Is Britain now a Disunited Kingdom?

The violent scenes in Glasgow on Friday night between Yes and No supporters may have been isolated, but they point to the clear divisions that have been stirred up by the Scottish independence debate and referendum.

Unionists flooded parts of Glasgow on Friday evening taunting and jeering nationalists who they saw as traitors to Britain. Some protesters, draped in the union flag, were seen making Nazi-style salutes whilst shouting chants of "England".

The protests were relatively small with only 80 police needed to contain the situation as pro and anti independence campaigners fought on the streets, some throwing chairs and flares at each other [Daily Mail / Daily Record / FT / Russia Today]

However the images that will be seen around the world will be uncomfortable for Westminster who would prefer that the decisive No vote showed there was a clear mandate that the people of Scotland wished to remain a part of the Union.

50/50 split

In fact only a little over half the the people of Scotland voted to remain part of the UK, and many say they were pushed towards voting no to independence because of the scaremongering in the last few days of the campaign.

The No vote defeated the Yes vote in Thursday's referendum by 2,001,926 to 1,617,989, a national split of 55% to 45%.

There have also been accusations of vote rigging and electoral fraud though it is unclear whether these cases will be investigated or if they played any significant part in the process [BBC / Sky News / Daily Mail / Metro / Guardian / RIA - Russian].

What is clear, is that Scotland is deeply divided. Many who voted no, have expressed a desire to have gone the other way but felt some fundamental questions, particularly about currency and finance, had not been addressed by the Yes campaign.

Dreams & nightmares

As first minister Alex Salmond announced his intention to step down on Friday he said the campaign for independence would continue and "the dream shall never die" [BBC / BBC].

But for millions of Scots, the decades ahead may prove to be more a nightmare. Many may also ponder the question "What if?". The younger generation, particularly, may feel aggrieved. Statistics showed that younger people were more likely to have voted Yes whilst older people voted No [Guardian]. There were also clear geographical divisions too with some parts of the country leaning more towards the No camp than others [BBC]. 

Back in Westminster, the No vote brought cheers with promises that there would be political reforms and changes to the way both Scotland and the rest of Great Britain was to be governed. But less than two days later there were already signs of divisions in parliament as leaders on both sides disagreed with each other.

Political divisions

Labour party leader Ed Miliband signalled he would not sign up to Prime Minister David Cameron's plan for a new UK-wide devolution settlement in the wake of the Scottish referendum.

Cameron wants enhanced powers for the Scottish Parliament and new powers for English MPs at Westminster agreed, in draft, before the 2015 election.

However, Miliband wants a "constitutional convention" after the election to discuss devolution plans for England. One reason he is reticent to discuss English devolution and address the West Lothian question is that Labour might also lose some sway in the Commons [BBC / Telegraph / Guardian / Telegraph].

English opinion

As for the people of England, opinions vary widely. Some have expressed disappointment at the No vote, hoping to be rid of the Scots that they see as a drain on English taxes.

Most people in England overwhelmingly reject the Scottish Government's claim that independence would have improved relations between the two countries, with only 10% believing that it would.

However, surveys carried out a month before the referendum showed that English people wanted a much tougher stance on Scotland if it decided to say in the Union.

Some 56% of those polled said that public spending in Scotland should be reduced to the UK average following a No vote, while 63% believed that Scottish MPs should be prevented from voting on English laws, a clear indication that many felt the West Lothian question should be tackled.

For some English people feelings are less strong. "It's a matter for the Scots," said one shopper on Saturday, "I'm just glad it's all over."

If only she were right.


tvnewswatch, London, UK

Scottish No vote creates divisions on both sides of border

On Thursday 18th September 2014 Scotland voted No in a referendum concerning Scottish independence. But while there was much rejoicing in the "Better Together" camp, the result may create some deep divisions, not only amongst the Scots but also between Scotland and its neighbours.

Issues of defence, financial concerns and what currency and independent Scotland might use were major questions that for some remained unanswered.

Scottish patriotism and a hope for a new start was not enough to swing it for Alex Salmond's Yes campaign.

High turnout

Voter turnout was extremely high, more than 90% in some regions, a clear sign that the issue was important in the minds of the Scottish people.

But shortly after 6:00 a.m. history had been made as it was declared that Scotland had rejected the chance of independence.

The final result was 44.7%, or 1,617,989 votes, for Yes, with 55.3%, 2,001,926, voting No.

Celebration in Westminster

In the hours that followed leaders of the major political parties came out to praise the decision. Prime Minister David Cameron said he was delighted at the result and said that is was "time for our United Kingdom to come together, and to move forward." 

Labour leader Ed Miliband insisted that the result was not a vote to maintain the status quo but a "vote for change".

All parties must now work for greater autonomy, a stronger Scottish parliament and a stronger Scotland, Miliband said. Indeed the decision should also spark discussions about devolution for Wales and England.

But while there was a sense of relief and celebration in Westminster, many English citizens expressed dismay at the result.

Anger on social media

Comments on social media showed there were deep divisions resulting from the whole campaign.

"As an Englishman I'm gutted, we've read on a daily basis the anti-English bile coming from a large proportion of Scots toward us, I was hoping for a resounding YES vote so we could cut the apron strings and the financial benefits we give these so called 'Bravehearts'," one man posted on the Daily Mail website under the moniker Bristolbeau.

He went on to accuse the Scots of "choosing to live off the back of the English lion rather than stand on their own two feet."

It was not a lone voice. Indeed the whole debate about Scottish independence has highlighted the iniquity that exists both north and south of the border.

Scots are widely seen as benefiting from free university fees, NHS prescriptions and eye care, on the backs of the English taxpayer.

West Lothian question

Many English also feel aggrieved that the Irish, Scots and Welsh also have their own national assemblies, while England maintains a national parliament where MPs from these states may still influence decisions made at Westminster. Indeed the debate surrounding the so-called West Lothian question will now be one that Westminster MPs will not be able to side track.

"Cameron has been so worried about the Scots he hasn't noticed how bloody angry the English are?" one man wrote on the Daily Mail website. "I can't speak for the Welsh or Irish but I suspect they feel aggrieved too, but they at least have assemblies."

It wasn't just comments on right wing newspaper websites that expressed anger. On the Guardian website there were also calls for English devolution and changes to the way Scotland is funded.

"People living in England have been treated as second class citizens compared to those living in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland for far too long," one commenter wrote.

Cameron will certainly be under pressure to make reforms, not only from the electorate but also the opposition. Miliband has suggested reform is needed, and Lib Dem leader Nick Clegg has also said the question over English devolution also needs to be tackled.

"If at first you don't succeed…"

Alex Salmond said he "accepted the verdict of the people".

However, there are many people in England who will not accept the status quo and will, in the coming months, demand change to the way England is run and the way Scotland is funded.

But what of the future of Scottish independence. Alex Salmond said he accepted that the people rejected the notion of independence "this time". The Edinburgh Agreement stated that a referendum must be held by the end of 2014. This has been upheld and there is no arrangement in place for another referendum on independence.

However, Salmond may be looking to history for inspiration. There is a well known legend surrounding Robert the Bruce, King of Scots from 1306 until his death in 1329. It is said that in the early days of Bruce's reign he was defeated by the English and driven into exile. Whilst on the run he sought refuge in a small dark cave and sat watching a little spider trying to make a web.

