Vanity versus principle
by Jura Watchmaker, 13 March 2008
For some strange reason that I cannot explain right now, I’ve just had a quick peek at Oliver Kamm’s blog. There I learn that that our favourite “left-wing” conservative will this very evening be debating with Tony Benn about the “achievements of the peace movement”.
All very predictable that, and no doubt as dull as ditchwater. But what’s really interesting is that Press TV is hosting the debate. Yes, that’s right, I refer to the Iranian employer of Sister Yvonne Ridley, and a broadcaster that once offered me a screen test (which I declined).
Kamm justifies his appearance on the Mullah-Lite programme, saying:
“So far as I’m aware [sic], nothing I say on these programmes is edited, so I’m glad to take part.”
Lovely jubbly.
Only yesterday did I read that dissident Iranian MP Noureddine Pir Mouazen has been accused of treason by the country’s Intelligence Minister, Gholam Hossein Mohseni Ejeie. This is for appearing on the Persian-language service of the US government-funded Voice of America, when Iranian law forbids public officials from conducting interviews with foreign radio and television.
So what comes first for Komrade Kamm – principled solidarity with pro-democracy Iranians, or yet another opportunity for him to appear as a talking head on the telly? I think we should be told.
Much as I would like to illustrate this post with side-by-side pictures of Kamm and Ridley – for rhetorical as well as comic effect – Kamm would probably sue me.
Thursday 13 March 2008 at 16:19
are you … accusing Kamm of treason?
Thursday 13 March 2008 at 17:25
Would you rather have Tony Benn and Yvonne Ridley hold forth unchallenged and on their own?
Thursday 13 March 2008 at 17:41
Sandbasher - are you seriously suggesting that just because an Islamist propaganda outfit decides to discuss a particular issue and invites a known nutter to present his case, that others who disagree with said nutter should accept an invitation to present a different viewpoint?
Press TV is not a legitimate forum for debate when the state that funds and controls this propaganda outfit forbids its own MPs from speaking with foreign media organisations.
Thursday 13 March 2008 at 17:51
Would you rather have Tony Benn and Yvonne Ridley hold forth unchallenged and on their own?
On a propaganda channel for the Iranian theocratic regime? Spreading ‘anti-state’ sentiment is a criminal offense in Iran, so I doubt that any of Kamm’s fire will make it through. How sensible to give the channel a little more legitimacy.
Mouazen is far from the only Iranian recently prosecuted by the regime for speaking to the wrong press organisation:
http://www.nysun.com/article/72382
Thursday 13 March 2008 at 19:37
Here’s someone who’s giving the Iranian Regime their money’s worth.
Galloway,the receiver of Press TV cash for a weekly show,brands executed boyfriend of gay Iranian refugee guilty of “sex crimes against young men”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ou1es7fNTpk
Thursday 13 March 2008 at 21:09
‘Sandbasher - are you seriously suggesting that just because an Islamist propaganda outfit decides to discuss a particular issue and invites a known nutter to present his case, that others who disagree with said nutter should accept an invitation to present a different viewpoint?’
Well, yes of course they should. If the only Brits who appear on Press TV are idiots like Benn and scumbags like Galloway, then English-speaking Iranians (who are, after all, the only people who are likely to tune in) are going to get a completely distorted image of what British politics and society is like.
Surely the whole point about fighting a war of ideas against the Iranian theocrats is that you don’t just defend your turf (e.g. the BBC and the UK media), you fight them and challenge them on theirs.
JM, if you (for example) had the opportunity to go on Press TV to rip into Ridley about Iran’s vile human rights record (the persecution of minorities, the execution of gays and underage girls, the blatant misogyny of the ruling regime) and the huge gulf between the aspirations of the ruled and the rhetoric of Ahmadinejad, are you telling me you wouldn’t take it?
Thursday 13 March 2008 at 21:28
Sandbasher - I would no more go on Press TV than I would appear in a public debate organised by the BNP or the Furedi cult. And in any case there is no way that Press TV would allow anyone to “rip into” Ridley or anyone else on that channel about Iran’s vile human rights record.
Anyone who accepts an invitation from Press TV is being extremely naïve.
In the present case Press TV is attempting to gain legitimacy by focusing on a particular aspect of British political history, thereby making it seem like the broadcaster is a legitimate media organisation. However, it is not not like al-Jazeera, which at least has a degree of independence from Arab governments, even if it adopts some very dodgy editorial positions.
Any legitimate journalist dealing with Press TV would be in contravention of their professional code of conduct. Yvonne Ridley ceased being a journalist a long time ago.
Who is this “JM”?
Thursday 13 March 2008 at 22:28
Who is this “JM”?
Sorry, that should have been ‘JW’. A second apology from me - I’m making it a bit of a habit.
I accept your points, and I have no illusions as to what the Iranian regime is like. After all, for six months of my life I could have been blown up by a bomb - courtesy of the Pasdaran or MOIS. I have no time for them whatsoever.
However, if Kamm goes on Press TV, two things could happen. If he is edited and his comments distorted, and if that shill Ridley skews the debate against him, we’ll know all about it, because he’ll put it on his blog.
But if (and I admit it’s a big ‘if’) he gets to say his piece without interruption or distortion, and if he can blow a hole in Tehran’s propaganda claims, then again that’s a win.
I don’t go for ‘No platform’ with anyone - be it the BNP, the Iranians, 9/11 wierdos or any other bunch of scumbags. If they get a free pass, they can lie at will. That’s how I see it.
Thursday 13 March 2008 at 22:41
Sandbasher - this is not a “no platform” issue, but one that concerns the potential compromising of moral integrity. Not just because Press TV is nowt but a propaganda organ, but also owing to the specific charge of hypocrisy outlined above.
If the Iranians won’t let their own people speak with western media, yet they come asking for contributions from political commentators over here, then they should be told in no uncertain terms to shove it.
Free pass? By that token we should engage with all the troofers and conspiracy nuts out there. No, some people are best left ignored. Life’s too short, and there is much to do that is far more worthwhile.
Debates can be had between people with widely differing views, but they must be moral equals.
Friday 14 March 2008 at 13:18
Something from Al Jazeera here worth a watch
http://www.memritv.org/clip/en/1704.htm
Shorter Utubed version here:
Friday 14 March 2008 at 13:42
Perhaps I need to qualify my reference to “moral equals”, as I certainly do not regard Tal’at Rmeih as the moral equal of Wafa Sultan in the above al-Jazeera debate.
But at least Tal’at Rmeih was prepared to engage in reasonably civilised debate with this uppity apostate. And al-Jazeera are prepared to broadcast such debates, and give airtime to those fundamentally opposed to Islamism.
The difference between al-Jazeera and Press TV is that the latter has at least some independence from the Arab regimes that support the broadcaster.
BTW, I learn that the corner-cutting and ethically-challenged toerag Andrew Gilligan chaired the Press TV debate between Tony Benn and Oliver Kamm. Ho hum…