Headline Story

2 Arabs arrested for the double murder of the Palmers.

Israel arrests Palestinian suspects in settler deaths.

Compare these two headlines for a minute. Did you learn English grammar? If so, draw on the clause analysis that you might have come across once upon a time. I never did, so forgive me if I’ve got it wrong, but in headline number one, I’d say: “2 Arabs arrested ” is the focus of the sentence, while “the Palmers” are subordinate and “double murder” is the nitty gritty. In other words the story is about an arrest.

In number two, “Israel” is now the subject, “Palestinian suspects” are the object, and “settler deaths” are a mysterious coincidental contemporaneous occurrence. The story has turned into a slightly different one, which has a vaguely critical inference regarding Israel.

Okay, I’m not a language expert, but although they say roughly the same thing, each headline imparts a very different message. I hope you’ll see that the second headline is the BBC’s.
Israel arrests”, is a somewhat aggressive opening gambit, phrased in the active form. “Palestinian suspects” sheds doubt on their guilt, while “in settler” a dehumanising and intentionally denigrating term for the victims, and “deaths” – passive, downplaying the act of murder.

Headline number one is a straightforward presentation of the facts.
2 Arabs arrested for the double murder of the Palmers is what happened. Elder of Ziyon includes the names of the victims, tells us where and when things happened and puts in enough detail to inform the reader. He tells us the facts and only indulges in one emotive but apposite comment at the end:
Indeed, no Palestinian Arab official has condemned the murders.

On the other hand, I’m afraid the BBC continues their agenda-fuelled theme throughout. The act which caused the victims’ deaths is described in a passive form “the car crashed”. They omitted to mention that the stone was hurled from a moving car, or that the police are looking into more possible stone-throwing offences by the same two. Early in the BBC’s report they bring in another story; so predictable, yet so unnecessary. You knew it, it’s the one about the mosque. An arson attack on a building is obviously regarded by the BBC as comparable to the murder of Asher and Yonatan Palmer.
Strongly emphasised is: “the words “revenge”, “price tag” and “Palmer”[….]written in Hebrew on the mosque walls”, and where the report is light on the details of the Palmers’ murders, it provides the whys and wherefores of the Mosque attack, and brings in other “price tag” attacks for good measure. Also included, something that has become a permanent attachment to anything connected with Israel, “The settlements are illegal under international law,” So that’s why they must always refer to the victims as settlers, rather than human beings. And, it’s factually unreliable too. “though Israel disputes this.” They would!

Their presence is a major obstacle to peace talks as the Palestinians insist Israel freeze settlement building before renewing negotiations.
This dodgy factoid has also crept in for no discernible reason, other than that it has become de rigueur. But hang on. What are they on about? They might as well come right out and admit that the Palestinians’ rejectionism is a major obstacle to peace, the only obstacle in fact, talks or no talks.
If the Palestinians insisted that the world’s a balloon before renewing negotiations, it wouldn’t make one jot of difference.
Negotiations no longer apply. There’s been a unilateral bid for statehood, remember, something which, should it succeed, would override the mythical, let’s-pretend negotiations. The Oslo Discords, the peace process, the talks, the table, the preconditions – all overridden and tossed into the dustbin of a peace process that the Palestinians never wanted in the first place, no matter how much the BBC and the international community disputes this.


Bookmark the permalink.

21 Responses to Headline Story

  1. ltwf1964 says:

    this shower genuinely make me want to puke

    The settlements are illegal under international law,”

    this drone like mantra is a payoff to al jazeera for al beeb allowing them to be taken up the jacksy by the arabs-something which will give a stiffy to one beeboid sock puppet clown I could mention 😉

    the headline is subtle-i’ll give them that-but the great unwashed will no doubt be taken in by the subliminal subtlelty to increase the ire against all things Israeli

    I know I’ve said it before,but there’s a good wall and a few posts lined up somewhere badly going to waste

    and the scum expect me to subsidise them?

    dream on al beeb and stand by for more cuts-in this case I definitely hope the first cut is neither the last nor the deepest

       0 likes

    • Teddy Bear says:

      Posted this on the other related topic about this article.
      Just noticed an interesting inclusion on the BBC Arabic version of this story, as compared to the English.  
      I’m sure we’re all used to the BBC statement that goes into every article related to Israel and the
      West Bank wherein:  
       The settlements are illegal under international law, though Israel disputes this.Their presence is a major obstacle to peace talks as the Palestinians insist Israel freeze settlement building before renewing negotiations.  
       
