An Unfortunate Series of Oppressive Events: how one woman’s life is affected by patriarchal, racialised capitalism

PART ONE – an introduction to Point of View, life writing, progress and regression

PART TWO coming soon – Love Aotearoa, Hate New Zealand

My experience of living in NZ and linking to What Makes Pakeha Tick  https://dianelangford.com/2016/10/

PART THREE coming later – Fuck the Police

A further exploration of ‘Socialism or Barbarism.’

People’s Democracy Versus Her Majesty’s Loyal Opposition (2020)

https://dianelangford.com/2020/03

PART FOUR coming a bit later – The Body Keeps the Score? Or Not.

The health and ‘wellness’ issues of me and my friends: ageing, grief and resistance.

Before plunging into the unfortunate series of oppressive events that have led me to disgorge this recursive, gushing, stream of consciousness, allow me to contextualise my reasons for placing Point of View at the centre of my perspective. Despite the efforts of inventive authors to subvert/revolutionise storytelling by flicking back and forward in time rather than adhering to a linear narrative, there’s always a beginning a middle and an ending.

Splurging is all my octogenarian brain can cope with in the heat of the day. Like the bewildered French bulldog in Morgan Day’s The Oldest Bitch Alive, I’m so old my memories, anecdotes and vignettes may be suspected of emanating from an unreliable narrator. However, I assure you, as with The Oldest Bitch Alive, which is related entirely from the dog’s POV, I’ve still got all my marbles and I’m breaking out of the confines of my perceived role in the world, as defined by the institutions named a few pages below.

I’m reminded of Derek Jarman’s observation, ‘What need of so much news from abroad while all that concerns either life or death is all transacting and at work within me.’ And, ‘I shall not win the battle against the virus – in spite of the slogans like “Living with AIDS,” the virus was appropriated by the well – so we have to live with AIDS while they spread the quilt for the moths of Ithaca across the wine dark sea.’

And the final paragraph of his film script for Blue [published by David Zwirner Books]:

‘I caught myself looking at shoes in a shop window. I thought of going in and buying a pair, but stopped myself. The shoes I am wearing at the moment should be sufficient to walk me out of life.’

‘Death is the end of self-improvement,’ is the title of a book, a Buddhist friend tells me, in all seriousness. The older you get, the more expanded becomes your POV. Years whizz by, an hour seems like a week. Loved ones die. Babies are born. Hope of human progress, enlightenment, a better world developing, may wear thin.

Progress and Regression, the text of a lecture by Rahel Jaegi, delivered at Humbolt University, Berlin, November, 2023, is worth a read.

‘Only a few decades ago,’ Jaegi writes, ‘you needed to have loose change on hand and wait in line at phone booths to communicate on the go; today, we are in touch with the whole world at all times, and my son finds it hard to imagine a social life without smartphones. He also has trouble imagining a time when women were not allowed to vote, children were legally beaten at school and at home, and homosexuality was a punishable offence in Germany.’

Jaegi’s section Critique of feature 3: imperialism includes the following observation:

‘If progress proceeds according to a fixed plan and binding pattern, those who do not conform to it are automatically marked as backward …’

And Walter Benjamin, in his theses on the philosophy of history, identifies the certainty of ‘moving with the current’, that is, to be part of an inevitable process, as the reason for the corruption of social democracy and its historical failure. Or, he might have used Rosa Luxembourg’s stark words for the choice facing us, ‘Socialism or Barbarism.’

Perhaps Benjamin’s concept of time, the time-space continuum, everything happening everywhere, all at once, may be of comfort, depending on your POV? A character in my novel, Dear Dupes, so far unpublished, contemplates her path not taken, based on an experience of my own:

Fifty years ago, on the platform at Westminster underground station, she’d spotted a vulture silhouette and confirmed its identity by peering into a cadaverous, gargoyle, sepulchral, ghoulish, reptilian visage. Hunched in a long black coat, homburg drawn down over his eyes, he was leaning on a knobbly walking stick.

If only she’d had the guts, she’d have pushed him onto the track as the train rushed into the station but cowardice and repugnance at the thought of touching him, held her back.

If the time-space continuum had been differently arranged, if she’d been seventy years old back then, she’d have done it in a heartbeat. And there’d have been no ‘rivers of blood’ speech, no fascist dockers and meat workers marching up and down chanting, ‘We’re backing Enoch, We’re backing Enoch.’

Of course, I’ve always been vaguely aware of an underlying expectation of progress, both of the trivial kind, made possible by one’s individual efforts, and human progress in general, even if it’s two steps forward, one step back. Only now, though, have I connected the conscious and unconscious expectation of the automatic maturation/advance towards wisdom of the human race, with the notion of Point of View.

POV, an unavoidable element of both fiction and non-fiction, applies to auto-fiction, autobiography and memoir alike.  Toby Litt is currently posting a series of invaluable essays on Substack analysing the virtuoso use of POV in the writing of greats such as Muriel Spark and Douglas Adams.

He writes: ‘Years ago, I was asked to teach a one-day workshop nearby Borough Market … The students were from the American University in London, which used to spam the tube with adverts. I’d occasionally wondered where these had disappeared. Checking now, I find that it had its accreditation withdrawn. What I remember most from the workshop was how the students speed-typed on their Blackberries, held at lap level, without looking at the screens. After a morning’s classroom stuff, those students went out into the Market, that place of mild to extreme sensory overload (not as crowded there now). They were asked to observe. Then they were told to come back and write.’

Toby asked the kids to write ‘as if they were a rat looking for food.’

Litt’s list of recommended reading about POV includes: The Rhetoric of Fiction, by Wayne C. Booth, University of Chicago Press, and The Implied Reader: Patterns of Communication in Prose Fiction from Bunyon to Beckett by Wolfgang Iser.  The latter famously posits a hypothetic model of someone (the author) who shares knowledge with the ‘implied reader’ and understands all their jokes and references ‘patterns of communication in writing, network of schemata, patterns, points of view.’

‘The Implied Reader’ is the one inside the author’s head as they write. Iser has framed this ‘implied reader’ as ‘Versus the Actual Reader.’ The actual reader, who is outside the elite community created by the author and their cohort, may need jokes to be explained and definitely needs full contextualisation of narrative development at every stage.

In Kit de Waal’s Substack commentary, ‘Letting Go,’ Kit tells us about ‘The Knob.’ Over a lengthy teaching career, Kit had thought ‘there’s always one.’ A knob, that is. Usually, a man who sucks all the air out of a group, who only wants to talk about his own writing, and fidgets, fiddles with his pen while others are reading their work aloud. The students on her last course were refreshingly different, however.

 ‘Mostly, I’ve learned how and why different people come to writing – a lesson I learn every time I step in front of a class. There were people on this course who have battled – are battling – deeply upsetting and difficult issues, things they’ve had to overcome just to sit in the room, just to put pen to paper and show up. There were people dealing with harsh truths and rejection and acknowledging their ambitions – rightly so – and others unsure of what they wanted to do next. And everyone, including me, finding solace through words and creativity, nourishing ourselves on the feeling of rightness that comes from doing what you’re supposed to be doing.’

[You can follow Kit and Toby on Substack and enrol for their writing courses there]

Distance learning became a thing during the Covid lockdown. How distant can you get? In my late teens, I studied for the University Entrance exam in Aotearoa (New Zealand) receiving intermittent packages of materials sent from London by an outfit called the International Correspondence School. Sitting in the examination room with younger kids, something was remembered from the ICS history course. In answer to a question about the causes of revolutions, I wrote that the history of the French Revolution and the Paris Commune confirm that revolutions and uprisings occur when social conditions begin to improve slightly. The underclasses sense they’ve got the wind in their sails and more can be achieved. Every advance shows that this could have been the case all along, if only they’d fought harder, the textbook had claimed. Their confidence grows in struggle. Is this true where you live?

Today, the glaring contradictions inherent in the overwhelming blanket of ‘Artificial Intelligence’ mean we can access Webinars by Naomi Klein, educate ourselves about genocides, see and hear human suffering and sadism in microscopic detail. This is unsustainable as the same stuff used to put out fires is guzzled by data centres to the tune of trillions of billions of gallons. Water is life. Human bodies are mostly water.

Here’s a useful piece of advice if you’re writing about something that makes you feel uncomfortable or might make your family and other significant others squirm when reading it. You’ll feel more detached, better able to write about something unpleasant as if it was happening to some else, not you, if you use the Third Person narrator.  Therapists sometimes suggest Third Person journaling as a method of distancing yourself from painful thoughts and recollections.

I’ve only written one novel using the so-called Eye of God POV, alternating between various characters though, so not quite full-on Third Person. The Talking Competition records my personal experience of bodily harm: illness, rape and sexual violence, abortion, childbirth. Medical harms including unnecessary operations, tonsils removed, gall bladder removed, sepsis inverted, ‘growth’ removed from side of foot. Lumpectomy, hysterectomy, mastectomy, legacy of DES (diethylstilbestrol, given to women to stop breast-milk, thereby causing intergenerational harm to mothers and children), bone density loss, hearing loss, tinnitus from news copy-taking headphones, RSI from typing, eyesight deterioration from working in a Kodak factory darkroom, sleep deprivation caused by nightshifts, thinned hair and hot flushes from chemo meds. The body certainly keeps score: the accumulated scars, surgeries and conditions bestowed by capitalism and patriarchy. Written on the body: class, work, sex, gender. The embodied abuse of working class women.

The main protagonist of Dear Dupes describes the exposed nature of bodily vulnerabilities:

Olive Stanton lingers in front of a wall painting by Stuart Sam Hughes portraying a giant William Morris, up to his calves in the Venice lagoon. The bearded figure is poised, both arms raised, gripping a massive yacht as if about to upend the vessel into the rippling jade water.  Boredom propelled Olive out of the house this grey and gloomy day. Within an hour, the Margate skyline was in sight, surf arcing over the seawall as she pulled her car into a disabled bay behind the gallery. Saltwater spattered the windscreen, creating puddles on the tarmac. Today, thanks to a steroid injection, she’s not using her zimmer frame.

As she made her way from the car park she’d realised she was being observed from a large viewing window by dozens of pairs of eyes. She loathed being overlooked. It was like The Truman Show.[i]  People are cruel. Ordinary, working class people who don’t have private health insurance, who’d be fucked without the NHS and blue badges, are cruel. Only yesterday a furious shopper had shouted, ‘Don’t forget to limp,’ as Olive walked unaided from her car outside Tesco. Blue badge rage is all the bait-rage.

For a few seconds she’d frozen with indecision and despair, feet velcroed to the ground, her anxiety, crab-like progress, animal-print coat, mastectomy scar, misshapen left eyeball, vertigo, wax-blocked ears, suddenly exposed to the crowd on the balcony. Olive has good days and bad days. Only that morning a postcard had popped through the letterbox, from a management company working for Kent County Council.

‘Proposed Changes to the Postural Stability Service – Public consultation – Have Your Say!

KCC is consulting on proposed changes to our Postural Stability Service in Kent. We are proposing that organisations apply for grants to fund desirable activities for over 50s closer to where they live.’

The effing consultation had ended a week ago. The second-class stamp had put paid to anyone taking part.

Some days she needs her walking frame, some days she doesn’t. Today is a good day. To hell with the mean-spirited, false consciousness of the Kent U-Kippers!  Except, it turns out, the people on the viewing platform are not looking at her at all, they’re waiting for a bronze, life-size, Antony Gormley sculpture to emerge from the sea as the tide recedes.

In The Talking Competition, the theme of adoption is adapted from my life experience.

‘It was raining the day Lorrie took the baby to the National Children’s Adoption Society to be viewed by the prospective parents. He was in fine fettle, awake and wide-eyed for the visit. Lorrie was put in a separate waiting room and, after a while, one of the women came out and took him away. The Jamaicans were in the building, she guessed. Half an hour later, a different official came back with Baby K in her arms. Lorrie settled him in his carrycot and the woman subjected her to a detailed grilling. Where were you born? Are there any illnesses in the family? Are you healthy? What are your interests?

‘The prospective parents are very well-to-do,’ she said. ‘The adoptive mother is a state-registered nurse. They want to take the baby to Jamaica to live. How would you feel about that?’

‘I’d feel good about that.’

His gorgeous, alert eyes were wide open as if he was listening and understanding everything. He blinked thoughtfully. His hair grew forward, flat against his head and when he raised his eyebrows she could see a crease where his hairline might form a widow’s peak.

After the meeting, they sheltered from the rain under a canopy outside the Adoption Society office. Cars had their headlights on even though it was only half past three. Traffic swished past throwing up showers of spray. Shop fronts along Kensington High Street glowed cheerily. The baby had a funny habit of pulling his ear and he was doing it right then as he looked up at Lorrie.’ 

Now, this is me, giving Third Person distancing another go, a prolix rodent scavenging memories.

***

Lately, doom-scrolling has led her to a number of extremely unpleasant subjects. Instead of looking away, she perseveres in collecting examples of the most egregious proofs of regression, or lack of progress in bringing down unrelenting patriarchal power. She is particularly struck by the truth of Fern Britton’s observation:

‘My daughter said the other day, every woman knows someone who’s been raped or assaulted. No man knows a rapist. They’re still murdering and raping us. So, what do we do?’ [ii]

The Guardian interview continues:

‘It can’t have been easy to be a young woman in TV in the 80s. “Well, looking back, yes, but at the time … We were really resilient, and it was just, well, that happens, these idiots.”  One of the Breakfast Time anchors was Frank Bough, a phenomenally famous TV presenter at the time, who would later be sacked by the BBC after a scandal involving drugs and sex workers. “Frank just measured women by how attractive and ‘fuckable’ they were,” says Britton. At a team lunch, she sat next to Bough. “He turned to me, lying back in his chair, [and said] ‘I wonder how long it’ll be before I’m having an affair with you. Because I do have a very big cock’. And you just go …” She makes a disgusted face. “So you had to have a lot of resilience but I just thought ‘strange, silly man’.”

‘Later, she says, “we just grew up with all the bottom pinching, all the being pinned up against a wall and trying to be snogged, grappled with in a lift. Oh, for fuck’s sake. I know it’s wrong, and we now see, of course, that was wrong, but it does give you an inner kind of strength and sense of self. I know that I’m not a pushover.”

In her 2008 memoir, Britton wrote about the sexual assault she suffered when she was 21, before she went into TV. Apart from the awfulness of the attack – it happened several times over one night in her flat, with a man she had only just met – I was struck by how she reasoned away ever reporting it to the police (“because I didn’t have bruises and he didn’t hit me”). “I didn’t even know that it had a name until about 10 years later, and I thought, hang on a minute, that was rape. He raped me. Many times, that night. That was my kind of naivety, really.” Her two daughters, she says, “are really feminist, very strict, and they’ve taught me a lot actually.

Listening to Cash Cow by Alev Scott recently read on BBC Radio Four is enough to keep any woman awake at night. Hearing it has shocked her to the core. Alev’s work on the exploitative surrogacy industry and soaring, unregulated, on-line sales of breast milk to males seeking eternal life, or with mummy issues, deserves its place in this repository of regression. According to Alev, men drink fetishized breast milk from baby bottles while wearing nappies. The same men complain of women breast-feeding in public.

Since the #MeToo movement gathered momentum, we face a regressive backlash. Countless women have paid the price of speaking out, losing jobs and health, punished for patriarchal crimes. Entire structures of international humanitarian law may be dismantled when it suits the suits, for example the International War Crimes Court (the ICC) at the Hague.

‘Khan is not the first ICC chief prosecutor to face extreme pressures – and, as with Khan, those pressures surfaced at the very moment Khan’s predecessor tried to take on Israel over its war crimes,’ writes Jonathan Cook on his Substack blog.

‘Fatou Bensouda [a Nigerian woman prosecutor DL] faced a “covert war” waged against her by Israel for the best part of a decade, according to an investigation by The Guardian in May 2024, just as Khan issued his arrest warrant for Netanyahu.

The Guardian’s report, published nearly three years after Bensouda had completed her nine-year term at the ICC, revealed that, during that time, she had faced threats to herself and her family, the monitoring of her communications, and an intimidating visit to her home.

More recently, Bensouda has confirmed these accounts in an interview with Al Jazeera. Bensouda notes that she repeatedly reported Israel’s campaign of intimidation to the Dutch authorities, but they did nothing to investigate the threats or protect her.

She also says certain ‘authorities’ – she does not name them – warned her that she was going too far in investigating Israeli crimes and that “you could be harmed or you could be killed, or family members could be harmed in some way.” ’[iii]

***

Despite the inspiring exhortations of Madame Pelicot about shifting blame from victim to abuser, talking about sexual abuse and misogynist exploitation is easier said than done. Especially when she’s working for ‘the man’ in the cradle of democracy. Though it happens over fifty years ago, the shame is never in the past.

Being taken to the beach as a child, forced to hop over scalding hot sand dunes to reach the water’s edge. Men looking at her in a way that makes her feel uncomfortable, old men, her father’s age and older, her father’s friends.

Being told by her mother and teachers that girls like her (working class?) only had two choices of career, working behind the counter at Woolworths or marrying a farmer. Woolworths is one of her favourite places, counters piled high with sweets and baubles, so she can’t understand why that would be such a bad thing.

A neighbour fixes her (18) up with her son (Robin Aisling, 32), a farmer. He takes her to a fancy restaurant near the airport where she feels so sick she’s unable to eat.  On the way home, he drives off road and they end up in the middle of a paddock where he jumps on top of her. Her mother’s angry on receipt of a bad report from the neighbour.

She’s working at the Christchurch Press where a colleague, older than her father, comes up behind her and squeezes her nipples till they hurt. Who can she tell? All she can do is vomit. They meet the man with his daughter at the public library that evening. He stops to chat to her mother, no trace of shame. ‘What a nice man,’ her mother says.

***

The ‘Labour’ Party is an institution that sits alongside other repressive institutions which have had a deleterious impact on her life, including: The Catholic Church, The Church Missionary Society, The Masonic Lodge, The Moral ReArmament Movement, The Moral Welfare Society (Adoption Department), The Metropolitan Police (Undercover Policing Unit), The Black and Tans, New Zealand Department of Education, House of Commons, House of Lords, Socialist Workers’ Party, Zionist Federation, British Broadcasting Corporation, male-dominated trade unions, to name but a few.

The whole thing starts with an advertisement in the New Statesman, a formerly left-wing magazine. ‘Two Labour MPs require Personal Assistant. Typing and shorthand required.  Must be a member of the Labour Party. Box Number xxx’

She hasn’t been in London very long, but in 1968, the year of the Battle of Trafalgar Square, she is still full of the naïve confidence of youth.

What are her qualifications?  Back then she still finishes her sentences with a kiwi question mark. Let’s say her degree is in English and let’s say she got a First from the University of Otago. She assumes that a remote place such as Otago, South Island, Aotearoa (New Zealand) would not have a university. She’s from there. Kind of. Later, she finds out that several famous New Zealanders studied at the supposedly fictitious university, at the exact same time as she was falsely claiming she did.  Piece of luck, the MPs don’t ask for proof of her non-existent degree. The dogsbody typing and shorthand skills are more important. Of course, she’s a member of the Labour Party, she lies.

Another piece of luck: it was meant to be. On the bus home she spots a billboard outside Kensington Library.  Barbara Castle is speaking at a local Labour Party event. Even she had heard of Barbara, famous for her red hair and for championing equal pay.  With Barbara’s blessing, she signs up and becomes a Labour Party member on the spot, thus magicking her lie into truth. No online sign-ups back then.

Russell Kerr MP for Feltham and John Ryan MP for Uxbridge become her employers. These two, regarded as ‘on the left’ of the Labour Party, put her to work as administrator of their travel business, with a name similar to Progressive Tours, but not Progressive Tours. In the same ball park though. Sending gullible punters to Cuba and elsewhere where they would find half completed hotels, or a pile of rubble where their hotel should have been. All complaints handled by her, never by Ryan or Kerr.  Her memories of this are hazy, but she believes the tours are organised by an outside, larger agency, such as Thomsons and sub-contracted to Kerr and Ryan for a cut of the profits. She remembers having dealings with Intourist and other state tourist agencies, such as YugoTours, working out of parliamentary office. Nothing of this is mentioned in the advertisement or job interview.

Our protagonist is also tasked with keeping her own employee tax records in order and has to learn from scratch how to obtain, fill in and maintain these. She is personally responsible for any mistakes in her returns, not Ryan or Kerr.

Kerr and Ryan send her into their constituencies to conduct advice sessions on their behalf. The citizens of Feltham and Uxbridge pour out their hearts about the hardships they are suffering from inadequate housing, poverty and ill-health while she takes notes. On one occasion she’s called upon to visit a youngster in Feltham Young Offenders Unit where she is confronted by his furious parents who threaten to physically attack her.

One of an army of women who carry out the daily mind-numbing work required to service Labour Party males, asks our narrator to stand as a candidate in the upcoming parliamentary elections in the constituency of Marylebone. The sitting MP is Quintin Hogg, Later Lord Hailsham.

In her other life, as a volunteer at the offices of the Campaign Against Racial Discrimination, she tricks Hogg into becoming a paid-up member of  CARD  by asking for a £5 donation, which happens to be the exact joining fee. The Evening Standard picks this up, after the offices are turned over by HM Constabulary, expressing outrage at Hogg’s supposed anti-racism.

 ‘You won’t actually have to debate with him’ the minion tells her, ‘or even show up in the constituency. You’d be a paper candidate only.’ But she wants to debate with him, she protests.

Jo Richardson works as secretary to Ian Mikardo MP in an office opposite the one in Cannon Row where she is working for Ryan and Kerr. They became friends, meeting a couple of days a week in St Stephen’s Tavern on the corner of Bridge Street. Mikardo is a virulent Zionist. That was before the narrator knew what the implications of Mikardo’s Zionism entailed. Nobody in these ‘left wing’ Labour circles questions the violent usurpation of Palestine. Quite the reverse. It doesn’t take long for her consciousness to be raised on the issue. The Movement for Colonial Freedom is challenged from within by women against settler-colonialism, such as Dorothy Kuya and Gertrude Elias, the latter a holocaust survivor, who later becomes a close friend.

‘Never get in a lift with Fenner,’ Jo warns. And there’s an ancient concertina-door lift that one must use to access Mikardo’s office. She’s frequently in the situation Jo warns her of.

‘Why are you wearing a scarf round your neck? Isn’t it too hot?’ Jo asks. Then, shockingly, ‘Are you hiding something?’

There are welts where her ‘boyfriend’ grabbed her and started to choke her when he was crazy jealous of her friendship with Mary Tyler, who had gone to India to join a Naxalite uprising. Mary was captured and imprisoned for five years.[iv]

 ‘What are you going to do about it?’ Jo wants to know.

‘Nothing,’ she says, ‘who’s going to listen?’

Jo wants her to go to the police. But it’s all too complicated. She’d managed to get out of the situation all by herself, hadn’t she?

She lives with her brother in a two room flat in West Kensington. They are having a party, organised against her brother’s wishes. He’s Queer too, doesn’t drink or smoke and hates hetero vibes. Her BF is bending her over backwards at the end of the grand piano in their front room. His fingers are squeezing her windpipe. Her brother, a student at the Royal Academy of Music, continues playing as if nothing is happening. I’ve Got Rhythm tra-la-la-la Who could ask for anything more … She reaches for one of her stiletto shoes and whacks the BF over the head. The room instantly divides into pro BF and pro her.  

Occasionally, she and Jo are joined by others in the pub, such as Bernadette who has taken up her Westminster seat at the tender age of 21, superseding Ryan as ‘baby of the house.’

Gerry Lawless, dubbed ‘one-eyed Irish trot’ by newspapers, lost an eye when a phone box blew up in Belfast. This is an eerie pre-echo of an incident that happened decades later when she became a news copytaker at the Press Association and was talking to a reporter over the line from Belfast when his phone box blew up.

 ‘We have to use Bernadette while she’s still around. She’s sure to be assassinated soon,’ Gerry opines over fish and chips.

Bernadette Devlin McAlisky[v] has dedicated her life to struggle for Irish independence and freedom. In her own country she’s celebrated for this. Not so much in England.  In the House of Commons Chamber, on January 1972, she immediately gains the respect of all those for progress not regression by crossing the dispatch box and slapping Reginald Maudling across the face. A well-deserved rebuke for his pompous blathering, delivered with panache.

‘The fact of it was, though, that Maudling lied in his teeth. I accused him of lying, but you’re not allowed to call Ministers liars. So I was asked to leave the House, and as I walked past, I hit him,’ Bernadette told an interviewer afterwards. ‘Once we came past Bloody Sunday there was nothing I did not believe the British government was capable of. Any illusions I had that it was anything other than a murdering machine were gone at that stage.’

The day before, Bernadette had been about to give a speech to a peaceful Catholic civil rights march in Derry when the British Army opened fire in cold blood, killing 13 people. Maudling told the House of Commons that the army was acting in self-defence. Remind you of anybody?

Jo Richardson was only seventy years old when she passed away, remaining an activist parliamentarian to the end.  Fifty years later our narrator is filled with immense sadness, recalling Jo’s early death and the struggles she’d endured to advocate for women’s rights, gay rights and against racism and fascism when a Labour MP.

