I suppose that those who may share my delight to see that Israel has taken out the Hamas cesspit and missile launching hotspot that masquerades as the UN HQ in Hamas are a minority. Naturally the BBC are enraged at this and you can expect the full response on Question Time tonight when wannabe suicide bomber Lady Tongue has her say. Even worse for the Beeb, those pesky Jews have only gone and killed Said Siyam, the Hamas interior minister, who controlled thousands of Hamas “security” troops in Gaza and who was said to be widely feared. The BBC does not elaborate on why he was feared but I am sure you can figure.

Bookmark the permalink.

46 Responses to STRIKE

  1. Greencoat says:

    Can I be the first to say:



  2. neil says:

    BINGO !!!!!

    only a few more hamas leaders to go and i can fill in my “dead killers of the middle east calander!!!


  3. moonbat nibbler says:

    Note in the general comments thread:
    DB | 15.01.09 – 5:31 pm |

    Said Sayim worked for more than two decades in UNRWA ‘schools’. Another link between Hamas and UNRWA you will not here on the BBC.


  4. moonbat nibbler says:

    hear, doh!


  5. cameron says:

    Oh superb, god I love the IDF


  6. Martin says:



  7. Cassandra says:

    The official hamas news agency(BBC) are going into ‘outrage overdrive’ now, although they seem to have forgotten about the journalist HQ that was hit by the IDF, I wonder why?
    Could it be that its become known that hamas fighters took over the lower floors of the building and held the journalists hostage while they fired at the IDF?
    Just saw some edited images of the UNRWA building supposedly set on fire by the IDF smokescreen, I noticed several palletts of foodstuffs burning but after closer inspection I noticed what looked like signs of a liquid accelerant on the bags, the phospherous sub munitions are not liquid and they do not spread like liquids(petrol).
    Its far too early to say for sure but when the investigators get a closer look at the remains they will quickly be able to tell whether the fires were started by phospherous or liquid fuel.
    What the BBC is doing is spreading unfounded allegations released by hamas and its useful idiot collaborators(UNRWA) before the facts are known, the BBC has left itself incredibly exposed to charges of collaboration with known terrorists and serial liars, its to be hoped that when the IDF releases its evidence the BBC will be called to account for its crimes.
    Terrorist sympathisers and enablers like Ging and Gunness should be discplined and sacked for their dishonest behaviour!


  8. Ron says:

    I love the smell of a UN HQ in the evening. It smells of victory.


  9. David Preiser (USA) says:

    The UN must be held accountable for its collaboration with Hamas, but I hate it when this kind of thing happens.

    Some people here may remember a couple years back when John Reith was debating about the Canadian troops at a UN post who were killed by an Israeli attack after Hezbollah had overrun their post. Nobody wanted the Canadians dead, but there was no alternative to Israel fighting back other than shutting up and dying. As usual, the argument degraded into more “Israelis kill innocents when it suits them”.

    If these UN people are sitting on their hands and not reporting what Hamas gets up to to their superiors, they’re guilty of aiding and abetting, and it’s getting increasingly hard to shed a tear for those who lie down with wolves.


  10. Martin says:

    David Preiser (USA): You’re right of course the UN doesn’t want to be thrown out of Gaza so it just goes along with what it’s told by Hamas.

    I’ve long since given up on the UN. It’s a corrupt organisation just used by leftists and Muslims who want to bash the west about anything and everything.

    I really do wish Bush had thrown the UN out of New York. Let the Muslims pay for it (and fund it)

    Just like the BBC, the UN is last century crap that should be closed down.


  11. Philip says:

    Happy days.. another Hamas-hole who won’t be down for breakfast.


  12. betyangelo says:

    “I really do wish Bush had thrown the UN out of New York. Let the Muslims pay for it (and fund it)”

    Exactly the sentiments of most Americans. I wonder how long it will take the Messiah to get on over there for a speech, and to accept his laurels as citizen and savior of the world.

    As for the BBC’s outrage, and the propaganda about burning foodstuffs – I’ve already gotten an earful from a couple of liberal friends – here’s hat’s off from an admirer.

