More kudos to the B-BBC commentariat coming up. When they smell a rat there usually is a rat.
John’s comment is a classic, retrospectively:
“I just caught Ola Guerin’s report on Kofi Anan’s visit to Beirut, it was very different from the one I saw beforehand on Sky. She depicted Kofi like a frightened rabbit, with Hezbollah supporters, especially screaming fanatical women, almost about to lynch him in Beirut, and gave the impression that if it wasn’t for his security it would have happened.
The sky report just mentioned his visit, it was devoid of showing a Hezbollah threat or that he was threatened. There must be a BBC agenda here“
Well, indeed (highlight mine).
And Archduke said:
“classic Orla Guerin tonight on the 6 o clock news.
scenes of Kofi Annan getting a rather hostile reception in south Beirut, complete with burka clad islamonazis & ranting Hezbollah “supporters”
Orla intones “whether this demonstration was spontaneous or organised it is hard to know…”
bwaaaaaaahhh…
Both comments top and tail this instance of Orlaesque reporting, as seen from “our side”, the viewing side.
But the suspicions highlighted here are amply confirmed in this post from the Counterterrorism blog, a “multi-expert blog dedicated solely to counterterrorism issues”, whose correspondent in Beirut describes unauthorised media footage of the arrival of Annan in Beirut:
“Lebanese Army officers and Hezbollah were seen smiling at each other and coordinating the staged demonstration. A camera linked to an international media agency was broadcasting live from behind the Hezbollah’s security lines. It captured the details of the “show.” A group of women and girls, in traditional Muslim dresses and scarves were gathered by Hezbollah bearded security some 15 minutes before the motorcade arrives. The gathering was at about 30 feet away from where Annan’s car was supposed to stop. This indicates that the motorcade security and the Hezbollah operatives knew ahead of time where the spot would be and had the women standing and waiting. Posters of Hassan Nasrallah were then distributed to the women….
As the UN delegation approached the group walking, the women screamed the name of Nasrallah and behind them couple men screamed “down, down, USA” (especially when the international media appeared). As soon as the officials walked farther, and as in a choreographed play, the women dispersed themselves opening the path for the militiamen looking males to rush behind the delegation walking through the ruins. Responding to orders barked form inside the group, the mens’ “demo” got loud and slogans were shouted with greater energy and menace. Interestingly, and since the camera was filming live from behind and feeding it to satellite around the world, observers were able to “see” the whole operation to its most detailed developments”
Now then, a question for the commentariat. Orla- corrupt or incompetent? I know which one I would go for, and it doesn’t begin with ‘i’. Also, if someone can track down this latest Orlrage in the form of a clip, I’d be only too delighted to link to it.
sky news is now islamic news.lost the plot you get more balance from the bbc.
whether the demonstration was pre organised or not, do you think that the sentiments expressed by the demonstrators were also “staged” ? I doubt it. It’s the sentiment that’s important to western viewers.
On a larger point – a lot of waffle has been around lately of the sort that “bloggers” expose truth. People without any journalistic training or experience who look for “facts” to create a case to back up their own pre conceived ideas. This is the very definition of “bias” reporting. I have to say that I find it increasingly unlikely that the BBC is anti-Israeli, or even worse anti-semitic, although I don’t think it too far fetched to suggest that some of their reporters may sympathise with the other side more than they do Israel.
The other day I was sent a link (from a poster here) to the ussneverdock blog as though this was an honest distillation of the mass of information about the middle east and the BBC’s reporting thereof. Prepared to belive this I soon noted that it uses as a source of it’s facts/counter evidence another site called “honsetreporting.com”.
A quick glance at honest reporting’s mission reveals that it’s aim is to educate “advocates” for Israel. It’s history of the region is even to someone fairly new to it all selective to say the least. But, not only are these sites evidently not impartial they are proud to be that way.
So this brings me to my question – if the BBC just came out and said we’re scrapping the licence fee and yip we want to see Israel “wiped off the map”, would that be a satisfactory outcome for you ?
“Orla intones “whether this demonstration was spontaneous or organised it is hard to know…” ”
For her, and only her, it seems. And how convenient. Heaven forfend that she would have to report something negative about the saintly Muslim population, although now even the Hamas leadership has finaly spoken against their self-pity and anarchy.
And she calls herself a ‘reporter’? Why on earth is this woman employed at all?
jlw writes: “People without any journalistic training or experience who look for “facts” to create a case to back up their own pre conceived ideas.”