      In the Arabic version however – as translated by Google, the BBC goes on to elaborate a bit further:  
       .
      ..committed by militants believed to be the Jews against the Palestinians in an attempt to dissuade the Israeli government for closure of West Bank settlements.  
       And those settlements are illegal in the eyes of international law, but Israel disputes this claiming it expands naturally in the housing projects to meet the increase in the number of its citizens.  
       The presence of settlements a thorny obstacle to the peace talks between Israel and the Palestinians, who insist on the cessation of settlement activity before the resumption of negotiation  
      Now they might have gone to also say that ‘Israel, in the absence of any compromises for peace by the Palestinians to achieve a final border status, doesn’t see why it has to recognise one following the capture of territory in a defensive war.  
       But then, that’s too close to the truth for the BBC. Best leave the British public in the bliss that is ignorance.    

         0 likes

  2. TooTrue says:

    The World Service trumpeted that mosque attack on every newscast on the hour and half hour for ages. It was like a major world event to the BBC. I don’t believe I have ever heard them giving an attack on a synagogue or the desecration of Jewish cemeteries the same exposure.

    I don’t believe I heard anythng at all on the World Service about the brutal attack on Asher Palmer and his son. To describe a tiny infant as a “settler” is despicable.

    I guess for the BBC there are no innocent Jews living over the green line. The BBC has a long history with the “settler” description. It’s apparently mandatory to use it.

    “Police in Israel have announced the arrest of two West Bank Palestinians accused of killing two Israeli settlers by throwing stones at their car.

    “The car driven by Asher Palmer and carrying is his infant son crashed near Hebron last month.”

    I note how ridiculous that second sentence makes the first sentence sound.

       0 likes

  3. Henry Wood says:

    Apart from comparing the two headlines, it is very well worth comparing the front pages of the two websites:

    The one that publishes the truth: No ifs, no buts, no maybes, has to rely on a PayPal Donate button in order to survive.

    Where is the PayPal Donate button on the BBC site? They do not need one because the BBC Poll Tax collection scheme is in full swing. The billions are constantly and never-endingly rolling in to finance this left wing, socialist propaganda machine. Unfortunately mine is due at the end of October and I have just had a reminder from John Humphrey’s tax collectors. I shall pay, because I do occasionally turn on the TV but this year I think I must pay late. Let me have a few “reminders”, they must at least cost postage? I feel it is bounden upon me to be seriously late, let’s wait until the happy chappies are knocking on the door! Oh, how I hate the BBC!

    I shall also ignore their platitudes advising me to take out a Direct Debit in their favour and will continue to pay using my Tesco credit card. Nothing saved for me by doing this, but I suspect it costs them a few coppers, just as my requesting a “paper licence” will cost them. (I also use my Tesco card for the Council Tax – it’s nice to get a few Tesco points from the BBC and my local council: “Every little helps!”)

       0 likes

  4. TooTrue says:

    The Guardian has a particularly despicable article on Israel, nicely timed for both the Jewish Sabbath and the holiest day in the Jewish calendar:

    “Sleep easy, war criminals”

    Britain’s insulting new rules on arrest warrants will only encourage Israel’s view of itself as above international law”

    It’s written by a Michael Mansfield. They really do come crawling out of the woodwork at the strangest times. I’m sure he’s really proud of this bit on the Palestinian doctor whose daughters were killed during Operation Cast Lead:

    “There could be no question that this admired physician was associated with Hamas or terrorism, or even a hostile thought. Only two possibilities make sense: a deliberate attack, or an indiscriminate one that did not afford proper protection for civilians.”

