The article is from Amena Saleem, who is an activist with the Palestinian Solidarity Campaign and, while it is really unnecessary for me to put in my own tuppence worth on her excellent piece on the two articles that have been conjured up by the BBC-Hasbara co-production, I would still like to add a little something extra.
Firstly, if the articles represent two further examples of how the BBC fulfills its own mission statement, which is “to enrich people’s lives with programmes and services that inform, educate and entertain” …. well, “entertaining”, certainly, and the two hacks responsible, Rupert Wingfield-Hayes and Kevin Connolly respectively, would have had me splitting my sides in laughter if it were not for the fact (as Amena points out) that they represent a “broadcaster with a huge global reach” and, therefore, should at least be taken seriously. Therefore, not wanting to jump the gun, we should, at least, do a little bit of research on Wingfield-Hayes and Connolly, after all, there might be just be some misunderstanding.
Unfortunately, the limitations of this “research” is obvious and there really isn’t the time to go through what very well might be a pointless exercise of scrutinising everything our two “journalists” have ever written or every opinion voiced on the pair. Nevertheless, should the reader want to do so, then the following link might shed a little light on Wingfield-Hayes. Having read a couple of his articles, the one on Gilad Shalit’s release is a real “cracker”, my own conclusion would have to be, “certainly, not what John Pilger would call a “journalist”.”
With Kevin Connolly it would appear sufficient to content ourselves with one particular article, which was written on the 20 March 2011, and which would appear to be consistent with someone who was to write a year later that “normal life in southern Israel is severely disrupted during periods of rocket fire”. After Libya had been bombed by NATO forces, he wrote. “it is now clear that Col Gaddafi’s strategy is to portray the attacks as an act of colonialist aggression and rally enough of the Libyan people behind him to maintain his grip on power.” Well, the evidence would appear to suggest that while Blair’s erstwhile friend failed to maintain his grip on power, the attacks were indeed an act of aggression. Or, has something been misunderstood? After all, the author of this post probably believes that “normal lives” are a dream for almost everyone in Gaza.