Each time the spider failed, it began again and continued until it succeeded. Inspired by this, Bruce returned to inflict a series of defeats on the English, thus winning him more supporters and eventual victory. The story served to illustrate the maxim: "if at first you don't succeed, try try try again."

Salmond will no doubt be thinking the same as he retreats to lick his wounds.


tvnewswatch, London, UK

ISIL censored videos still invoke fear & concerns

On the 14th September ISIL claimed to have killed a British hostage and published an execution video on the Internet. It was the latest in a series of such videos showing western hostages forced to denounce foreign policy prior to their execution by a member of the terror group ISIL [BBC / NBC / D Mail].

The barbarity of ISIL is unquestioned. This is a terror group that has been involved with the wholesale slaughter of entire villages and executions [Warning Graphic: D Mail /   EAWorldView / LiveLeak]. They have beheaded and crucified ethnic minorities and Christians in northern Iraq and Syria [Telegraph / WesternJournalism / Vice News]. And it is also reported that ISIL are also selling women as sex slaves [Telegraph / D Mail / Al Arabiya / Zee News].

Execution videos

The videos related to the execution of US journalists Steven Sotloff and James Foley, and British aid worker David Haines all have striking similarities. All the hostages are dressed in orange boiler suits. The militant who appears in the videos appears to be the same man and speaks in a London accent. And the location where the videos were shot is a barren desert. As well as there being a focus on the identity of the militant and location, the content and editing has also raised a number of questions.

While few doubt the men have been murdered by the terror group, the actual killing not shown. After the hostages have made statements condemning Barack Obama or, in the case of David Haines, David Cameron, an ISIL militant follows by making his own statement and raises a knife to the victims throat. The video then fades to black. The video then shows the victim's decapitated head placed on his body. This apparent self-censorship has struck some as being somewhat bizarre given the group is hardly known for its sensitivity.

Anomalies and conspiracies

Another anomaly is that there are few, if any religious references. The Islamic State militants claim to be guided by the Koran, but there are no shouts of  Allāhu Akbar [الله أكبر], or "God is Great", something which is often a trademark of Islamic extremist videos. Some have also pointed to the fact that as the militant appears to draw the knife over the victim's throat it appears to be more for show since there is no sign of blood [Telegraph / IBT / Global Mirror / TopInfoPost].

The inconsistencies have spawned many conspiracy theories, with some even suggesting the hostages have not even been killed and that the series of videos are part of a well crafted PsyOps perpetrated by the United States to justify military intervention in Syria and Iraq [InfoWars / LiveLeak].

However, whether or not the video is fake, made by rogue elements of ISIL or even a PsyOp, ISIL is clearly a threat. Indeed, the videos themselves have certainly been accepted at face value by both ISIL supporters and its enemies.

Propaganda & copycat plots

They have served as useful propaganda to draw together allies in a renewed war on terror. The videos have also served as a recruiting tool and it is feared that they are also giving ideas to those who might wish to carry out domestic attacks abroad.

Only days after the third hostage execution video was released Australian police launched raids and arrested a number of suspects it believed were planning random executions.

Police said they had uncovered information that suggested Islamic extremists were plotting to capture members of the public, drape them in the Islamic State flag and behead them.

The "demonstration killings" would have been filmed and then posted on the Internet, according to Australian media reports. The raids, involving at least 800 heavily-armed officers, led to 15 arrests [BBC / Sky News / CNN / ABC / Mashable / .

Raising threat levels

The reports will not only certain raise public concerns in Australia, but also in Britain, Europe and the US. Australia had already raised its terror alert level to "High", suggesting that a terror attack was "likely" [National Security]. Britain had also raised its alert level to "Severe", meaning that a terrorist attack was "highly likely" [MI5].

The reportage, posting of extremist videos and terror threats have served to increase Islamophobia and racism.

Rising Islamophobia

Indeed it has been reported that Islamic State extremism and the Rotherham abuse scandal are fuelling a far-right backlash in the UK, according to one of the Home Office's most senior advisers on right-wing extremism [BBC].

Data compiled by Tell Mama UK, which monitors anti-Islamic hatred, reflects fears that the actions of ISIL are provoking Islamophobia in the UK. In August it received 219 reports of abusive incidents targeted at Muslims in England, the same month as the IS beheading of US journalist James Foley. This was almost double the 112 incidents recorded in January.

In pubs across Britain some people are not shy of expressing their anger and intolerance of Muslims. "We should round up all the beardies and send them back," one man in a pub on the far outskirts of London declared. Another, asked for his view on the subject, suggested authorities round up all Sunni Muslims with a connection to ISIL and string them up on the wind turbines at the Ford plant in Dagenham. He went on to say anyone identified as a member of ISIL should be hung, drawn and quartered

Such views are extreme, and could be dismissed as just talk. However there are some that are prepared to do more than just talk.

Fears in Muslim communities

Such talk is raising fears in the Muslim community. And while British Muslims have condemned the terror groups and called for the release of British hostage Alan Henning this has done little to calm anger amongst some in the white community [BBC]. Indeed, the perceived threat from ISIL and other extremists may even trigger social disorder in communities across Britain and elsewhere.

Despite all the claims by politicians that terrorists should not be allowed to change our way of life, the opposite is in fact true. Real or not, the terror threat has resulted in tighter security, increased surveillance, growing racism and a more suspicious society.

The reasons behind the self-censorship of ISIL videos remains unclear. They are certainly less graphic than the videos released by Al Qaeda several years ago such as the execution of lorry driver Ken Bigley. But the effect has been the same - one of perpetrating fear.

tvnewswatch, London, UK

Former DUP leader Ian Paisley dies age 88

Ian Paisley the former leader of the Democratic Unionist Party, blamed by nationalists for stirring up trouble in Northern Ireland and by others for helping cement the peace process, has died aged 88.

The son of a Baptist minister he was a protester, preacher and peacemaker and particularly marked by his firebrand style of his speeches.

When he stepped down as first minister of the DUP he said it was of his own choosing but later said his successor Peter Robinson and others in the DUP forced him out.

Whilst he divided opinion, his parting will leave a hole in Northern Ireland's political landscape. In fact, despite the turbulent relationship Paisley had with his rivals in Sinn Féin, Martin McGuinness tweeted that he had lost a "friend".

"Very sad to learn that Ian Paisley has died, McGuinness posted on the social network. "My deepest sympathy to his wife Eileen & family. Once political opponents - I have lost a friend."

Reports: Sky News / BBC / BBC - Obituary / Ch4 News

tvnewswatch, London, UK

Scottish independence rattles China, Spain and others

The debate over Scottish independence has raised concerns in a number of countries where there are ongoing disputes over independence.

Some papers have discussed fears that a split from the union could spark an independence movement in small countries elsewhere. There have also concerns raised as to whether constitutional links amongst Commonwealth countries might be affected.

Chinese concerns

China, in particular is worried that the Scottish referendum might rekindle debates over Xinjiang, Tibet and Taiwan.

