volunteer to take Jews onto its soil.

Moral equivalency is the basis of anti-Israel condemnation around the world, and is the hallmark of current anti-Semitism and the multicultural left.

9/11 was an attack on a wholly civilian target in a time of peace, directed at a target with no relationship to the attackers.

If you can’t see the difference you are morally bereft.


49 posted on 06/27/2012 3:25:00 PM PDT by dervish (ABO)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: dervish

‘You fail to make the moral distinction between attacks on civilian targets and attacks on military targets. You fail to distinguish between Britain’s positive obligations to allow Jews into a Jewish State and America’s passive failure to volunteer to take Jews onto its soil.’

I fail at nothing. Because my point was obviously not a serious personal opinion. My point was to point out the illogicality and paucity of such an argument where terrorism would be justifiable. Which is why I put the word logic in inverted commas, to signify that it was in fact illogical.

My whining remark is pure sarcasm and again to point out the offensiveness and bizarre ‘logic’ (oops there I go again) of condoning terrorism.

I am sorry if you havent understood the point I was clearly making. I assumed people here would understand it. For heavens sake, how more blunt could I have been with my language?.

‘Moral equivalency is the basis of anti-Israel condemnation around the world, and is the hallmark of current anti-Semitism and the multicultural left.’

I agree. Then again, I AM pro-Israel, pro-Jewish and conservative.

‘If you can’t see the difference you are morally bereft.’

Again, you have failed to understand the point I was making.


50 posted on 06/27/2012 5:00:33 PM PDT by the scotsman (I)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-59 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson