the durban review

The Durban Review Conference is being held this week in Geneva, Switzerland. It will evaluate progress towards the goals set in 2001 by the World Conference against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance, which was held in Durban, South Africa.

The Durban Review Conference, or Durban II as are describing it, will serve as a catalyst to fulfilling the promises of the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action, which was adopted by consensus amongst a vast majority of the global community in 2001.

Attendees are set to work through and find consensus on reinvigorated actions, initiatives and practical solutions. After long deliberation, delegates last week reach agreement on a draft outcome document to guide their efforts at the conference this week.

Zionists appear to fear Durban II. They've been campaigning to derail it. The Israeli government has excluded itself from this important United Nations initiative. The Zionists want other nations to comply with their obstructionist stance.

Zionist lobbying has influenced the decisions made by the governments of the following nations: Canada, Italy and Australia. They'll all sadly now boycott Durban II and do none of the good work that needs to be done at this conference.

President Barack Obama has come under intense pressure from pro-Israel groups. According to the Jewish Telegraphic Agency, the United States told Israeli officials that they will not be attending this year's conference.

So what is it that the Zionists fear about the Durban Review Conference?

Both Zionist lobby propagandists and the government of Israel claim that there is something that "offends" them about the Durban Declaration. They claim that it includes "unacceptable language." They claim that Durban II will reaffirm the "unacceptable" Durban Declaration.

Here's what the Durban Declaration actually says directly in relation to Jews and Israel:

61. We recognize with deep concern the increase in anti-Semitism and Islamophobia in various parts of the world, as well as the emergence of racial and violent movements based on racism and discriminatory ideas against Jewish, Muslim and Arab communities;


63. We are concerned about the plight of the Palestinian people under foreign occupation. We recognize the inalienable right of the Palestinian people to self-determination and to the establishment of an independent State and we recognize the right to security for all States in the region, including Israel, and call upon all States to support the peace process and bring it to an early conclusion;

64. We call for a just, comprehensive and lasting peace in the region in which all peoples shall co-exist and enjoy equality, justice and internationally recognized human rights, and security;


150. Calls upon States, in opposing all forms of racism, to recognize the need to counter anti-Semitism, anti-Arabism and Islamophobia world-wide, and urges all States to take effective measures to prevent the emergence of movements based on racism and discriminatory ideas concerning these communities;

151. As for the situation in the Middle East, calls for the end of violence and the swift resumption of negotiations, respect for international human rights and humanitarian law, respect for the principle of self-determination and the end of all suffering, thus allowing Israel and the Palestinians to resume the peace process, and to develop and prosper in security and freedom;

What's so "unacceptable" about those statements?

Could it really be that Zionists fear the efforts of government and non-government representatives from around the world coming together to determine actions, initiatives and practical solutions designed to reduce and eliminate racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance?

Could it really be that they fear free expression during the proceedings of something that is true -- that Israeli policies, especially with regard to the Occupied Palestinian Terrorities, have been reflective of racial discrimination and related intolerance?

What really motivates Zionists to derail Durban II?


  1. My 1st reaction is "How mortifyingly embarrassing!" How dare the Aus govt. act sooo badly??! (But - that's a BIG BUT: Not in my name!)

    If there is to be any 'valid debate' about the (modern??!) state of Israel, it *MUST* include religion - since their putative state is to be more or less Jewish[1] - and they *attempt* to claim some sort of 'g*d[2]-given right'(??!) to sadly now mostly ex-Palestine (all their choice of words), and one guaranteed way 'in' is to convert to the religion of Judaism; it *MUST* include racism[3], since another guaranteed way 'in' is to have been born of a Jewish mother, along with their so-called (puffed-up!) 'exceptionalism' (again their choice of words), plus the fact that they single out their opponents by calling them Arabs or Muslims or both (and, 'of course' worse, where 'of course' is not at all 'of course'.)

    This is not, and now I justly use 'of course,' any so-called 'leadership' here but rather followship. Apropos, I do *NOT* think that the US has led anybody anywhere, especially in the 'last little while,' except down the path to rack and ruin, i.e. towards perdition.


    Intermezzo: Criticizing someone (here, a Jewish someone), does not imply, nor should it ever attract, the trumped-up charge of anti-Semitism. Making that charge invokes a Lakoffian frame "Oh, you poor little Jew-boy!" The state of Israel is *not* to be criticized so much, as it is to be utterly, unequivocally condemned - and then damned - all the way to hell.