The above represents our narrator’s early contact with the Labour Party, an interlude that quietly implodes when she’s accused of stealing a briefcase from John Hume, one of the Irish politicians who are frequent visitors to the cramped little office in Cannon Row.  The brown leather bag lies undisturbed at the back of an ugly grey steel cabinet with double doors, where guests leave stuff. Various coats droop from a pedestal coat rack. The office is a dumping ground where MPs whose own offices are overcrowded leave miscellaneous items, umbrellas, waterproofs, pairs of shoes, scarves.

The night before the Christmas parliamentary recess, she’s sitting in one of the crowded, male-dominated, watering holes in the House of Commons, perhaps the Strangers Bar. One of the elite macho drinking dens complained of by Hannah the Plumber in recent times. Her glass is being topped up by Ryan. He’s inebriated already and tells her above the buzz of drunken voices that he has had a vascectomy. His wife has a rare disease that would make it impossible for her to bear children. She could die in childbirth. Why is he telling her this? Later, she discovers that his wife and two children are at their happy home in West London, awaiting his appearance.

Russell (call me Russ) has decided they must have an office get-together to show their appreciation of her work. He asks her to book a table at Veraswamy’s, a deluxe Indian restaurant near Piccadilly.

‘They know me there,’ Russ says, ‘you’ll have no problem getting a table in my name.’

They flag down a black cab from the rank in the cobbled precincts of the Mother of Parliaments near the Westminster Hall exit. Sure enough, at Veraswamy’s, a table awaits. When the imposing greeter, in full Pujabi finery, including feathered headdress, divests her of her shabby ‘best’ coat, the lining comes away in his hands as he makes to hang the coat on a hanger. Russ and John are oblivious to her embarrassment.

She remembers being ushered to a table in the corner, gold and red banquettes, gold and red wallpaper, gold and red statues and vases. Bottles of wine brought to the table by men in gold and red uniforms and military moustachios.

After eating the hot, hot food, they wait under the awning as a factotum carrying a long pole with a butcher’s apron on the end, flags down a taxi. They splash through puddles, dodging revellers milling along Piccadilly. The lights hurt her eyes. Nausea. The cab drops Russ somewhere he can get a bus to the flat he keeps in central London. Is his extraordinary wife, Anne, still in the USA after attending the Democratic Convention in Chicago, where she was maced in the face? So says The Daily Mirror.

Passing out, juddering awake, passing out, suppressing vomitus. The taxi ride is like riding to hell. Nothing is recalled about going inside her flat except waking up, stretched out on her bed. Pressure of a large white, blancmange belly bearing down on her. Coldness entering her, emanating from John Ryan MP, former ‘baby’ of the House, and lying rapist.

[This is a sick-making pre-shadowing of George Galloway’s utterances, decades later, on the subject of consent and another reminder, if we needed it, how far women have to go to get ‘equality’ let alone actual liberation.

‘Oh, but he’s good on Palestine,’ some say, including some women.

DL]

After a couple of weeks hanging out with friends while parliament is not sitting, she returns to a tense atmosphere at work. Hulme’s briefcase has disappeared. It’s their word against hers. They adopt a passive-aggressive manner. Her period is late. More weeks pass.  Ryan hasn’t been into the office for a while. Kerr tells her, ‘It seems you have irritated John.’

‘In what way?’

‘You commissioned a report into childcare from the House of Commons Library without permission.’

‘That’s not true. I suggested that it would be a good idea to see what nursery provision is available in the UK. Back up what Jo’s trying to do. The Women’s Liberation Movement is all over the news.’ 

Our narrator’s photograph (by David Montgomery), posing with a poster of Chairman Mao has accompanied an article by Irma Kurtz, in The Sunday Times, entitled ‘Boadicea Rides Again’ [September 21, 1969]. Obviously, unread by her bosses.

She suspected all along that Ryan hadn’t been listening but he did grunt assent when she’d suggested accessing the childcare research. That was good enough for her. ‘John definitely approved the library request,’ she tells Kerr. So now they’re looking for another excuse to get rid of her. At the time, a parliamentary election is looming. Kerr begins to hint that they’ll have to ‘let her go’ if one of them loses his seat.

After ‘the Battle of Trafalgar Square’ an anti-Vietnam War demo, an article by Mary McCarthy appears in The Sunday Times and New York Review of Books. The woman who’d written The Group was taking sides, and had come down on what our narrator has begun to think of as her side, her group. She cries in the darkened cinema when the Lesbian character in The Group kills herself. 

 ‘Mr Manchanda, a former teacher, was an old-fashioned classical Marxist,’ McCarthy wrote. ‘Like many of those men, he had a witty mind …What came out of our meeting with Mr Manchanda, following on our meeting with Tariq Ali, was a series of paradoxes…the style of Tariq Ali was radical; the style of Mr Manchanda was modest petty bourgeois, recalling the home lives of Marx, Lenin and Trotsky himself. Maoist China, they say, is hermetic, suspicious, hostile to foreigners, yet the Maoist cell in Hampstead was open as the Laundromat where Mr Manchanda had been doing his smalls. Though we came from the bourgeois Press, we were not treated as trespassers but simply as guests – the reverse of what happened in Carlisle Street. This, too, perhaps a lesson in the persuasiveness of non-violent techniques on the plane of human relations, for the next afternoon, marching up from the Embankment, when we came to the crossroads of choice at Trafalgar Square, whether to turn left with the Maoists to Grosvenor Square, I had no real hesitation in making up my mind, and what slight hesitation I had was purely journalistic … on these issues I found myself agreeing with Mr Manchanda: the main enemy is in Grosvenor Square; march on him there…’   

Perhaps our narrator thinks of herself as a kind of spy, collecting information, such as the reality of women’s total responsibility for childcare and the farce of nursery provision?  Or considers her eavesdropping as a source of information at the disposal of the resistance?  So, it transpires that, other groups in the WLM, are taken by surprise when the tiny Maoist women’s group she belongs to publishes a detailed leaflet listing the number of nurseries in every constituency in the UK. Many constituencies have none.

Picture that accompanied Sunday Times article Boadicea Rides Again by Irma Kurtz, September 1969 about the Women’s Liberation Movement in the UK, Diane posing on sofa by poster of Chairman Mao – picture by David Montgomery

Then she tells Ryan she’s pregnant as a result of what he did to her.

He asks if she’s sure it was his fault. Did paternity tests exist back then?

Grudgingly, he tells her he’ll ask David Owen MP to help, a medical doctor dubbed Doctor Death by anti-choice newspapers. Instead, David Pitt, later Lord Pitt of Hampstead (in Jamaica), refers her to Charing Cross Hospital, a spanking new built hospital in Hammersmith where, in 1967, she receives one of the first abortions on the NHS.

After which she never sees Ryan again, apart from a fleeting glimpse, in Portobello Road once the pregnancy and adoption are over. She’s selling Chairman Mao’s Little Red Book from a stall. He’s with his wife and kids and abruptly changes course when he spots her, hurrying his family down a side street.

Now she begins to wonder how he gained egress into her flat that night. Did her brother open the door to them? Had Ryan rummaged through her handbag, found the key and opened the door himself? The answers to these questions can only be guessed at by turning memories into auto-fiction as a writer called Diane Langford tries to do in her novel The Talking Competition.

Here endeth, with a whimper, her first interlude in the clutches of the party of the working class.

‘This is how the world ends, the world ends, not with a bang but with a whimper’

  • T.S. Eliot
    •  

An understanding and analysis of the role of the Labour Party as an oppressive instrument of the British State comes later, in Part Three.  Our narrator draws on her insider experience of how the Canterbury and Whitstable Constituency was captured by the extreme right of the party, a precursor to the same thing happening elsewhere all over the country.

Jeremy Corbyn becomes Leader of the Labour Party, representing the possibility of moral progress. Instead we are confronted with the actuality of betrayal and hypocrisy.

Dramatis Personae

Fenner Brockway, revered pacifist and founder of The Movement for Colonial Freedom, protested against the response of the government to the Mau Mau Uprising in Kenya.  From the late 1950s he regularly proposed legislation in Parliament to ban racial discrimination. He strongly opposed the use or possession of nuclear weapons by any nation and was a founding member of the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament.

The Brockway Room at Conway Hall in London is named after him.

Bernadette Devlin, Member of Parliament for Mid-Ulster 1969 to 1974.

‘One resident of Free Derry was Bernadette Devlin, a strong-willed, working class woman whose straight talking made her a natural advocate for her people. Elected as an MP aged only 21, she is well known for slapping a Tory MP in Parliament and as a leading voice in the fight to abolish the barbaric H-Blocks prison. After her 4-month prison sentence for ‘riotous behaviour’, she gave an insightful interview on the oppressive function of the law. Typifying abolitionist views on the criminal justice system in one sentence, she explained‘When we break the law, we go to jail. When the government breaks the law, the government changes the law.’

Bernadette Devlin would later become friends with the revolutionary abolitionist Angela Davis after Devlin visited Davis in prison in 1971. In future, Davis would be a leading voice in the struggle to free Bernadette Devlin’s daughter, Róisín McAliskey, from prison. Speaking at a rally protesting McAliskey’s detention, Angela Davis condemned the ‘terrible treatment of Róisín McAliskey by her British captors… Róisín must be freed, and Northern Ireland released from the shackles of British imperialism!’

Bernadette herself went on a tour around America to raise funds for refugees and political prisoners in Ireland, only to be faced with the violent racism of Irish American assimilationists. Despite these crowds sending millions of dollars to support Irish Republican prisoners back home, many were agents of the same oppressive policing system that tyrannises marginalised communities in America. Devlin was known to scold these crowds, meeting instead with the Young Lords and Black Panthers, famously giving them the freedom key to New York that she had been awarded by the city’s mayor.

The Black Panthers themselves reported on the situation in the six counties, publishing an article with unbelievable foresight entitled ‘Ireland Oppressed Fights Back.’ An Phoblacht, the Irish Republican newspaper, was in-turn outspoken in their support for Mumia Abu-Jamal, a political prisoner in the struggle for Black liberation, asserting that ‘We in Ireland have had too much experience of corrupt legal systems in the past to watch quietly from the side-lines as Abu-Jamal goes to his death.’

Rosie Duffield MP

Elected Labour MP in 2017 by feigning support for the Corbyn platform. Upon election in 2017, instantly came out as a protégé of Labour Friends of Israel and an infamous persecutor of the Trans community. At grass roots level, many of her constituents have chronicled her dire lack of representation. Thousands of emails begging for help with the daily problems of poverty, lack of housing and failures of the local hospital trust, remain unanswered to this day.

Gerry Fitt, Member of Parliament for Belfast West Belfast 1966-1983,  ‘enobled’ in 1983.

Bibulous Irish politician, resembling member of British comedy duo, with large black-framed glasses. Who the hell am I to call another person of Irish heritage BIBULOUS? – DL

Poems about my Auntie Vonnie who lived in an alleyway in Christchurch, not in Aotearoa, but in New Zealand. How my family ended up in Aotearoa will be examined in Part II.

Whisky Sonnet

Whisky pisses from a doorway Mother

takes my hand Jump together, mind your shoes.

Auntie Vonnie is an all-time loser,

tapping us for money, fags and booze.

In my DNA and in my bones,

Whiskey pours down drains into the sea.

I dream of sailing far and clean away,

where no-one knows my pedigree.

Jack Daniels aged in oak distilled our heads,

Rye, Irish, Scotch and sour mashed our lives.

On ice-cube rocks, men soiled their unmade beds.

Confessing, they owned up to beating wives.

Malt grain thins life’s blood and sluices thought from brain.

Chin Chin! Like fools we claim to feel no pain.

Whisky Haiku

Whisky on the brain,

In my veins and DNA.

Cheers! I feel no pain.

John Hume, 18th Janury, 1937 – 3 August 2020, Irish nationalist, hero of the social democratic part of the story that excludes Bernadette Devlin, whose briefcase I was accused of stealing. He has stored it in a steel filing cabinet that also doubles as a coat rack.

George Galloway, Labour Member of Parliament June 1987 – October 24, 2003.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2012/aug/24/george-galloway-todd-akin-rape-comments

It has been a difficult week for Becky John. First there was Republican congressman Todd Akin’s suggestion that in cases of “legitimate” rape women rarely get pregnant because “the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down”.

Then George Galloway dismissed the act of having sex with a woman as she slept – one of the allegations made against Julian Assange – as nothing more than “bad sexual etiquette” if the pair had already had sex the night before. “Not everybody needs to be asked prior to each insertion,” the Respect MP said.