    “I have the greatest admiration for your propaganda. Propaganda in the West is carried out by experts who have had the best training in the world– and have mastered the techniques with exceptional proficiency … Yours are subtle and persuasive; ours are crude and obvious … I think that the fundamental difference between our worlds, with respect to propaganda, is quite simple. You tend to believe yours … and we tend to disbelieve ours.”– Soviet correspondent based five years in the U.S.


  13. xjboy550 says:

    just a thought but how did the un get such a large and combustable stockpile i thought they were all ways running out of this and that!well that’s what they keep harping about !!! bloody idiots its a war zone not a warehouse in reading


  14. pounce says:

    The bBC, and Not the Nine O/Clock News

    Something the bBC won’t be reporting from Demark.

    The bBC, and Not the Nine O/Clock News


  15. lemar says:

    I thought the people in Gaza were starving so why are the warehouses full of food. Something fishy here (sorry for the pun) but the BBC never can add 2 + 2 together.


  16. Rod says:

    The BBC reports a massive explosion, would a shell or phosphorus cause this or was it something else like self raising flour.


  17. George R says:

    BBC Radio 4 at 10 pm on, had an anti-Israel accusatory piece on phosphorous; we do know that Hamas uses phosphorous in its mortor shells fired at Israel.

    Melanie Phillips on:

    “War, Lies and Credulity” [and phosphorous]


  18. adam says:

    the more UN buildings Israel bomb, the more i support them.
    but thats just me


  19. Anonymous says:



  20. Garden Trash says:

    “Chris Gunness, a UNRWA spokesman, said that the building had been used to shelter hundreds of people fleeing Israel’s 20-day offensive in Gaza. He said that pallets with supplies desperately needed by Palestinians in Gaza were on fire.

    “What more stark symbolism do you need?” he said. “You can’t put out white phosphorus with traditional methods such as fire extinguishers. You need sand, we don’t have sand.”

    No friggin sand?


  21. thud says:

    The Gaza situation just gets better everyday….I always supported Israel but their actions in annoying to the point of madness all the crazies and sob merchants in the world has me more thankful than I could ever imagine.


  22. Cassandra says:

    Hmmmm, just seen more pictures of the supposed phosperous fires at the UNWRA(hamas)building and it looks increasingly fishy to me.
    Its very convenient that the UNWRA/hamas appologists were whinning about the IDF use of smokescreens which have caused the hamas fighters such problems and helped the IDF so much and then the UNWRA buiding just happens to catch fire and its blamed on the IDF!
    Film of one of the fires behind some pallets showed the fire isolated with very little smoke burning yellow, phospheous submunitions burn bright white, they do not spread by themselves, they require a highly flammable medium to spread and it seems unlikely that the flames would spread that quickly without some kind of acclerant and flour is not an accelerant, those bags of flour would not burn so quickly with a localized ignition source.
    Is there a poster with fire service experience who could lok at the hamas approved pictures provided?
    I hope that the IDF insists on an indepedent inspection of the UNRWA building as soon as possible, an expert fire investigator will be able to tell very quickly if the fire was started and fed by liquids or phospherous, I wouldnt put it past the UNRWA/hamas activists to pull a cheap propaganda stunt.


  23. Cassandra says:

    Garden Trash,

    The IDF phospherous sub munitions are the size of an egg, they burn for about 90 seconds and then the secondary fires can be put out with ordinary fire suppression gear.
    The munitions only provide a highly local source of heat and they require a highly combustible material to spread quickly.
    Water will not put out the phosperous while it burns BUT the combustible material surrounding it can be quenched as normal untill the munition is exausted and this happens quickly,too quickly to spread the flames beyond a very small area, in other words the UNRWA/hamas story is starting to look quite dodgy, although an inspection by fire service experts wold be able to find out the true source.
    The BBC/UNRWA/HAMAS couldnt work better together if they were allies in a political cause…. Ooooops!