    Then I start to relax; I realise that yet again, we are trying to deal with an artificial situation whereby we are being confronted with/by propagandists - and their (filthy!) lies...

    Propagandists do not care for the truth. Worse, they try to conceal it, distort it, contradict it even.

    What??! The truth of the matter is that the US and Israel simply can't abide honest dialogue - because they themselves are lying, cheating, killing-to-steal crooks. And the Aus govt. dares to join the baddies' side. Boo! Hiss!



    [1] Jewish adj. 1 of Jews. 2 of Judaism.  Jewishness n. [POD]

    [2] god n. 1 a (in many religions) superhuman being or spirit worshipped as having power over nature, human fortunes, etc. b image, idol, etc., symbolizing a god. 2 (God) (in Christian and other monotheistic religions) creator and ruler of the universe. 3 adored or greatly admired person. [ibid.]

    My comment: At the very least, one *must* insist, on the separation of church from state. Render unto Caesar, etc. Attempting to turf the Palestinians out amounts to a monumental and massive crime - the only *proper, just* remedy for which, is to allow the Palestinians to return *to their own land*.

    [3] racism n. 1 belief in the superiority of a particular race; prejudice based on this. 2 antagonism towards other races.  racist n. & adj. [ibid.]

  2. A good piece Orana and summed up well when you say 'Zionists appear to fear Durban II'.

    Rudd's disgusting 'me too' subsevience to the US is transparent. Most Australian's, indeed, most folk around the world, now see Zionist Israel for what it really is these days especially after the way they treated the Palestinian people of the Gaza culminating in the carnage last Dec/Jan and the oppression since.

    The world is rapidly waking up to the fact that a Jews-only Israel is a racist and apartheid state - Durban II or not.

  3. G’day Orana, ID and Damian,

    The problems with the Durban Review friends seems to be that the Zionists do not like facts; truths or any indication of considering them “ordinary humans”.

    There was a time, when writing that would bring down the wrath of God (we were taught) but the real Zionist Jews, while enjoying the genocide in the Middle East, especially the Gaza holocaust, are nevertheless destroying the very image they have tried to portray of themselves for 60 years.

    And while the resentment from any thinking and civilised person is rising, the insidious power of these people still permeates every facet of our societies – no matter where. Damian is right to say that people around the world are waking up to the real picture of Zionism and they must have some vision of what that can mean if allowed to solidify and fester.

    King Abdullah warned the world of the future of Zionist Israel in a 1946 address to the US viz: “I am especially delighted to address an American audience, for the tragic problem of Palestine will never be solved without American understanding, American sympathy, American support”.

    And: “Palestine is a small and very poor country, about the size of your state of Vermont. Its Arab population is only about 1,200,000. Already we have had forced on us, against our will, some 600,000 Zionist Jews. We are threatened with many hundreds of thousands more.”

    And for 60+ years the Americans have supported the Zionists in their genocide and ethnic cleansing of Palestine.

    I cannot understand why we elect fascist people like Howard and then, after serious breaches of human rights, we try for a revival of Australian values by electing the oldest political party in Australia – only to find that even they too are victims of the US/Israel unholy alliance.

    The US method of “liberation” is no different to that offered by the Nazis and any attempt at convincing the world otherwise has surely passed its use-by time.


    This will be cross-posted in http://yourdemocracy.net.au/ Real Terrorists.

  4. Clues as to what the Zionists really fear are found on pro-Zionist propaganda site, NGO Monitor:

    "This Durban strategy, led by NGOs, is behind the BDS (boycotts, divestment and sanctions) efforts ..."

    So what do they fear? They fear people around this planet applying the strategies we used to end Aparthied in South Africa.

    So spread the word and hit 'em where it hurts. As long as the Palestinians do not enjoy a peaceful life on their lands: Buy no Israeli product. Invest in no Israeli business.

  5. Sound thinking, orana gelar. To drive home the point - and easily done, is if in Woolies, say, take an offending example to the manager(ess) then hand it to him/her, look 'em right in the eye and say firmly "I refuse to buy stuff from here!" Israel exports lots of oranges and other produce - unfortunately, we can't say "No!" to their military exports - because as peaceniks, we're not in the market for (illegitimate!) killing machines.