China has expressed surprise that London would even consider allowing the UK to break up. Furthermore its Premier Li Keqiang has said he wants to see the United Kingdom remain "united", adding that he believed the UK could "stay at the forefront in leading the world's growth and development".

His reply should not have come as a surprise. It reflects Beijing's worry about any independence movement, even one half way round the world.

Whilst the Scots are being offered a vote to determine their future, in China any talk of separation is regarded as treason and could result in a lengthy jail sentence.

Beijing has launched a huge security crackdown against what it calls Uighur separatists in the western region of Xinjiang. And in Tibet tensions still exist more than 50 years after China 'liberated' the territory and imposed Chinese rule.

Meanwhile the island of Taiwan has been threatened with invasion should they declare formal independence [BBC / BBC].

Chinese media response

Whilst China's state run news agency has been unable to avoid reporting the news surrounding Scottish independence, official responses have been somewhat muted.

When asked whether China would veto any application to the UN following independence, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesperson responded by saying that Scotland's independence referendum was "an internal matter of the UK."

"China has no comment on that," the spokesperson added [Xinhua]. While China claims not to have an opinion, its reporting has been very much biased towards the 'No' campaign. Articles in the last few days all point to the negative effects that independence would bring.

Oil tycoons voice opposition against Scottish independence, Salmond tries to disperse concern over financial consequences from "Yes" vote, Scottish vote for independence would change political map of remaining UK: expert, and Latest poll shows "No" backers exceed "Yes" over Scotland's independence were just some of the headlines, an indication that China's view was very much that of PM David Cameron that the UK would be better off working together.

Some media has gone further though, suggesting that the remaining union would become a third-rate nation should Scotland depart. The Beijing News roundly mocked the idea of a divided Britain, saying that the country would lose its status as a "world centre of politics, economics and culture".

The Global Times and the People's Daily, both Chinese state run newspapers, also suggested that the UK would fall from "a first-class country to a second-class one" and that David Cameron would "become a 'sinner' of history for the UK".

Chinese language newspapers and websites were even more vocal. The China Daily, Xinhua and the Global Times all talked of the risks of separatism and said China could not "afford to play this British game"

Meanwhile China Institute of Contemporary International Relations, deputy director Wang Shuo said Scottish independence would "establish a bad precedent" whilst the Global Times said "any step towards separatism can provoke a chain reaction" [Telegraph].

Spanish worries

It's not just China who is worried about the Scottish referendum. The independence debate has sparked discussions in Spain where Catalonia has sought independence for many years.

Some 1.8 million separatists in northeastern Spain have staged mass protests across Catalonia to demand a secession vote deemed illegal by Spanish government. "The UK is willing to let Scotland vote and Catalonia is refused that right by the Spanish," says Liz Castro, an author and publisher who divides her time between Massachusetts and Barcelona. "Catalans look to the Scotland-UK question with a sense of envy and admiration."

Despite the protests, a 'Yes' vote in Scotland won't change anything since the Spanish Government will maintain that the Constitution prohibits any consultation or referendum in an autonomous community [Telegraph / Guardian / US Today]

Other separatist movements

Europe has dozens of separatist movements and it is possible that some could stir should the Scottish referendum swing towards independence. In the far west of England there exists a strong nationalistic movement seeking the devolution of Cornwall from the rest of the UK.

Across the rest of Asia as well as China, separatist may become more emboldened. There are dozens of regions disputed by separatists, nationalists and state bodies. The same is true in Africa, North and South America and other parts of the world. 

In some countries, such as China, independence campaigners will simply be beaten back. In others they will simply be ignored. But Scottish devolution has already ignited the touchpaper and it will be hard to extinguish the flame.

tvnewswatch, London, UK

Many questions unanswered in Scottish independence debate

With only ten days to go before Scotland decides on its future as either an independent state or part of a "family of nations", the UK's party leaders dropped into Scotland in attempt to boost the No vote.

Prime Minister David Cameron as well as Labour leader Ed Miliband abandoned their weekly prime minister's questions clash to fly north. Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg also followed prompting First Minister Alex Salmond to call them the "Three Amigos".

In what appeared to be a last ditch attempt to turn things around, the Westminster troop needed to seize the initiative and persuade the Yes camp that Scottish independence would not be good either for Scotland or the UK as a whole.

Amongst the nationalist camp there is a rejection of assertions that Scotland would be unable to go it alone. Indeed many appear to be ignoring or glossing over fundamental issues.

Salmond self has evaded questions or given woolly answers concerning issues such as the future of the Scottish currency, defence, NATO membership and even border controls.

Writing in The Times, Sir John Major said the repercussion of Scottish independence would be profound. "I believe Scotland and the whole of the UK as a whole would be damaged."

"The UK would be weaker in every international body and, most damagingly, within the European Union. Our chance of reforming the EU would be diminished, and the risk of our exit from it enhanced."

Scotland too would face major challenges.

Memberships

As Salmond maintains, Scotland would be able to become a part of the EU. However, the current policy of the European Commission, as set out by its last president, José Manuel Durão Barroso, is that an independent Scotland would have to apply to join the EU. The Scottish government disagrees since it believes its membership would be continuous. It denies Scotland would be forced, as new nations are, to join the euro. The current consensus among EU member states is that Barroso is correct in his assertion, but it remains to be seen.

Scotland's independence would result in it no longer being a part of NATO. Whilst it could apply to join NATO, it would need to commit to spending 2% of its GDP annually on defence, reversing the defence cut it has promised to make after independence.

England would also face dilemmas concerning its significant military presence in Scotland. There are a number of submarine, navy and other military bases which may well be forced to head south, at great cost to the rest of the Union.

Currency issues

Currency is one of the much discussed issues. Salmond maintains that Scotland will continue to use the pound, though Westminster says he can't. To allow the Scots to use the English currency without the Treasury in Whitehall having control of Scottish economic policy would incur massive potential liabilities for the English taxpayer if the Scottish economy imploded.

Of course Scotland could choose to use the pound, in the same way that some Caribbean islands use the US dollar despite being outside America. However, divergence between the two economies could make Scotland a debt-ridden state much as Greece is to Germany.

Choosing to use the euro in the same way would bring similar problems. Furthermore Scotland cannot adopt it officially while it is still outside the EU which brings up the issue concerning membership which is again tenuous.

Scotland could set up its own currency, but it might face rapid and possibly steep devaluation, especially if it defaulted on its historic share of UK debt. Scotland has 8.4% of the UK population, and could be expected to pay 8.4% of the national public debt amounting to £111 billion of the current £1.32 trillion debt. However, the SNP say they won't honour the debt unless England agrees to a currency union, which itself is highly unlikely.

Dividing borders

No-one has yet proposed rebuilding Hadrian's Wall, but there have been some serious discussions concerning border controls.

Should Scotland join the EU, it would be forced to join up to Europe's Schengen agreement, which effectively abolishes internal borders. This would mean that anyone on the Continent could travel to Scotland unhindered.

The fear is that Scotland might create another easy entry point to England for thousands of economic migrants that currently mass in northern France [Daily Mail / Telegraph]

Such concerns have prompted the likes of Ed Miliband and others to intimate that a Yes referendum result could lead to policed border controls and passport checks between England and Scotland.

