We all know we are never to forget the Jewish Holocaust - if you have grown up in the West that is all you would have heard from your school days and all through your lifetime. And as David Cox writes in the Guardian "what is it with the Nazis? It's now well over half a century since their thousand-year Reich collapsed, yet still they continue to haunt us.
Stalin and the Mao probably killed more people than Hitler.
"... Rwanda's Hutus perpetrated a genocide in some ways even more remarkable than the Holocaust, dispatching half a million of their neighbors in a mere hundred days without benefit of fascistic ideology, death camps or culture.
... "Yet, it's the Nazis who continue to invade the imagination of publishers and TV Producers."
He points out that we have just got over the film, "The Boy in the Stripped Pyjamas" with Daniel Craig leading the Jewish resistance; with the next blockbuster in hot pursuit with Tom Cruise trying to assassinate Hitler in "Valkyrie" and of course the overstretched film "The Reader" with Kate Winslet as a German harboring a secret where she helped kill hundreds of Jews.
All film releases have taken place around the time that the Gaza Holocaust was taking place. Of course we must not forget that just in time of the Gaza conflict the BBC started airing the "The Diary of Anne Frank", another story of the persecution of Jews.
Against the backdrop of all the films and dramas that were showing in London and America, the BBC was once again criticized for its bias reporting on the Gaza conflict and using only the Israeli government's narrative.
If the point behind the whole strategy of films and dramas was that you remembered Israel's Holocaust narrative while you watched the killings and massacres of over a thousand Palestinians, many just children, then the objective some may argue was achieved. The Holocaust is central to the national narrative of Israel, it justified, according to them, the throwing out of occupants of Palestine who had been residing there for centuries because "the poor persecuted Jews of Europe needed a home" and why today these "persecuted people" can kill Palestinians with impunity.
This constant justification of Israel's existence based on the Holocaust is imbued into nearly every facet of society and media. It is against the law in Europe to questions the Holocaust or even question the numbers that died. It is no secret that the major Hollywood film studios are owned by Jews - nothing wrong with that except these Jews are mostly Zionists.
It is also a known fact that the Jewish lobby controls American foreign policy; no president can come into power until he has proven to Israel that he or she supports them as Barack Obama also recently did. Shortly after Obama won the elections and named self-proclaimed Zionist Rahm Emanuel as his chief of staff, the Israeli newspaper Ma'ariv called him "our man in the White House".
There is still a distinction between being Jewish and a Zionist even though the Israeli propaganda machine is trying to merge the terms into one. Zionism and Jews is not one, Zionism is a fascist ideology and Jews are people, many like Avi Schlaim, Noam Chomsky, the late Tanya Reinhart, Neve Gordon, Tom Segev, Uri Avnery, Ilan Pappe and Norman Finklestein who are much respected in the world community and constantly speak out against Israel's oppression.
As the Israelis have already declared their propaganda machine went into operation after losing the war in Lebanon 2006; plans were made to counteract the massive public outcry against Israel's use of disproportionate force and civilian deaths. The National Information Directorate was set up with the aim to give out information based on spin and propaganda. Eight months before Israel's attack on Gaza began, the NID had already started to brief Israeli officials. The highly influential Jewish lobby and the Labour Friends of Israel within the UK government had begun the task of putting over the spin generated by the NID before and during the conflict.
Their influence can be seen in the biased reports that TV stations like the BBC have been churning out. Writers and broadcasters, with a few exceptions, have used the Israel government's narrative explaining the conflict. As Abdul Bari Atwan, the editor of Al Quds writes: "One must not underestimate the career damage journalists, politicians and academics fear in the event of being branded 'anti-Semitic'. Most do not have the moral courage to unreservedly criticize Israel".
John Kampfer, journalist and chief executive of Index and Censorship compared Channel 4' reports with the BBC's and argues that the line of questioning was weak when BBC presenters questioned Israeli spokespersons: ".. on The World at One on 9 January Yigal Palmor was allowed to fob off the charges with relative ease in an interview with the usually rigorous Brian Hanrahan. These spokespeople, along with Maj. Avital Leibovich of the Israeli Army, have been ever present on the news channel, but rarely have they been truly pressed"
The BBC which prides itself on its objective reporting showed its subjectivity and bias throughout the Gaza conflict, basing all reports on "Israel's right to defend itself".
The latest decision by the BBC not to broadcast the Gaza humanitarian crisis that has sent shock waves globally should be seen in this context. The BBC and other major broadcasters have broken a 45-year-old agreement with overseas aid charities by refusing to broadcast their fund-raising appeal for Gaza.
The Disasters Emergency Committee launched its national appeal for Gaza, saying the devastation was so great the twelve leading British aid charities felt "compelled to act".
The biggest advantage of a DEC appeal is the free airtime given to it by the major broadcasters. The agreement to grant free airtime dates back to 1963, the year the big aid charities first came together for a joint appeal, and it has been sanctioned by broadcasting regulators.
The reason the BBC has given for blocking an appeal for emergency aid is that it wants "to avoid any risk of compromising public confidence in the BBC's impartiality".
Lindsey German, national convener of Stop the War said, "What has 'impartiality' to do with an appeal for humanitarian aid to a devastated people? How can you be impartial about that? Either these people need the aid or they don't."
"This is a betrayal of the BBC's obligation to be a public service," said Tony Benn, president of Stop the War. "To deny the help that the aid agencies and the UN need is incomprehensible".
The BBC's stance has come about as demonstrations after demonstrations are held around the country against Israeli atrocities in Gaza and students sit- INS are taking place in many universities.
If we know anything by now, it is that this is not going to be the only Holocaust carried out by Israel, especially as it knows that given the American backing it will not be held responsible for any of the war crimes it has committed.
Also it is a known fact that the UN is powerless and many of its decision are worthless as America can veto any action. Therefore it is not surprising that this time the BBC with the rest of the Western media have come out of their closet and revealed what the Middle East and Muslims have known for quite a while: That the BBC discriminates against Muslims and is biased in favor of Israel.
The sad fact is if the BBC bosses do finally give in to public pressure and broadcast the Gaza aid appeal - it would still be too late - the damage to the reputation of this cultural icon has already been done.