  6. Here's the relevant "unacceptable" (anti-Zionist) text from the NGO Forum at Durban in 2001:

    "Recognizing further that the Palestinian people are one such people currently enduring a colonialist, discriminatory military occupation that violates their fundamental human right of self-determination including the illegal transfer of Israeli citizens into the occupied territories and establishment of a permanent illegal Israeli infrastructure; and other racist methods amounting to Israel’s brand of apartheid and other racist crimes against humanity. Recognizing therefore that the Palestinian people have the clear right under international law to resist such occupation by any means provided under international law until they achieve their fundamental human right to self-determination and end the Israeli racist system including its own brand of apartheid."

    "99. Recognizing further that a basic “root cause” of Israel’s on going and systematic human rights violations, including its grave breaches of the fourth Geneva convention 1949 (i.e. war crimes), acts of genocide and practices of ethnic cleansing is a racist system, which is Israel’s brand of apartheid. One aspect of this Israeli racist system has been a continued refusal to allow the Palestinian refugees to exercise their right as guaranteed by international law to return to their homes of origin. Related to the right of return, the Palestinian refugees also have a clear right under international law to receive restitution of their properties and full compensation. Furthermore, international law provides that those Palestinian refugees choosing not to return are entitled to receive full compensation for all their losses. Israel’s refusal to grant Palestinian refugees their right of return and other gross human rights and humanitarian law violations has destabilized the entire region and has impacted on world peace and security."


    "160. Appalled by the on-going colonial military Israeli occupation of the Occupied Palestinian Territories (the West Bank including Jerusalem, and the Gaza Strip), we declare and call for an immediate end to the Israeli systematic perpetration of racist crimes including war crimes, acts of genocide and ethnic cleansing (as defined in the Statute of the International Criminal Court), including uprooting by military attack, and the imposition of any and all restrictions and measures on the population to make life so difficult that the only option is to leave the area, and state terrorism against the Palestinian people, recognizing that all of these methods are designed to ensure the continuation of an exclusively Jewish state with a Jewish majority and the expansion of its borders to gain more land, driving out the indigenous Palestinian population."

    "161. We declare that this alien domination and subjugation with the denial of territorial integrity amounts to colonialism, which denies the fundamental rights of selfdetermination, independence and freedom of Palestinians. Condemn this process of settler colonialism through the on-going collective punishments, expropriation and destruction of Palestinian lands, homes, property, agricultural land and crops; the establishment of illegal Israeli settlements, the mass transfer of Israeli Jewish
    populations to the illegally expropriated Palestinian land and the development of a permanent and illegal Israeli infrastructure, including by-pass roads."

    "162. We declare Israel as a racist, apartheid state in which Israels brand of apartheid as a crime against humanity has been characterized by separation and segregation, dispossession, restricted land access, denationalization, ¨bantustanization¨ and inhumane acts."

    "163. Appalled by the inhumane acts perpetrated in the maintenance of this new form of apartheid regime through the Israeli state war on civilians including military attacks, torture, arbitrary arrests and detention, the imposition of severe restrictions on movement (curfews, imprisonment and besiegement of towns and villages), and systematic collective punishment, including economic strangulation and deliberate impoverishment, denial of the right to food and water, the right to an adequate standard of living, the right to housing, the right to education and the right to work."

    "164. We recognize that targeted victims of Israel´s brand of apartheid and ethnic cleansing methods have been in particular children, women and refugees and condemn the disproportionate numbers of children and women killed and injured in military shooting and bombing attacks. Recognize the right of return of refugees and internally displaced people to their homes of origin, restitution of properties, and compensation for damages, losses and other crimes committed against them, as guaranteed in international law."

    "165. Appalled by the discrimination against the Palestinians inside Israel which include: The imposition of discriminatory laws, including the discriminatory laws of return and citizenship, which emphasize the ethnicity of the Israeli state as a Jewish state; the granting of benefits or privileges solely to the Jewish Israeli citizens; the imposition of restrictions on the civil and political rights of Palestinians because of their national belonging or because they do not belong to the majority ethnic group;The negation of the right of Palestinians to equal access to resources of the State and civil equality, including affirmative action policies, which recognize the historical discrimination against Palestinians inside Israel."

    Clearly, there are accusations of crimes against humanity levelled at the Israeli government in it, but not an anti-Semitic statement whatsoever is made in this text.

    The claims made by Zionists and their apologists about the Durban I documents are false.