Indeed Scottish citizenship would require the issuing of Scottish passports. And then England and the rest of the UK could bar Scottish citizens from England, Wales and Northern Ireland until such times as Scotland's membership of the EU is ratified.

Other questions

These aren't the only challenges facing an independent Scotland. There are of course worries about the economy itself and how an independent Scotland will make money. There are debates over its future head of state. The Queen would likely stay as the Queen of Scotland, though Scots could invite the man regarded by some as James's legitimate heir, the 'Stuart Pretender', to replace the her. That would mean the present Duke of Bavaria becoming King Francis II of Scotland. However, Duke Franz claims to be perfectly content where he is.

Less of an issue for Scotland is what might become of the Union Flag. There has been much debate over this. Some have suggested that the flag might remain as it is, though a redesign is just as likely. The blue background might well be erased or even replaced with another colour [BBC].

Nothing is certain other than the debate over Scotland's future will continue well after the vote on September 18th.

Read more: Daily Mail /  / Guardian / BBC - Papers / Wikipedia /

tvnewswatch, London, UK

ISIL kill US journalist threaten death of Brit

Britain held an emergency COBRA meeting Wednesday after it emerged that a British citizen was amongst others held by the terror group Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant.

The news that a British man was being held emerged in a new video that was posted on the Internet and discovered by SITE, which monitors the Jihadist threat. The video showed the execution and beheading of US journalist Steven Sotloff, preceded by a statement from Sotloff criticizing American foreign policy. It seemed clear the Sotloff was acting under duress, forced to make propaganda statements for his captors before being murdered in the desert.

Censorship & redactions

The video does not show the actual killing, cutting to black as the knife is brought to Sotloff's throat, Though a subsequent shot appears showing his decapitated corpse. Its structure is similar to that of the Foley execution video which was released two weeks ago.

In both cases there has been censorship, redactions and self-censorship imposed by news organisations themselves, or requested by government departments.

No news organisation has shown the video in its entirety, which is perhaps understandable. However, many news organisations also resorted to only showing selected still shots. In addition, the British journalist shown at the end of the video, and threatened with execution, was not named by most British news organisations.

Some redactions and acts of censorship is understandable. There are questions of taste when it comes to broadcasting execution videos. However, the naming or not naming a British citizen is not such a clear cut decision. The man has been named by some US news organisations, however UK government officials put out a request that the media not name the individual concerned.

Reasons offered by official intimate that "coverage will increase the threat to their lives." Though such assertions have been questioned.

The lack of publicity is said to dissuade would-be hostage-takers from bothering to kidnap reporters or others. There is some logic to this. But a complete blackout is almost entirely impossible in the modern age where the spread of information through the Internet is less controllable [Daily Beast].

What's in a name

The very name of the terrorist organisation, labelled a major threat to the West, has also been the subject of debate. Initially news organizations called the group ISIS, or Islamic State of Iraq and Syria. But later the last two letters were dropped with much of the media calling the terror group IS or Islamic State.

Meanwhile the British and US government have decided to stick with ISIL or the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant.

Government have explained their decision saying that calling the terror group IS gives them legitimacy. Nonetheless, Sky News and the BBC have yet to drop the IS tag in favour of ISIL or ISIS. CNN and other US news outlets continue to use the acronym ISIS.

Some Arab media outlets and politicians have meanwhile started using the term Da'ish. It appears to have originated from posts by Syrian opposition activists and social media users.

Da'ish is not an Arabic word and the use of acronyms is not common in Arabic. Furthermore, the jihadist group objects to the term and has advised against its usage [BBC].

Meanwhile, the use of the acronym ISIS has upset a number a number of people who share their name with the terror group. Isis Martinez, an alternative medicine provider based in Miami, started a petition asking the media to call the Islamic State by the acronym ISIL rather than ISIS. The former acronym, while used by President Obama and considered acceptable by scholars and journalists for its technical merits, is far less common than the more understandable and recognizable acronym ISIS [Vox].

Isis is also the name of an ancient Egyptian goddess worshipped as the ideal mother and wife as well as the patroness of nature and magic. She was also the friend of slaves, sinners, artisans and the downtrodden, a far cry from the murderous group that is currently spreading terror in the Middle East.

Ongoing war

There are fears that the British man shown in the latest ISIL video may already be dead. Indeed, similarities in the Foley and Sotloff productions seem to point to the fact they may have been filmed at the same time.

Whether or not he is safe, there are believed to be many others held by ISIL whose lives hang in the balance. Unfortunately their chances are not good.

Rescue efforts have been launched and failed. New strategies will likely be planned. Speaking after Sotloff's murder, President Obama affirmed his objective to "degrade and destroy ISIL". However, both the US and Britain have yet to establish any clear strategy as to how they might tackle the ongoing jihadist threat.

Obama conceded that the mission to destroy ISIL was "not going to be a one week operation". That much is clear. It took more than a decade to significantly degrade al-Qaeda following the 9/11 attacks. Yet like the Hydra, its extremist ideology was not killed by striking off one head. Indeed ISIL has itself grown out of Tanzim Qaidat al-Jihad fi Bilad al-Rafidayn - more commonly known as Al-Qaeda in Iraq - formed by Abu Musab Al Zarqawi in 1999, which took part in the Iraqi insurgency against American-led forces and their Iraqi allies following the 2003 invasion of Iraq.

The irony is that al-Qaeda themselves have cut all ties with ISIL, reportedly for its brutality and "notorious intractability".

Media censorship, blackouts and redactions will do little to curtain ISIL's brutality. The public may be shielded from the horror, and families of those kidnapped may be protected from unnecessary grief. Politicians talk of cutting off the oxygen of publicity concerning such terror groups. Yet ignoring the severity of the problem and watering down the horror may only serve to soften the response to the threat.

tvnewswatch, London, UK

A bleak future of Islamophobia & Islamic extremism

The kidnapping and murder of American journalist James Foley has shocked many people around the world. The killing by Muslim extremists has also rekindled the debate concerning what the West should do to curb the growing tide of fundamentalism.

Whilst most academics and Muslim leaders say that the majority of Muslims are peaceful, there are a growing number of Muslims who are angry at Western foreign policy and exploit the Koran for their own purposes.

Religious interpretations

The interpretation of religious texts is often disputed, be it the Bible or Koran. Some words are taken literally, whilst others are softened or even ignored for convenience. Indeed the commandment "Thou shalt not kill" is not always observed even by Christian societies who take part in conflicts around the globe.

Hebrew texts make exceptions and allows for justified killing in the context of warfare, capital punishment, and self-defence.

The Koran too, makes clear its stand on killing. ""Do not take any human being's life which God has declared to be sacred other than in (the pursuit of) justice: this has He enjoined upon you so that you might use your reason." [Quran 6:151]

However, it comes down to interpretation and the twisting of words. Jews might seek justification in its texts that allows killing in times of war. Meanwhile Islamic extremists might suggest that their executions and murders are only carried out in the "pursuit of justice".

Whilst many Christians discard parts of the Bible, deeming certain sections to be incongruous with current times, some Muslims take the whole of the Koran very seriously.

Graven images & blasphemy

For example, the Bible states, within the Ten Commandments that one should not make a graven image or false idol. In Exodus 20:4-6 it says, "Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth. Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me."