John, who was raped at the age of 15 by a man whose home she had gone to voluntarily, has become used to hearing public figures reveal astonishing views about sexual violence; last year she was incensed when the justice secretary, Kenneth Clarke, talked about “serious” rape involving “violence and an unwilling woman”. But she, frontline workers and academics in the field all say there is nothing unusual about the sentiments they express.

“It made me feel sick,” John, now 36, says of her initial reaction to Galloway’s comments. “Like: ‘Oh crap, here we are again.’ The ideas society has about rape are staggering. Obviously people are not clear what it is and isn’t, or we wouldn’t be having these conversations.”

Research suggests she is right. In a poll of people in London carried out for the Havens, the capital’s trio of flagship sexual assault referral centres, one in ten said they didn’t believe it was rape if a man made his partner have sex when they didn’t want to. Another 18% weren’t sure.

“There is still, in some areas, the feeling that a woman within an established relationship has a duty to accept sex,” says an independent sexual violence advisor at Birmingham’s Rape and Sexual Violence Project, speaking anonymously. We don’t have lots of cases like that but I’ve definitely come across it.”

Galloway’s suggestion that once you’ve had sex with someone once, you don’t need to ask every time, plays out on jury panels too, lawyers say. “The general public are very easily persuaded, I’m afraid, that in the context of a long-standing relationship there’s a presumption of consent,” says Miranda Moore QC, a barrister with wide experience of both prosecuting and defending rape cases.

Jane Bickerstaff QC, a longtime specialist rape prosecutor, says: “There’s an element with juries where they think: ‘I don’t care, there’s no harm done. They’ve had sex hundreds and hundreds of times before, why is public money being spent on this?'”

Anne Kerr, Member of Parliament for Rochester and Chatham, 1964.

Anne Patricia Kerr (née Bersey; 24 March 1925 – 29 July 1973) British Labour Party politician, elected for two successive terms as a Member of Parliament.

Born in Putney into a Methodist family, she spent most of her childhood in west London, attending St Paul’s Girls School. She was evacuated to Budleigh Salterton in Devon, during the Second World War, and later joined the Women’s Royal Naval Service. In 1944 she married James Doran Clark (subsequently TV and film scriptwriter James Doran). They divorced in 1952.

Before entering politics she was an actress and television interviewer, using the name Anne Doran. She was elected in Putney at the 1958 London County Council election as Anne Clark, and held her seat until the council was abolished in 1965. She was an ardent opponent of capital punishment, a founder member of the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament and was on the Committee of 100 set up by Bertrand Russell in 1960 to oppose nuclear weapons. She was married again in 1960 to fellow Labour politician Russell Kerr, who became MP for Feltham in 1966.

She won the Rochester and Chatham seat at the 1964 general election, defeating the sitting Conservative MP Julian Critchley with a majority of 1,013 votes.

Always passionately interested in human rights issues, Kerr was vocal in protesting against the executions of three black Rhodesians in 1968, the first since Rhodesia’s Unilateral Declaration of Independence, placing a wreath of flowers outside the Rhodesian High Commission (Rhodesia House) in London on the day of the executions, on 6 March. She attended the 1968 Democratic National Convention in Chicago when she was detained and manhandled by police. She and her husband were also two of three British MPs who accompanied Gerry Fitt MP for West Belfast on the Civil Rights march in Derry on 5 October 1968, which is generally regarded as the starting point for the Troubles in Northern Ireland.

She was a staunch opponent of Britain’s entry into Europe’s Common Market, and after her 1970 defeat, she was a founder of Women Against the Common Market. In April 1972, she joined Women Against the Common Market in an anti-Europe protest on a ferry to Calais. When French riot police boarded the ferry, Kerr reportedly had to be pulled away from them, shouting “Let’s have your gas.”

Kerr died at her home at Twickenham of acute alcoholic poisoning on 29 July 1973, aged 48. At the inquest into her death, Russell Kerr said that she had never really recovered from being beaten by police at Chicago five years earlier.

Bill aged 14, before concert debut at Christchurch Civic Theatre

WILLIAM LANGFORD [1943-2023] Concert Pianist

‘Hurrying along the Embankment in freezing drizzle, he was reminded of the barman from the Admiral Duncan, battered to death on this glittering section of riverside. That’s what you got for flaunting it, coming out and presenting yourself as a target to the very people who were happy to use your head as a football. As he increased his pace, putting the murder scene behind him, a skinny boy with kohl-circled eyes stepped out in front of him.

‘Fancy a blowjob, granpa?’

He averted his eyes and rushed on … Wind shipped past his ears and pellets of hail bounced off his head as he struggled over Hungerford Footbridge.’

Diane’s tribute to her brother at his funeral:

Bill’s musical talent was discovered when he began playing recognisable tunes on a tin whistle, a present for his fourth birthday. He loved drawing and making model aeroplanes from paper and balsa wood. A boy who didn’t want to play rugby wasn’t treated kindly in New Zealand in the 1950s. Though shy and nervous, he was entered into piano competitions from an early age. At 9, he played a Chopin Prelude on Radio 3ZB Children’s Hour.

Nancy Watson, his first piano teacher, soon realised that Bill needed more advanced tuition and recommended Ernest Empson. The music scene in Christchurch was cliquish and snobby and the Empsons were seen as doyens of that tight-knit community. Empson ran The Eroica Club, providing a platform for his star pupils. Our parents and Bill had difficulty penetrating that milieu. When Bill was 14, I organised a concert at the Civic Theatre, Christchurch, against Empson’s advice, that received excellent reviews. At 16, Bill gave an acclaimed performance of the Saint-Saëns Piano Concerto No 2 with the NZ National Orchestra at the Auckland Star Piano Competition.  Composer-pianist, Elsie Betts-Vincent, declared him the most talented pianist the country had produced since Richard Farrell https://www.rnz.co.nz/collections/richard-farrell

Pianists like Julius Katchen, Bela Siki, Shura Cherkassky and Andor Foldes toured NZ and it was customary for them to give master classes or at least invite young pianists to play for them … Bill’s master class with Bela Siki was reported in the local press.  Winifred Atwell and Liberace also played the Civic Theatre. We were there. June commented how mean people were for gossiping about Liberace. She was certain he was ‘normal.’

Bill had a rough time at Christchurch West High School, though he was essential to their annual productions of Gilbert and Sullivan Operas. Empson advised him to transfer to another school, study for University Entrance and do a Bachelor of Music degree, which he achieved, with Honours, from Canterbury University.

We came to London in 1963, on the Italian ship, the Gallileo Gallilei, after flying to Sydney. He’d won a bursary to the Royal Academy of Music. We’d studied German in anticipation of going to Vienna, as an alternative scholarship was on offer there. Initially, we stayed in a hostel in Earls Court Road and frequented The London Music Club where Bill could practice on one of the rickety grand pianos and I could sit in the seedy bar, drink Guinness, and chat to pianist Peter Katin or composer Alan Rawsthorne.

“Oh, London in the 60s was a fantastic place to be a young musician. There was so much energy, so many great talents emerging. And a lot of us lived at one time or another in an insane place called the London Music Club in Holland Park.

“It was a sort of hotel, owned bizarrely by the Church of England until they had to sell it, and just so much fun with everyone being together, eating together, practising around the clock.

“I was there for four years in my 20s and they were some of the best times of my life – never to be forgotten.” https://www.hamhigh.co.uk/things-to-do/21390985.brahms-brings-balm/

Stephen Kovacevich

Bill and I sometimes hung out at the Coleherne, a gay pub in Earls Court, to watch a drag act.  We were regular concert-goers, sometimes slipping in during the interval and standing at the back without paying. Arthur Rubenstein, Lili Krause, Fou Ts’ong, Rostropovich, Wanda Landowska, Segovia, Marian Anderson and at the Edinburgh Festival, Marlene Dietrich was sitting in the row in front of us to hear Sviatoslav Richter. At the Hammersmith Odeon we heard Oscar Petersen, Duke Ellington, Ella Fitzgerald and Dizzy Gillespie, among other jazz greats.

Bill’s happiest times were as a pupil of Franz Reizenstein, a German-born composer-pianist who inspired him to great heights of musicianship in both piano and composition. In the first eight weeks of starting the RAM, the works they studied together included the Scriabin Sonata No. 5 in F sharp minor, Rachmaninov’s Etudes Tableaux (Opus 39), Liszt’s Years of Pilgrimage, Mozart Sonata in A Minor, Shostakovich’s Prelude and Fugue, Bartok ‘Out of Doors’ Suite and the Tchaikowsky Piano Concerto. He was devastated when Reizenstein died suddenly in 1968. Louis Kentner became his tutor and was also supportive, continuing to teach Bill when his scholarship expired without charging a fee.

The struggle for funds and the pressure to return to New Zealand was ongoing. The Principal of the Royal Academy of Music wrote to our father, Harold, ‘We think it would be disastrous for him to return to New Zealand at the present time, and I hope very much that you will reconsider all the aspects of his career, and perhaps come to feel that his development as a musician would be better secured in Europe for the next year or two than it could be in New Zealand.’ Bill was still intent on winning an international competition, as he was desperate to sustain his musical life and break the burden of dependence on our parents’ financial support. He entered the Commonwealth Prize, where he competed against Kiri te Kanawa; he came second after Ross Pople, Kiri came third.

Our father resented paying towards the upkeep of a son he never saw. However, Bill found an indefatigable mentor at the Academy in composer, Alan Bush. In September, 1969, Dr Bush wrote to Harold, ‘I must venture to disagree with one sentence in your letter. You wrote: “it is as unfair for him to exist on scholarships and bursaries as it is for him to rely on our dubious earning power.” If William can exist in order to proceed with his studies by means of bursaries or scholarships, good luck to him. He is not idling away his time, I can assure you. I can also assure you that the profession of concert-pianist is a very hazardous one, yet such is his extraordinary talent, that there is a chance that he may succeed in it, even without large financial backing. There are very few concert artists, except those from the socialist countries, where private capital does not need to be expended on launching them, who manage to bring themselves before the public without very considerable expenditure. There are, however, exceptions even to this, and William may be one of them. If he is able to develop his powers as a performer to a sufficiently high level, it may be that one or two appearances, which he might be able to organise without undue expenditure, will be enough to make a name for himself.’

Dr Bush went on to say that Bill was preparing himself for ‘a very important audition’ under the auspices of the Arts Council of Britain and had appeared at the Dartington Summer School of Music where he had made a very favourable impression on William Glock, Head of Music at the BBC. This led to a series of lunch-time concerts, for which Bill was paid very little. One of the short-lived jobs he tried to augment his scholarships and bursaries was at Lyons Corner House, vamping show tunes for a line of high-stepping ‘chorus girls,’ but he was sacked when he switched to The Gershwin Songbook during the break.

Unknown to Dr Bush or Sir Thomas Armstrong, Bill and I were regaling our parents with ranting letters over their apparent support for the Vietnam War. We had arrived in London during a time of solidarity with the civil rights movement in the USA and were galvanised into action by the murders of Martin Luther King and Malcolm X. A few years later, London was mirroring the Paris Uprising of 1968 in working class, anti-racist and anti-war activity. In 1974 Bill was offered the opportunity to compete in the inaugural Arthur Rubenstein International Prize to be held in Tel Aviv and it was broadly hinted that if he were to enter, he would be assured of winning. After being contacted by Vanessa Redgrave, who explained the situation to him, he turned this down out of support for the Palestinian people and said he didn’t want to be used as a ‘political pawn.’ As an activist in the Revolutionary Students’ Union, Bill campaigned for jazz and new music to be taught at the RAM.

Bill in Moscow, Hands off Cuba!

Gerry Lawless was an Irish socialist, trade unionist, and republican. While he was heavily involved in left-wing Irish politics as early as the late 1950s (notably becoming the first person to take an internment case to the European Court of Human Rights), his activism continued straight through the 1960s, culminating in his role as a prominent founding member of the Troops Out Movement (TOM) in Britain in the early 1970s. [Wiki]

Ian Mikardo MP 

Before becoming an MP herself, Jo Richardson worked as personal assistant to Mikardo, a Zionist/socialist. At the time I didn’t know jack and took his self-description at face value. Now I know that these two terms are mutually exclusive. You can’t be a zionist and a socialist. Just like you can’t be a zionist and a feminist (DL).

‘Mikardo was a Labour Member of Parliament for Reading 1945–50, Reading South 1950–55, Reading 1955–59, Poplar 1964–74, Bethnal Green and Bow 1974–83 and Bow and Poplar 1983–87. He was Chairman of the House of Commons Select Committee on Nationalised Industries, 1966–70. He issued many pamphlets; the most famous were Keep Left (1947) and Keeping Left with Dick Crossman, Michael Foot and Jo Richardson, 1950. He was also a Fabian essayist, staunch friend of Israel, as well as friend and mentor to many in the Labour movement, where he made a great impact.’ (Wiki mash-up)

David Owen, Later Baron Owen, MP for Plymouth constituencies1966-92. Also known as Doctor Death for his support for abortion on demand.