  7. Australia is Israel’s 19th most important export destination.

    Last financial year we bought $685mil of their product.

    $122mil worth of pearls and gems.

    Who buys pearls and gems?

    $69mil worth of fertilisers.


    $68mil worth of telecoms kit.

    Perhaps we should find out who bought it and boycott them.

  8. Here's one Australian company that bought Israeli telco kit: OMNIConnect Telecommunications. It's been buying up small regional telco networks, like the one in South Gippsland, Victoria.

  9. their very worst fear ...

      .. the fear that dares not say its name ...

        .. is the fear that they will be exposed as fakes

    I just love appropriate qualifiers, so here are a few: utterly criminal, brutal mass-murdering-to-thieve fakes - Oh! and complete failures as human beings. They are nothing but crude, Neanderthal-like savages.


    The very idea, of stealing someone's land and water, terrorising and driving out the legitimate owners of now sadly mostly ex-Palestine, could only ever occur to, be carried out by, some sort of throw-backs to a savage, undisciplined and ugly (pre-human!) past. They can't even obey their claimed g*d's prime directive: "Thou shalt not kill!" - presumably since they never recovered from their trumped-up history-book Cain killing his very own brother Abel - not to mention 'that other bloke'.

    Ghastly, completely barbaric primitives.


    G'day again orana gelar,

    just seen your latest(of Apr 20, 2009 2:53:00 PM; you've been busy), on the way to drafting this. IF the world knew, THEN they'd be appalled - and presumably, they'd then go about moving heaven & earth to rein in the criminal Zionists. Q: Why didn't we hear about all this Israeli depredation, until just recently (aka internet)? A: Because the AusBC, say, withheld and/or obfuscated. - Boo! Hiss!

    Then Q: What about our politicians, who have 'professional intel' services? They all, surely must know the horrid, ugly, murdering-to-thieve truth? 60+ bloody, gruesome years long? A: Good question.

  10. And here, the Victorian government boasts:

    "Victoria is home to around 20 Israeli companies of which half are from the ICT sector. These include ClickSoftware, Ex Libris, Gilat, Rad Data, Radware, Shiron, Sunguard, Tescom and Wizcom Technologies."

  11. Perhaps the biggest disaster in all of this - is that Obama's 'playing along.'

  12. how's this ...

      .. as an outright lie ...

        .. from good old Aunty AusBC?

    Controversial UN racism talks open
    Posted April 20, 2009 20:48:00
      «Mr Ahmadinejad has repeatedly called the Holocaust a "myth" and for Israel to be "wiped off the map".»[AusBC/justin]


    Says it all, really. No *further* proof required, ever.

  13. ClickSoftware's clients here include Telstra, Aristocrat, Commander, Chubb, Downer EDI, Fisher & Paykel, KinCare, ETSA, and Panasonic, amongst others.

    Ex Libris deals with many of our university and public libraries. Tescom won a major contract with Monash University.

    Gilat's and Shiron's big client here is Optus.

    RAD Data deals with CityLink, the toll road company, and Telstra, amongst others.

    Radware deals with Computershare, and Dimension Data, amongst others.

  14. I keep missing your comments as I do research, IDHolm. Good old Aunty AusBC? She tells tall tales.

  15. The above item from Aunty AusBC could presumably cause the guaranteed, mother-of-all orgasms - somewhere? For almost all others, only pure disgust.

  16. This comment has been removed by the author.

  17. Bob Wall said...

    The US had other objections, as Chris Hedges points out:The Obama administration at first refused to participate in the preliminary negotiations for the conference, chaired by Russia, Iran and Libya. It then agreed to attend for one week. It demanded the removal of references to Israel in the document outlining the goals of the conference. The references were removed. It also demanded other insidious changes, as Vernellia R. Randall, a University of Dayton Ohio law professor, pointed out. The Obama administration asked that the call for reparations for African-Americans be expunged. It insisted that the description of the transatlantic slave trade as “a crime against humanity” be cut. And it demanded the elimination of a call to strengthen the U.N. “Working Group of Experts on People of African Descent,” which deals with the African diaspora.And don't mention the native-Americans.

  18. From the Dragon's mouth:

    Monday 20 April 2009 - 19:10
    UNSC infrastructure needs revision

      «President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on Monday called for fundamental change in the infrastructure of the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) and questioned the legitimacy of the right to veto.