There are two fatal assumptions in the above sentence. The first being that people writing and commenting on blogs lack ‘journalistic training or experience’.
This is nonsense. Several prominent bloggers are journalists. So are (at least) several commenters I can think of.
But would it mater if they weren’t?
When discussing warfare, you are far better served by having people with a military background who, rather than emoting over scenes of a flattened building or damaged vehicle, can actually tell at a glance whether the type of ordnance clamed to have done the damage could actually have done so.
Are you so lost in your liberal miasma that you would rather trust the word of Orla Guerin or Fergal Keane on military matters, against that of people who have used the weapons and at least know something about them?
The accusations you have repeatedly levelled against bloggers and commenters are patently silly.
Rather than challenge facts, you simply do precisely what you accuse your opponents of – preferring whichever side promotes the argument you happen to believe. In your case, a rather nasty (if fashionable) dose of anti-Israeli cultural relativism.
jlw
You have once again fallen into the trap set for you by Hezbolla.
You are SURE that the sentiments were not staged for the benefit of journalists by a terrorist organisation, well known for influencing and manipulating the media. You are probably ‘sure’ that a red cross ambulance was hit by an Israeli missile, that a Reuters Land Rover was ‘hit’ by an Israeli missile, that a woman lost the same house in a bombing raid at least twice on at least 2 different days etc. etc.
What makes you so sure? Why! It’s the media report that makes you sure. Unless you live in Lebanon, you cannot be SURE of anything except your prejudice, which enables you to discount the evidence of your own eyes(if you are prepared to read ALL the evidence, not just the so-called evidence that fits your bias).
It has been PROVED and ADMITTED over and over again that much of the coverage by the media has been influenced by hoax, stage management, lies etc. Why do they need to do that if the truth can stand unaided?
I prefer to look for truth, rather than just confirm my own prejudice. That is what a truly educated person is supposed to do .
That’s why I look at websites run by Lebanese as well. Look at website run by cedarsrevolution -they have a different view from yours.
Read ALL the evidence, and then, if you need to explain away the lies,hoaxes , manipulation by ignoring it, then you need to question your underlying prejudice/bias/anti-judaic feelings as being just that.
But don’t tell us that you’re looking for truth.
Because that would be lie.
All demonstrations are staged, and almost always for the same purpose – to attract the attention of the press and TV cameras. That’s why people do it.
Everyone knows this – there’s an almost quaint sense of protocol with which “demonstrations” are produced around the world. The question then becomes, who selects which production should make it to screen.
For Orla to pretend she doesn’t know this can only be dishonest – either that, or she’s very very very stupid.
The real question is. . . who editorially decides to “believe” it, and why bother to run with it?
jlw
i) I think you might be surprised at the depth of journalistic experience & training amongst bloggers.
ii) you might consider it possible that journalistic experience and training are neither necessary nor sufficient for ascertaining truth in any given situation.
iii) if the average BBC journalist is no less sensible/observant than the average blogger, then the question of why they from time to time make seemingly unnecessary errors must be bound up with the institutional environment in which they operate. In this case, that means the BBC: it’s monopoly, it’s insulation from the market, and the management/editorial structures which are expressions of that position. It’s not Orla, so to speak: it’s the institution that produces/employs Orla.
So to answer your question about the licence fee and the BBC consequently “coming out” and saying they want Israel wiped off the map – yes, that’d be absolutely fine with me, because their ratings/revenues would be down there with Hezbollah TV. And Orla, poor girl, would lose even more weight on her necessarily reduced diet.
“It’s the sentiment that’s important to western viewers”
Is jlw actually Shane Richmond? He is certainly using the “fake but true” argument used by SR to defend the use of photoshopped images.
Now that you’re rants are over would you care to answer the questions.
The idea that you have read every theory proposed by any commentator on the middle east, have objectively weighed up the strengths of each one and come to the conclusions about the middle east you have(which I’m sure were reached many years ago) is a lie, and don’t try an tell me otherwise.
Thanks.
jlw:
Prepared to belive this I soon noted that it uses as a source of it’s facts/counter evidence another site called “honsetreporting.com”.
A quick glance at honest reporting’s mission reveals that it’s aim is to educate “advocates” for Israel.
Its HONESTREPORTING.COM
What’s so wrong with its declared aim? At least its honest about it. People like you claim to care about truth and justice but you really have another agenda.