There are similar tracts in the Koran too. But whilst most Christians no longer take no issue with images of Christ or even depictions of God, for Muslims their attitude is very different.

There are conflicting opinions whether Islam prohibits graven images. Not all Islamic traditions ban images of Mohammed. Indeed some are pretty lax about pictures of lesser figures. For Muslims, the rule against depicting God and the prophets comes from the Hadith, a collection of sayings and actions attributed to Mohammed.

A few years back a cartoonist in Denmark drew pictures depicting Mohammed and drew ire from both radical and moderate Muslims alike [tvnewswatch: Trouble flares over Mohammed cartoons].

But whilst some Muslims condemned the cartoonist only with words, others threatened both the artist and Denmark with violence [tvnewswatch: Denmark faces financial crisis in wake of cartoon row].

Extreme opinions

Years before 9/11, the Taliban destroyed massive Buddhist statues in Afghanistan. They were seen by the ruling Taliban as being false prophets - false idols that demanded their destruction. Indeed the Taliban's war on art was inspired by the Koran which is often interpreted as forbidding the portrayal of living things.

"Personally I agree with the destruction of the Buddhist statues," one Muslim tells tvnewswatch. This was no flippant remark. Kadeer, a man aged about 40 and living in Shanghai, spoke passionately concerning his beliefs.

As he sat sipping an espresso coffee, he spoke of how he supported the actions of the Mujahideen and justified their actions saying, "How many times must we be hit before we react?"

Like many 'extremists' he insisted that no-one in the Twin Towers were innocent and are all were guilty of propping up the imperialist machine that is America. It is up to the US and the enemies of Islam to call a truce first, Kadeer insisted.

In spite of such views he says that Muslims are nonetheless peaceful. "What does Salaam Alaikum mean?" he asks. "It means peace be upon you," he explains.

Speaking very animatedly and with conviction, Kadeer, a Jordanian now living in China for the last 14 years, says that his views are not of a small minority of Muslims.

"I'd say around 60% of Jordanians support the Mujahideen". Though this cannot be verified, it does give an indication of how much anger exists in the Middle East directed at the West concerning their perceived interference in foreign lands.

But he calls for change not just in the West, but everywhere. Leaders everywhere exploit their citizens and that needs to change before there's peace, Kadeer says.

Kadeer is just one man amongst many who are angry at the West. And while he seemed unlikely to launch terror attacks himself, his views expressed were certainly unnerving. But there are others who not only hold such views but willing to stage violent attacks.

Suspicions and divisions

In Britain there is a significant Muslim population and in recent days they have been become the focus of suspicion. There is a fear, especially amongst the predominantly white indigenous population, that all Muslims are a threat, despite claims to the contrary.

And reports that up to 500 British jihadists have left Britain to fight in Syria and Iraq only raise levels of distrust.

The likes of extremist groups such as Al Muhajiroun and protagonists such as Anjem Choudary, Abu Hamza and others don't help the cause of moderate Muslims who insist they are not a threat to Britain and its way of life.

Losing hearts & minds

An article published in the Independent on Sunday reported that Muslims were themselves to blame. "We share blame for creating jihad generation" a Muslim strategist claimed. a former senior Muslim Army officer suggested that many young Muslims in British inner cities had been left disenfranchised by society.

During the early throes of the War on Terror which began soon after 9/11, there was much talk of "winning the hearts and minds" of Muslims around the world.

That policy has largely failed, claims Afzal Amin, a former army officer and chairman of the Armed Forces Muslim Association. And he says there must be more efforts to "defeat the coherent message of international terrorists who've hijacked religion for their own ends".

Young British Muslims' disenfranchisement is exploited by radical Islamic groups who point to the faults of NATO and its allies. The torture and prisoner abuse at Abu Ghraib, the disproportionate number of civilians killed in Iraq and Afghanistan and the US backing of Israel has not helped.

Syria and Iraq have now become bases for the new 'al-Qaeda' while Britain has become a recruiting ground and outpost [Telegraph].

The West justifies its continued military action in Iraq and elsewhere saying groups like ISIS pose a threat to the region and western interests. Militants continue their 'jihad' saying that they are merely "seeking justice" for Western crimes against Muslims.

With no side willing to call a halt to hostilities, extremism is only likely to grow with each allied strike. Conversely, each terrorist attack, beheading or atrocity will only cement the resolve of the West in what seems like a never ending War on Terror.

Britain's Home Secretary has promised new laws to combat the rise of extremism [Telegraph]. However, such laws may do little to strike at the deep seated causes. Indeed the future may well be one of increased Islamophobia and Islamic extremism.

tvnewswatch, London, UK

China uses Foley murder, Ferguson riots as propaganda

Chinese media has capitalised on the murder of kidnapped journalist James Foley and the riots in Ferguson, Missouri as a propaganda tool.

Certain sections of the press in China have exploited the incidents to criticise US foreign policy and point a finger at the disquiet and ethnic divisions that exist in some parts of the United States.

On August 20th, soon after video  emerged showing Foley's execution by Islamic extremists in Iraq, Beijing-based finance magazine Caijing and Hong Kong-based Phoenix Media both published posts on their official Weibo accounts about the US journalist.

Half truths

"The American reporter beheaded by ISIS blamed the US government for the tragedy," Caijing's Weibo post began. It then quotes Foley as saying, "I call on my friends, family, and loved ones to rise up against my real killers: the US government," who ordered recent air strikes targeting ISIS.

Whilst Foley did utter these words, Caijing crucially neglected to point out that ISIS militants had forced him to read them aloud in front of the camera.

Phoenix Media's Weibo post followed in a similar vein and posted several photos of the execution including a partly censored photograph of Foley's body lying in the desert.

"US negligence"

The state-run Global Times, known for its nationalist editorials, took another tack, intimating on its Weibo account that Foley's death resulted from US government negligence towards its own citizens. The Global Times asked rhetorically on its official Weibo account, "No matter where you are, can you always rely on the U.S. military?" and followed with a nose-picking emoticon.

Public screenings

Meanwhile in Beijing a large TV was used to display footage of the execution interspersed with riots in America that followed the shooting dead of black teenager Michael Brown by a police officer. Edited into the video loop were clips of "happy families skipping in front of various Beijing landmarks" and "photographs of local school children holding handicrafts and helping old people."

"This type of juxtaposition is fairly common in China," says George of That's Beijing, adding that images of peace and prosperity in China are typically contrasted with clips of violence around the world, promoting the narrative that "chaos looms beyond our pleasant and safe borders."

According to another online source, the video was unlikely to be mandated by the state. Dr. Xu Wu, an associate professor at the Walter Cronkite School of Journalism, told Quartz that if the government had the intention to use foreign violence as propaganda, it wouldn't just be in Dongzhimen in Beijing. "You'd see it across China…everywhere," he said.

However, the screen in question often shows broadcasts from the state run channel CCTV. Furthermore there was an official looking logo shown on the bottom right of the screen, which we've as yet been unable to identify.

Anger from citizens

Whilst the state media may be trying to exploit troubles abroad, Chinese citizens were outraged both by the murder of Foley and some of the media reportage.

