Wonder if you managed to wade through Frank Gardner’s latest paean to the wonders of Arab diplomacy here? Yes, US and UK armed forces risk life and limb in the dangerous parts of Afghanistan fighting the Taliban but like all good leftists Frank believes that “winning hearts and minds” is the name of the game and this is where troops from the United Arab Emirates score, delivering humanitarian aid to their fellow Muslims and, on occasion, even fighting their way out of Taliban ambushes. Frank manages to get us some Afghan comment..
“People are not afraid that Emiratis will harm their religion, or disrespect the mosque or burn the mosque, things of this nature,” Governor Patan says. “People are very friendly with them. Everybody will drag them in for lunch or for dinner.” These are hearts-and-minds operations at their most effective – drinking tea with Afghans, discussing what help can be provided, Frank gushes.
The problem is that drinking tea is not going to do anything to stop the Taliban, much as the BBC might wish otherwise. This is a war. I also reject the implied slur concerning the behaviour of US/UK troops in the quote he provides. This is subtle character assassination of our own military and how they behave. Now I applaued all efforts made to combat Islamic extremism and in that regard the efforts of the UAE soldiers are to be welcomed but the likes of Frank Gardner is VERY selective who he lavishes praise upon – and the US and UK armed forces do not fall into this elite camp. Maybe if we sent in a battalion of aromatherapists and stress councillors Frank might take notice of the gallantry of OUR soldiers?
The left if forced to acknowledge the use of armed forces can only do so by rebranding them as Peace keepers etc…god(substitute allah for al beeb)forbid they might use those terrible things that go bang on the bad guys (read activists for beeb)
I’ve read the article and your comments, still not sure what you think is biased about it. Nevermind, its about Muslims, that’s good enough.
http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/2005/10/well-they-didnt-listen-to-us.html
This is Frank Gardner who lost the use of his legs and gone back to this particular area to report? Perhaps if you’d watched the report?
And David’s way of engaging with the ‘enemy’ is to drop a daisy cutter on their head. A daisly cutter is a bomb for those of you who may not have googled it,
The daisy cutter bomb
For David’s views read here:
Look folks, these people are beyond all reason and we need to put them beyond this mortal coil. They want to KILL us, and YES that includes even the UN. What we need to do is unite in our determination to wipe them off the map, to coin a phrase. Being a dhimmi gets you nowhere and all the platitudes in the world from the UN will not assuage the feverish killing fantasies of the Religion of Peace and Love.
Posted on Thursday, April 3, 2008 at 07:33AM by David Vance in War on terrorism | 3 Comments
So the bias in the BBC story is where exactly?
Joel
Typhoo
Your demands to know where the bias in the story is simply demonstrates your unwillingness to acknowledge it exists or you simply do not understand the meaning of the word bias.
What a twisted take. Gardiners report is about muslim soldiers helping muslims in this region – it’s not about the US or Brits, and their effort is helping the coalition forces,and maybe even saving a few of their lives.
This post byDavid Vance is definitely incitement to hatred, or very very close to it.
anon why don’t you point out the bias then?
Sorry but David Vance has a point. In the excellent TV programme with Ross Kemp, Ross explained in one episode that although British soldiers were being fired upon from a Mosque, they were NOT allowed to fire back.
I don’t see camp Gardiner reporting that?
The Islamic way is to hide behind women and children. I don’t see the BBC reporting on how the Muslims are so desperate that they use mentally sub normal women as mules to launch suicide attacks.
The Kemp programme was done from the British military point of view, Gardiners was done on the change that had taken place since he’d last been there and had been bombed and ended up in a wheel chair.
This piece was done on the changes Gardiner himself seen over a period of time, not from any military stand point.
The post does eventually refer to bias.
‘be welcomed but the likes of Frank Gardner is VERY selective who he lavishes praise upon ‘
Is that a hunch or do you have anything to back it up?
Gardiner risked his life to go there to report the news for the British public and you think he’s doing it to show their military up? To promote the Taliban rather than British forces. And the daisy cutter remark from DV is hardly the British way of going about things is it?
