I'm just checking here.

Is "Not having the Iranian point of view" essentially the same as "Not getting the Palestinian point of view"?

I bet Press TV doesn't have the Taxpayers Alliance on every week.

Who needs Dr. Goebbels' propaganda when you have the BBC?

Reading through an article in the science section today my eyes fell upon a statement which the Beeb would have us believe is now a scientifically determined fact (given the countless times it has been wheeled out over the last eighteen months):

[i"The Iranian government is publicly committed to Israel's destruction"[/i

Which is odd given that even Israel’s minister of intelligence and atomic energy, [url=http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/04/17/israeli-minister-agrees-ahmadinejad-never-said-israel-must-be-wiped-off-the-map/Dan Meridor, doesn't believe it.[/url

It speaks volumes about the indoctrination of supposedly non-partisan BBC journalists when someone like Shukman can confidently make such a claim - despite evidence to the contrary [i[uone paragraph further into his OWN REPORT[/u[/i. Comically, he makes this very point - describing Israel and Iran's collaboration on a cutting edge particle accelerator as "astonishing" - although clearly not astonishing enough for him to doubt the validity of his far more astonishing presumption, including the hopelessly slanted suggestion that this is "a land of ancient hatreds" (which any half-decent account of Middle Eastern history could provide copious examples of the opposite).

I should say this isn't the first time I've seen Shukman injecting suspicious politics (especially relating to the Middle East) into his reporting. I'd like to think he - like most of his colleagues - is simply toeing the company line, but over the years there have been journalists who've been more than willing to accept more than one master.

I'm not sure that Ahmadinejad wants to be bezzy mates with Israel though, if I'm honest.

Godwin's.



And the most hilarious over-reaction I've read on here in a while.