    President Ahmadinejad made the remarks at the International Durban Review Conference (Durban 2) in Geneva on Monday.

    The Iranian president also called for change in the monetary and financial system of the world.

    It is among the grave responsibilities of intellectuals, scientists and officials of the world to play their historical role at this sensitive juncture, he said.

    Capitalism like Communism has a wrong concept of the world and its development and tries to impose its will on the world people while merely pursuing materialistic goals rather than justice, freedom, brotherhood, affinity and kindness, he said.

    All should take proper lessons from such developments and this can be attained through collective contribution of governments and nations round the globe.
    Ahmadinejad: UNSC has given Zionists liberty to commit crimes
    President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad told the International Durban Review Conference (Durban II) on Monday that United Nations Security Council (UNSC) has in the past 60 years supported the occupier Zionist regime and given it the liberty to commit any crime.

    Addressing the participants at the international meeting on racism in Geneva, he questioned the right to veto, wondering which logic underlies such a right. "With which human value does it comply? Is it compatible with justice, equality and human dignity?" he asked.

    Referring to the fact that UNSC is the top-most source regarding international peace and security, he questioned that while legal discrimination prevails and laws are based on force rather than justice, how one can expect justice and peace?

    He complained that a number of western and European governments consider themselves committed to the genocide racists and support them.

    Following World War II, some displaced a nation and moved a number of people from Europe, the US and other countries to their land under the pretext that the Jews were victimized, and established a totally racist regime in the occupied lands, he said.»


    One could assume that this was the point when the true villains walked out of the chamber. [More to come.]

  19. distraction via demonisation ...

      .. why that - and from whom ...

        .. exactly who could benefit, how?


    Well, of course and hardly a single "Ah, ha!" - silly questions.

    The "Who benefits" bit is obvious, the same-old same-old villains (any still naïve can start with USrael then add the coerced and quisling); the real question is how can we ever change horses (from those of the Apocalypse?)

    I can't seriously fault Ahmadinejad; what he reportedly said is mostly common sense, obscured a bit by religious overtones and mangled a bit by the translation. But basically on the correct (as opposed to the confused and confusing 'right') track.

    I concern myself mainly with publicly-financed broadcasters, since a) they are essentially an organ of the state - it'd be hard for them to function without at least the tacit approval of the governing regimes, b) they therefore form a key component in a so-called democracy by informing the electorate on the one hand, and providing 'competition' for the privately owned MSM (now, unfortunately, regretfully but accurately known to be utterly corrupt and as good as criminally venal), and finally c) publicly-financed broadcasters are paid for by us, we the sheople, and *must* be accountable to us - and held to account by us - these last (i.e. (c)) because if the politicians don't/won't (boo! Hiss!), then we have to do it all for ourselves.

    I have reported here what I've been able to find on the AusBC website(s) so far; what I've heard/seen elsewhere is difficult to document, but the 'flavour' can be hinted at by my prior reference to the H-word, plus 'hetzen' (to incite. On hearing this, I nearly fell right out of bed - literally; my alarm is a clock-radio set to deliver an early-morning news bulletin.) Not to mention the obligatory, nearing-ritual anti-Semitic accusations, hardly worth bothering with (unless they, the publicly-financed broadcasters themselves, are trying to incite. Haw! - but not at all funny, actually.) Also (repeating), it's not just what they say, but how they say it - in this case, with v.stern looks and/or dramatic intonation.

    Enough. My conclusion is that Ahmadinejad's message is basically OK, that Israel in particular (as mad dog's tail) and the US (as thoroughly wagged mad dog), then the row of cowardly sycophants (with, outrageously and embarrassingly, Aus near the head of the quisling pack) - none of these outright law-breakers, their supporters and apologists can stand to hear Ahmadinejad's truths - and so they, with and through their publicly-financed broadcasters are trying to shout Ahmadinejad down. Another, much louder, boo! Hiss! We demand the whole truth, we demand the justice rightfully ours!

  20. Bolton's back (at the AEI) with his bald lies.

    For example:

    Bolton: "As depressed as backers of unconstrained US "engagement" [Lie 1] must be, our boycott reflects an inescapable reality [Lie 2]: The outcome of Durban II was going to be as hateful and anti-Semitic as that of the original [Lie 3], 2001 UN "anti-racism" conference in Durban, South Africa. Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's speech to the parley yesterday proved the point [Lie 4], as he viciously [Lie 5] attacked Israel and America."