Lucky for the MoD he never served a day in his life – only shouts from the sidelines. Ready to fight to the last drop of everybody elses blood.
If we didn’t know 5 years ago that it’s pointless trying to fight the Taliban in a way that just encourages others to join them then I sure as hell hope we do now.
I thought it was a really good, positive article from a pro Afghan-war point of view. If they’d portrayed it as Arab traitors helping the evil US to murder their co-religionists then THAT would have been biased.
Gardiners was done on the change that had taken place since he’d last been there and had been bombed and ended up in a wheel chair.
Typhoo | 03.04.08 – 12:10 pm
Do please check your facts before posting as most people here, unlike you, actually know what they’re talking about, even if you don’t agree with what they say.
Frank Gardner was shot not bombed, in Saudi arabia not Afghanistan.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/pressoffice/biographies/biogs/news/frank_gardner.shtml
Frank Gardner is the BBC’s full-time Security Correspondent, reporting for TV and radio on issues of both domestic and international security, notably on Al-Qaeda-related terrorism.
In 2004 he was shot six times at close range by Al-Qaeda terrorists in Saudi Arabia and his cameraman was killed. After many months in hospital he returned to the BBC to resume his job.
Typhoo: You imply that the BBC does not have a “perspective or point of view?”
Gardiner was so far up the Muslims army backside he might have run into Peter Mandelson or George Michael
I can’t ever remember the BBC cooing so much about OUR soldiers stuck out there.
And it’s OUR soldiers that are doing the fighting (and being killed)
Bio, watch the report, Gardiner says he returned to that area, the news reader introduced the clip on the tv as ‘where Gardiner had been bombed before’ when he was there…..so I’m half right, thats what I get for typing too fast. He still lost the use of his legs to report the news.
Makes no difference anyway – fact is fact – there is no bias in the report! And the incitement to hatred still stands.
law
Under this part of it.
‘making inflammatory public speeches’
“Typhoo: You imply that the BBC does not have a “perspective or point of view?”
No you have misread. In this instance Gardiner was returning to where he’d been before to report on the changes….there is nothing there – watch the linked video – where Gardiner is taking the side of the ‘enemy’.
It’s interesting to note that all reference to Frank Gardner’s famous plea for mercy have been airbrushed out of BBC reports.
http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/archives/002149.php
RIYADH – Riddled with bullets, BBC correspondent Frank Gardner pleaded for his life in the Saudi capital shouting to bystanders to help a fellow Muslim, a police officer said on Monday.
“I’m a Muslim, help me, I’m a Muslim, help me,” the British father of two daughters cried in Arabic, the officer said.
Gardner was stretched on the road, covered in blood from multiple bullet wounds in a slum area of southern Riyadh known as a hotbed of hardliners.
A fluent Arabic speaker with a degree in Arab and Islamic Studies, he was carrying a small copy of the Koran, the Muslim holy book, a device used by Westerner reporters to try to reassure Islamist militants.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/4123145.stm
“Probably the whole attack took less than ten minutes, maybe even less than five, but I remember every single thing. I looked into the face of the gunman who shot me.
I saw in the faces of the gunmen absolute hatred; they had pressed the button of violence and nothing I tried to say to them in Arabic was going to dissuade them.
As far as they were concerned I was a heathen, a western infidel who had come into their area and this was an opportunity to execute a westerner.”
Bio
*roll eyes*
THIS report is about winning hearts and minds………
No bias in it!
Typhoo:
Bio, watch the report
I’ve watched it twice on BBC World.
so I’m half right
You’re half wrong. Just like the BBC who you defend your use of words, bad grammar, and omission of salient facts mislead the uninformed reader.
He still lost the use of his legs to report the news.
He lost the use of his legs because he was shot, not bombed, Saudi Arabia, not Afghanistan.
Makes no difference anyway – fact is fact
Well there’s a contradiction in terms!
It does make a difference when you (you, not the BBC) mix up facts.
It reminds me of the recent case of the BBC showing a video of the Israeli army demolishing a house in Bethlehem and claiming it was a different house in Jerusalem.
Fact is fact and reporting it wrongly, for whatever reason, does make a difference.
