Dumb and Dumber

Tweak a story to suit the presumed intelligence level of your audience, and you risk exposing the agenda. Omit a detail here, embellish another there, ignore chronology, obfuscate and gloss over, simplify and spin as you might do when explaining something nasty to a child. You want to make sure he knows what’s right and what’s wrong, without preaching or telling him in so many words. He must come to the correct conclusion all by himself.

Often, when watching the BBC, you will catch a glimpse of where their slip is showing; or their show is slipping.

The BBC’s web report concerning Israel’s decision to accelerate settlement building and withhold Palestinian funds is one example. If you compare it with other reports, the first thing you’ll notice is that the BBC’s presentation seems intelligence-insultingly dumb. Then you’ll notice that the agenda shows, subtly but surely.
Reuters, the source of many other press reports, and the BBC, both tell us that ‘The new building will be in “areas that in any future arrangement will remain in Israel’s hands.”
Reuters, not notable for pro Israel advocacy, puts it like this:
“A senior Israeli government official said after the cabinet meeting[…] speaking on condition of anonymity. “the new building will be in “areas that in any future arrangement will remain in Israel’s hands.”
The official said 1,650 of the new tenders are for units in eastern parts of Jerusalem, and the rest are for Efrat and Maale Adumim, Jewish settlements in the occupied West Bank.”

The BBC’s article says:
“The Israeli government said Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had called for the accelerated construction of about 2,000 housing units.
It said the construction will be in “areas that in any future arrangement will remain in Israel’s hands”, according to a statement quoted by Reuters news agency.”

The BBC never provide full context when alluding to “settlements” because the BBC wishes to give the impression that all Israel’s construction activity is for the purpose of creating ‘facts on the ground’ in order to steal land. They want us to think all construction work is new encroachment on “Palestinian land” in accordance with what they see as Israel’s malevolent expansionist policies.

The BBC won’t admit that Jewish settlements they refer to as illegal will remain in existence after agreed negotiated land swaps that everyone knows must eventually take place – should a Palestinian state ever come to pass.
Even though the Palestinians have implicitly torn up all previously negotiated and agreed terms by opting out of the peace process with their decision to make unilateral bids, the only circumstance in which these settlements will cease to be is if, heaven forbid, the Palestinians ever achieve their real aim, which is the total elimination of Israel. This aim has frequently been proclaimed quite openly, but nevertheless the international community and the BBC ‘disputes this’. So they insinuate that the Israeli government’s words ‘future arrangement’ and ‘will remain in Israel’s hands’ are somehow dubious, “according to a statement quoted by Reuters news agency,” as though they’re merely blustering excuses or another of Israel’s spurious claims.

The one thing that all factions of the Palestinian leadership agree on is that they have no intention of living peacefully side by side with a Jewish state. Clearly the majority of the Palestinian people have been educated against this, and the leadership has promised them they’ll never accept it. But the useful aiders and abetters in the West won’t acknowledge that, because to do so would take the shine off some of the halos they’ve created.

“Netanyahu has called to restart peace talks without preconditions, but Abbas says he will return to negotiations only after Israel totally freezes its settlement activity.” Say Reuters. At least that sounds as though Israel is interested in the peace process, and hints at Palestinian intransigence.
The BBC has, instead:
“A spokesman for the Israeli foreign ministry, Yigal Palmor, told the BBC the measures were designed to increase pressure on the Palestinians.
Mr Palmor said they were “a response to unilateral measures aimed at confronting Israel at the UN and elsewhere on the international scene”.
“They [the Palestinians] shouldn’t be wasting time by all these manoeuvres. They should continue to negotiate,” he said.”
They’re making it look as though the Israelis are merely being vindictive, which is of course exactly what they want we infants to absorb when deciding who deserves our support.

