This is not a post about the BBC’s lacking courage. They do, but the metaphor is a bit more literal than that. I’m referring to an interesting article concerning the booming state of the Israeli economy which is paradoxically dominated by the BBC’s focus on poverty.
The trouble is, like so many BBC reports, it lacks the spine provided by recognition of fundamentals. So we get a jelly-like rambling commentary telling us how
‘Last year, the economy expanded at its fastest rate in years, bolstered by healthy growth in exports, strength in the technology sector and a healthy investment climate.’
You look through the article in vain for the central theme: it is conveyed only in hints about a positive ‘investment climate’ and how ‘a Palestinian uprising sparked a slump’ in 2000.
But the real story behind economic growth is the stability brought about by Sharon’s barrier policy and unilateral action. Because they will not focus on this, a fundamental issue, they are released to focus on one of their cherished topics, poverty, which enables them to include Palestinian alienation in their ‘compassionate’ coverage. In doing so they pass over the fact that the gap between rich and poor is mirrored by the gulf between terrorist sponsoring people and law-abiding citizens.
so building a wall around Islamofascists = more economic growth.
trouble is, brownstuff cant see that.
You have to ask yourself, why does a country such as Israel, which has no natural resources, have a booming economy, while some other states, awash with oil, are poverty ridden?
Before you say, American dollars, don’t forget many countries get foreign aid, it is probable that Egypt would collapse without American aid, it is debatable whether we get anything in return.
http://www.americanthinker.com/articles.php?article_id=3897
For all its aid, what does the US get from Israel exactly?
Bloke, it works the other way round.
For all its aid, what does the US get from Israel exactly?
Well, the last time the world was convulsed with this level of anti-semitism, we got Albert Einstein, Billy Wilder and a whole lot more out of the deal. Who knows what we’ll get this time?
Susan,
As an American, what are peoples views of the UK at the moment? Are we seen as sowing our own destruction? Would help be forthcoming in the future, if we needed it?
As an American, what are peoples views of the UK at the moment?
The view of the UK as the closest ally hasn’t changed. In fact there’s a bit of a “neo-British Invasion” going on here at the moment. Brits are highly visible on US TV (Simon Cowell, Anne Robinson, Hugh Laurie, Supernanny “JoJo” and many more) and one of the biggest retail stores, Target, is currently running a “Buy British” campaign (don’t know what that’s about, except that British things are seen as “cool”). The new Mini Cooper, including the one with the Union Jack on the top, is seen as a “status symbol” especially in California which loves all things trendy. Some organization did a poll recently which found that 75 percent of all Americans saw the UK as the “closest ally”. Americans do not talk trash about Britain like Australians do about “the poms” etc. Which is strange because of the violent manner in which we gained independence from you.
Would help be forthcoming in the future, if we needed it?
Not sure what you’re alluding to here. Civil war between indigenous Europe and the Muslims? Sadly I couldn’t say. I’d like to be able to say “yes” but then again, Clinton bombed the Serbs and helped the Muslims. We have the same multiculturalist/leftist weirdos here as in Europe, you know, and they have a lot of influence.
For me, I would always be on the side of indigenous Europe, and indigenous England, but that’s just me. Most Americans don’t follow European or even British politics that closely. I myself only started to follow it because five years ago I chanced upon an op-ed on the Internet by Julie Burchill that I liked, and started to read the British press from then, and the more I read, the more I became really, really concerned and upset about what was happening in Britain, so here I am.
Susan
I am British-born, living in St. Louis, Missouri (yep, right slap in the middle of the middle).
I have never encountered anything but warm and welcoming Americans, and most of my friends being conservatives such as I are very positive about England and the English.
Regrettably, to a man, they like Tony Blair. I have spent much time re-educating them, but largely without success.
Hi Martin, my late Dad grew up in “Mizzourah,” not far from Harry Truman’s home town as a matter of fact.
Regrettably, to a man, they like Tony Blair. I have spent much time re-educating them, but largely without success.
Yes, it is true, most Yanks largely adore Tone-boy and even tolerate his bizzaro missus. I used to like Tone too, until I started to read blogs like this one!
I think it is his plummy accent that gets to them. Most Yanks love a plummy Brit accent beyond all reason. We still have an inferiority complex about the way we talk compared to you guys.
No, I mean right now, what exactly does the US get from Israel?