Type more slowly, and use your brain before writing anything.
THIS report is about winning hearts and minds………
It is about Muslims “winning (the) hearts and minds” of other Muslims.
Nothing those Arab troops are doing there will stop the Taleban from trying to kill British and US troops.
The report is about winning (the) hearts and minds of the British public and convincing them that Islam is the Religion of Peace™
‘It is about Muslims “winning (the) hearts and minds” of other Muslims.’
yes.
‘Nothing those Arab troops are doing there will stop the Taleban from trying to kill British and US troops.’
And this is based on?….
‘The report is about winning (the) hearts and minds of the British public and convincing them that Islam is the Religion of Peace™’
No it’s a report for BBC news to INFORM the British public of what is happening. Thats all.
NO bias.
It really is only reflecting reality to suggest that Muslim, Arab soldiers may be more welcome by Afghans that US/UK forces. It doesn’t take a genius.
As to ‘winning hearts and minds’, I think it was Mao Tse-tung who said that no terrorist organisation can survive without a degree of support from the people. I realise the Taleban won’t always ask for help, safe houses etc from the population, usually they will demand it but don’t tell me UK troops are not out there trying to win hearts and minds, cultivating good relations with locals. Good for intelligence if nothing else, which will help defeat the enemy.
I can understand some people might think the BBC biased but examples like this are so bizarre that I find them really difficult to comprehend.
It seems to come down to “My perception is that this makes Muslims or a Muslim look good, therefore its biased.”
Martin, this article is not the BBC’s entire coverage of Afghanistan is it? You cite examples that you think make Muslims look bad. They have nought to do with this story. They do reflect your dislike of all things Islamic however. That illustrates a bias alright. Your bias.
In the same vein, why does the anti-Western media
(see the guest post at Harry’s Place, http://hurryupharry.bloghouse.net/archives/2008/03/31/it_is_no_longer_left_vs_right_but_prowestern_vs_antiwestern.php, for an intriguing look at the political realignment that has taken place in the Western democracies since the fall of Communism and the events of 9/11) insist on using photographs like this
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/apr/03/iraq
instead of more unusual ones such as this?
http://www.longwarjournal.org/archives/2008/04/iraqi_military_conti.php
‘You’re half wrong’
Still half right.
‘He still lost the use of his legs to report the news.
He lost the use of his legs because he was shot, not bombed, Saudi Arabia, not Afghanistan.’
Doesn’t matter where,he still lost the use of them, he was reporting the news.
Makes no difference anyway – fact is fact
.Well there’s a contradiction in terms!.
No there isn’t. Makes no difference to the fact that there is no bias in the report.
‘It does make a difference when you (you, not the BBC) mix up facts.
It reminds me of the recent case of the BBC showing a video of the Israeli army demolishing a house in Bethlehem and claiming it was a different house in Jerusalem.
Fact is fact and reporting it wrongly, for whatever reason, does make a difference.’
How could my typing in a different location remind you of a BBC report? Are you mixing your facts now?
Why I do believe you are.
‘Type more slowly, and use your brain before writing anything.’
Ahem – likewise.
Typhoo:
‘It is about Muslims “winning (the) hearts and minds” of other Muslims.’
yes.
I’m glad you agree.
It’s also a case of preaching to the converted. Did you miss the bit about the UAE building mosques before schools for the Afghanis?
It’s an Arab propaganda exercise helped along by the BBC.
‘Nothing those Arab troops are doing there will stop the Taleban from trying to kill British and US troops.’
And this is based on?….
The Koran.
*shakeshead*
There is nothing anyone can say to your last post Bio. It shows a mind set clearly set against any other point of view, steeped in bias and perhaps even biogotry.
So you agree then with the daisy cutter remarks?
Amazing!!
How could my typing in a different location remind you of a BBC report? Are you mixing your facts now?
Do you have problems reading and comprehending?
It reminds me of the recent case of the BBC showing a video of the Israeli army demolishing a house in Bethlehem and claiming it was a different house in Jerusalem.
You claimed Gardner lost the use of his legs after being bombed in Afghanistan.
