What goes around°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°comes around°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤

[Teddy Bear]

The French Foreign Ministry complains that the international media is fanning the flames of Islamic riots in the suburbs of Paris.
Having seen the effects the international media has had in fanning the flames of the Palestinian intifada, there is no doubt that the French FM is correct. There is a certain irony to this though as the French media has been right up there with the BBC in doing so against Israel, without any complaints from either FM thus far. Despite increased anti-semitic acts, both here and in France, as well as most countries around the world, that this reportage, under the guise of 'caring about the Palestinian underdog' has incited and perpetuated.

For any readers who might believe that this 'care' is genuine, consider that many of the incidents reported as facts are staged purposefully for the media who hunger for anything that shows the 'freedom loving Palestinian' against the 'evil tyrannical land grabbing Israelis'. One main example of this, filmed by French TV, was the El-Dura incident at the beginning of the present intifada which apparently showed the Israelis shooting an unarmed father and son who were cowering in fear trying to take cover. The BBC were very quick to also present this news as fact, before any investigation had been made, although experience has shown that if any incident puts Islamists into bad light, they are very careful about how they portray them. Subsequent investigation did in fact show that this particular incident was staged, as well as quite a few others that present Israel in a negative manner, that until now have still not been corrected by these media 'caring' souls.
Fact is, this tyoe of media coverage has only made life much harder for the genuine peace loving Palestinians, while increasing the power of despots, tyrants, and corrupt individuals who thrive on continued conflict and belligerance. France has certainly given Islamists an easy ride. So much so, that there have been suggestions that Palestinians should set up their new state within French borders. They should then rename this new country Frankenstine.

For any naive BBC reporters who might be reading this, consider well what you're slant is contributing to. You are not above natural law, and eventually - what goes around - comes around. To those BBC journalists who consciously perpetuate their appeasing and multi-cultural rubbish with elements who have no interest in integration, just for the news factor and ingratiating yourselves with Islamic regimes around the world who use you, you have no idea how stupid you are.

[Teddy Bear]

Great parody on the Paris riots from Joseph Farah, a Christian Arab, who is the editor of World Net Daily French solution: Paristinian state
Worth reading the whole article.

OK, enough is enough.

It's clear France is no longer in control of its population.

It's clear millions within its borders are struggling for freedom and independence.

It's clear that these people are not rioting for the sake of rioting, they are responding to oppression from French authorities.

It's clear that their uprising cannot be met with state violence, because that would only lead to a cycle of violence.

It's clear that these freedom-fighters – whom I have dubbed "Paristinians" – want a state of their own.

It's clear that the international community must force France to the negotiating table with these freedom fighters to begin the peace process that will inevitably lead to the creation of an autonomous, independent state of "Paristine."

If it's good enough for Israel, it's good enough for the French surrender monkeys who have been leaders of the global movement to force the Jewish state into appeasement of terrorists.

We've got to stop referring to this "intifada" in France as "riots." This is a movement for self-determination. This is a movement for independence. This is a movement for freedom from imperialism.

[Teddy Bear]

There are many inferences to the following article to understand the purpose of news or no-news by media organisations in line with their prejudices.
French media admits bias over the riots.
Riot coverage 'excessive', says French TV boss
Claire Cozens in Amsterdam
Thursday November 10, 2005

One of France's leading TV news executives has admitted censoring his coverage of the riots in the country for fear of encouraging support for far-right politicians.
Jean-Claude Dassier, the director general of the rolling news service TCI, said the prominence given to the rioters on international news networks had been "excessive" and could even be fanning the flames of the violence.

Mr Dassier said his own channel, which is owned by the private broadcaster TF1, recently decided not to show footage of burning cars.

"Politics in France is heading to the right and I don't want rightwing politicians back in second, or even first place because we showed burning cars on television," Mr Dassier told an audience of broadcasters at the News Xchange conference in Amsterdam today.

"Having satellites trained on towns across France 24 hours a day showing the violence would have been wrong and totally disproportionate ... Journalism is not simply a matter of switching on the cameras and letting them roll. You have to think about what you're broadcasting," he said.

Mr Dassier denied he was guilty of "complicity" with the French authorities, which this week invoked an extraordinary state-of-emergency law passed during the country's war with Algeria 50 years ago.

But he admitted his decision was partly motivated by a desire to avoid encouraging the resurgence of extreme rightwing views in France.

French broadcasters have faced criticism for their lack of coverage of the country's worst civil unrest in decades. Public television station France 3 has stopped broadcasting the numbers of torched cars while other TV stations are considering following suit.

"Do we send teams of journalists because cars are burning, or are the cars burning because we sent teams of journalists?" asked Patrick Lecocq, editor-in-chief of France 2.

Rival news organisations today questioned the French broadcasters' decision to temper coverage of the riots.

John Ryley, the executive editor of Sky News, said his channel would have handled a similar story in Britain very differently.

"We would have been all over it like a cheap suit. We would have monstered the story, and I didn't get the impression that happened in France," he said

[Teddy Bear]

In John Simpson's column concerning the Paris riots, among many unsubstantiated conclusions he states as fact, one about Chirac goes "No matter that events have thoroughly borne out his criticisms of the US and British invasion of Iraq in 2003. The Muslim teenagers who briefly applauded him then have long since forgotten all that - though of course if he had supported President George W Bush and Prime Minister Tony Blair then, he would be in even greater trouble now."
Just what criteria does he use to make the highlighted statement (mine)?
An evil tyrant who supported terrorism and was a threat to the surrounding region has been ousted.
The Iraqi people have a democracy that even women can vote.
Pressure has been put on other regimes of that ilk to make them review their dubious policies, like Syria withdrawing its troops from Lebanon.
The main reason Chirac didn't support the Iraq war was because of French financial interests with Saddam.

So what 'events' is Simpson referring to?
I find Homer Simpson makes a lot more sense than this idiot masquerading as a journalist.

[Teddy Bear]

Steevo posted a reply elsewhere that I think is also pertinent here in response to John Simpson's article above.

steevo said:

Llewellyn's assertion our troops caused more casualties than insurgents is grossly inaccurate and not worthy of serious refutal.

I think its always telling to report some of the positive news. Below is a little editorializing on my part from a recent article:

Many Iraqis who couldn't get jobs under Saddam Hussein because of their ethnicity, sectarian identity, or refusal to join the Baath party, are now working. The private sector economy is booming because Iraqis are investing in it, with some of the money coming from family members abroad. Thriving banks, restaurants, and furniture stores now occupy what were abandoned stores last year.

Further: in August, new business startups in Iraq exceeded 30,000. Individual Iraqis are better off financially than they have been for 20 years. According to the World Bank and International Monetary Fund, per capita income has doubled since the United States toppled the Saddam regime. There are more than 3.5 million cellular phone subscribers in Iraq, up from zero when Saddam ruled. Internet cafes are thriving in even small towns.

And so, on and on.

blogs.washingtonpost.com/thinktanktown/2005/11/a_cheerier_view.html

[Teddy Bear]

Further evidence has been uncovered by the Second Draft team, exposing the sham of the El-Dura shooting, and highlighting the complicity of our 'respected' news organisations to dupe the public with their slant.

See what really happened on this day

You are not going to believe your eyes when you see the two cameramen SITTING DIRECTLY NEXT TO THE FATHER AND SON WHILE THE BULLETS ARE SUPPOSEDLY FLYING. Or the whole crowd who "cleared the set" while the al Durah's sat there, ready to do a second take. Or the mumbling Palestinian cameraman for France 2, who made up the whole thing, lying through his teeth when he gets caught. Devastating and remarkable. A brilliant expose.