Im all for the survival of Israel, dont get me wrong, but its a very one-sided deal is it not. To look at it in a non-serious manner: if there was a war between Israel and Britain who would the US support? Israel of course. The war nerd pointed out that in a war between the US and Israel, congress would definately support Israel.
Someone mentioned aid to Egypt and how crap Egypt is, very true. That really just counts as more aid to Israel though doesnt it. That cash is to prop up the Egyptian regime, to help stop the the rise of hardline islamics. A bribe also to leave Israel alone. If Israel vanished tomorrow, US aid to Egypt would vanish about 2 seconds later.
Don’t kid yourself, Grimer, or let others do it for you. The quaint pieties above are Alistair Cooke vintage, with little place in Matt Frei World.
Odds are Europe will be allowed to stew, slowly and thoroughly. Sorry if it pops your balloon, but the Anglo-Saxon lobby in the US is weak and getting rapidly weaker: sentiment and nostalgia just ain’t what they used to be.
To those who disagree: where’s the constituency? Sir Humphrey and Terry Thomas? Former Masterpiece Theater lovers with fond memories of The Forsyte Saga? The last heterosexual Episcopalian standing? Gimmeabreak.
Main reason: You can’t be bothered to help yourselves, so why should we help you? Saving your sorry asses twice turns out to be one time too many. Three times is out of the question.
Also: You think the endless anti-Americanism of your media, academics and politicians will be allowed to pass unnoticed, without consequence? Just why exactly?
Your elites made your bed for you; the rest of you sit there passively, twittering a bit now and again but generally doing what you call Sweet FA about it.
So…Your future is in the Emirates of the English, Caliphate of Eurabia. Eat and enjoy, and may your moral superiority protect you all.
We have better allies elsewhere.
“No, I mean right now, what exactly does the US get from Israel?”
lots and lots of hi-tech – computer science, communications and military.
martin: “Regrettably, to a man, they like Tony Blair. I have spent much time re-educating them, but largely without success”
well, he did stick with Dubya at considerable political risk to himself. so, i suppose, from an American point of view, that loyality is to be commended. i think thats what your American friends are getting at.
talk to them about the civil contingencies bill and similar laws, and they might start having another opinion.
Bloke:
The US (& others) “get” the satisfaction of supporting a free, hard-working,civil, intelligent and humane society against psychotic, brain-washing, medieval, terrorist-sponsoring, restaurent-bombing fascists.
‘the more I read, the more I became really, really concerned and upset about what was happening in Britain, so here I am.’
Susan,
Christ knows what you’re reading but really love, there’s no need to worry about us.
Susan,
We still have an inferiority complex about the way we talk compared to you guys.
I just love the way you guys speak English, but I’m not so sure about the way you spell it!
Cockney,
I disagree. There’s plenty to worry about.
Cockney, I dunno.
Is today’s UK the same as the one that fought with great courage and emerged relatively intact from the bloodbaths of the first half of the 20th century?
There’s been a tremendous dumbing down of the country, with the intrepid flag-bearers of the BBC leading the way.
Although I have real concerns about the future of the UK, the US alarms me. Radio 4 reviewed some (specially selected) American newspapers. The NYT reported the final attempts by California to resist being subsumed into Mexico by stating that the demonstration in LA by 500,000 people against any attempt to curb illegal migration was awesome – words to that effect. It was further reported that there are 11 million illegals in the US and that they could soon be made ‘legal’. The Republican Party is divided on this issue: that is what was reported.
Firstly, who were the 500,000 demonstrators? Illegal migrants in favour of illegal immigration?
Secondly, are the 11 million not almost entirely Mexicans?
Thirdly, doesn’t it say something about how the Republicans and GWB have abandoned any claims to defending the US when the presence on American territory of 11 million undocumented illegals does NOT meet with firm action rather than giving full rights to people who will sooner or later attempt to force seccession of Texas, California and other formerly Mexican territories from the US back to Mexico. Mexicans (as distinct from Mexican-Americans) will form an absolute majority in several states if GWB surrenders again on this front. And naturally, the BBC opposes any border controls as racist and xenophobic.
Allan@Aberdeen
George W. Bush, for reasons that I can’t fathom, has been pushing for some time for the surrender of the US to Mexico.
He just gave a speech about immigrants having built the US.