  24. Cockney says:

    Given that the Israeli death toll has been stuck on 13 for days now (and half of them were OGs) despite “hand to hand fighting” in Gaza City, shouldn’t the Beeb be reporting on hown incredibly crap Hamas seem to be at this war lark (which I though was their raison d’etre in the first place?) They were quick enough to gloat about the end of Iarael’s military invincibility when they had a bit more trouble than they expected in Lebanon a couple of years back.

    can’t remember where I saw it but my favourite comment on the Ossie Bin Laden hunt was that the Yanks couldn’t find an Arab in Stringfellows so how about “Hamas: Couldn’t hit a Jew in White Hart Lane” as headline on News at Ten.


  25. Peter says:

    I take no pleasure from any people’s deaths, especially when the circumstances remain uncertain. However, I accept that in a shooting war people, preferably ‘willing’ combatants, die. But also, sadly, mistakes get made and innocents suffer.

    I merely hope that that the IDF does and did here everything it possibly could to ensure that the shelling was warranted. In which case the dynamic of the situation changes significantly.

    Equally, one would hope that the ‘UN’ (or at least one of the seemingly endless entities that are allowed to append its ‘brand’-prefix, and often it seems without much brand oversight by those who might wish to ensure it remains untainted) is equally certain of the claims made or are made in their name. At least, as reported.

    Speaking of which, it would be hoped (though sadly now in vain), that so-called ‘professional’ ‘news’ organisations would have the ethical commitment and commercial cojones to avoid immediate sensationalism to compete in a 24/7, ratings-hungry media environment.

    I was away yesterday and merely learned that the UN Sec. Gen was ‘furious’ with the Israelis for the shelling of a compound. As there is some doubt still, let’s for now avoid any aspect of why on the part of the IDF, from mistake to response to threat, beyond saying the former does not suggest intention and the latter at least some level of justification.

    What I have not heard from Mr. Ban Ki Moon, or at least reported (and if so why not, and if not why not comment) is much by way of outrage for the preceding eight years when, at best, Hamas has deliberately targeted civilians indiscriminately over a protracted period. The difference between a few shells in a compound and a few rockets, per day, all over the shop is what, exactly?

    And, listening to the news just now, Hamas are offering a ‘cease fire’ … ‘for a year’. Er… what then? Did we give Hitler a year off in 1944 to help sort himself out a bit for kicking off again?

    It is a multiplicity of standards on on the part of some entities that seems hard to comprehend, especially, or perhaps due to the ways things are explained.

    Not getting the fully story, and a fair spread of analysis of it from my national broadcaster is worse than nothing at all. Being forced against my will to pay for such is injury to insult.


  26. Anon says:

    The following is from a company that supplies security personell to the BBC (and other media) I doubt they will be investigating Hamas???!!!

    “There is a possibility that we may in the near future have a requirement to conduct an investigation of a technical military nature.
    If you have attended either the Weapons Staff course (dagger) or the Gunnery Staff course could you let me know.”


  27. Anon says:

    Sh’ma Yisroel.


  28. Cockney says:

    “Sh’ma Yisroel.”

    Bless you


  29. Chris Feene says:

    I have been watching and listening to the Beeb for over 30 years in many parts of the world, but I have to say their coverage of the Gaza conflict has just gobsmacked me with its biased and totally pro Hamas and Palestinian reporting. I am amazed to see the various Palestinian (Hamas)reporters they have dug up who hardly even speak proper English plus the crazy Norwegian Doctors who are so pro Hamas its not even funny. Even the French coverage (where I live) has great inteviews with Israeli families in their homes wheras not once have I seen any Israeli opinion on the Beeb. Well shame on the BBC who have shown they are biased and misleading and unable to report objectively on this major ocnflict. By the way Go IDF and take the Hamas terrorist scumbags out completely.


  30. Bill 'the one and only' Buchan says:

    those getting all hot under the collar here should ask themselves the following:

    what incentive would the UN have for lying about Hamas firing rockets from the UN HQ? the UN don’t choose sides, i would have thought that was obvious by now.

    as for the ‘UN hates the Jews’ line I’ve read here somewhere before, thats nonsense, and just shows the lack of argument many people have if they have to resort to ‘they hate us cos we’re Jewish’ crap.

