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.
…chill out, the people here on this blog know the score, they are not doormats or wimps.
Susan: Don’t be patronising. Folks can speak for themselves, or not. No need for an ersatz den mother, clucking and preening as you do.
Your world view of US allies omits Japan. You seem out of your depth.
Dude, I respect Japan. But I don’t see them as all that ready to help us out militarily. They make money; that is what they do. Military endeavors are far down on their list of priorities. Also, they are getting old, just like most of the industrialized world.
I’m not a den mother, I just know that not all Europeans and Brits are as dhimmi as you seem to think they are. Most of the folks on this blog are a good example of non-dhimminess.
Susan,
Japans sphere of influence is Asia, when push comes to shove they know what is required of them.
Japan government thinktank calls China military growth ‘destabilizing factor’ in East Asia
By ERIC TALMADGE TOKYO
China’s increasing military strength and the possibility of it using force to quash independence movements on Taiwan are a major destabilizing factor in East Asia, a thinktank affiliated with Japan’s Defense Agency said Monday.
In its closely watched East Asian Strategic Review 2006, the government-run institute, which serves as the policy research arm of the Defense Agency, also said North Korea’s development of weapons of mass destruction and ballistic missiles pose a ”grave threat” to the region.
http://english.ohmynews.com/ArticleView/article_view.asp?no=282001&rel_no=1
Susan
You are right. In fact nearly all people are not thick anywhere in the world. They just have different skills priorities and ambitions.
Thank god, the whole world is NOT as mindfull of politics as we are, and out just having fun.
Advice to the young out there
The only time when man feels safe is when he is young.( if he is lucky )
There Historicaly never has been a time when man was safe.
The best definition of peace is that it is “the gap between wars.”
Man can not change quickly, but his weapons have.
History shows us that the bigger the gap between wars was, the bigger the wars were.
For all its aid, what does the US get from Israel exactly?
This is a different question from why does the US (and an overwhelming majority of its citizens) support Israel.
Here is a short list. (I would be happy to accept additions)
🙂 Effective remote control of the Eastern Mediterranean. Turkey and Greece have a part in this but are unreliable This was crucial during the Cold War.
🙂 A realistic barrier between Iraq and the Mediterranean. Would Jordan have been able (or willing) to prevent Saddam Hussein using this route to smuggle arms, etc? I think not.
🙂 Destruction of the Osirak nuclear reactor. What would the world be like today if Saddam had had the bomb? Put a price on it.
🙂 Contribution to military research, including battle-testing of equipment and modification. The US taxpayer would otherwise have to pay for it.
🙂 Research for American companies in communications, biotech, computers, agriculture etc. It is not for nothing that Intel and Microsoft maintain large facilities in Israel.
🙂 A major tourist destination. The Jews may not be pro-Christian but they protect the holy sites and the pilgrims (for that matter they protect the Israeli Christians).
🙂 A major investment area for American finance. The US can buy oil from the Arabs but it is hard to invest as the Arab East essentially doesn’t produce anything.
🙂 A large market for goods and services. This directly leads to jobs at all levels.
I am a great believer in periodic cost-benefit analysis of all government policies. Perhaps it is time to ask the same question of all US (and UK/EU) international relations?
❓ For all its aid, what does the US/EU/UK get from Palestine exactly?
deegee,
Only Terrorism.
Susan, this English wimp would never ‘pick on’ a tough American dame like youse! ;). Klien mas merde seems more foolhardy though, but you are more than capable of lasooing him up without me adding my ha’pennies worth over his boorishness.
No, just an interesting thing you put out there about ‘butt kicking India’. The wars India have had with Pakistan have been border wars when they were faced with the choice of fight or die. I think every nation that is a member of the US Coalition in Iraq (let us give it its proper name, after all), with all the brickbats that involves in this amoral world seems worthy of due esteem. I can only talk of my country Britain on ‘remote’, living here in Spain, but if there is a change of Government in Britain, one headed by Gordon Brown maybe, Britain could well go the way of Spain. We weren’t exactly distinguished over Moslem ‘toonophobia’ as well.
hippiepooter – We’re still not distinguished over the Motoons. A man carrying a Toon poster at the demonstration for free speech has been charged on the word of someone who looks like a Pakistani who told the police he “felt threatened” by the Toon.