It’s dishonest in the extreme. These people are not immigrants.
They are illegal aliens.
So here you have an elected leader actively encouraging outsiders to break the laws of his country by invading it rather then immigrating through the proper channels.
And when citizens complain about the state of afffairs and try to have laws passed restricting the illegal takeover of their land and resources, they are in effect told that the illegals have more rights than them.
It’s beyond bizarre. In a saner, un-PC age he would be flung in prison and the key thrown away. If he was lucky.
And naturally, the BBC opposes any border controls as racist and xenophobic.
Too true.
”And naturally, the BBC opposes any border controls as racist and xenophobic”
That’s becuase in essence they are. I like Bush precisely because he is a liberal president. He believes in free movement of goods, services and people wherever possible and beneficial. He doesn’t see things through a prism of colour, religion or nationality. That is why the left hate him. Because that is their stock in trade.
To Bloke, Bob
US-Israel relations serve both sides–
“some good points against the claim that America’s alliance with Israel is bad for the U.S.:
The United States has been able to be Israel’s biggest backer and financier, its staunchest defender and weapon-supplier while maintaining strategic alliances with most if not all Arab dictatorships, including the Palestinian Authority under both Yasser Arafat and Mahmoud Abbas. Moreover, US companies and American investments have the largest presence across the Arab world. . . .
Finally we come to the financial argument, namely that the US gives an inordinate amount of money to Israel–too exorbitant a cost that is out of proportion to what the US gets in return. In fact, the United States spends much more on its military bases in the Arab world, not to mention on those in Europe or Asia, than it does on Israel. Israel has indeed been very effective in rendering services to its US master for a good price.
And these were stated by anti-Israel Columbia professor Joseph Massad “
Er… that should be rather than immigrating
Bloke
“A bribe also to leave Israel alone”.
You are kidding, I’ve been to Egypt and stood atop the Aswan Dam built with Russian Soviet roubles. Every Egyptian looks at that dam and shudders with fear, one Israeli nuke and Egg wipe gets wiped out, in another biblical flood.
The egg wipes don’t have to be bribed to leave Israel alone, its the other way around, Israel could take them down in a day.
Scabs I like Bush precisely because he is a liberal president. He believes in free movement of goods, services and people wherever possible and beneficial.
We hear the argument from the left – that right wingers are all for the free movement of capital, but baulk at the free movement of labour, so there should be no border controls.
I think this argument falls down in a welfare state (which even the US is to some extent). Its not the free movement of workers, it is a flow of people looking to obtain more from the state than what they will pay – a circumstance almost inevitable from a low paid family.
will
You are right, the US does have an overlooked welfare industry. Welfare hand out day is the day when the greatest number of drug deals take place.
Bloke,
From what you seem to be saying it would be very easy to get you wrong. So before saying anything else go here:
http://www.jcpa.org/brief/brief005-20.htm
We would be interested in your views afterwards.
I must agree with scabs here. The free market would suggest that prices are set by the meeting of buyer and seller. Mexican labour is vital to much of the US West, the vast numbers of Latinos alreay there make a mockey of US immigration laws. A third way is vital in this dispute (work permits etc). The difficulty here is that California & Texas were once part of Mexico, i.e. that is where you can expect to find Mexicans, and you do!
Put simply, Its their part of the world.
”Put simply, Its their part of the world”
Perhaps geographically. What is not theirs is entitlement to US tax dollars of which they have not contributed. Personnally I think that the vast majority of problems associated with immigration come from well meaning people offering immigrants access to services that they have no right to offer and which the immigrants have no right to accept. Work permits and compulsory health insurance (Bush’s policy) allows people to enter America and work for their own benefit without (rightly) pissing off the tax payers. Its win win, its called liberalism and it is the very opposite of what left wingers believe.
Open immigration can only work in the absence of a demos based mutual safety.
In the presence of welfare states newcommers will allways be motivated to relocate, or be suspected of relocating for purely parasitic reasons, thus building hate.
Lurkr in a Burqua,
There is only a fixed physical amount of land, and thus a fixed amount of “common land”. Each Newcommer to a country makes the slice of common land smaller.
The number of immigrants should be restricted and the right to immigrate should be auctioned.
Rob; If your argument is that extensive welfare states cause resentment towards immigrants I couldn’ agree more.
If your solution is to scrap immigration rather than the welfare state; I couldn’t disagree more.