Jo Richardson, Member of Parliament, elected for Barking on February 28, 1974, serving for 20 years until February 1, 1994.

Quinton Hogg, Baron Hailsham of Marylebone,

‘Hailsham retained some of the manner of a clever schoolboy – likeable, irritating and untidy – throughout his life. He was in the habit of reciting long passages of Ancient Greek verse at inappropriate moments in conversations. He would sometimes come to work on Mondays with Greek epigams he had written over the weekend, to show his staff. His handwriting was calligraphic … ‘ [Wiki] 

As First Lord, Hailsham was briefed about Eden’s plans to use military force against Egypt, which he thought were “madness”. Nevertheless, once Operation Musketeer had been launched, he thought that Britain could not retreat until the Suez Canal had been captured. 

Born in Bayswater, London, Hogg was the son of the 1st Viscount Hailsham, who was Lord Chancellor under Stanley Baldwin, and grandson of Quintin Hogg, a merchant, philanthropist and educational reformer, and an American mother; Hogg’s great-grandfather was Sir James Hogg, 1st Baronet, a businessman and politician from Ulster. The middle name McGarel comes from Charles McGarel, an Ulsterman who had large holdings of slaves, and who financially sponsored Quintin Hogg’s grandfather, also called Quintin Hogg, who was McGarel’s brother-in-law.

Hogg participated in his first election campaign in the 1924 general election, and in all subsequent general election campaigns until his death.

Educated at Sunningdale School and then Eton College, where he was a King’s Scholar and won the Newcastle Scholarship in 1925, he entered Christ Church, Oxford as a Scholar and was President of the Oxford University Conservative Association and of the Oxford Union. He took Firsts in Honours Moderations in 1928 and in Literae Humaniores in 1930. He was elected to a Prize Fellowship in Law at All Souls College, Oxford, in 1931. He was called to the bar by Lincoln’s Inn in 1932.

John Ryan (then MP for Uxbridge) and Russell Kerr (then MP for Feltham)—alongside Russell’s wife, Anne Kerr MP—acted as official, high-profile parliamentary observers during the famous Derry Civil Rights March on 5 October 1968.

When the banned march was violently broken up by the Royal Ulster Constabulary (RUC), all three British MPs were caught in the crossfire. They witnessed—and were physically caught up in—the police brutality alongside prominent Irish nationalist leader Gerry Fitt. Their first hand accounts and subsequent protests back in Westminster provided pivotal British media coverage that drastically shifted public awareness of the brewing conflict in Northern Ireland.


[i] “An insurance salesman is oblivious of the fact that his entire life is a TV show and his family members are mere actors. As he starts noticing things and uncovers the truth, he decides to escape.” IMDb

[ii]

[iii] Former Prosecutor calls for EU Statute blocking US sanctions on ICC members by Patrick Wintour

https://www.theguardian.com/law/2026/may/24/former-international-criminal-court-prosecutor-calls-for-eu-statute-blocking-us-sanctions-on-icc-members

[iv] My Years in an Indian Prison Mary Tyler, published by Penguin

chaitanyakalbag.com

[v] https://www.plutobooks.com/blog/when-angela-davis-met-bernadette-devlin/

Memo to Polly Toynbee: regarding Deir Yassin

Memo to Polly Toynbee: Deir Yassin must be remembered!

Over the past week, there has been a concerted effort by pro-Israel advocates to smear Jeremy Corbyn and accuse him of anti-semitism because of his steadfast support for Palestinian human rights. Several articles, repeating the same mantra, under different bylines, emanate from the British Israel Communications and Resarch Centre (BICOM) 

On August 14, @pollytoynbee tweeted:

“Wise words from excellent ‪@J_Bloodworth : foreign policy is being all but ignored in Lab leadership.Read this ‪http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/aug/13/jeremy-corbyn-labour-leadership-foreign-policy-antisemitism …” 

The article by James Bloodworth was a mash-up of one that first appeared in the Jewish Chronicle on August 10th by Marcus Dysch; a Jewish Chronicle editorial on August 12;  and another on the website Left Foot Forward, under the byline of Loris Cross-Bell, a researcher for the British Israel Communications and Research Centre.

Further work on behalf of BICOM has been carried out by Alan Johnson, an editor of Fathom.

Joan Ryan, the new ‘chairman’ of Labour Friends of Israel, was quick to join the smear campaign, expressing ‘concern’ at Corbyn’s candidature. Ivan Lewis, who attempted to establish ‘guilt by association’ rather than make an outright accusation, had to hurriedly backtrack when a headline in the Daily Telegraph, featuring his insinuations, spelled out his underlying accusation of anti-semitism.

Bloodworth mirrored Lewis, stating that, “Because there is no direct evidence that he has an issue himself with Jews, there is overwhelming evidence of his association with, support for – and even in one case, alleged funding of – Holocaust deniers, terrorists and some outright anti-Semites.”

His reference was to an organization known as Deir Yassin Remembered (DYR).

Both Bloodworth and Loris Cross-Bell use near-identical language when pointing out that DYR is ‘an organization so extreme that even the Palestine Solidarity Campaign refuses to associate with it.’

Others repeated this implication (“even the Palestine Solidarity Campaign”), hinting that the Palestine Solidarity Campaign is itself anti-Semitic, but DYR is even more so!

None of these writers mention that Jeremy Corbyn is Honorary President of the Palestine Solidarity Campaign and was involved in deciding the PSC’s stance towards DYR and other holocaust deniers who were promptly exposed and expelled by the organization at a packed AGM. Like Jeremy Corbyn, the PSC is firmly anti-racist and rigorously opposes anti-semitism.

Like Corbyn, the PSC advocates human, civil, national and political rights for Palestinians. This stance has invoked the smear campaign by BICOM and those working on behalf of the Government of Israel.

In the early 2000s, I attended two events organised by DYR in London, having read about its American counterpart which was set up to raise funds to build a Nakba memorial dedicated to all those who were massacred during the ethnic cleansing of Palestine, known as The Nakba, to make way for the foundation of the State of Israel.

The first such event, as I remember, was held in a reform synagogue in St. Johns Wood and featured music, poetry and readings by renowned actors. I do not recall whether Jeremy Corbyn was there, but there were certainly some Members of Parliament, public figures and Church Leaders. It was a given that we were in a space where the issue of antisemitism would not arise.

A year later, musicians, dancers and actors, gave a performance for Medical Aid for Palestinians, organised by DYR, at the Peacock Theatre. Shortly after that, my friend, the late Hanna Braun, issued a warning regarding the involvement in DYR of Israel Shamir, a Russian-Swedish Israeli with links to Paul Eisen.

A bloc of DYR board members, including Hanna, resigned in protest. Over time, Eisen and his Israeli associate, Gilad Atzmon, emerged openly as Holocaust deniers and anti-Semites, with links to extreme rightwing groups and individuals. The potential damage to the Palestine solidarity movement was averted by the speedy, anti-racist action of PSC. It is hard not to draw the conclusion that the subversion of DYR was designed to fatally damage the solidarity movement and PSC was the prime target on their list.  For too long, the activities of Eisen and Atzmon continued to be facilitied by the Socialist Workers Party.

Hanna Braun, who died a few weeks after the publication of her autobiography in 2011, was an anti-Zionist Jewish woman who’d been taken to Palestine as a child. While a teenager she was recruited into the Haganah, a Jewish terrorist group. She remembered Deir Yassin in her frank account of her life, Weeds Don’t Perish, Garnet, 2011.

‘Early one morning in April 1948 a friend burst into my room with tears streaming down her face. “They’re massacring everyone in Deir Yassin!” she cried…the senseless brutality of such slaughter was incomprehensible. Even more despicable was the parading of some of the male villagers in an open van through the streets of Jerusalem prior to their being shot. Our only comfort, if such it could be called, was that the atrocity was perpetrated by the Stern Gang, forerunners of Likud. That fig leaf was torn from us when, a few months later Stern and Etzel members were incorporated into the army and their commanders became our officers.”

It is worth noting that in his Jewish Chronicle article, Marcus Dysch, refers to the “alleged killing by Jewish soldiers of 100 Arabs before the 1948 war of Independence.”

This language says all you need to know about Nakba denial. By using the word ‘alleged,’ Dysch plants an element of doubt about an event that is well documented, is not denied by Israeli historians and is pictorially represented in the national archives of the State of Israel. Calling Palestinians “Arabs” avoids the word “Palestine” or “Palestinian” in a bid to render Palestinians invisible. Referring to the massacres, ethnic cleansing and land grab upon which the State of Israel was established as a “War of Independence,” is both Nakba denial and a cover-up of Israel’s colonial settler enterprise.

Hanna Braun was determined that Deir Yassin should and must be remembered. Her book chronicles her journey from Zionism to activism in the Palestine solidarity movement.

The original organization, based in the USA, whose name was appropriated by Eisen to discredit the solidarity movement worldwide, had among its initial advisory board, Hanan Ashrawi and Edward Said. Its website  quoted Simon Wiesenthal’s observation that “Hope lives when people remember.”’ It is time to remember Deir Yassin, the symbol of the Nakba: Palestinian dispossession, forced expulsion, massacre and oppression.

Rare BBC Editorial Complaints Unit ruling on Edo Hecht article:

British Broadcasting Corporation White City, 201 Wood Lane, London, W12 7TS

Telephone: 020 8743 8000 Email: ecu@bbc.co.uk

Editorial Complaints Unit

AB/1400381

29 October 2014

Dear Ms Langford

“Gaza: How Hamas tunnel network grew”, bbc.co.uk

 

I am writing to let you know the outcome of the ECU’s investigation into your complaint about this article on the BBC news website. I am sorry that you were not happy with the response you received when you first raised this with the BBC. We have now read the article and reviewed the earlier correspondence and conducted research on the internet. I have considered your complaint against the BBC Editorial Guidelines concerning Accuracy, particularly that which says:

We should normally identify on-air and online sources of information and significant contributors, and provide their credentials, so that our audiences can judge their status.

The author of the article, Dr Eado Hecht, is described as

…an independent defence analyst and lecturer in military doctrine at the Begin-Sadat Center for Strategic Studies at Bar Ilan University.

You have complained that it is inaccurate to describe him as independent given his association with the Israeli military. This is described by the Begin-Sadat Center for Strategic Studies (BESA):

Dr. Eado Hecht is an independent defense analyst specializing in military doctrine and its interpretation. He teaches military theory and military history at Bar-Ilan University, Haifa University and at the Israeli Defense Forces Command and General Staff College, and serves on the Editorial Advisory Panel of The Journal of Military Operations.

In response to your complaint, the Middle East desk at the BBC news website has made the point that as Dr Hecht is not employed full-time by BESA, or any other institution, the description is appropriate. They say:

Eado Hecht is independent in that he is not employed on any full-time basis by any institution, including the Begin-Sadat Center for Strategic Studies (Besa). He is an external lecturer, who gets paid per course only.

At the time he was commissioned to write the article, Eado Hecht was not teaching at the Israel Defense Forces Command and General Staff College as his contract had ended. As he is independent, the General Staff College is one of a number of institutions where he has been paid to lecture. As pointed out in an earlier response: “If Mr Hecht was employed by the IDF he would have required the IDF’s express permission to write for the BBC, and then by [Israeli] law he would not be permitted to accept any payment from us.”

When Eado Hecht wrote the article, Besa was his only active contract.

I understand the point they are making but it seems to me that, particularly in this context, this is an unduly narrow definition of “independent” which, based on employment, is not one that the audience would be aware was being used. In this context, I believe that the average reader would take the word to mean the position of someone who is not aligned with a particular party in a dispute and who stands aside from it, offering independent analysis. This does not seem to be the case with Dr Hecht. Without wishing to cast any aspersions on his academic credentials, it would appear to me that articles published under Dr Hecht’s name reveal a clear pro-Israel perspective and offer guidance and analysis as to how Israel might better prosecute its dispute with the Palestinians.[1] I note, for example, one he co-authored in 2005, entitled: “Neglect of IDF Ground Forces: A Risk to Israel’s Security” whose executive summary says:

Dramatic cuts to the IDF budget have forced the army to reduce its ground forces capabilities. This is a mistake, as the IDF still must rely on a capable and credible ground force to deal with its strategic threats, specifically the rocket-launching capabilities of Hamas and Hizballah.[2]

In addition, Dr Hecht’s connection with BESA is not confined to that of an external lecturer paid according to the courses he teaches. His articles are also published under the imprimatur of BESA, which describes itself as advancing

…a realist, conservative, and Zionist agenda in the search for security and peace for Israel. The center conducts policy-relevant research on strategic subjects, particularly as they relate to the national security and foreign policy of Israel and Middle East regional affairs.

