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?