California and Texas were both idependent nations before they joined the Union. Thus it’s inaccurate to say that the US “stole” those states from Mexico. They both won their independence from Mexico, then decided later to join the Union.
Mexican labour is vital to much of the US West,
No, it isn’t. Before the Mexicans, poor whites (and blacks) migrated to California from the South to provide labor.
Susan,
Christ knows what you’re reading but really love, there’s no need to worry about us.
Cockney | 28.03.06 – 7:57 am | #
I’d say things are in a pretty desparate way considering the photos I saw from the “March for Free Expression,” and the fact that the guy who showed the Dreaded Toons of Humiliation has now been “summoned.” But you’re right Cockney, that could just be dumb old paranoid me.
Is the US too close to Israel?
The US is Israel’s closest ally and provides aid worth billions of dollars each year. But is their special relationship good for both countries?
Whatever the outcome of this week’s Israeli elections, the United States will continue to be Israel’s key diplomatic ally and main foreign backer. In the words of US Vice President Dick Cheney, the two countries are ‘fellow democracies, both founded in struggle….and natural allies.’
Acting Prime Minister Ehud Olmert has said he will seek US support before going ahead with a unilateral withdrawal from the West Bank. Meanwhile, President Bush says Iran’s threat to Israel is a threat to the US.
What sort of relationship should the US and Israel have? How far do their interests coincide? Is Israel essential for Washington’s diplomacy in the region or is it a strategic liability to the US?
World Have Your Say will be in New York to discuss these issues on Tuesday 28 March. Please include your phone number if you would like to be a caller or join us in the audience.
http://newsforums.bbc.co.uk/nol/thread.jspa?threadID=1413&&edition=2&ttl=20060328162237
We have better allies elsewhere.
Who dat, exactly? We’ve got Israel, and a shaky newborn deal with India, and the Ozzies, who god bless ’em are tough as nails, but they’re only 20 million of ’em. And that’s about it.
This is off topic, but kind of relevant to the discussion.
Did anybody see “Wilson ‘plot’: The secret tapes”?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4789060.stm
It was pretty poor, even by BBC standards. However, it was quite interesting. Basically, the BBC documentary took the line that the ‘evil establishment’ (army, Royal Family, aristocrats, MI5, CIA, etc) all plotted to get rid of Harold Wilson and were prepared to stage a military coup to prevent the UK becoming a communist state (A lot of people in MI5 and the CIA believed that Wilson had been ‘turned’ by the KGB).
I couldn’t help but feel relieved that patriotic people were willing to take the necessary action to prevent the UK becoming a Stalinist state. No coup took place, so they were obviously willing to let things ‘play out’, and only take action if absolutely necessary.
Of course, to the BBC, this was still an ‘interference with the democratic process’. Maybe they’d prefer ‘one person, once vote, one time only’?
Just a thought, but you can probably count certain members of the Royal Family out of any plans to thwart a future London Caliphate.
scabs,
No I’d scrap the welfare state. I’d also auction off immigration places.
Say number of emigrates + number of job vacancies.
Grimer,
I think the BBC staff would be looking forward to an increased status and pay after state-slavery (communism) seizes power.
Great post. A BBC Correspondent was at it again this morning, talking about how candidates will be judged on their policy ‘towards the Palestinians’. As these reporters also say that the most important issue in the election is “security”, they know all to well that the Israelis to not judge their politicians on their policies and attitudes towards the Palestinians, but on dealing with Palestinian terrorism. Because the ‘T’ word is censored at the BBC, most especially when referring to Palestinian terrorism, not only can the BBC not properly report the conflict, but they make out the Israelis to be threatening and callous by talking about ‘their policies towards the Palestinians’, the only way this makes sense when divorced from the word ‘terrorism’, is that the Israelis are on some sort of kick giving stick to the Palestinians for the fun of it because its what the Israelis like seeing done.
I look forward to the day when some enterprising journalist or blogger fully researches the origins of substituting the word ‘terrorist’ for ‘militant’ to describe those who strap explosives to children to use as bombs to kill other children. I’m sure the research would find this policy was a deliberate attempt to sanitise Palestinian barbarity by terrorist sympathisers/supporters at the BBC Middle East Dept.