    The UN would have no incentive to lie, so theres been a gaint balls-up here. Israel has made a mistake it seems, the sooner it confessed to its mistakes like this, the sooner that public opinion might not show such outrage.


  31. David Preiser (USA) says:

    Bill ‘the one and only’ Buchan | 16.01.09 – 4:05 pm |

    what incentive would the UN have for lying about Hamas firing rockets from the UN HQ? the UN don’t choose sides, i would have thought that was obvious by now.

    What planet are you from? The UN chose sides long ago.


  32. betyangelo says:

    The U.N. is comprised of corrupt officials appointed by corrupt governments who got their posts through the barter system. They arrive in NY full of class arrogance where they flaut money and position by breaking U.S. law and annoy the natives with an attitude of entitlement. They mouth the global Anti-America stance and vote down our soveriegnty at every chance – because we are the world’s sows – even as they buy up our goods and live in luxury provided by the American taxpayer. In fact, their jobs are provided by the American taxpayer, in short, they bite the hand that feeds them.

    “The UN would have no incentive to lie…”

    Of course not, they are all honest, hard working, intelligent, responsible citizens of the world.


  33. Robert says:

    Hamas are always telling us that “we love death like you love life”, so what’s the problem – everyone satisfied, trebles all round!


  34. Bryan says:

    David Preiser (USA) | 15.01.09 – 8:01 pm,

    Yes, I filed most of that debate. It was on an open thread from 23/11/07:

    I believe it started with my comment about an Israel-bashing article by Paul Adams, in which the UN post was mentioned:

    Reith took exception to my comment here:

    Then the debate continued on another thread:

    with Reith accusing me and others of being “apologists for murder.”

    Then it really got quite heated.

    I wonder what happened to John Reith?


  35. Biodegradable says:

    “Hamas: Couldn’t hit a Jew in White Hart Lane” as headline on News at Ten.
    Cockney | 16.01.09 – 8:59 am

    I confess that raised a smile, but, real Jews being really hit by real home-grown Islamonazi wannabe mujahadin in Golders Green is no laughing matter.


  36. Biodegradable says:

    Sh’ma Yisroel.
    Anon | 16.01.09 – 1:38 pm

    Shabbat shalom!


  37. David Preiser (USA) says:

    Bryan | 16.01.09 – 5:37 pm |

    I wonder what happened to John Reith?

    I believe JR said he didn’t like the tone the blog had taken at the beginning of David Vance’s tenure. He may also have stopped working for the BBC entirely, and felt like coming here was no longer worth the effort.

    It’s too bad, really, because even though he did seem to harbor a couple of anti-Jewish beliefs (not the same thing as actually being anti-Jew), he did know the inner workings of the BBC, and I even learned a thing or two from debating with him. At the very least, he did his homework, although sometimes that was after he had come out swinging and got something wrong. But he was infinitely better than the usual defenders of the indefensible we get here.


  38. deegee says:

    The UN would have no incentive to lie
    Bill ‘the one and only’ Buchan | 16.01.09 – 4:05 pm

    More than 99% of UNWRA employees are local Palestinians, mostly ‘refugees’.
    Isn’t that incentive enough to lie?


  39. Bryan says:

    David Preiser (USA) | 17.01.09 – 6:05 pm,

    Yes, I agree with that assessment of Reith. But his anti-Israel obsession went a little deeper. You might recall that he indicated he had a relative caught up in the King David Hotel attack.

    Goes a long way towards explaining his animosity towards Israel and anyone who defends the country.


  40. deegee says:

    Goes a long way towards explaining his animosity towards Israel and anyone who defends the country.
    Bryan | 17.01.09 – 8:32 pm | #

    I don’t want John Reith back – not that I have a choice in the matter.

    I recall that he was a disciple of the so-called new historians, like Ilan Pappe.


  41. Sue says:

    Here in the south west our MPs are Lib Dem, and Exeter University has a big Islamic studies department. One of the history lecturers there is ‘historian’ Ilan Pappe.
    Down here everyone is predominantly, and if I may say so, emphatically, anti Israel. Antisemitic too; yet there are so few Jews here; most people who hate them don’t know any personally.