You refuse to look at another link I gave you because the URL contains the word “zionism” – the link quotes the Geneva Convention which you can also find from other sources just in case you don’t believe its accurate when a “zionist” quotes it.
So this brings me to my question – if the BBC just came out and said we’re scrapping the licence fee and yip we want to see Israel “wiped off the map”, would that be a satisfactory outcome for you ?
I think I know how you would answer that question, your previous posts give us an inkling of your feelings towards Israel and its continued existence. In fact I’d hazard a guess that you’d be willing to continue paying the licence fee too. Its Israel that bothers you, not the BBC.
Umbongo,
Photoshopped images aside, what I meant is that the sentiment expressed by the demonstrators is not “staged” whereas the demonstration itself I’m sure probably was. Whether Orla Guerin knew this or not is piffling as the important message is that people were demonstrating against Israel and the US when Kofi Anan arrived. Big deal.
Biodegradeable, we have been over your attempts to smear me as a rabid anti-semite who wants to see an entire civilisation wiped out. Leave it alone.
There is nothing at all wrong with their stated aim (of honest reporting). What is wrong is that an objective broker of facts has a mission statement which is to promote advocacy of only one side.
jlw
HonestReporting.com doesn’t claim to report both sides, the BBC does, that’s the difference.
What bothers you is that when the facts are seen objectively they often come out on Israel’s side and clearly show wanton bias on the part of those whose word you wish to believe.
eg: http://www.honestreporting.com/articles/45884734/reports/The_Photo_that_Started_it_All.asp
But,jlw, do you not see anything wrong with manipulation of an obviously complicit (willingly often, unwilling in many cases, but unable to say so, for fear of being killed ,banned, etc) crew of reporters, and therefore of the images they then send to a Western audience which swallows it hook line and sinker?It seems that it’s OK with you, as long as the lies and hoaxes confirm your bias.Your view is it doesn’t matter, as long as you know the real truth-(evil conspiratorial Zionists-seems I’ve heard that before),The problem is you don’t even know the truth when it hits you between the eyes.
Why do you continue to believe the lies as truth, and the truth as lies? Because it’s on the BBC? But the media are often hoodwinked, just like you, in the interests of their liberalism. The same thing happened pre 1939.They fell for the lies then too, as did many other ‘liberals’ only to realise they’d been hoodwinked too late.
honest reporting tries to redress the balance.They only started because of a false caption to a photo in the NYTimes, and decided to do something about it, and make the FACTS clear. Why is that wrong?Facts are the truth-Truth is not subjective.Truth belongs to both sides , but it seems that one side tries much harder than the other to pervert the truth- The evidence shows it.
Where are the blogs of pro Arabs exposing the hoaxes,photo manipulations, lies of the Israeli side? I haven’t come across too many. Why should that be? Maybe there aren’t too many to find.
Why does one side find it NECESSARY to run hoax photos etc? If their stories were true, the hoaxes wouldn’t be necessary.
The issue is not whether the media is manipulated- that is a fact.
The issue is why a public funded body should be so unaccountable to the public it is supposed to inform, but actually misinforms?
” people were demonstrating against Israel and the US when Koffi ANnan arrived”
What people were they? Where had they come from? How many were there? Were any counter demonstrators allowed? Those questions need to be asked and answered. You don’t ask them.
By the way, many, many people have done exactly the research you claim they have not done(how can you be so sure?Are you psychic? ) and have come to the very conclusion that you claim is pure prejudice and bias.
I am one of them.I am neither prejudiced nor biased, but a researcher of the truth. I am now sure where the truth lies.
jlw
HonestReporting.com isn’t PAID to report both sides by a forcibly levied tax, whereas the BBC is.
That there is pro-Hezbollah sentiment within Lebanon is unquestionable. That the BBC should report it is perfectly reasonable.
However, it’s equally clear that there is relevant CONTEXT that the viewers are entitled to, ie that this particular very public demonstration was staged by Hezbollah in collaboration with elements in the Lebanese army, for the cameras.
And as far as I’m concerned that’s OK too. I’d just like the Beeb to tell us.
But there’s another story to be told from Lebanon – the story of millions of Lebanese, especially Christians, who believe that Hezbollah is Syria and Iran’s way of taking over their country again, and who are angry with Israel, not for attacking Hezbollah, but for failing to emasculate them.