"Global Times, how despicable," wrote one user. "All day you use a magnifying glass to look for dirt on other people." Another user asked sarcastically, "I wonder what the Chinese government would do if you, Little Editor, were kidnapped."

Across Chinese social networks there were  expressions of horror at Foley's death and anger at the extremists who killed him. Many called his killers "monsters" or asked for a moment of silence for war correspondents. Some users posted pictures of lit candles on Weibo as others wished for peace in the Middle East.

Reports: Foreign Policy / IBT / YouTube

tvnewswatch, London, UK

Social media provides battle ground for terrorists

Social media is increasingly being exploited by terrorists to disseminate graphic videos, images and messages from around the world.

But the very size and automation of such networks is making it difficult for the companies concerned to control.

"Heart of their jihad"

"Social media is at the heart of their jihad," says Steven Stalinsky, executive director of the Middle East Media Research Institute. Indeed by posting a video showing the beheading of kidnapped journalist James Foley on YouTube the terror group achieved far greater publicity than it may have achieved should they have posted it on a jihadist website.

News of the beheading spread like wildfire across social media, with users viewing the video and sharing the link on other sites. Meanwhile the hash tag #JamesFoley almost immediately became a trending topic on Twitter.

Instilling fear

The posts are intended to instil fear, attract new recruits and raise money for such terror networks, and to some degree it is working. Groups like ISIS have received huge publicity and instilled fear amongst many Western populations and politicians alike. From reports it seems clear that many British Muslims have left to join these radical groups. It is believed that some 500 British jihadists are fighting in Iraq and Syria, with half that number coming from London alone.

And whether directly or indirectly through the use of such tools as Twitter, YouTube, Facebook and Skype, ISIS have built up a massive wealth estimated to be in the region of $1 billion.

Online battle

Curtailing the use of these social media platforms by terrorist groups is difficult. While YouTube, Twitter, Instagram and Facebook all have rules about what can be posted, it often requires users flagging up content before the companies can act.

Eileen Naughton, the new managing director of Google in the UK, explained that while the video concerned was "really troubling", YouTube, which is owned by Google, deals with a deluge of data every minute, making it very difficult to immediately remove content.

Indeed the video remained online throughout much of Tuesday 19th August before being taken down after being flagged for being in violation of YouTube policy concerning "violent and disgusting content". In a statement the company said that while it defended "everyone's right to express unpopular points of view," it draws the line on several subjects, including pornography and bomb making.

"Terrorist organizations have moved their online presence to YouTube, Twitter, Facebook, Instagram and other social media outlets," Gabriel Weimann, a University of Haifa professor, said in a recent report on terrorism and social media. "They have turned to the new media not only because counterterrorism agencies have disrupted their traditional online presence but also because the new media offers huge audiences and ease of use."

Breaking terror laws by watching

However, ordinary users of these social networks run the risk of being labelled a terrorist or breaking terror laws. Scotland Yard's Counter Terrorism Command, SO15, has said it will be investigating the video and has warned people against viewing the graphic footage themselves.

Meanwhile, a Metropolitan Police spokesperson said, "We would like to remind the public that viewing, downloading or disseminating extremist material within the UK may constitute an offence under Terrorism legislation."

Social media backlash

There have been some examples of self policing and citizens themselves reporting links. Twitter and Facebook users soon began posting pleas to not watch the content, calling it horrific, sickening and shameful. The hashtag #ISISMediaBlackout also became popular.

But last night it was clear that the battle lines were moving as jihadists began posting on Diaspora and JustPaste.it.

In the four-minute, 40-second video, posted on YouTube, James Foley kneels in the desert in an orange uniform as a masked man dressed in black stands beside him. Foley recites a statement calling the US government his "real killers" and disavowing his American citizenship before he is beheaded.

There was mixed opinion about whether one should watch the video, law breaking aside. Channel Four News reader Krishnan Guru-Murthy suggested that simply by watching one was giving ISIS the oxygen of  publicity and submitting to their intention of spreading fear.

"Spreading a video, or even watching it yourself and telling people about it, is simply doing exactly what IS and al-Qaeda want. It is, in effect, helping them," he argues.

However, he tended to skim over the fact that while most media did not show the video, by reporting its content they were still "telling people about it" and thus in Krishnan's own words "helping them".

The video may have been an attempt to stop Western aggression, but it will likely have the opposite effect. There is a danger however that anti-Islamic tensions may rise inflaming already volatile relations between Muslims and the general population in parts of Britain, Europe and the US

Reports: BBC / Channel 4 News / Guardian / Telegraph / IBT / Vice News / Emergency Management / Press TV / Guardian / NY Post / Register / Channel 4 News

tvnewswatch, London, UK

Good Samaritans hard to find in China

Five people have appeared in a Chinese court charged in connection with the beating to death of a woman in a McDonald's restaurant earlier this year.

The woman, 37-year-old Wu Shuoyan, is alleged to have been killed last May simply for refusing to hand over her phone number to cult members [Sky News / BBC / Telegraph / Guardian / Straits Times / Tomo News - YouTube / YouTube - viewer discretion advised]. But just as shocking as the woman's murder was that people in the restaurant stood watching rather than stepping in to help. In fact some even attempted to fim the incident on their mobile phones.

Outrage

The murder, filmed on CCTV and on mobile phones, sparked outrage across China. The incident also triggered much soul searching as many Chinese netizens questioned why no-one stepped in to help the woman as she was repeatedly hit with a broom handle [Shanghaiist / D Mail]. 

The fact that nobody stepped in to help is not unusual. Indeed there are countless examples where people have ignored people in distress or need of help.

Child left for dead

In October 2011 Chinese media and internet users voiced shock at a hit-and-run incident involving a two-year-old child who was left injured in the road as passers-by ignored her [BBC ]/ D Mail / YoutTube - viewer discretion advised / Wikipedia].

The girl was hit by a van in the city of Foshan in central Guangdong province. But instead of stopping to help the child, the driver sped off. For minutes the girl laid on the road as several pedestrians and vehicles passed the girl without stopping. Then another vehicle drove over her before a rubbish collector finally helped came to her aid. Sadly the girl died a few days later [BBC].

Those that passed by were described as shameful by one local shop keeper [BBC].   

Ignoring sex assaults

The same month a man sexual assaulted a woman in full view of passers-by. But instead of helping the woman members of the public in Tianlin Road in the Xuhui District of Shanghai stood and watched with some filming the spectacle on their mobile phones [Ministry of Tofu].

As regards such incidents described above there is a fear by some people of getting involved. In seeing a violent incident many people perhaps understandably fear for their own safety. But when it comes to seeing injured toddlers on the street, the psychology is a little more difficult to explain. Some might fear litigation and culpability. Indeed in road accidents few people are willing to come forward as a witness. There are also cases where good Samaritans have found themselves in trouble. In fact China is notorious for its poor treatment of good Samaritans. There have been incidents in China, such as the Peng Yu incident in 2006, where those who helped people injured were accused of having injured the victim themselves [China Daily / Bloomberg / Alvinology].

Hysteria

The fear of becoming involved has grown to almost hysterical levels. In early August Shanghai commuters fled in panic after a foreigner feinted on a subway train. As they did so there was a near stampede and several people were knocked over in the rush [WSJ / YouTube].