“Palestinian Authoirty [sic] President Mahmoud Abbas says the move will speed up the destruction of the peace process” the BBC recounts matter of factly, (not ‘according to a Reuters news agency’ or any other third party) as if Abbas’s antics at the UN and the UNESCO recognition would slow down the destruction of the peace process or bring peace closer in any way whatsoever.
So Kevin Connolly says the announcement will be seen as a “Punishment for the Palestinians”. And here comes the context you can always rely on:
“Almost 500,000 Jews live in settlements on occupied territory. The settlements are illegal under international law, although Israel disputes this.”
Funnily enough, Reuters didn’t bother to include that. Nor did they include the sub heading: ‘Stealing money’ as the BBC did.
The Reuters sub heading was: “Withholding funds

Reuters is as bad as the next ‘impartial news organisation’ when it comes to misrepresenting Israel and not recognising its point of view, for example their lame attempt at providing some context regarding the background to the peace process, which is full of omissions. But the BBC is in another league. Here’s the BBC:
“Nabil Abu Rudeina, the spokesman for Mr Abbas, said the decision to withhold funds collected by Israel on behalf of the Palestinian Authority was “stealing money from the Palestinian people.”
This time, not “according to” Reuters or any other news agency, it’s straight from the horse’s mouth. The Palestinians are having some of their import duties withheld, when they thought they were entitled to circumvent the peace process, make preconditions, opt out of negotiations, refuse to recognise Israel, send rockets into Israeli cities, all without suffering any consequences at all. Tough.
But never mind, they’ve got their UNESCO recognition, and they’ve got the BBC batting for them so audiences worldwide are condemning and delegitimising Israel. What more could they want?

Bookmark the permalink.

11 Responses to Dumb and Dumber

  1. Biodegradable says:

    Talk about “stealing money from the Palestinian people.”!

    Arafat’s wife says Tunisia trying to defame Palestinians

    She said that since Arafat’s death the PA has been paying her a monthly salary of $12,000.



    • cjhartnett says:

      That will be the Tory cuts Mrs Arafat…is he her only husband then?
      Brendan Barber will wear a keffiyah to flag up this latest callous scandal involving the Coalition when he goes out a strolling on November 30th.
      It`s what Yosser(giss`ajob!) would have wanted…as well as any Semtex that Irelands finest in the North may still have on approval from Gaddhafi


    • Grant says:

      So, despite all the billions that baby-murdering scumbag Arafat stole, he didn’t even provide for his widow !


  2. Davieboy says:

    Great post again Sue.
    Unilateral decisions; ironically, two can play that game!


  3. cjhartnett says:

    I thank God for your keen attention to detail Sue!
    I have come late to the cause of Israel, so am a broadbrush kind of character…I rarely have the evidence for what the Beeb etc are up to, but I can see the trends…David, Robin and you as well as the many fine contributors who pop up regularly on this site.
    God knows…and He does…how Israel manages to exist as a democracy that has no death penalty in amidst the most evil damned conspiracy on the planet.
    It is funded from Riyadh, stops us from ever visiting Mecca or Medina and has bought up all manner of anti-Semites and hellbound socialists who will fight wars anywhere but in their own countries(and in truth, the cultural wars can be seen to be won, so why bother?)
    The whole Sunni-Shia bit will unravel them, but with all that oil that they squat upon-they fuel a fair few limos at the BBC as well as the burning of the midnight oil at the Guardian etc.
    So let the BBC suck up to Ahmedinajadh or Bahrains monsters…let them groom the Muslim Brotherhood in Tunis today and Fez tomorrow.
    WE know what the BBC are up to, we despise them and will willingly get ourselves acquanited with Israeli history, culture and ensure that the lies and shibboleths of the BBC will strangle them sometime soon.
    Their Guardian syntax book may have “peace” and “diversity” in it-but they don`t know the meanings of the words.
    They do need to know words like shibboleth though…and whilst they`re at it…hubris, catharsis, thanatos and democracy…even Tin God Freud( Siggy…not Clem!) knew their meanings!
    Israels going nowhere but to the toppermost of the poppermost…the BBC is already for disembowelling up on Teeeside if we play it right!