    Right, so there’s a distinct possibility that those evil Jews were rubbing their hands together and deciding that the doctor’s daughters were a prime target.

    That’s skating close to anti-Semitism, not simply an anti-Israel rant.

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/oct/07/israel-tzipi-livni?commentpage=last#end-of-comments

       0 likes

    • sue says:

      That article is really bad, but encouragingly, the comments seem surprisingly critical of it. I haven’t trawled through them all though.

         0 likes

      • TooTrue says:

        Yes, it’s sort of evenly balanced between anti-Israel and pro-Israel comments.

        If you come across somebody called ‘TrueToo’ grinding his teeth that’ll be me.

           0 likes

    • ltwf1964 says:

      I’m assumimng this is Michael Mansfield QC

      lover of trendy left wing “causes”,and major beneficiary of the yoomin rites industry cash cow machine

      allegedly 😉

         0 likes

      • Henry Wood says:

        I retch when I hear the wretch’s name. A thorough out-and-out legal scoundrel.

        As a gentleman called Shakespeare once had one of his cast members state in one of his plays as to how the world could be instantly improved by change:

        “First, let’s kill all the lawyers!”

        Would *anyone* object to this?

           0 likes

        • Grant says:

          Yes, Mansfield is one of the most revolting of all the human rights parasites. Pure vermin. 

             0 likes

  5. David Tiffany says:

    When people disregard the Scriptures, it’s easy for them to regard the Jews as “settlers.”  But when the Scriptures are taken seriously as being the Word of God, then we see that Israel is the land that God, who created the heavens and the earth, and to whom all things belong, has given to the Jews as an everlasting inheritance.  The Jews are not “occupiers” or “settlers.”  This is their homeland.  http://483years.blogspot.com/

       0 likes

  6. Craig says:

    Yes, the strange use of language in the BBC website’s coverage of Israel and the Palestinians is an ongoing source of concern. The description of a one-year old boy as “an Israel settler” is beyond strange. It’s disturbing. 

    The Getty photograph has a similarly cold (and politically loaded) accompanying text, “The Palmers were living in a West Bank Settlement” – as if that’s an appropriate caption to accompany this photograph of a father and baby son’s funeral.

    A bit of common humanity wouldn’t go amiss BBC.

       0 likes

    • ltwf1964 says:

      but they were jooz Craig,jooz

      which in bbc terms means subhuman-or maybe that should read “untermenschen”……..

         0 likes

    • Grant says:

      Craig,
      The word “humanity” does not sit easily with Beeboids. 

         0 likes

  7. Paul Thomas says:

    I read the BBC report of this event and it was SO biased even by their standards that I was quite shocked.

       0 likes

  8. Biodegradable says:

    The planned construction in Gilo is NOT an “obstacle to peace”!

    PLO conceded Gilo in 2008 negotiations

       0 likes

  9. Biodegradable says:

    A Muslim went to Israel and discovered the truth. How is it that the BBC’s Middle East correspondents don’t come to the same conclusions?  
    A Muslim’s journey from anti-semite to Zionist

       0 likes

  10. cjhartnett says:

    As soon as I saw the opening paragraph, it was clear who had written it…and was pleased to see I was right!
    Wonderful again…like you, I`m no expert in grammar but this is as clear a lesson in it as I have ever received.
    Orwell gets a good deal of credit for pointing out the abuses of language by ruling elites and their ciphers…and these two comparative sentences scream the case that the BBC seems to insist on shamelessly confirming every warning that Orwell gave us.
    Outrageous…and borne purely out of spite, malice and being as craven to Muslims as it is despicable to Jews.
    Another materclass Sue…after Craigs piece today I`ve had my maths and English lessons for the day. It won`t be wasted eu=ither…because so many of us are getting Open Learning in the coming counterculture from the likes of you both!
    God Bless Israel….as Netenyahu said…better a bad press than a nice eulogy…but even he would see this use of language as worthy of Goebbels ,or Said himself”

       0 likes