Useful web sites

Twitter Updates

    follow me on Twitter

    « Cyclamen and their huddling conspiracies | Main | Denying anti-semitic motives to avoid riots? »



    It is not clear to me why the Secretary General of the Arab League should think it is his job to defend Islam against perceived insults. Not all Arabs are Muslims. It seems a bit like the secretary general of the European Union defending Christianity against perceived insults.


    The BBC positioning David Irving as "a martyr to free speech" is particularly rich when one remembers that his lies were exposed at a libel trial that HE filed in against U.S. academic Deborah Lipstadt in an attempt to silence and intimidate her and to deter other critics from criticizing his methods and conclusions.

    Irving brought his lawsuit in the UK, forcing Ms. Lipstadt to travel to the UK to defend herself, and to engage UK legal counsel.

    Now, after trying and failing to abuse the British legal system to silence his own critics, Mr. Irving wants to position himself as a defender of free speech?

    Has no one pointed out this irony to the BBC?



    Yours is a very interesting article. And also thank you for your link to the Irving legal decision.

    As for the BBC article, I think the interesting thing is how Muslims and Europeans use Jews as the centerpiece through which to engage. There is, you will note, a long history of just that, going back centuries.


    Usually an "academic" needs an academy to be attached to. Irving, as I understand it, is a freelance Holocaust denier.

    The only accurate part of the "British academic" description is "British"


    What an egregious piece of "journalism"! Where is BBC Watch in all of this?


    "Not all Arabs are Muslims."

    I suppose that for the Arab League the non-muslim arabs are of no consequence given the manner in which they have been trated by the muslims and the Christian churches.
    Recent history is replete with the persecution of copts in Egypt, the bestial rampage of muslims over Lebanese Christians, the treatment of Christians in Saudi Arabia, not to mention the other states.
    And to add insult to injury various Christian ministers, both Anglican and Vatican have gone cap in hand to Ramallah, the seat of the PLO which reduced Arab Christian occupancy of formerly Christian towns after Arafat gained control under the Oslo accords, to bargain away their flock's rights in their interests to hurt the Jews of Israel as much as possible.
    Why,even after Arafat's men massacred more than 500 Christians of the town of Damour in 1976, and turned the church into a garage for their jeeps and a pistol range, Hilarion Cappucci (Vatican) went arms smuggling for the PLO.


    If this were an isolated article, I might agree with you. But it isn't. This is a short article reporting the debate about the upcoming trial. It is not an article about the last trial. And if any of you bothered to follow any of the BBC links on the page itself, you'd find that they've already reported that, at length, including quoting the judge. Try, for example:

    (Calling him an 'academic', on the other hand, is an insult to all real academics.)



    Your link to your BBC article does not function. I must add as an American who follows debate in Britain, the BBC is a terrible source if the goal is to non-ideological information. Among other things, it is terribly biased against Jews.


    @Neal: [yawn] ... Yeah, we Europeans are American hating, anti-Jew, etc... And you Americans are all grass-chewing hill billies? I think not. We have the same debates and range of opinions as you guys, it's just that we frame them differently.



    It would help if you read what I wrote. Did I use the word "hate"? I said that the BBC is terribly biased. It is. Admit it.

    The Pedant-General


    Looks like the page has been stealth editted - I can't see "Academic" anywhere. There are a number of rather awkward references to "The Briton" e.g.

    "The Briton had brought the case against American academic Deborah Lipstadt"

    which would suggest a hurried edit....


    chevalier de st george

    What did Irving thinks he as doing?
    a trip on the way to the holocaust deniers conference in teheran with a prelimanary stopover to celbrate the Fuhrer's birthday, with the old bunch of Waffen SS comrades in Linz? No wait that's not till April and these days is held in Belgium.
    What would he have said to the piece of shit who runs Iran.
    "Thank you for the generous cheque but i must tell you that I have now changed my views..Bla Bla"
    The BBC appear to be mildly batting for Irving, but had Irving had the sense (like many of his holocaust denier friends), to Convert to ISLAM, the BBC would have been shouting for his immediate release.

    The comments to this entry are closed.

    August 2015

    Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
    2 3 4 5 6 7 8
    9 10 11 12 13 14 15
    16 17 18 19 20 21 22
    23 24 25 26 27 28 29
    30 31          
    Blog powered by Typepad