BESA Center publications and policy recommendations are directed at senior Israeli decision-makers in military and civilian life, the defense and foreign affairs establishments in Israel and abroad, the diplomatic corps, the press, the academic community, leaders of Jewish communities around the world, and the educated public.[3]

This is a clearly pro-Zionist agenda and unless Dr Hecht’s articles, published under BESA’s auspices, explicitly disassociate themselves from this mission statement – which they do not – it seems to me that they must inevitably be considered part of BESA’s endeavours. The fact that BESA describes him as “independent” does not dispose of this issue given the problem of definition which I have identified above.

Finally, I note that, in 2002, Dr Hecht appeared on CBS 60 Minutes, in a report investigating Iraqi and Iranian backing for terrorism, where he was described as a senior Israeli intelligence official.[4]

Taking all of this into account and bearing in mind the meaning that the average reader is likely to ascribe to the term, I do not believe that “independent defence analyst” is sufficiently accurate or informative in relation to Dr Hecht, and I am upholding your complaint.

As Andrew Bell explained in his earlier email, this is a provisional finding and you have the opportunity to comment on it before it is finalised. If you wish to take that opportunity, I’d be grateful if you would let me have your comments by 12 November. In the meantime, thank you for writing to us and giving us the opportunity to investigate your concerns.

Yours sincerely

Fraser Steel

Head of Editorial Complaints

[1] http://besacenter.org/author/ehecht/

[2] http://besacenter.org/perspectives-papers/neglect-idf-ground-forces-risk-israels-security/

[3] http://besacenter.org/about/mission/

[4] http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/760059/posts

BBC Today Programme, 19.3.15: Ya’alon

I’d be grateful to receive a reply to this complaint. Thanks.
The Today Programme Thursday 19th March 2015 showed institutional pro-Iraeli bias when, at 08.39, Sarah Montague hosted Israeli Defence Minister Moshe Ya’alon. I say ‘hosted’ rather than ‘interviewed’ for the following reasons:
Ya’alon was given free rein without being challenged to claim that Palestinians “enjoy political independence,” “decided to be divided,” and that “Arabs” have “the same civil rights as we enjoy.”
Ms Montague facilitated Israel’s extremist, illegal actions by presenting them as normal. She went further, plugging the Israeli narrative and drawing out further excesses from Mr Ya’alon. By treating with kid gloves a putative war criminal representing a self-avowed racist government that has vigorously reaffirmed its determination to defy international law, Ms Montague was actively enabling war crimes.
How was it possible that she remained silent while a torrent of lies was disseminated on air? Can you tell me why she did not challenge the fantasmagoric assertion that “Actually, they enjoy already political independence. They have their own political system, government, Parliament, municipalities and so forth…We don’t want to govern them whatsoever.”
Mr Ya’alon was allowed to speak for nearly three minutes, uninterrupted, unchallenged, before Ms Montague decided to ask him another simpatico question.
Is it possible that Ms Montague has never heard of checkpoints, the apartheid wall, the military occupation under which the life of every single Palestinian in the West Bank and Gaza is jeopardised, restricted and terrorised? Where was she when white phosphorous rained down on Gaza? When whole families were wiped out? Is it possible that the BBC is more obliging to the Israeli regime than even the United States of America, whose government has today expressed concern over the racism and extremism that was manifested during the election campaign, and Netanyahu’s rejection of a two-state solution?
Had Ms Montague not heard about Mr Ya’alon’s colleague, the Israeli FM who has recommended “beheading Arabs”? Had she not heard about Mr Netanyahu’s Jim Crow warning to get the right-wing voters out: “Arabs are being bussed to the polling stations”?
Did Ms Montague not know that Israel reacted with extreme violence to the formation of a Palestinian unity government? Otherwise, how come she did not challenge Ya’alon when he concocted his fiction that “they decided to be divided into two principal entities.” Has she not heard of the UN partition plan of 1947 that imposed the State of Israel in the region and divided Palestinian land to make way for Israel?
Why did Ms Montague focus on ‘security’ issues for Israel raised by the spectre of a unitary state with equal rights for all citizens? This echoed Israel’s racist ‘demographic problem’ that manifests in ethnic cleansing, threats of ‘transfer’ and keeping Palestinians in a state of constant terror.
Ms Montague showed no concern for the victims of Israel’s extremist, apartheid policies.
While she has no such inhibitions when she interviews Palestinians – a rare occasion, admittedly, isn’t it strange that she becomes meek and obliging when ‘interviewing’ Israeli war criminals?
Yours sincerely,
Diane Langford

The Honourable Woman BBC2/Sundance

Morally Repugnant Story-telling

 

‘The Honourable Woman’, BBC 2/Sundance

 

Where to start with a critique of this series? With the finale still to come, it’s safe to say The Honourable Woman is a dishonourable endeavour with delusions of grandeur. Writers of fiction often assert an infinite horizon within which they can write about anything under the sun, liberating the imagination, say, to adopt the voice of a character of a different gender, ethnicity or species. Nothing is out of bounds. But without any historical contextualisation or factual accuracy, the results can be of variable authenticity and levels of offensiveness. Ricky Gervais, for instance, has plumbed the depths with his ghastly depictions of disabled people. Larger productions have included ‘Birth of a Nation’ and ‘Exodus,’ both examples of blockbuster propaganda efforts to make heroic narratives out of colonial settlement and dispossession.

The concept of ‘the Israel-Palestine conflict,’ so-called by the BBC – in reality a brutal military occupation – is adopted by writer-producer Hugo Blick, conforming to the corporation’s obsessive falsehood of ‘two sides,’ both behaving badly. Lack of authenticity is just one of its failings.

Blick gave an interview to Rebecca Nicolson in the Guardian (Saturday, 16th August, 2014 http://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2014/aug/15/the-honourable-woman-hugo-blick-spy-thriller-middle-east-maggie-gyllenhaal) in which she praises a narrative constructed ‘under the opaque moral uncertainty of no side behaving well.’ An Israeli entrepreneur philanthropist ‘attempts to build reconciliation between Israel and Palestine,’ writes Nicolson, without considering that reconciliation usually takes place after an occupation or apartheid regime has ended. ‘The first episode aired at almost the same time as the resurgence of violence in Jerusalem…it could not be more timely.’ Violence in Jerusalem is always present as it is an occupied/annexed city whose Palestinain occupants undergo continual ethnic cleansing, house demolition, arrests, etc, but I wonder whether she is referring to the latest attack on Gaza? What would be timely – indeed, what the times cry out for – is truth telling, in both drama and reportage. The risible notion of balance, a smokescreen for privileging the Zionist narrative, has been taken to extremes in the BBC’s coverage. Thousands of films, books and TV series have been produced about the Nazis and nobody talks about ‘balancing’ the Nazi point of view with that of their victims.

In this series, the ongoing occupation and massacres are not depicted. The shallowness, inauthenticity and grandiose claims of Blick’s drama is blown to bits by the latest round of invasion, bombing and destruction perpetrated by the Israelis and watched in horror by millions on their TV screens.

The Guardian interview includes a disingenuous disclaimer: the writer-director pinpoints two morally repugnant tropes, readily admitting that his narrative relies on them. One is the notion that women who have been raped are gagging to repeat the experience and, to that end, become danger junkies. The second is that the oppression of the Palestinian people is an irrelevance and must be invisibilised.

Blick’s self-serving distancing of himself from the herd of other ‘glib’ writers is as dishonourable as the project itself, given that the series is entirely dependent on occupation and rape. ‘Within dramas, within the context of a thriller, rape is used as a story-telling device so glibly. We make it the middle of the story’. Blick explains the second rape: ‘It’s important that the character was trying to orbit the problem by returning to it, or returning to the danger of it, and going across that line.’

The founding of the State of Israel, the dispossession of the Palestinians, the endless occupation, siege, land theft and killings, cry out for authenticity in the telling, fiction or not. Peter Kosminsky’s four-parter, The Promise, turned down by the BBC and eventually made for Channel 4, was exemplary. Imagine making a TV series about South Africa through the lens of white racists without reference to apartheid?         As Blick’s Israeli heroine sweeps through a checkpoint in a convoy of limos, we glimpse, just for a second, Palestinians queueing up to go through the turnstiles, but unless the viewer is familiar with the scenario, that moment could easily be lost. The strand of plot involving the contracts for laying cables for a mobile phone network (again positing a false equivalence) in the West Bank dramatises the possibility of the Israelis and Americans listening in. In reality, the even more sinister use of the airwaves under Israeli control enables them to carry out targeted assassinations guided by victims’ phones. Absurdly, the Palestinian envoy in London – whose real-life counterpart is never invited to appear on the BBC, while Israeli spokespeople flood the news – is depicted as having a plush office and instant access to top level British intelligence agents, just as the Israelis do. The Israeli characters are rounded, cultured and complex, the Palestinian characters, thuggish and duplicitous.

Blick is concerned that ‘viewers might think’ that he is ‘capitalising on the conflict.’ Of a visit to Hebron he opines, the violence and conflict ‘is like a volcano that goes down and comes back up,’ and ‘it’s a complication that never goes away,’ evincing no awareness of the way in which military occupation deliberately creates eruptions of violence. He congratulates himself for what he describes as ‘a dexterity to the story-telling.’ It’s a dexterity that requires frequent pointers such as ‘three years later’ and after a few more unconnected scenes ‘eight years earlier’ and so on. No wonder Maggie Gyllenhaal was ‘alarmed by the whole idea’ and, according to Nicolson, ‘had to be pushed’ into accepting the role. What were those other fine actors thinking of? Lindsay Duncan has few lines and spends her screen time staring distractedly into the middle distance. Stephen Frea adopts his usual lugubrious, hangdog expression to no particular avail. Janet McTeer plays Frea’s ball-breaking spy-mistress and Eve Best, so great as Dr O’Hara in Nurse Jackie, should get back to All Saints as fast as her legs can carry her.

 

 

 

Palestine and the Media: talk at University of Kent, during Israel Apartheid week 2013

Palestine and the Media: Talk at the University of Kent during

Israeli Apartheid Week – 26/2/13

 

Let’s start with the case of local rapper, Mic Righteous, from Margate, whose freestyle ‘Free Palestine’ was censored by the BBC’s Radio One: a sound effect was inserted over the word “Palestine” by the station’s duty editor. Following hundreds of complaints the corporation issued a statement:

“All BBC programmes have a responsibility to be impartial when dealing with controversial subjects and an edit was made to Mic Righteous’ freestyle to ensure that impartiality was maintained.”

With colleagues from the Palestine Solidarity Campaign, I met Helen Boaden, then Head of News at the BBC, early last year. She attempted to explain the obliteration of the word Palestine: it was a mistake by a tired, hapless editor, late at night, trying to avoid controversy. The point is, why would any BBC employee feel that to mention Palestine is controversial?

By contrast, last week, Radio 4’s Desert Island Discs, a flagship Sunday programme, repeated on Friday mornings, featured the columnist, Julie Burchill. Celebrities are invited to choose eight tunes they’d like to take with them were they to be marooned on a desert island. Burchill chose the Israeli National Anthem, the theme to the film Exodus and a Zionist pop song.

A word about Exodus: this film was huge when it came out starring one of the biggest Hollywood icons of the day, Paul Newman. It showed the power of cinema to shape people’s perceptions, even though the film has long ago been thoroughly exposed as myth-making propaganda…along the lines of D.W. Griffiths’ Birth of a Nation, which presents the ethnic cleansing of Native Americans as heroic nation-building.

Burchill’s choices were all aired without censorship. Such hypocrisy would be laughable if it wasn’t for the tragic situation underlying the BBC’s double standards.

I’ve been following the BBC’s coverage of the so-called ‘Israel-Palestine conflict’ for many years and gave evidence to the 2006 independent panel on impartiality that produced the Thomas Report. This document was shelved, despite its helpful findings. Ironically, the review was set up at the behest of the Zionist Federation who like to maintain the fiction that the BBC is biased against Israel. Instead, Thomas found that BBC coverage fails to convey the asymmetry of the conflict and doesn’t provide sufficient context to viewers and listeners to enable them to understand the background.

The BBC, like most western media, has unquestioningly adopted the Israeli narrative and language.

In fact, even the analogy of a ‘dual narrative’ is itself misleading, as the Israeli and Palestinian narratives are not equally valid. One represents the occupier and the other the occupied. The dispossession and occupation of Palestine is often referred to as ‘The Israel Palestine Conflict’ implying a conflict between two equal parties.