Susan says – “Just a thought, but you can probably count certain members of the Royal Family out of any plans to thwart a future London Caliphate.”
Susan, for all your reading of the British press, you don’t seem to be informed about our royal family. It doesn’t matter what “certain members” think because not one of them has an iota of power. The Queen is the monarch, not “certain members”. She is the only one with power.
Second, I don’t like Prince Charles but I get irritated reading comments by Americans on various sites sneering that Charles is an Islamophile. Some Americans even report the secret information that HRH has “converted”. Prince Charles has had a lifelong interest in religion. In fact, the spiritual journey of human being is one of his major interests. He pals around with the Dalai Lama. He goes on retreats at the Greek Orthodox Church in Greece. He is interested in Judaism. He is interested in Islam – specifically Suffism. He sees Islam through the rose-coloured specs of the goodwill he holds for all religions. You forget how sheltered he is.
In a lot of ways, Prince Charles is very naive, and has a Rodney King attitude to religion. Of course, real life isn’t like that.
It doesn’t matter what “certain members” think because not one of them has an iota of power. The Queen is the monarch, not “certain members”. She is the only one with power.
Well of course I know that about your Queen. I was thinking the unthinkable, after she’s gone. I hope she lasts another 20 years, personally.
He is interested in Islam – specifically Suffism. He sees Islam through the rose-coloured specs of the goodwill he holds for all religions.
I used to think that too, but after I saw those photos of Charles in Egypt and SA — even when he was dressed in decent Western clothes I noticed he was carrying Islamic prayer beads around with him. It was the prayer beads that really made me do a double-take, more so than the turban etc. I don’t think I’ve ever noticed him carrying a rosary around while hanging out with Catholics.
But, sorry if I offended you by dissing Charles. I mean that sincerely.
Hal, I didn’t mean to diss any of the members of the coalition in Iraq. I of course acknowledge the UK’s efforts greatly.
Susan – I didn’t think you were dissin’ them. Just didn’t know the background. He visited a Sikh temple in India today wearing a turban. This isn’t a Clintonesque vote catcher because Charles isn’t running for anything. He is genuinely interested in different religious paths, and he may well indeed have taken a rosary into an RC church with him, or when he visited the Pope.
He was a terribly lonely little boy at Gordonstoun – for which he was totally unsuited. As boys do, his schoomates goaded him and jeered at him for being the Prince of Wales, his parents were distant – on foreign tours or going about state business – and he turned inward for solace. This developed into a lifelong interest in spiritual paths. His interest in Islam is mainly Sufi.
You have to understand, as an American, how sheltered he has been all his adult life. He has private secretaries and under-secretaries and aides who read the papers for him and mark paragraphs for him to read. Obviously, with the vast amount of other things he is engaged in (I don’t know whether you know about The Prince’s Trust and the Duchy of Cornwall) he doesn’t have time for a browse through the papers.
I’m sounding like an apologist for the Prince of Wales whereas, actually, if I met him, I don’t think I’d like him. But people should know his background. His interest in spiritual paths is absolutely genuine and has been for 50 years. I think he’s a raving lefty about things like green issues and I have a horrible feeling he quite likes T Bliar, but he is assuredly not about to leave the Christian faith or the CofE.
As an ex-Brit I am embarrassed both by the bbc and the royals. Charles Windsor,(I never did figure out why his last name is not Mountbatten. Do royal layabouts take the Queen’s name, or rather the name of her father? Wasn’t taught any of that in the poxy secondary-modern.) Anyway, what has any royal contributed to our world? For that matter, what has the bbc given to us, other than acutely sloppy reporting and gratuitous (a secondary-modern word that)
opinion-mongering?
The BBC has also given us sophisticated, polished propaganda:
*By omission of facts.
*By distortion of facts.
*By the stealth edit of articles that reveal its agenda a little too clearly.
*By applying make up to the ghastly face of terrorism.
Thnx Bryan; well stated