The BBC claimed a house in Jerusalem had been demolished when in reality a house in Bethlehem had been demolished.
Remember?
http://biased-bbc.blogspot.com/2008/03/caught-out.html
But of course it’s all the same to you, innit?
Typhoo:
*shakeshead*
Careful it doesn’t fall off!
Yeah sure I can see how I’d be confused with the BBC.
Of course I can.
*rolls eyes*
Biodegradable’s Ghost:
Typhoo:
*shakeshead*
Careful it doesn’t fall off!
As long as no one drops a daisy cutter on it, I’m sure it will still remain attached 🙂
There is nothing anyone can say to your last post Bio.
So do please shut up then.
It shows a mind set clearly set against any other point of view, steeped in bias and perhaps even biogotry.
I am not willing to accept the Islamic point of view in the name of tolerance and multi-culturalism. I am willing to consider other points of view but that means having my own opinions on them. I don’t see that as bias. In any case I can be as biased as I wish, I have no statutory obligation to be neutral, the BBC does.
Neither do I accept that pointing out that the Koran explicitly calls for the death of non-believers makes me a bigot.
Calling anybody who points to the truth about Islam a bigot is typical of the new left as a way of stifling open debate on the subject, so I’ll consider our conversation at an end.
“The problem is that drinking tea is not going to do anything to stop the Taliban”
Which is the nub of your objection, isn’t it?
You dismiss a guy who’s covered security issues in the Middle East for some years, has actually been out to Afghanistan and talked to soldiers on the ground as wrong.
Because you, tapping at keyboard a few thousand miles away and who I would bet has spent zero time on the ground interviewing people and has no discernible background in security issues or Afghanistan, with no supporting evidence whatever, say that it won’t work.
And therefore the BBC is biased.
It’s hardly a compelling argument you’ve got, is it?
LOL @ DV.
I see Jammiewearingfool is praising this exact same report from the BBC!
‘They Came Here to Give You Peace’
While I’m not crazy about this information being divulged for the obvious reason these soldiers may later face repercussions, it’s refreshing to see a report noting we have assistance from Arabs in Afghanistan, and, unlike popular perception, they don’t all hate us.
Surprising to see it from the BBC of all places, considering their notorious anti-American bent.
“And we try to convince the people about the US, about British. They came here to give you peace.”
We now return you to the typical anti-American drivel from the BBC.
Labels: Afghanistan, BBC, United Arab Emirates
posted by JammieWearingFool @ 9:00 AM Comments | Trackback links to this post
So DV where is the bias. Since one of your own writers is disagreeing with you!!! Wadda hoot!! And if he cross posts on ATW it’ll be an even bigger hoot!!
“The problem is that drinking tea is not going to do anything to stop the Taliban”
Who are you quoting?
Nobody here said that.
If you’re going to quote somebody please do it accurately or else paraphrase or use reported speech.
We see plenty of that manipulation by the BBC, we surely don’t want to see it here too!
‘So do please shut up then.’
Oh dear if your argument fails bring on the abuse!!
“The problem is that drinking tea is not going to do anything to stop the Taliban”
My apologies for my last post, I now see that it was David being quoted from his original post.
Typhoo | 03.04.08 – 2:15 pm
That just goes to show what a varied lot we are here, although of course an outsider could just as easily quote any of your comments as being representative of this blog…
From the same person who said, “It shows a mind set clearly set against any other point of view, steeped in bias and perhaps even biogotry.” (sic)
Oh dear if your argument fails bring on the abuse!!
Typhoo | Homepage | 03.04.08 – 2:16 pm
I thought our conversation was at an end?
hmmm..
Regarding the two blog posts. An American blog praises the BBC and calls the report refreshing and a Brit one says its biased.
hmm….
Biodegradable’s Ghost:
“The problem is that drinking tea is not going to do anything to stop the Taliban”
My apologies for my last post, I now see that it was David being quoted from his original post.
———————
Don’t type so fast and engage your brain!!! Now that reminds me of the BBC reporting that a house was demolished…….;-)
posted by JammieWearingFool @ 9:00 AM Comments | Trackback links to this post
So DV where is the bias. Since one of your own writers is disagreeing with you!!! Wadda hoot!! And if he cross posts on ATW it’ll be an even bigger hoot!!