I’ll focus on the BBC because of its vast global footprint and its role as a public broadcaster obliging it to educate and inform its viewers and listeners. The Murdoch empire would require a whole other talk, but I recommend a quick look at what Sam Kiley has written from his point of view as a journalist who experienced the atmosphere of fear in the newsroom at The Times whenever Ariel Sharon’s close friend, Rupert Murdoch, telephoned.

In 2004 Greg Philo and Mike Berry of the Glasgow Media Group published a groundbreaking piece of research called “Bad News from Israel” establishing that most people get their information from television. They uncovered astonishing levels of public ignorance about Israel and Palestine and established a clear link between this information gap and the way the situation is reported. Respondents told researchers that even the phrase “occupied territory” doesn’t make clear who is occupying what. Just a couple of words could make that clear. Lack of time or space, doesn’t justify the omission of crucial words, and only adds to incomprehension and a feeling of helplessness. An impression is created that the problem is too difficult, too intractable and too complicated to understand.

Perhaps this is explained by a statement from the Israeli embassy press secretary, 21st September, 2001, carried by the The Independent newspaper.

“London is a world centre of media and the embassy here works night and day to try to influence that media. And, in many subtle ways, I think we don’t do a half bad job, if I may say so. We have newspapers that write consistently in a manner that supports and understands Israel’s situation and its challenges. And we have had influence on the BBC as well.”

The BBC changes its terminology to fit current Israeli PR requirements. For instance, Israel’s initial descriptor for its grotesque Wall was “separation fence”. When it became clear that comparisons with apartheid were invoked by reference to “separation” this term was dropped. In lock-step with Israel’s PR concerns, the BBC duly began using the new preferred term “security fence’.

Even when the Israeli army kills unarmed civilians the people involved are referred to as “militants”. A young boy was killed near the Wall and his murder was justified because he could have been ‘a look out for militants.’

When the Israeli army, one of the most powerful in the world, enters refugee camps or Palestinian towns with tanks and helicopters, the BBC describes the resulting slaughter as ‘pitched battles with militants.’

Another example of bias is manifested by the BBC’s practice of buying Israeli-produced programmes and showing un-mediated, non-attributed IDF propaganda footage. Imagine the BBC giving prime airtime to film coverage supplied by a Palestinian crew from a Palestinian perspective.

Though there are several Israeli nationals reporting from Jerusalem for the BBC, there are no Palestinian journalists with similar responsibilities – these are just “stringers.” Would the BBC send a Palestinian journalist to report on Israeli issues? Obviously this would be unthinkable even in terms of how such a reporter would traverse checkpoints and avoid closures, let alone obtain a press pass from the occupying power.

Despite a burgeoning Palestinian film industry, an incredible achievement of a people living under occupation, the BBC chooses to operate what amounts to a boycott of films produced by Palestinians, including feature films.

The courageous, non-violent demonstrations against the occupation, especially those against the apartheid Wall have not been given any attention by the BBC. The Israeli government restricts access to such demonstrations, but if Haaretz and Al Jazeera can cover these demonstrations, why not the BBC?

And there’s ample YouTube material: in the case of Syria and Iran, the BBC has no qualms about using uploaded mobile phone clips.

There’s a stark contrast between the rudeness with which Palestinians are often treated, as opposed to the deference shown to Israeli spokespersons, many of whom could be indicted as war criminals. The BBC appears to be at pains to avoid posing hard questions about the illegality of Israel’s actions when interviewing Israeli leaders.

Tzipi Livni, the former Israeli foreign minister (in post during Operation Cast Lead) was in London on 6 October, last year, to meet William Hague. This led to a seven-minute interview with her on the ‘Today’ programme.

Evan Davis listened to Livni without a single challenge or interruption of any kind.

Having her on the Today programme was an opportunity to grill her on the arrest warrant issued against her in the UK in December 2009, which led to her cancelling a previous visit to London for fear of arrest. The warrant gave details of war crimes she is alleged to be guilty of: the use of phosphorous bombs, the avoidable massacre of civilians, attacking an unarmed, occupied population. As a result of Livni’s warrant, and the cancellation of visits by other Israeli officials, the Conservative Party took out a full page advert in the Jewish Chronicle in the run-up to the 2010 General Election, pledging to amend the legislation on universal jurisdiction that allows such warrants to be issued. They began work on this after taking power in May 2010 and, on September 15, 2011, the changes came into place as part of the Police Reform and Social Responsibility Act. Despite this change in the law, which makes it harder for war criminals to face arrest in the UK, Livini was also granted ‘special mission’ status by the UK Foreign and Commonwealth Office to enable her to make last October’s visit without fear of arrest.

Not a single question was asked on the Today programme about this extraordinary situation and Livni was in complete control of the interview. International law was ignored and Davis ratified illegal occupation and war crimes by referring to them as the ‘robust position’ taken by Israel.

What is left out of BBC reportage is often more significant than what is included. You could call this censorship by omission. For instance, as far as the mainstream media is concerned, the long-lasting campaign of hunger strikes by political prisoners has not been happening.

It is noticeable that words such as “quiet” are often used to describe periods in which no Palestinian resistance has occurred, even as targeted killings, house demolitions, land theft and mass arrests continue on a daily basis. If we didn’t know otherwise, it could be assumed “nothing” was happening. This indicates that Palestinian lives are considered less significant than Israeli ones.

Jerusalem is often referred to as the capital of Israel, rather than Tel Aviv, the internationally recognised capital; Palestinian towns such as Bethlehem and Jericho are frequently cited as being part of Israel; settlements are referred to as ‘Jewish neighbourhoods.’

Any Israeli violence must be presented as retaliatory, when all sources outside Israeli governmental circles show that this is not the case. It is as if ‘balance’ involves not reporting anything that shows Israel in a bad light. Can this bias be unintentional when we consider for example that the BBC Board of Governors has included Pauline Neville Jones, prominent member of Conservative Friends of Israel (incidentally also a director of weapons company Qinetiq, which trades arms with Israel, specialising in drones)?

In November 2009, Channel 4 broadcast a programme about the pro-Israel lobby, presented by Peter Oborne, of The Daily Telegraph. Dispatches approached Jonathan Dimbleby, who’d authored a powerfully argued article for the UK-based website Index on Censorship, criticizing the BBC’s betrayal of Jeremy Bowen, its Middle East editor. Dimbleby was keen to be interviewed by the show’s producers and the Dispatches team was baffled when he abruptly backed out.

In 2000, near the Lebanese border, Bowen witnessed an Israeli tank attack that incinerated his local colleague and driver, Abed Takkoush. Andrew Balcombe, Zionist Federation Chair, immediately wrote to the BBC Trust demanding Bowen’s removal as Middle East editor, claiming this incident was a “tragic mistake” that “may have colored [his] views about Israel.” Ever since, Israel’s allies have targeted Bowen.

He was accused of using language that “appears to be calculated to promote hatred of the Jewish state and the Jews.”

The BBC Trust upheld a complaint that Bowen had breached their standards of accuracy and impartiality by stating: “Zionism’s innate instinct to push out the frontier” and “the Israeli generals, mainly hugely self-confident Sabras in their late 30s and early 40s, had been training to finish the unfinished business of 1948 for most of their careers.”

Moreover, Dispatches discovered that the BBC’s Dimbleby began to experience exactly the same process of complaints that he described in the Bowen case. After attacking Bowen, the Zionist Federation’s Turner argued that Dimbleby’s defense of his colleague made him unfit to host the BBC’s popular radio program Any Questions.

In addition to those at the BBC, Dispatches discovered other members of the media who’ve been targeted by the Zionist lobby. Alan Rusbridger, editor of the Guardian newspaper, described a 2006 visit from Gerald Ronson, chairman of the Community Security Trust, a charity for British Jews, and Henry Grunwald, the president of the Board of Deputies of British Jews. The meeting was triggered by an article in the Guardian by Chris McGreal that compared Israel to apartheid South Africa. After an emergency meeting at the Israeli ambassador’s residence that was also attended by British Israel Research and Communications chairman Poju Zabludowicz, Grumwald and Ronson were dispatched to confront the Guardian editor. Ronson accused the Guardian of fomenting anti-Semitic attacks, stating that “There is a line which can’t be crossed, you’ve crossed it, and you must stop this.”

The Guardian’s relationship with Israel has evolved. In 1914 the Zionist leader Chaim Weizmann met with the editor of the then Manchester Guardian, C.P. Scott, a meeting that led to the Balfour Declaration of 1917. But the Guardian has fallen out of love with Israel now.

The website organisation HonestReporting organised an “email bombardment” of The Guardian which included a hate campaign against their correspondent Suzanne Goldenberg which was so intense that it prevented her from carrying out her job.

Other journalists who’ve been hounded out of their Middle East postings include Orla Guerin and Barbara Plett of the BBC.

BBC coverage of the Palestinian/Israeli prisoner exchange, in October 2011, entirely focused on the released Israeli prisoner, Gilad Shalit, a serving IDF soldier, who was described as ‘a shy little boy’. Palestinian prisoners were lumped together as a group ‘who have committed appalling crimes’. The BBC never asked if the Palestinian prisoners had been properly tried in court and held under a legal framework, or had been seized and held without trial. There was no mention of detained Palestinian children. The only references to Palestinian prisoners were in a context of terrorism and how their release would affect grieving/fearful Israeli families.

BBC coverage of the 2012 onslaught on Gaza slipped below even its previous low point – its 2008/09 reportage of ‘Operation Cast Lead,’ when the BBC refused to broadcast a routine charity appeal and allowed Israeli spokesperson, Mark Regev, to take over its air waves.

Israeli attacks on Gaza were presented as ‘in response to Palestinian attacks’. Palestinian rocket attacks on Israel are never presented as ‘in response’ to 64 years of Israeli occupation or four years of siege.

Again it was demonstrated that the concept of rule of law, international human rights law and the Geneva Conventions are apparently irrelevant to the BBC’s pre-determined lack of balance. Failure to rigorously challenge Israeli army and state spokespeople is a hallmark of the BBC’s bias in favour of the occupying power and against the occupied Palestinian people and amounts to complicity with Israeli war crimes.

The weighted concern for Israeli civilian deaths and injury as compared to those of the entrapped, besieged civilians in Gaza who were being bombed in 2008-2009 and again in 2012 represents corporate cruelty towards Palestinians as the BBC’s default policy.

The setting up of a false equivalence has always been the main feature of BBC coverage and was again deployed from the outset of Operation Pillar of Cloud, the Israeli name for its latest attack on Gaza.

This began with the slaying of a boy playing football and was deliberately escalated by Israel’s targeted assassination of Ahmed Al Jabari. Despite the political significance of Mr Al Jabari’s role as a seasoned negotiator and participant in the formulation of a longer-lasting ceasefire, there was barely any analysis of this extreme provocation and its implications. Neither was the peaceful Palestinian initiative to apply for non-state membership of the UN given due importance alongside Israel’s upcoming election as the motive for Israel’s aggression.

Unless Israel is under rocket attack, apparently nothing is happening that is of interest to the BBC’s listeners and viewers.

During ‘Operation Cast Lead’ and its aftermath, the BBC frequently invited Jonathan Sacerdoti, introducing him as a ‘political analyst’ when in fact he has been a Director of Public Affairs at the Zionist Federation. Mr Sacerdoti was again in BBC studios to defend the attacks and massacres in Gaza, just as he was when Israeli forces attacked the aid ship Mavi Marmara in international waters, killing nine passengers who were trying to break Israel’s inhumane siege of Gaza. On 15 November last year he joked on Facebook that he ‘may as well move in’ at the BBC after yet another interview was lined up.

Over 1,500 complaints were received by the BBC after it aired a Panorama programme called Death in the Med in which it claimed that the human rights defenders aboard the Mavi Marmara were responsible for their own deaths. Ms Boaden described critics of the programme as ‘obsessives.’

She went on to describe Death in the Med as a ‘brave, thorough and highly forensic examination of what went wrong [on the Mavi Marmara]’, and described the programme’s presenter, Jane Corbin, as ‘one of our absolutely best reporters’.

A BBC Trust inquiry into complaints about the programme conceded that it failed to use the autopsies on the nine passengers killed by Israeli commandos, failed to mention the mistreatment of passengers by Israeli soldiers, failed to mention the amount of aid being carried on the Mavi Marmara and unfairly dismissed the medical aid as being out of date.

Towards the end of last year the Palestine Solidarity Campaign requested a further meeting with Helen Boaden to review matters discussed at our previous meeting when PSC offered to provide a list of contacts based in Palestine and outside experts who’d be available 24/7 for interview and comment. We were told that we’d already had one meeting in 2012 and we couldn’t have another one so soon.

In light of comments made by Ms Boaden about the number of times she meets with ‘the other side’ as she put it, and the boast of Mr Sacerdoti about moving into the BBC studios, I made a Freedom of Information request asking how many times last year Ms Boaden had met the Zionist Federation, the British Board of Deputies and BICOM. This was refused on the grounds of journalistic exemption.