There have been similar occurrences in other cities too. In June, six passengers were injured when a passenger who had fallen ill and fainted created a panicked rush to vacate Meihuayuan Station in Guangzhou [Xinhua].

The same month, a fight Guomao station in Beijing resulted in another mass stampede causing some people to fall to the ground in the commotion.

Such panic and hysteria has prompted the state news agency to call for an emergency response [Xinhua]. However, it needs more than "crisis management education" and an understanding of what to do in an emergency. Some of the scenes reported at subway stations and shopping malls are a direct result of the heightened concern over a spate of terror attacks across the country.

Indeed a rumour that someone was "slashing people with a knife" at a shopping mall in Shenzhen City in May caused a panic resulting in 12 injuries.

Possible causes

There is an inbuilt psychology amongst many Chinese not to get involved in another person's business, be it a road accident, fight or injury. Some Chinese say that it could partly be explained by years of communism where people were expected to be subservient to the state. In order to avoid trouble, especially during the Cultural Revolution, people would keep themselves to themselves and keep their noses clean.

The younger generation is less affected by the past, but the big focus on money and success has created a society where people avoid any interaction with others unless it is required of them. Even in work, few question what is asked of them even if they have grievances in order to avoid trouble.

It has to be said that there are cases in the West where similar incidents happen [China Daily / NBC / China Smack]. However, in China it is becoming more commonplace, and good Samaritans are harder to find.

Some countries legally oblige people to help others in need of help, though there are cases where such laws are ignored [Wikipedia - Good Samaritan Law]. China has discussed the possible introduction of such a law but legislation has yet to be passed [China Daily]. However in August last year Shenzhen became the first region to introduce such laws on a local level [SCMP]. It remains to be seen whether legislation can change the deeply ingrained mindset of many Chinese people.


tvnewswatch, London, UK

Man arrested over Tilbury Docks container death

A man has been arrested on suspicion of manslaughter in connection with the death of a man found inside a shipping container in Essex on Saturday.

The 34-year-old man, from Limavady in County Londonderry, was arrested just after midday today [Monday 19th August] on the A1 at Banbridge on suspicion of manslaughter and facilitating illegal entry.

He is currently in the custody of the Police Service of Northern Ireland [PSNI] ahead of being returned to England for questioning by Essex Police.

Essex Police have now named the dead man as 40-years-old Meet Singh Kapoor. Initial post-mortem tests have proved so far been inconclusive. Thirty four survivors include 10 men, nine women and 15 children were also found in the container on Saturday. Their ages ranged from one to 72 years of age and are of Afghan Sikh origin.

They are all in the care of the Home Office after being questioned by police and are reported to be seeking asylum in the UK.

The group had arrived in the UK on Saturday on a ship from Belgium and were said by police to be victims of people trafficking. They were discovered after dock workers heard banging and screaming coming from one of the containers [Sky News / BBC].

tvnewswatch, London, UK

Murder probe after illegal immigrants found in Tilbury docks

A dead man was among 35 immigrants found in a container at Tilbury Docks early this morning [Saturday 16/08/2014] after "banging and screaming" alerted the crew.

"homicide" investigation

And now Essex police have launched a "homicide" investigation following the discovery.

The man was discovered with 34 sick children and adults hiding in a container on a P&O ferry. The Norstream, a Dutch registered cargo vessel, had departed Zeebrugge in Belgium at 21:44 on Friday [15th August] and arrived at Tilbury shortly after 05:00 on Saturday.

Dehydrated

Some of the immigrants, believed to be of Indian origin, were suffering from severe dehydration and hypothermia. Amongst the group were 7 children. Seven ambulances were sent to the scene and removed them to various local hospitals. Eighteen patients were taken to Basildon Hospital, nine to London Whitechapel Hospital and seven to Southend Hospital.

The roll-on roll-off ferry was carrying 64 containers, 72 trailers and five lorries and drivers and police spent much of the day checking that other containers did not harbour any other illegal immigrants.

Police were called to the scene after the people were discovered as the containers were being unloaded at 07:35 by Port of Tilbury authorities.

"People trafficking"

At a press conference on Saturday afternoon Superintendent Roe described those discovered in the container as victims of "people trafficking". He said they had been in the container a "significant amount of time" and that now police were working with international agencies to establish their movements prior to arriving in the UK.

South Basildon and East Thurrock MP Stephen Metcalfe described the incident as "tragic". Speaking to the BBC he said, "The fact that so many people appear to have travelled so far and are so desperate to get into the UK - either on their own or being trafficked is really very sad."

The Conservative MP said it was important "to get to the root causes of what is motivating people to go to such extreme lengths to travel from other parts of the world to get into the UK" and tackle people-trafficking.

[Sky News / BBC / Daily Mail / Mirror / Express / Telegraph / Guardian / Independent]

tvnewswatch, Tilbury, Essex

On demand TV opens up a brave new world

There is a revolution happening in the way that television content is consumed and commissioned.

No longer are viewers obliged to watch what broadcasters schedule. With more and more on demand services, and the facility to stream other content to the TV screen, viewing habits are rapidly changing.

But there may be a price to pay for this convenience and accessibility.

On demand

Companies like Amazon and Netflix now offer TV on demand services. Subscribers can choose from a wide range of films and given their broadband speed can cope, the content is streamed to their 42" TV in their living room.

Sky, in Britain, also offers similar services to its subscribers, enabling people to view programmes and films outside the normal schedule.

In the last year there's also been an upsurge in devices such as Chromecast, Roku and Apple TV which allow users to pull in content to less Smart televisions or those which don't have an Internet connection.

Users of Google's Chromecast can, for example, stream Netflix subscriber content, YouTube videos, programmes via BBC iPlayer or films purchased in Google Play.

Roku offers slightly more content, with Netflix, NOW TV, Sky Sports, ITV, Demand 4, BBC iPlayer and BBC Sport being just a few of its available services. Apple TV offers a similar service to both the above with iTunes video content replacing that of Google Play.

Whatever service or platform one opts for there are several things viewers will be tied to. With regards the Apple TV and Chromecast routes, users will be tying themselves into an ecosystem if they decide to 'buy' movies.

Growing content

There is a drawback with all such services and that is a feeling of information overload or an overwhelming choice.

Once upon a time British television consisted of only a single BBC channel, expanding later to two BBC channels and one commercial channel. By the 1980s Channel Four joined the list with Channel Five arriving by the late 1990s. For those prepared to pay extra, satellite and cable brought hundreds of channels to the small screen.

However, viewers might still find themselves missing their favourite programme or find that broadcast times did not fit into their schedule. Thus, with the advent of fast Internet connections, on demand services were born.

Targeting audiences

In the past, broadcasters could only guess the popularity of a certain programme through surveys and by providing a select group of people a box which would log a family's television habits.

Such information is useful to advertisers and those selling commercial slots. Advertisers are interested in targeting as many people as possible, and broadcasters are in the business of making as much money back from their programmes as possible in order to fund new productions.

With the advent of on demand TV there are big advantages for the consumer, advertiser and programme maker.

