Friday, January 09, 2009

British Taxpayers Fund BBC Broadcasts of MAB Extremist Islamist Discussion

The taxpayers of Britain are being forced to shell out money to fund the BBC Arabic Channel which spreads the ideology of radical Islam.

This is taxation without representation. And that is reason for the overthrow of the British government.

The BBC continues to maintain its "impartiality whilst reporting on the Gaza conflict, true to its charter that stipulates that all reporting must be unbiased the BBC has shown just how it intends to do just that via the BBC Arabic television service, 

BBC Arabic television was launched in March last year and is available free to viewers across the Middle East and North Africa.

It is funded by taxpayers' money through a £19 million annual grant from the Foreign Office, rather than the television licence.

Despite being based in London it is only readily accessible to viewers in the UK through a website.

Via this media the BBC transmitted the following:

Dr Kamal El-Helbawy, the founder of the Muslim Association of Britain, told a discussion program that, while he condemned the killing of civilians, he believed all Israeli children were "future soldiers".

He said: "A child born in Israel is raised on the belief that the Arabs are like contemptible sheep.

"In elementary school they pose the following math problem - 'In your village, there are 100 Arabs. If you killed 40, how many Arabs would be left for you to kill?'. This is taught in the Israeli curriculum."

Dr El-Helbawy, 69, founded the MAB in 1997 when he was also a spokesman for the Muslim Brotherhood.

read more here

Gandalf comments, 

"We must not forget that funding for this service comes via the Foreign Office via our taxes, I personally object to my taxes being used in this way.

The BBC becomes more disgusting on a daily basis, their reporters continually show great bias in their reporting of the conflict in Gaza  therefore it is not surprising that they broadcast such material, this type of broadcast will only serve to motivate Muslims in the UK to increase their anti semitic , anti Christian and anti UK activities in the UK."

Pastorius comment:

One has to wonder if the radical Islamist message also promotes the idea that Sharia law ought to be established in Britain and across the Earth. If so, then it is the case that British citizens themselves are funding the spread of the very ideology which calls for the destruction of their country and their way of life.


jeppo said...

Here's a good article calling on paleoconservatives to get behind Israel

Pastorius said...

You and I live in different intellectual universes.

However, I'm glad you like IBA, and I hope you continue to do so, and continue to leave comments and links, cuz I truly appreciate it.

I am disappointed to see Ilana Mercer fall into the trap of defining Israel as a nation of blood and soil. In my opinion, that will be the death of Israel.

I don't know if you are a Christian or a Jew, or perhaps, non-religious, but it seems clear to me that while Israel is a tribe, the direction of the Jewish Bible, and the Christian scriptures which followed on its heels, is that we are to live by the Torah, which is the written Word, not blood.

The genius of America is that it became a nation found on ideas (the Word) instead of blood.

I believe in this. I believe in the Word. I do not believe in blood.

The way I see it, human beings are animals, who are asked by God to ascend to be higher than the Angels, and the way to accomplish that is to struggle with our lower nature, and overcome our instincts through adherence to the Word.

Because I believe this, I can not align myself ideologically with people who appeal to blood and soil. And, what I mean by that is that I will not say I agree with those ideas. That does not mean, however, that you and I don't recognize the same enemy, or that we can't fight side by side.

Pastorius said...

I guess it really depends on how hard you push your agenda.

We both have our own opinions.

One of the lamest things about this whole schism in the anti-Jihad movement is that people like Christine and Baron pushed their agenda so much that they pushed people like me out.

Baron's stated objective was to open the tent up wider so that we could accomodate allies like Filip DeWinter, but he was clearly willing to sacrifice allies like me and Charles in order to have his tent of Daliesque dimensions.

I believe that tells you something about the underlying objectives of Bodissey and Brim.

We shall see as events play out.

jeppo said...

When Mercer says "blood and soil", she means the ancient bloodlines of the Jewish people and the land promised to them by God. I really don't see the problem with that at all, but we'll have to agree to disagree about that.

"Baron's stated objective was to open up the tent wider so that we could accomodate allies like Filip DeWinter"

That statement reminds me of the oft-repeated slogan at LGF "No Nazis in my foxhole", as if we collectively as bloggers and commenters had a tent or a foxhole to share. It's the politicians, not the bloggers or commenters or anyone else, who are going to make the difference in the fight against the jihad. And that goes for politicians we both like (Wilders), ones we're split on (the VB), or ones we don't like (Le Pen). Pretending that we'll let them into our tents or foxholes, rather than the other way around, is the ultimate in hubris IMHO.

Pastorius said...

Baron Bodissey? Guilty of hubris?


On the subject of Ilana Mercer, and her "blood and soil" comment; she was being critical of Fukuyama's rejection of that as a foundational basis for a modern enlightened society.

Israel is nothing. if it is only blood and soil. What makes the Jews unique in the history of people's is their adherence to the Word of God. Indeed, it is their privelege and torment to be the bearers of the Torah through the ages.

Ilana Mercer notes, in her VDare article, that she is not a religious Jew. If one is a Jew, and yet does not believe in their religion, then what is left, other than blood and soil?

I will say this, I do not think blood counts for nothing. Likewise, I do not believe instinct counts for nothing. Thank God for instinct, because if it didn't exist, sex would not be nearly as much fun.

But, blood and instinct without the taming force of the Word (whether it be religious in nature, or intellectual) is not a way to run a culture, in my not so humble opinion.

jeppo said...

Did you know that 44% of Israeli Jews describe themselves as secular, and 35% don't believe in God? Israel is a far less religious society than the US. Its secularism is more akin to Europe, and of course completely contrasts with the insane religiousity of its Muslim neighbours.

So Ilana Mercer, a South African-Israeli-Canadian-American Jew, is not atypical in an Israeli context. Even religious Jews like Arieh Eldad have a blood-and-soil take on Israel as an ethnically Jewish state. He said something to that effect at the recent Facing Jihad summit.

But what I really liked about that article was Mercer rallying the paleos behind Israel. She's using language that appeals to them, not to you. But you neocons (no offence, do you consider yourself to be a neocon?) are already onboard.

Pastorius said...

Is a Neocon a Liberal who got mugged by reality on 9/11?

If so, I'd say that's a pretty accurate picture of what I am.