Backspin FrontPage
Backspin FrontPage
HonestReporting.com
Media Backspin
About Media Backspin Contact Media Backspin Media Backspin
  Media Backspin
Backspin FrontPage
 
 
 
Media Backspin RSS Feed   [ About RSS ]
 
Subscribe with Bloglines
 
Add to My AOL
 
Subscribe in Bloglines
 
Subscribe to MyMSN
 
 
Subscribe in NewsGator Online
 
Add to Google Reader or Homepage
 
ARCHIVES July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008
 

 
 
Media Backspin
« The Independent dignifies arch-terrorist | Main | Odious ode »

Tuesday, November 15 2005

Dubious Dublin debate degenerates

In the Boston Herald, Clifford May describes his participation in a debate hosted by the Trinity College of Dublin’s Philosophical Society. Though the topic of debate was the Bush presidency, the discussion degenerated into a bash-Israel affair. May went on to call participant Tim Llewellyn, who once worked for the BBC, an anti-Semite.

Tim Llewellyn, a former BBC Middle East bureau chief, announced: "George Bush is a threat to world peace on so many levels we can't begin to discuss it."

So he didn't try. Instead, he turned to the topic that really fires him up: Israel. Yasser Arafat, he said, had been correct to reject the offer of Palestinian statehood made at Camp David in 2000 because it was "a pro-Zionist type of approach." It would have allowed the Jewish state to survive. He found that a distasteful prospect.

I was not surprised. Before the debate, he'd noted that he had heard a BBC host cut off a caller who wanted to discuss Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's threat to "wipe Israel off the map." The caller didn't see what was so terrible about this idea. Llewellyn lamented that there now seems to be a taboo against expressing such opinions….

I told Llewellyn - politely, but to his face - that he was an anti-Semite. That term, I explained, used to mean those who wanted a Europe with no Jewish population; today, it means those who want a world with no Jewish state.

This is not the first time Llewellyn’s hostility to Israel was expressed so openly.

 

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d834515b7869e200e550343fb68834

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Dubious Dublin debate degenerates:



 

Comments

Despite its benign and charming facade, Ireland is home to a great deal of anti-Israel sentiment. This is due to three causes: (1) Ireland's blind Euro-style support for so-called Palestinian "underdogs" (2) Irish people's mistaken belief that Israel-bashing UN resolutions constitute "international law" and (3) the growing Muslim and Arab population in Ireland.

As an Irishman I can say with confidence that we are next in line for what France and other European countries are now experiencing. Just recently I saw a flyer in Dublin calling for the realization of an Islamic republic in Ireland. This does not bode well.

I was with Cliff May at Trinity and had to follow Mr. Llewellyn. It wasn't debate, it was pure anti-Semitic hatred. I would have hoped for -with his years of journalistic experience- an unbiased assessment of the situation in the Middle East, even if I didn’t agree with it (though that was not the topic). Instead it was one-sided and very disproportionate. He spoke of Israelis stealing land (after just giving the Palestinians the Gaza) and claimed that George W. Bush along with Ariel Sharon had somehow ‘ripped up’ UN Resolution 242. He didn’t even seem to know what 242 was about and that it spoke of ‘territories’ as opposed to ‘the territories’. He spoke of Israelis killing Palestinians as if this was going on in a vacuum and not once mentioned the terror Israelis face on a daily basis.

I was, to say the least, flabbergasted.

The question: How could this man have turned off such feelings before the BBC cameras were turned on? I don't think it was possible. I can’t see how the BBC can possibly be unbiased in their reporting from any part of the Middle East.


Charlie Wolf,
TalkSPORT Radio

Tim Llewellyn is a member of CAABU, The Council for Arab-British Understanding (www.caabu.org) a British pro Arab lobby. I had a long correspondence with him. He is rabidly anti Israel. see his reply hereunder:


Tim Llewellyn,
A friend of mine has passed on to me your reply to his polite letter to you (hereunder).

I shudder to think that as a BBC Middle East correspondent you are the one who was supposed to present unbiased, objective, balanced news. Alas, your deep hatred of Israel has made you lose all modicum of civil discourse. The fact that you joined CAABU, a virulently anti Israel and pro Arab lobby, speaks for itself. The fact that you did not show your true colours (as a pro Arab lobbyist) when you wrote the article is also indicative.
Now you claim to have monopoly on the truth too. Your yardstick is that whatever is anti Israel is supposed to represent the truth. Whatever happens, the Arabs are always right and the Jewish state is wrong. It seems your deep rooted prejudice has completely coloured your judgment.

Israel has the smallest army in the Middle East, the Arabs have more tanks than NATO, yet it is Israel with its citizen army of lawyers, accountants, teachers, doctors and businessmen, that is militaristic?

Before 1967 there was no occupation, do you know how many Israelis were killed?
During the Oslo years which were supposed to lead to peaceful coexistence there were no acts of terror by the Palestinians? Buses were not exploded? Cafés were not blown up?
The dynamics of the Palestinian wave of violence have been so manipulated as to turn the victims into aggressors and the perpetrators into victims. That the Palestinians and other Arabs should subscribe to such a distortion is nothing out of the ordinary, that you subscribe to this fallacy, shows only bad faith.

According to you if Israel only withdraws, there will be no violence. How are you so sure? Did you talk to the Hamas, the Islamic Jihad and the whole array of terrorist organizations now present in Cairo? Do Iraq, Iran and the Hizbullah, now funding terrorism, accept the existence of Israel?

Of course, you do not have to take the risk of your ill intentioned advice. Probably you are the only one who takes Arafat's claims at face value.

Yours Sincerely,

Eli Tabori

----- Original Message -----
From:
To:
Sent: Friday, January 24, 2003 11:36 AM
Subject: Re: Your article in The Guardian today

Thank you for your comments. It is always nice to hear from Israel.

My job is that of a journalist, not a peacemaker. My job is to seek the truth, not make life pleasant for militaristic states who steal other people's land and maintain brutal occupations on it.

I spent enough time in Israel to know that the end to violence lies in Israel's hands alone---it's called ending the occupation.

Tim Llewellyn

Michael Reardon -> i wouldnt worry too much about it. The Danish Cartoon fiasco woke up a lot of Irish folks to the threat of Islamism, myself included.



 

Post a comment

[Comments are held for approval before appearing.]






HR Links


HR Social Media


Featured Blogs


Featured Links

 
Media Backspin