With every click, online services can log how users consume content. They can see what is watched, how much and when. Just as Google and other search companies target Internet users with tailored advertising, so too can the likes of Netflix, Amazon Instant Video, Google Play, Apple iTunes.

Privacy concerns

Within a few years it is likely that such companies will have a massive database of family viewing habits and interests.

This may be useful to the average individual as they are offered films and programmes which closely resemble their interests. Indeed such profiling already exists with Google Play, Amazon and other online trading stores offering suggestions and recommendations based on previous purchases or browsing habits.

These offerings sometimes fall wide off the mark, but this profiling will get better in time as companies refine their techniques in collecting and analysing user information. In fact in the future these companies may know you better than you know yourself!

There is a downside to all this tailored content, other than giving up our privacy. There was once a sense of community when there was only a choice of three of four channels. Conversations at work or down the pub might often revolve around a recently broadcast television programme.

Now, with hundreds of channels, DVDs, and on demand streaming television, the chances of a person having seen the same programme as you is dwindling fast.

In many households the news does not have the same importance it once did. In fact families will often only pick up a newspaper for the television schedule.

Television has long been blamed for killing the art of conversation as families sit in stoney silence watching the box for hours without saying anything to each other. The children's charity I CAN, in a 2007 survey, said the TV is affecting young children's ability to string a sentence together as parents increasingly spend more time watching TV and cleaning around the house than they do talking to their children [Daily Mail]. Of course it's not just the TV. The whole online, interconnected world we now live in - with Twitter, Facebook, WhatsApp, Google+ and others, is actually making people less social rather than socially connected.

Even if one can muster up the strength to drag oneself away from the TV, the topics of conversation down the local pub are dwindling fast. However, with nothing to discuss concerning a recent TV show or major news story, at least we British can fall back on our usual topic of discussion - the weather [BBC / Globe & Mail].

tvnewswatch, London, UK

Truth also a casualty as Gaza conflict continues

No single article can explain the complexities of the continuing Middle East conflict between Israel and Hamas, as well as other Palestinian groups in the region. Israel has been labelled as a child-killing monster and likened by some to the Nazi regime. Meanwhile Hamas and other extremist groups have been declared terrorist organisations.

Territorial claims

Both Palestinian and Israeli territorial claims stretch back many hundreds of years. Many look back only to the last 100 years to the Sykes-Picot Agreement and the Balfour Declaration which help establish and draw up the borders between Israel, Palestine, Gaza and other Middle Eastern states [BBC / Guardian].

However the history of the region is far more complex. What is now Gaza, the West Bank and Israel have been continually swallowed up by various empires for the last 3,000 years [Video - YouTube]. The Kingdom of Israel existed briefly after being a part of the Kingdom of Egypt but was later swallowed up by Assyrian, Babylonian, Persian and Macedonian empires. The territories were later consumed by the Roman, Byzantine and Sassanid Empires before becoming part of the Caliphate and later the Seljuk Empire.

Around 1,000 years ago parts of the region were invaded and occupied during the Christian Crusades. Then came the Saladin's Empire and the Ottoman Empire before European Colonialism begun to shape the nation states that currently exist.

Thus depending upon which part of history one points to Israel and Palestinian territories have different claims to legitimacy.

Growing militancy

With regards to border agreements and UN declarations applied in the last century Israel may well be on occupied land. Their blockades of Gaza have certainly kept the people of Gaza in an almost stateless limbo. The inhabitants of the Gaza strip are unable to trade like a normal country nor can they easily travel.

But as Palestinians claims have intensified, so have their methods become more extreme. Hamas and Al-Aqsa Martyrs' Brigades have continued to launch terror attacks against Israel. While the Al-Aqsa Martyr's Brigade seeks to drive the Israeli military and settlers from the West Bank and other Palestinian territories, Hamas's goal is the complete destruction of Israel.

Israel maintains the blockade which it says is necessary to limit Palestinian rocket attacks from the Gaza Strip on its cities and to prevent Hamas from obtaining weapons. But the consequence is that the population has problems obtaining food, medical supplies and other commodities.

Kidnappings and retaliation

Israel has found it galling to negotiate with a named terror group whose stated aim is the destruction of Israel. The continued stand-off has precipitated attacks on Israel and the kidnapping and murder of Israeli civilians [Wikipedia].

Hamas denied involvement in the kidnappings, but Israel angered at renewed attacks begun an assault in order to degrade the terror organisation's military capabilities.

The operations by the Israeli Defense Force has resulted in many deaths. But as in any war, truth has also become a casualty.

Propaganda War

Israel's propaganda machine has certainly been in overdrive, pointing to the fact that thousand of rockets that Hamas has fired towards Israel. Israel asserts that without its defensive infrastructure known as the Iron Dome these rockets could have killed many hundreds of civilians.

On the other side it is claimed that hundreds of women and children have been killed by indiscriminate missile attacks by Israeli forces on schools and hospitals. However the truth on the ground is very different from what is shown on television screens.

Writing in Monday's Times Melanie Phillips says that the outside world is not getting the full picture. While she concedes that civilian population in Gaza is suffering, the pictures shown on television give a distorted image of what is really happening

Viewers' "emotions are being manipulated," Phillips writes. "They are not being shown how Hamas is using its own people as human shields and sacrifices."

According to the British journalist Hamas has failed to build shelters and forces civilians to use UN schools, whilst at the same time ordering Gazans to ignore Israeli warnings to flee their houses and stay put under bombardment.

Meanwhile declassified Israeli aerial pictures clearly show Hamas rocket launchers situated and being fired near mosques, schools and playgrounds [YouTube]. Furthermore Hamas rockets have been found stashed in three UN-run schools.

Shifa hospital has reportedly been used as a Hamas command centre, but such details are often excluded from news reports. Indeed journalists reporting from Gaza work under an implicit threat.

One Spanish journalist described the difficulties of reporting and why there are no pictures of Hamas firing from hospitals. "It's very simple, we did see Hamas people there launching rockets, they were close to our hotel, but if ever we dared pointing our camera on them they would simply shoot at us and kill us." [elderofziyon / Facebook / CBN / The Blaze]

Death toll

More than 1,300 Gazans have died in the conflict. However, Al Jazeera reports that most of those killed in Gaza are young men of fighting age, not women, children or old people. However Hamas dictates anyone talking to the media must describe all Gaza casualties as "innocent civilians" and ensure "there is no evidence of rockets being fired from Gaza population centres" [Algemeiner / Al Jazeera - list of dead / Al Jazeera].

There is also virtually no reporting of Gazan casualties caused by Hamas's own rockets falling short, Phillips observes.

It may well be that Israel is guilty of war crimes of which it is accused. But Hamas too could could be just as complicit of creating the conditions which result in civilian deaths.

Never ending cycle

The latest war between Israel and Hamas will likely come to an end. Gazans will pick up the pieces and rebuild their homes. Israel will relax a little following the degrading of the Hamas war machine. But in time Hamas will regroup, weapons will be smuggled in and new tunnels will be dug.

For another conflict to be averted there all sides need to sit down. Hamas need to moderate in their stance against Israel. Israel too needs to offer concessions to the people of Gaza in return for a halt of hostilities. When neither side is willing to negotiate there is little chance for a lasting peace [Guardian].


tvnewswatch, London, UK