Bloke, what does the US get out of its relationship with Israel? A heck of a lot. Like the rest of the civilised world. Cast your mind back when the Israelis did the world a huge favour and took out Saddam’s nuclear weapons programme in ’82. What did Israel get back in return? Unprecedented moral masturbation. In the not so distant future the entire civilised world will see what else it gets out of Israel – when it does the world another enormous favour and uses the 500 bunker-buster bombs the US has supplied it with to take out Iran’s Nuclear Weapons Programme. Lets hope the world has more than unprecedented moral masturbation to offer Israel as thanks this time round. Their going to need help after doing this, and it will be an honour and a privilege to provide it.
Susan, the US allies in the world are more than you fear. Dont forget Poland, Denmark, Holland, El Salvador, Germany (under Merkel), Czech Republic and more.
Bloke, what does the US get out of its relationship with Israel?
Interesting question – what does the Us get out of its “relationship” with Japan, Korea, China, Argentina……..and…..and…..and…….?”
The US is the super-power that succeeded the British Empire, it has global interests and global presence…………..as such it does not need to perform a calculus on every event in such a relationship.
“Bloke”…..what did your parents ever get from their relationship with you ?
California and Texas were both idependent nations before they joined the Union. Thus it’s inaccurate to say that the US “stole” those states from Mexico. They both won their independence from Mexico, then decided later to join the Union.
Susan | 28.03.06 – 3:21 pm | #
Yes and it was British foreign policy to keep Texas independent to prevent the United States from having two coasts………….it was Great Britain that was very keen to have Texas outside The Union.
Susan, the US allies in the world are more than you fear. Dont forget Poland, Denmark, Holland, El Salvador, Germany (under Merkel), Czech Republic and more.
I don’t mean to slight them but they are not exactly the same butt-kicking type as the Ozzies, the Indians and Israel are! (Well, Denmark is — but how big of an army could they possibly have?)I don’t agree with kein mas merde to say we have all these “better allies” waiting in the wings. No we don’t unless we’ve been talking to space aliens on the sly.
Hey guys, I apologize for my compatriot’s rude remarks. I used to be where he was two years ago, furious with Europe because of all the anti-American media, but after reading it for two years I realized how utterly absurd and pathetic a lot of it is, like when the Beeb’s “business” reporters pull a long face when US economic growth dips slightly below 4 percent per quarter, while going into celebratory orgasms whenever the German or French economy registers a pathetic uptick of 0.2 percent or so. Now I just laugh at it, it’s so nuts, and I realize that fewer and fewer people are believing it every day — witness how the commentariat of this blog has grown from what it used to be.
So kein mas merde, chill out, the people here on this blog know the score, they are not doormats or wimps.
“We have better allies elsewhere”
Like all conflicts many potential “allies” skulk on the sidelines waiting to back the winning side. During the Battle of the Atlantic when U-boats were sinking “allied” shipping, Brazil was largely pro-German.
Until the U-boats sank three Brazilian ships. Attitudes changed overnight, the Nazi flag was torn down off certain houses and the occupants dragged out onto the street and never seen again.
At the end of WW2, no less than 58 countries were officially at war with Germany.
HYS’s at it again. For assorted leftie celebs and socialists who die, they have: Your tributes. Caspar Weinberger has died. For him it’s: Your comments.
And the Beeb forgot to mention an important point for British readers: Cap Weinberger was awarded a knighthood by the Queen. A rare honour, although of course, as an American he couldn’t use it. But it was a great honour.
Susan, India is butt-kicking??? Are they in Afghanistan or Iraq?
I’m suprised you dont regard the Poles as butt-kickers (hey, this American terminology is growing on me). They have operational command of the central region of Iraq and there is nothing I’m aware of to suggest that they are in any way untrue to their WW2 legacy. Let’s hope the Canadians get back to their butt-kicking best.
On a slightly different note, I guess one thing that helps to keep a perspective on British media anti-Americanism is that much of the American media is just as bad!
Susan, India is butt-kicking??? Are they in Afghanistan or Iraq?
No, but they sure as hell handed the Pakistanis their asses three times last century if I recall. From that I get “butt-kicking.” True the Poles seem to be moving up in the butt-kicking stakes.
Hey don’t pick on me Hal! I was just trying to stick up for youse guys.
On a slightly different note, I guess one thing that helps to keep a perspective on British media anti-Americanism is that much of the American media is just as bad!
Very true!