Typhoo | Homepage | 03.04.08 – 2:15 pm
How is JammieWearingFool “one of your (David vance’s) own writers”?
http://jammiewearingfool.blogspot.com/2008/04/they-came-here-to-give-you-peace.html
Only in the little world of small minded leftish clones are we all expected to read from the same song-sheet and have the same ideas – where we are supposed to be open to other view points but when we are then we’re accused of biogatry (sic).
Foxtrot Oscar “Typhoo”, over and out.
LOL. Bio
How is JammieWearingFool “one of your (David vance’s) own writers”?
Ask DV. JWF posts (writes) for ATW, DV’s blog.
Sure two people can take different views. An American on his own blog says the BBC report is refreshing, and DV on ‘Biased BBC’ says it’s biased.
Now isn’t that amazing lol. Biased BBC contributor says the EXACT same post as an American is biased, while the American says its refreshing.
Most likely DV has looked at JWF seen the post re BBC report and decided to do a different take on it for Biased BBC.
Nothing else available?
lol
Nothing else available?
lol
Typhoo | 03.04.08 – 2:51 pm
I see you have a (broken) link to the infamous BNP supporting Lionheart blog.
“Interesting” friends you have.
hmmm…
http://www.littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/lgf-search.php?searchString=Lionheart
For me the salient point is this: “…the likes of Frank Gardner is VERY selective who he lavishes praise upon – and the US and UK armed forces do not fall into this elite camp.”
David,
You can add the Iraqi security forces to the non-elite. The reporting of their actions in and around Basra has been odd to say the least. At a time when al-Maliki and his forces have caused the militia to die, leave or surrender it is being framed as a failure that was only ended by the grace of Moqtada al-Sadr.
The media like to report bad news when it comes to the US and UK forces. Very much a cynical and critical ‘we’re doomed’ stance. The positive stuff is few and far between. Perhaps to avoid being seen as supporters of our own troops, I’m not sure.
I’ll respectfully disagree when you say “The problem is that drinking tea is not going to do anything to stop the Taliban, much as the BBC might wish otherwise.”
It does. It stops them coming back.
The UAE forces will only go in where they feel relatively safe thanks to US aircover. It is NATO that has made the Taleban largely move on or die in those areas although some resistance remains. In goes the UAE with food and assistance and the people see an alternative to the Taleban. That they are muslim troops is of obvious benefit to all concerned. It is an uncommon and positive step.
It is to the media’s shame that they have mostly ignored similar behaviour by other forces, particularly the US and particularly in Iraq. Michael Yon and Michael J. Totten have done sterling work in documenting it.
All this should in no way detract from the work the UAE are doing. It is good their efforts are reaching a wider audience via whatever means. What bothers me is the apparent reluctance to point out that NATO in Afghanistan and the US-led alliance in Iraq do exactly the same.
All you whiners out there supporting Gardner are missing the point. No Muslim army came to the rescue of the Afghans either during the Soviet invasion or after the Taleban took over.
The Muslim soldiers that are out there now are only there because Western soldiers are keeping theTaleban at bay.
Poncy Gardner can’t be arsed to report on the rebuilding work being done by western forces. Oh and most of the population (even reported by the BBC itself) want the western soldiers to stay until the Taleban have been exterminated.
Perhaps poncy Gardner should be asking WHY Muslim Countries continually fail to come to the help of each other in times of need?
Take the Tsunami of a few years aback. Funny but I didn’t see large numbers of Saudi’s or Iranians going to the help of the people (many of them fellow Muslims) who were effected by it. In fact over here in the UK it seemed to me to be mostly white western Governments and people raising money and providing aid.
Bio what are you on about? I don’t post at little green footballs. David Vances blog had a post on it, I may have commented then but that is all.
In fact David has invited the British national party to have a debate on his blog as he says the political class has let the british people down, but anything on my blog is nothing to do with lionheart.
But don’t let that stop you posting bald faced lies eh???