    Truth contrary to Lie 1: President Obama's "engagement" approach is constrained.

    Truth contrary to Lie 2: The only inescapable reality is that the boycott Durban II was a "pre-emptive" (aka prejudiced) decision.

    Truth contrary to Lie 3: Neither Durban I nor Durban II was/is "hateful and anti-Semitic".

    Truth contrary to Lie 4: As "the point" Bolton attempts to make is false, the claim he makes about Ahmadinejad's speech is also false.

    Truth contrary to Lie 5: It is not a "vicious attack" to claim that Zionists established "a completely racist government in the occupied Palestinian territories" nor to speak of "the crimes and ugliness of the nature of the Zionist regime." What is vicious, i.e. inflicting pain or suffering, is the large scale murder of Palestinian women and children by Israeli soldiers who've gone on to proudly wear T-Shirts celebrating their viciousness toward those women and children.

  21. Spot on coverage, orana. When people walk out "at the first mention of Israel" it hardly indicates a response to the substance of the president of Iran's speech.

    As to the racist state comments:

    Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu told the US Middle East envoy George Mitchell on Thursday that his government would condition talks over Palestinian statehood on the Palestinians first recognising Israel as a Jewish state.

    "Israel expects the Palestinians to first recognise Israel as a Jewish state before talking about two states for two peoples," a senior official in Mr Netanyahu's office quoted the new prime minister as saying. Statements from the US State Department indicated that the Obama administration regards such an Israeli condition as unacceptable, saying that the United States would continue to promote a two-state solution.
    As to constraints, the above article also reports on the rise of J Street:

    "Instead, the group's political arm ended up funneling nearly $600,000 to several dozen Democrats and a handful of Republicans in 2008, making it Washington's leading pro-Israel political action committee, according to Federal Election Commission expenditure records. Organisers say 33 of the group's 41 favoured House and Senate candidates won their races.

    " 'It certainly exceeded our expectations,' said Jeremy Ben-Ami, J Street's executive director. 'We didn't know what level of success we would have. But we think this is a message whose moment has come.'

    "Riding alongside the ascent of President Obama and other liberal Democrats, J Street blends old-style politicking with a media-savvy approach aimed at altering the US political debate over Israel and other Middle East issues."

    "J Street recently released a YouTube video, complete with threatening sound effects, which condemned the 'incendiary and racist' campaigning tactics of Israel's new foreign minister, Avigdor Lieberman. Even activists were stunned by the boldness of the attack."As to Bolton well he's not called "Bonkers" for nothing. Why he isn't restrained in some secure place should be a surprise. But, unfortunately, isn't.

  22. the H-word ...

      .. pathetic ...

        .. and criminal


    Warning: this is real slippery-slope stuff. I'd like to request all, in the very first instance, to consider the Lakoffian framing; be aware of it and any possible pitfalls. The "H-frame" is their almost-exclusive invention and it is most often they who initially deploy it; the possibly worst variation being "self-Hing Js." That shows that their snivelling contempt can be and is deployed even against their own - if such own ever dare dissent.

    By being aware, I mean try to avoid expressing or invoking any negative emotions; orana gelar's dispassionate analysis of Bolton is a good example of the right way to go. An example I have previously offered is that we don't "H" particular people per se, but we utterly detest murdering for spoil no matter who (v.short list) do it.

    So. We have the H-frame being deployed via multiple publicly financed broadcasters; this tells us (as if we hadn't already realised), that there is a *MAJOR* propaganda push on; our task is to analyse in preference to reacting. How novel!

    My comment: Distress (for me); disgust and deplore, for the quisling-traitors conduiting the H-propaganda.

    The real question here, is "What's on?" - i.e. is it 'merely' another filthy propaganda exercise, are they disguising some other depredation - or is this yet more, and more definitive, run-up to attacking Iran?

    The effort involved is massive (I'm amazed at the intensity and nature of the words, i.e. along with the H-word itself we've had "inciting" then "H-tirade" is a total shocker); on the shoot-the-messenger principle, if enough people twig to this misuse, the reputations of publicly financed broadcasters could be severely (if not terminally) damaged - in the eyes of the still until-now naïve, that is.

  23. Re: Israel Boycott article and our Google-indexing problem; a work-around is to export the blog from the dashboard... then search the resulting .xml