    • Grant says:

      Classic,  cj,  just classic  !!!!!!!!!

      But, you raise a thought that where is Clement Freud when we need him  ?


  4. David Preiser (USA) says:

    Almost 500,000 Jews live in settlements on occupied territory. The settlements are illegal under international law, although Israel disputes this.

    I think this must be pre-populated in the template they use to post these pieces in the BBC News Online system.  It’s there verbatim every time.


  5. Teddy Bear says:

    I wonder when it will occur to the UN that it has really allowed the Palestinians to run rings round them, and showing them up for the ridiculous and twisted organisation, lacking any moral authority, that it has become. 

    64 years ago the UN issued a Resolution (181) that divided the area of Palestine into independent Jewish and Arab States.
    The proposed plan was accepted by the leaders of the Jewish community in Palestine, through the Jewish Agency. The plan was rejected by leaders of the Arab community (the Palestine Arab Higher Committee etc.), who were supported in their rejection by the states of the Arab League.
    The Arabs have since unsuccesfully been trying to drive the Jews into the sea and claim the whole region for themselves. Any land partitions originally allotted become null and void to any moral judge, since it is the Arabs who were trying to deprive the Jews of theirs. The fact that the Arabs have continued to lose is a good lesson for them to examine the consequences of bad reasoning and actions.
    I can’t think that there’s been any occasion anywhere in the civilised world where a criminal that has been found guilty of a crime and sentenced to imprisonment, has had his salary reimbursed by whatever company he might also have been working for at the time he committed the crime, or serving the sentence for it.
    Even worse in this example is the fact that the criminal has sworn to engage in further crimes, and still demands to receive a continual salary, despite no attempt to honest labour.

    Yet this is what the UN, and mouthpieces like the BBC, thinks the world should accept. otherwise why would they seriously even entertain the notion that they should reward Palestinians by recognising them as a State, or legal entitlement to any land at all?

    I can’t wait for the Hardtalk that has a UN representitive being challenged for this decision, but we all know why this will never happen.

    Apologies to the many here who already are aware of this travesty, it wasn’t written for your benefit. For the benefit of an Beeboids, I have purposefully left a spelling mistake for you to challenge me on.


    • Grant says:

      Didn’t spot the spelling mistake. I’ll leave it to Dezzie or Scottie to find it and point out that it invalidates your whole post.
      Where are they these days, anyway.  Real world not conforming to their “ideology”  ?


      • Teddy Bear says:

        Missed the Y (why) out of any Beeboids
        and put a ‘tit’ instead of ‘tat’ in UN representative


  6. Cassandra King says:

    67 borders?

    Are those the borders that the so cvalled ‘Palestinians’ AKA Arabs rejected at the time as a basis for a two state solution?

    Since 1948 the Arab side has rejected any compromise, rejected any notion that the 48 or 67 borders were acceptable launching multiple wars of aggression to grab everthing. The BBC has not once acknowledged that in fact there are no as yet recognized borders because one side refused outright the original settlement on the creation of the state of Israel.

    Here is the important bit, as there has been no agreement as yet between the two parties there are in fact no borders to recognize as yet, only by the two sides sitting down together and drawing up a negotiated border can there be an actual ‘Palestinian’ state. And guess what folks? oh yes, the ‘Palestinians’ keep refusing to sit down and negotiate these borders.

    The BBC keep flogging the lie that if only Israel would agree to the 67 borders then flowers would fall from the sky and the angels in heaven would sing and all would hold hands and dance together. In fact there are no settlers in Israel or in this fantasy made up entity called ‘Palestine’ not least because there is no such state as ‘Palestine’ and wont be until? Yep you guessed it, the two sides sit down and work out a border between them.

    Now it could be that the beeboids are simply drooling retards barely able to remember where they live OR they are being smart enough to hide the facts from the public just in case that public understood the actual truth. As there are no borders yet negotiated there is as yet no state and as no state yet exists there can be no settlers in a land that does not yet legally exist let alone have borders.