| Submit your comments on this article | ||
| Israel-Palestine-Jordan | ||
| BBC's Johnston fitted with explosive vest to prevent 'rescue' | ||
| 2007-06-25 | ||
The BBC said it was aware of the video and appealed for Mr Johnston's release. BBC statement: In a statement, the corporation said: "It is very distressing for Alan's family and colleagues to see him being threatened in this way. We ask those holding Alan to avoid him being harmed by releasing him immediately. We are keeping his family fully informed and offering them our continued support." Johnston's family's statement: Mr Johnston's father, Graham, said: "My family and I are obviously most concerned and distressed at this latest development. "Our thoughts, of course, are with Alan in his present predicament. We earnestly request his abductors to release Alan, unharmed in any way." Jonston's own [coerced] statement: In the tape, posted on a website used by militants, Mr Johnston is seen wearing a device around his torso and attached to shoulder straps. "The situation now is very serious. As you can see I have been dressed in what is an explosive belt, which the kidnappers say will be detonated if there was any attempt to storm this area," he says. Mr Johnston appeals for a peaceful resolution to his situation, saying talks had reached an advanced stage. Captors tell me that very promising negotiations were ruined when the Hamas movement and the British government decided to press for a military solution to this kidnapping." Hamas' statement: Earlier, Hamas leader Ismail Haniya said Mr Johnston's captivity could not carry on. "We will not allow the continuation of the abduction of the British journalist. The issue of Alan Johnston must end," he said in a speech to his supporters. The FO statement: The British Foreign Office said it deplored such footage of Alan Johnston. "We condemn the continued release of videos like this which can only add to the distress of Alan Johnston's family and friends," a spokeswoman said. "They have not seen Alan for over 14 weeks. Those holding Alan should release him."
The Army of Islam has demanded the release of Abu Qatada, a Palestinian-born Islamic cleric who is suspected of having close links with al-Qaeda and is held by the UK government as a threat to national security. | ||
| Posted by:Seafarious |
| #24 I have long since given up caring what happened to a BBC reporter, no matter who or what they are. |
| Posted by: Old Patriot 2007-06-25 15:59 |
| #23 There is a case for saying (repeat a case) that the party with most to gain from Alan Johnston's permanent disappearance was Israel. It would not be the first time that Israeli agents had dressed as Arabs to make a hit. This is total anti-Semetic filth. If Israel has already whacked Johnston, I doubt Hamas and the Dughmush clan would be going through all these backflips over a rotting corpse. To review: On Count One, Alan was not only the BBC's man, he was the only permanent foreign correspondent in Gaza. He was, in short, the best and most informed provider of news about the Palestinian side of the story; a story which, in many of its details, is an embarrassment to Israel and those governments, most notably the Bush and Blair regimes, which support Israel's efforts to break the will of the Palestinians to continue their struggle for an acceptable minimum of justice. From the BBC's anti-Semetic tone, it sounds as if this world will be a lot better off if Johnston falls down and goes boom. He sounds like a prime enabler of terrorist Palestinian scum. |
| Posted by: Zenster 2007-06-25 15:00 |
| #22 And then there's this guy... By Alan Hart At a public meeting in London on Wednesday 11 April, I was asked for my thoughts (as a former ITN and BBC Panorama correspondent) about Alan Johnston's "disappearance" in Gaza. I said that I feared he could be dead, and that if he was, he might well have been shot in the head within minutes of being taken more than a month ago. If Alan is dead, the truth about who killed him might be in accordance with the claim of the Tawhid al Jihad Brigades group that it was responsible; but it also might not be (repeat might not be). The group which claimed responsibility in a fax to news agencies on 17 April is an Al Qaeda franchise (driven by events in Iraq), and was unknown in the Palestinian territories; and what can be said for certain is that the Palestinians were the party with absolutely nothing to gain and much to lose from Alan's permanent removal from the scene. And they had much to lose on two counts. On Count One, Alan was not only the BBC's man, he was the only permanent foreign correspondent in Gaza. He was, in short, the best and most informed provider of news about the Palestinian side of the story; a story which, in many of its details, is an embarrassment to Israel and those governments, most notably the Bush and Blair regimes, which support Israel's efforts to break the will of the Palestinians to continue their struggle for an acceptable minimum of justice. On Count Two, and if he has been murdered, Alan's death, if it could be blamed on a Palestinian or a pro-Palestinian Arab and/or other Islamist group, would be a huge political setback for the legitimacy of the Palestinian struggle and the present leadership of it. (The Al Qaeda franchise would not give a damn about harming the Palestinian cause). There is a case for saying (repeat a case) that the party with most to gain from Alan Johnston's permanent disappearance was Israel. It would not be the first time that Israeli agents had dressed as Arabs to make a hit. If Alan Johnston is dead, it's my hope that the BBC at executive management level will rise above its fear of offending Zionism too much and allow its reporters (Frank Gardner and Jeremy Bowen are second to none) to make a full, thorough and honest investigation. Oh, don't worry, Alan. I'm sure the BBC will get by that Zionist bias of there's and get to the bottom of it... |