The bulk of the article is a paean to the UAE soldiers and their work, and I don’t actually have a problem with that. Or, I wouldn’t have a problem with that if it didn’t turn out to be completely fatuous at the end, revealing itself as a thinly disguised call for the replacement of US and Coalition troops with Muslims.
Maybe the real problem is that the UAE troop activities have been and still are so top secret that Gardner can’t actually say what they’re doing, and is forced to fake it. But there is some real phoney-baloney stuff at the end of his article for which there is no excuse.
“People are not afraid that Emiratis will harm their religion, or disrespect the mosque or burn the mosque, things of this nature,” Governor Patan says.
Now how many times have we heard about Muslims destroying mosques in Iraq and elsewhere versus Americans doing so? Who really destroys mosques, BBC? Why would an Afghani government official confirm fears that it’s only Americans? And what do Coalition troops do that harms their religion? What does that mean? Are we supposed to just leap to the conclusion that US and Coalition troops are doing harm to Islam simply by being there? Is that really what Gardner’s getting at? Or is it that the UAE troops are more likely to look the other way when Afghanis go about activities that are perfectly acceptable in their culture, but not in ours? Certain cherished cultural activities such as “love Thursdays”, perhaps?
“People are very friendly with them. Everybody will drag them in for lunch or for dinner.”
These are hearts-and-minds operations at their most effective – drinking tea with Afghans, discussing what help can be provided.
Oh, that’s all it takes? Coalition troops never do that, never seen it on the news, no sir.
The Emirati approach is to meet their fellow Muslims’ religious needs first, then build schools and clinics later.
This doesn’t even mean anything. This is a nonsense statement pretending to be a news item.
But for this to have a wider, lasting, and national effect, the blueprint would need to be repeated and expanded by others, many times over and throughout Afghanistan.
And that is not likely to happen in the near future.
No, Frank, we’re not going to pull out all non-Muslim troops immediately and replace them with chatty Emiratis. I’m sure we’re supposed to take Frank’s lead and conclude that it’s the nasty US warmongers’ fault, and nothing whatsoever to do with the fact that the number of Muslim Arab countries that have offered to send armed troops in to do this sort of thing is very short indeed.
This would have been a good article if it didn’t turn out to be so crap. It’s too bad Gardner had to spoil a good subject like this.
Typhoo:
Bio what are you on about? I don’t post at little green footballs.
I never said you did. I did say that you have a (broken) link to Lionheart on your blog. I provided a link to posts at LGF that deal with Lionheart.
But don’t let that stop you posting bald faced lies eh???
Typhoo | Homepage | 03.04.08 – 4:00 pm
Don’t call me a liar.
http://thumbsnap.com/v/OqOhe7CC.jpg
And read what I write.
‘I see you have a (broken) link to the infamous BNP supporting Lionheart blog’
LOL you think that picture is a picture of lionheart.
Guffaw.
Interesting friends I have.
That thumbsnap image is from this post
http://typhooshaunt.blogspot.com/2008/04/victims-family-is-told-not-to-rock-sinn.html
and the image is from the Irish News
http://www.irishnews.com/appnews/540/5860/2008/4/3/584234_341329365757Murdervic.html
My you’ve got it bad with me? Are you on meds for it?
You posted a bald faced lie so if the cap fits…
infact try this for the complete image from the irish news paper
http://www.irishnews.com/articles/540/5860/2008/4/2/584153_341234726410IRAkiller.html
Also the same story posted on DV’s blog
http://atangledweb.squarespace.com/httpatangledwebsquarespace/the-seven-year-itch.html#comments
Jesus that bio truly takes defeat in an argument bad…..
and the image is from the Irish News
The image is a partial screen shot of your blog – look to the right at your list of links.
You posted a bald faced lie so if the cap fits…
Typhoo | 03.04.08 – 4:25 pm
Are you saying that you do not have a link on your blog to the Lionheart blog?
Think hard before responding, anybody can see that you do and I have a screen shot in case you delete it.
I’ll expect an aplology.
Now where did you say my (broken) link to the BNP was???
bald faced lie.