I got a remarkable amount of normative disagreement in this post, given that my comment was entirely positive in nature. Few of you that claimed to disagree with me actually engaged with my point. So I'll ask:
1) Do you disagree with my (non-normative) prediction that if the Gaza appeal were to be shown on the BBC then Israeli sympathisers would organise an appeal for those that are threatened by missile attacked in southern Israel? (Not - do you think that such an appeal ought to be organised. Do you think such an appeal would be organised?) I suspect most of you agree with me on this.
2) Do you disagree that the BBC would find it difficult not to agree to air such an appeal if it had already aired the Gaza appeal? (Not, ought the BBC to find this difficult; not would it be fair that the BBC found this difficult. Would it find it difficult?) I suspect that almost all of you agree with me on this.
3) Do you believe that the BBC would be able, politically, to resist airing such an appeal if it had previously shown the DEC appeal? (Not, would you side with the BBC. Would it, in practice, be able to resist doing this?) I suspect that quite a few of you think the BBC would be able to resist this. This really should have been the main point debated on the other thread, not the stuff that was, in fact, debated.
4) Finally I ask, does any of you dispute that once the southern Israeli appeal were aired, the pressure for West Bank appeals and suicide bomber victim appeals and Southern Lebanon appeals and so on would be irresistable? My guess is that you all agree with me.
So, whether I was right or not comes down to number 3. That's the one on which I'm interested in hearing counter-arguments.