| Posted by: tu3031 2007-06-25 13:58 |
| #21 That *would* be an intriguing headline indeed. |
| Posted by: Seafarious 2007-06-25 13:38 |
| #20 Here is an interesting possible future headline: "BBC suicide bomber kills dozens of Hamas members." |
| Posted by: mhw 2007-06-25 12:28 |
| #19 In my case it is missing the modicum of sympathy, implied or otherwise. No harm, no foul, twobyfour. PATHETIC 1. Arousing or capable of arousing sympathetic sadness and compassion 2. Arousing or capable of arousing scornful pity. I suppose we're going with the "scornful pity" end of things. However, while the whole affair is pitiful, I really don't feel any pity for those involved. |
| Posted by: Zenster 2007-06-25 11:44 |
| #18 Don't tease me that way, Excalibur! |
| Posted by: Bobby 2007-06-25 09:29 |
| #17 Gordo Brown's first act as PM should be to effect a rescue mission as rapidly as possible. If that means the rescue doesn't quite work, but the belt does, well, so much the better. |
| Posted by: Nimble Spemble 2007-06-25 09:29 |
| #16 We shoot threaten to retaliate by blowing up the BBC is Alan Johnston is harmed in any way. |
| Posted by: Excalibur 2007-06-25 09:17 |
| #15 Well, no matter what it is, I doubt it's turning out the way Al thought it would... |
| Posted by: tu3031 2007-06-25 09:03 |
| #14 What? No decap video? |
| Posted by: gromgoru 2007-06-25 06:58 |
| #13 Zen, maybe we both associate a somewhat different meaning with pathetic. In my case it is missing the modicum of sympathy, implied or otherwise. |
| Posted by: twobyfour 2007-06-25 03:46 |
| #12 I think this is all just kabuki and hence I can't bring myself to find it hilarious. Then where is it at all "pathetic"? If this is merely charades on both parts, Johnston and Fatah alike, then all that is called for is outrage. Pathetic implies a modicum of due sympathy. There is nothing of the sort merited from what I can tell. |
| Posted by: Zenster 2007-06-25 03:37 |
| #11 From the tone of their coverage it seems like most BBC reporters wish they could strap on a bomb vest. |
| Posted by: Glinesh Henbane7862 2007-06-25 03:22 |
| #10 Can see your point. But I think this is all just kabuki and hence I can't bring myself to find it hilarious. |
| Posted by: twobyfour 2007-06-25 03:08 |
| #9 I'd not say it is hilarious Whenever a self-aggrandizing opportunistic pro-Muslim |
| Posted by: Zenster 2007-06-25 03:00 |
| #8 Right, Johnston, not Johnson. Mea culpa, mea maxima culpa. ;-) I'd not say it is hilarious, but there is a great deal of irony in there. Pathetic, yewbetcha. |
| Posted by: twobyfour 2007-06-25 02:15 |
| #7 This is amazing, both my "Pathetic" and "Hilarious" meters are pegging at the same time. As always with such an anomaly, I'm going for the "Hilarious" option and laughing myself silly. If only to prevent such a stupid git from profiting through his role in this theater of the absurd, I'm hoping Johnston gets to test drive his vest. Let's see just what sort of gloriously lucrative narration he can write about it afterwards. This turd went after a sensational and obviously pro-Palestinian story and needs to get one helluva a lot more than he bargained for. |
| Posted by: Zenster 2007-06-25 02:03 |
| #6 Dunno, something is not right in this story. My bullshit meter pegged a bit. Here is my take: 1. Johnson did agreee to make a Paliwood production piece with his friends, and make a cut on the proceeds. 2. Hamas takeover created an unanticipated problem. They would use the situation for their own ends and that brings a degree of danger as Hamas can't accept any other group with a smidget of influence or power. 3. Johnson and his friends have no choice but to up the ante a tad, as the status quo was not in their favor. Not that it decreased the danger, but at least there is a shift of focus. 4. If AOI 'releases' Johnson, the next thing that happens is that Hamass will hand their ass to them. If they don't, Hamas may still get in and kill all of them including Johnson (as a collateral). 5. AOI may try to get some sort of deal, where they leave Gaza to save their behinds and get some relocation startup cash and when they are safe, they would hand Johnson to Hamas which would then turn Hamas propaganda machine into high gear. 6. In any case, Hamas is the winner, no matter whether Johnson ends up dead or not. |
| Posted by: twobyfour 2007-06-25 01:23 |
| #5 Obviously the only answer to the 'Belt' threat, is to put Abu Qatada in a bomb belt, and release a counter suggestion that he will splode if Alan Johnston splodes, then proceed with the rescue plans! "Tit For Tats" work great, Russia, China and Iran will vouch for that! |
| Posted by: smn 2007-06-25 00:49 |
| #4 It is sad by Geraldo Rivera probably makig inquiries about whether he can arranged to be held in Gaza. If he works a deal, he will demand the vest treatment. |
| Posted by: Super Hose 2007-06-25 00:16 |
| #3 Hang him with Chemical Ali. |
| Posted by: Seafarious 2007-06-25 00:15 |
| #2 Release him on the Great Barrier Reef at night after a rub down with the contents of a can of Starkist. |
| Posted by: Super Hose 2007-06-25 00:12 |
| #1 Solution move Abu Qatada into a shared exercise area like that cannibal was in Wisconsin's fine jail. |
| Posted by: 3dc 2007-06-25 00:05 |