Despite all this, I believe there’s been a major shift in public understanding in the past ten years. This is the result of intensified campaigning by Palestine solidarity activists, widespread use of the new media and the horrific actions of Israel itself that no amount of propaganda can whitewash, greenwash or pinkwash. Above all, world opinion is changing because people are witnessing for themselves the steadfastness of the Palestinian people in the face of dispossession, war crimes and apartheid.

The failure to tell the truth makes the media not only complicit but culpable. It’s up to us, international civil society, to tell the truth and spread awareness. So join PSC, take action whenever possible – be a part of the activism that counters the lies which perpetuate Palestinian oppression.

 

 

 

 

Newsnight complaint update

27th May 2010

Mr Bruce Vander,

Editorial Standards Committee,

The BBC Trust,

180 Great Portland Street,

London W1W 5QZ

Dear Mr Vander,

Richard Hutt has directed me to your Committee regarding my complaint (ref: RH1000081) against Newsnight, 19th Janury 2010. I am grateful for this opportunity to appeal against his findings.

In my opinion the segment featuring Colonel Tim Collins failed to ‘retain a respect for factual accuracy’ and did not ‘fairly represent opposing viewpoints when appropriate.’

Mr Hutt writes, in relation to Jeremy Paxman’s preview and opening cues:

‘It seems to me that these cues made clear to viewers that the report would give the “take” of Colonel Tim Collins on the conflict. I also consider that the introduction made clear that the perspective which Colonel Collins would offer would be that of a soldier, able to comment on the military exchanges that had taken place in the locations he visited. I would consider therefore that the report was appropriately signposted as an “authored” piece with a focus on the military aspect of the conflict.’

Contrary to the above, Colonel Collins completely failed to interrogate ‘military exchanges’ and instead chose to focus only on the feeble resistance to the overwhelming firepower of the Israeli offensive that a tiny number of Gazans were able to mount, ie. homemade rockets. He made no attempt to evaluate the ‘military exchanges’ initiated by Israel or to put these in the context of the breaking of the ceasefire with Hamas on the part of Israel. As I pointed out in my original complaint his analysis of whether weapons had been fired from a particular location did not hold up evidentially – he offered no evidence, only his biased opinion.

Colonel Desmond Travers, a co-author of the Goldstone Report, which, despite Israel’s attempts to undermine it, is the most authoritative and balanced source of material regarding Israel’s onslaught on Gaza, described the comments of Colonel Collins as ‘in breach of good evidentiary procedures.’

The segment did not live up to the introductory cues and was grossly biased and inhumane in its conclusion that the IDF were justified in firing on unarmed civilians and wiping out an entire family in one location visited. Many viewers were deeply shocked and saw this as of apiece with the BBC’s unfair decision not to broadcast the DEC appeal.

Yours sincerely,

Diane Langford

Frankie Boyle hits back

Frankie Boyle: BBC are cowards
Comic defends Palestine gag

Frankie Boyle has lashed out at the BBC, branding them ‘cowardly’ and ‘cravenly afraid of giving offence’ after censuring one of his jokes.
In an angry open letter, the comedian hit back at the BBC Trust for apologising for a gag he felt drew some small attention to the ‘apartheid’ in Palestine.
The corporation’s governing body yesterday issued an apology for the joke Boyle made on Radio 4’s Political Animal two years ago. A listener took their complaint that the gag was anti-Semitic – although appearing on a show hosted by the Jewish Andy Zaltzman – all the way to the top.
They ruled that the gag was a ‘serious’ breach of BBC rules and said: ‘It said: ‘As a result, the committee wished to apologise to the complainant on behalf of the BBC for any offence the remark may have caused him and other listeners to the programme.’
However, Boyle says the Palestinian situation is a suitable topic for satire and defended the joke.
Here is the full text of his response:
Obviously, it feels strange to be on the moral high ground but I feel a response is required to the BBC Trust’s cowardly rebuke of my jokes about Palestine.
As always, I heard nothing from the BBC but read in a newspaper that editorial procedures would be tightened further to stop jokes with anything at all to say getting past the censors.
In case you missed it, the jokes in question are: ‘I’ve been studying Israeli Army Martial Arts. I now know 16 ways to kick a Palestinian woman in the back. People think that the Middle East is very complex but I have an analogy that sums it up quite well. If you imagine that Palestine is a big cake, well…that cake is being punched to pieces by a very angry Jew.’
I think the problem here is that the show’s producers will have thought that Israel, an aggressive, terrorist state with a nuclear arsenal was an appropriate target for satire. The Trust’s ruling is essentially a note from their line managers. It says that if you imagine that a state busily going about the destruction of an entire people is fair game, you are mistaken. Israel is out of bounds.
The BBC refused to broadcast a humanitarian appeal in 2009 to help residents of Gaza rebuild their homes. It’s tragic for such a great institution but it is now cravenly afraid of giving offence and vulnerable to any kind of well drilled lobbying.
I told the jokes on a Radio 4 show called Political Animal. That title seems to promise provocative comedy with a point of view. In practice the BBC wish to deliver the flavour of political comedy with none of the content. The most recent offering I saw was BBC Two’s The Bubble. It looked exactly like a show where funny people sat around and did jokes about the news. Except the thrust of the format was that nobody had read the papers. I can only imagine how the head of the BBC Trust must have looked watching that, grinning like Gordon Brown having his prostrate examined.
The situation in Palestine seems to be, in essence, apartheid. I grew up with the anti apartheid thing being a huge focus of debate. It really seemed to matter to everybody that other human beings were being treated in that way. We didn’t just talk about it, we did things, I remember boycotts and marches and demos all being held because we couldn’t bear that people were being treated like that.
A few years ago I watched a documentary about life in Palestine. There’s a section where a UN dignitary of some kind comes to do a photo opportunity outside a new hospital. The staff know that it communicates nothing of the real desperation of their position, so they trick her into a side ward on her way out. She ends up in a room with a child who the doctors explain is in a critical condition because they don’t have the supplies to keep treating him. She flounders, awkwardly caught in the bleak reality of the room, mouthing platitudes over a dying boy.
The filmmaker asks one of the doctors what they think the stunt will have achieved. He is suddenly angry, perhaps having just felt at first hand something he knew in the abstract. The indifference of the world. ‘She will do nothing,’ he says to the filmmaker. Then he looks into the camera and says, ‘Neither will you’.
I cried at that and promised myself that I would do something. Other than write a few stupid jokes I have not done anything. Neither have you.
Frankie Boyle

BBC Respond to ‘Newsnight’ complaint

Complaint regarding “Newsnight” on BBC2

Dear Gerald McCusker,

Thank you for your response to my complaint about the ‘Newsnight’ broadcast on 19 January 2010. You correctly anticipated that I would not be satisfied with your reply.

Far from engaging with ‘military matters’ the segment by Colonel Tim Collins made no effort to analyse the military aspect of the attack on Gaza with any pretence at objectivity. If this had been the case why were we not shown the extent of Israel’s military might? The Israeli army is the fourth largest in the world and has a vast range of munitions from nuclear to buzzing drones that are partly for surveillance (not a cat’s whisker moves in Gaza without the Israeli military knowing about it) and partly for psychological warfare (they are constantly overhead, ‘like having a wasp in your ear’ as one Palestinian has described it).

By making out that homemade rockets pose a threat to the Israeli army’s arsenal as if there were two equally powerful sides, your programme set out to give credence to Israel’s propagandising justification for its blitz on Gaza using weapons of mass destruction such as phospherous bombs.

This ‘soldier’s view’ was biased against the Palestinian people and Colonel Collins’  ‘military eye’ was turned away from Israel’s massive armoury.

Regarding your point that overall context of the piece was clear, this was far from the case. By suggesting that that the level of resistance to Israel’s onslaught merited its description of ‘military matters’ and ‘soldier’s eye’ is to grossly distort the facts. The Palestinians do not possess an army. The Gazans do not possess any military equipment at all that is capable of confronting the Israeli Army. How is a ‘soldier’s eye’ appropriate in this one-sided situation? The entire commentary was from the point of view of the Israeli side and was completely biased and a distortion of facts on the ground.

This being the case, I wish to take my complaint to the next stage of the process.

Thank you for your help with this.

Yours sincerely,

Diane Langford

Dear Ms Langford

Thanks for your e-mail regarding ‘Newsnight’ broadcast 19 January 2010.

I understand you’re concerned by Colonel Tim Collins’ report in this particular programme and I note you feel that it offered a unbalanced and biased account of the situation in Gaza.

I’m sorry you were unhappy with our authored report by Colonel Tim Collins. It was not meant to provide a political analysis of the conflict. As was made clear in the introduction to the piece we were giving a “soldier’s view” of the conflict, introducing Colonel Tim Collins as a “celebrated war veteran,” indicating that this was a piece offering a personal view based on his military experience.

The overall context of the piece was clear, in the introduction we said that a year ago “the Israeli army was readying itself to withdraw from the Gaza Strip, after a three-week campaign which led to accusations of war crimes.” We then go on to say 1300 Palestinians and 13 Israelis died in the conflict.

As a soldier, he examined the evidence at the mosque – and gave his opinion – in fact he used those words “my opinion” – about the cause of the secondary explosions that he had discerned. He didn’t talk about Goldstone and the wider context because he was just reporting with his military eye on what he was able to see on the ground.

The piece was not intended as a comprehensive report but a ‘what I was able to see and reflect upon’ authored piece about military matters that, while a personal view, nonetheless took pains to steer clear of the perceived political rights and wrongs of the conflict.

We have covered the Gaza incursion on ‘Newsnight’ in many ways, and this piece should be seen as one perspective in our overall coverage. The role of ‘Newsnight’ as a news and current affairs programme is to give our viewers distinctive coverage from the news bulletins and to offer new perspectives on long-running stories, and so engage our viewers. This is what we were attempting to do with this piece.

However I note the strength of your feelings in relation to this matter and accept that you may continue to disagree and I’d like to take a moment to assure you that I’ve registered your complaint on our audience log.

This is the internal report of audience feedback which we compile daily for all news programme makers within the BBC, and also their senior management.

Thanks once again for taking the time to contact us.

Regards

Gerald McCusker

BBC Complaints

http://www.bbc.co.uk/complaints

BBC2 Newsnight, complaint

Newsnight, Tuesday 19th January 2010

I was repelled by the ‘Newsnight’ segment featuring Colonel Tim Collins on Tuesday night. He was on an obvious mission to justify the Israeli massacre in Gaza that occurred a year ago. Given the BBC’s callous refusal to publicise The DEC appeal that followed this inhuman and, universally acknowledged, disproportionate attack, it is astonishing that you would follow this up with a downright justification of Israel’s horrific war crimes. The BBC’S claim to impartiality has been completely discredited by this sequence of events.

Colonel Collins, who has been compared to a character out of ‘Apocalypse Now,’ made no effort to make sense of the numbers of deaths involved: 13 Israelis (four of those were ‘friendly fire’, 1,400 Palestinians, involving hundreds of civilians, including women and children. Instead, he seemed unmoved by the evidence in front of him and chose only to see Hamas posters and interview the usual suspects in their ‘lair’ with an arsenal consisting of homemade rockets.

At Sderot, his guide was Mickey Roosevelt, ‘from North London’ who showed Colonel Collins the rockets collected since 2000 which have caused so little damage. He was not taken to review Israel’s arsenal of F16s, nuclear weapons, phosphorous bombs and all the other paraphanalia of the world’s fourth largest army. It was as if Israel was the unarmed victim, living in fear of having homes demolished, schools flattened and hundreds of civilians slaughtered.

The programme presented a complete distortion of the facts and made no attempt to inform, provide context, or even the slightest attempt at impartiality.

Colonel Collins is well-known for his gung-ho speeches (‘show them no mercy’, ‘we are their nemesis’) and boasts of his war record in the most brutal military interventions of the past decades. ‘Not as bad as Faluja,’ he commented, eyeing a flattened mosque. He claimed to have found proof of weapons having been stored in the crypt of this building, but there was no evidence shown on camera.

As he toured the region in an Israeli-piloted helicopter, he flew over Qalqilya, one of the Palestinian towns most grievously affected by Israel’s apartheid wall. ‘It’s to protect the main road,’ said the pilot, speaking of an Israeli-only road built on stolen Palestinian land.

Given the BBC’s complete blanking of the recent VivaPalestina Convoy, the Gaza Freedom March, and other efforts by civil society humanitarian activists from around the world, the programme takes on a special meaning. The depth of the BBC’s bias is demonstrated across the entire output of your programming and not only by the skewed nature of this particular item on ‘Newsnight.’