    Letters in the papers, stop the war vigils etc. etc. Kaffeyahs round everyone’s neck.

    I feel a bit like a commenter on Atlas Shrugs who describes her feelings of isolation on the Dead Babies page “I am becoming more and more isolated, suspicious of people I’ve known for years, ..”

    Stupid me for living here, eh.

    I don’t want JR back, but I do wonder if anyone from the BBC reads the blog these days.


  42. Bryan says:

    deegee | 17.01.09 – 9:09 pm

    Sue | 17.01.09 – 9:40 pm

    Re JR, my predominant feeling is good riddance to bad rubbish, though it was challenging crossing swords with him.

    Two weeks ago I had a brief e-mail exchange with Paul Reynolds, who used to pop in here, re an article of his bemoaning the fact that journalists were not allowed into Gaza and writing about Israeli “propaganda” while retaining a typical BBC silence about Pallywood. I invited him to visit here again if he was interested in finding out about BBC bias. That’s when the exchange ended.


  43. Biodegradable says:

    Here in the south west our MPs are Lib Dem, and Exeter University has a big Islamic studies department. One of the history lecturers there is ‘historian’ Ilan Pappe.
    Down here everyone is predominantly, and if I may say so, emphatically, anti Israel. Antisemitic too; yet there are so few Jews here; most people who hate them don’t know any personally.
    Sue | 17.01.09 – 9:40 pm

    There was a female “Lecturer” from Exeter U on AlJazeera recently insulting Alan Dershowitz… I don’t remember her name.

    Re antisemites not knowing Jews; I’ve lived in several European countries and Spain, where I live now, is the most antisemitic of all, with the smallest Jewish community, who keep the lowest profile. Of course there are historical reasons too:


  44. Sue says:

    Biodegradable | 18.01.09 – 3:43 pm

    There was a female “Lecturer” from Exeter U on AlJazeera recently insulting Alan Dershowitz… I don’t remember her name.

    I think I saw her too, either on Sky or BBC.
    Insulting Alan Dershowitz is a common tactic, they must find his logical reasoning so maddening.

    Exeter University hands out a lot of honorary doctorates to artists and celebs.

    Would love to turn one down and tell them in no uncertain terms why. (Husband = artist)


  45. Biodegradable says:

    I think I saw her too, either on Sky or BBC.
    Insulting Alan Dershowitz is a common tactic, they must find his logical reasoning so maddening.

    She’s a sort of Alahbi-Brown (sp?) look-alike.

    She said something to the effect that the Israelis had “recruited” Dershowitz to lie for them.

    He pointed out that the Israeli government had never contacted him, nor was he paid by them to air his views.

    How they love to blame everything on The Global Zionist Lobby™

    “…if the telephone is busy, if your bathtub springs a leak,
    if receipts don’t tally up right, if your lager tastes too weak
    if the cake runs out on sunday, if the Prince of Wales is gay
    If the bedstead creeks at nightime, if your poodle’s stool is grey
    chorus: The Jews are all to blame for it!
    To blame, to blame , to blame for it!
    Why so, why are the jews to blame?
    My child, don’t ask, they’re just to blame…”
    from German cabaret song 1931
    (to be sung to Habanera from Carmen if you fancy giving it a go, gentlemen…)


  46. David Preiser (USA) says:

    Bryan, deegee, and Biodegradable:

    I don’t ever expect JR to come back, nor any other actual Beeboids (NB, any mischievous trolls who want to try anything: he posted from a BBC IP, which the mods can check, so don’t waste your time). Not only do they realize that to do so would lend credibility to the blog, but it would also force them to engage with people they view as being worthy of contempt. We had a drive-by from at least one BBC employee a few months back who said as much. So I’m not holding my breath waiting for one of them to come by.

    The lone exception is Sarah Jane, who seems to be sympathetic to certain things we complain about. Although s/he’s certainly willing to correct us when s/he thinks we’re wrong, and seems to talk pretty straight.