There are reports out there about this. Here’s one:
http://www.tnr.com/doc.mhtml?i=w060807&s=behe080706
And here’s another
http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/new.php?n=7314
Hezbollah intimidation of those who don’t support them is a major story, but one that the BBC is unlikely to tell. This is scandalous.
And yes, I would prefer to have public funding of the BBC stopped. Its journalists could then sink or swim according to the audiences they attract.
Alternatively they could hop right back to the Guardian from whence most of them came.
Not again. Not another thread taken up with head-banging with jlw.
He hates Israel & is not going to have his mind changed.
Any consideration of the BBC is tangental to jlw’s wish to find fault only by Israel & for him to support anti-democratic, anti-equality Muslim factions.
Why are threads being filed with this pointless “conversation”?
JLW:
Yeah, of course I believe that those are HEZB’ALLAH’s sentiments. There’s a difference. And, even accepting your twisted take, why didn’t Orla/Foreskin tell the truth? Something like: “although this demo was clearly staged for the western media, I, personally, believe that it reflected genuine local opinion”? Now, that’s not too difficult, is it? It’s called HONESTY. It’s something we NEVER get from BBC reporting in the Middle East – or, increasingly, anywhere else
Edna – are you perchance Jewish ?
Bob – is your helmet rubbing against your trousers ? Nothing wrong with foreskins.
“The idea that you have read every theory proposed by any commentator on the middle east, have objectively weighed up the strengths of each one and come to the conclusions about the middle east you have(which I’m sure were reached many years ago) is a lie, and don’t try an tell me otherwise.” Thus speaks the voice of democracy (but only for jlw and his ilk)….
Oh dear. So the years of experience some of us have in the Middle East and worldwide and/or military don’t count. And yes, most of us DO look at both sides and try to come up with a balanced viewpoint but it is rather difficult when the BBC deliberately and regularly omits all the facts as do the Guardian etc and, as I have found out on occasion, so do the Daily Mail and the Sun! Blogs are better in many ways because you see almost at the outset where they are coming from – left/right/centre/Atilla the Hun fan club etc and can amend your reactions to their posts accordingly…unlike the BBC which makes a habit of sneak editing when caught out.
I doubt very much given your reactions to comments that you are the world’s foremost expert on the Middle East somehow. More like a minor version of Robert Fisk – you know the one who thought Jesus was born in Jerusalem but claims to be THE expert on the Middle East!
I’m sorry but given your rather daft (and wholly uninformed) opinions so far I’m not going to be swayed into an anti or pro viewpoint by the likes of you. As always, and as do most of us here, I/we will seek the light in this and other places and form our own opinions. Perhaps you should give us up as a lost cause and go back to Democratic Underground or suchlike?
Nasty, nasty Capitalism
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/5292860.stm
Er……..
http://www.bbc.co.uk/branding/
Hmmmmm!
I doubt very much given your reactions to comments that you are the world’s foremost expert on the Middle East somehow.
Absolutely right, and nor did I claim to be.
I find it a bit rich that you should all claim Israel is the victim of state funded propaganda and mis information when Israel with .001 % of the worlds population and the 16th wealthiest country in the world is the recipient of 1/3 of the total US foreign aid and has cost the US taxpayer £135 billion dollars (so far).
Meanwhile a million people some of whom are directly descended from those ‘removed’ from their land to create Israel (even Yizhak Rabin said so before you all start) live in abject poverty behind a huge “fence”, under daily threat of Israeli attack and with no control over any of their resources. But the most vile thing about all of this is that it is held by you lot to be their own fault. To most people without a bias one way or the other it would seem as though Israel enjoys a very priveleged position indeed. Most people quickly become aware that one side is rich and powerful and the other is marginalised and impoverished. Whatever else you may say about the middle east – these are the bare facts.
Trying to demonise the BBC as “anti-Israeli” is a waste of time and wont change peoples perception of Israel, nor will trying to portray Israel as being the vanguard in a new “clash of civilisations” as long as such fundamental imbalance is plain for all to see.
Edna – are you perchance Jewish ?
Bob – is your helmet rubbing against your trousers ? Nothing wrong with foreskins.
jlw | 29.08.06 – 1:03 pm
Of course you’re not a Jew hater are you? How could we have possibly thought that of you?
Shame on us!
I admit that was a cheap shot but I didn’t bring up the foreskin !
jlw:
Fuck off
Or alternatively GFY!
Biodegradeable Orla/Foreskin Spot the connection being made here ? Get off your crutch.
Explain “Edna – are you perchance Jewish ?”, then fuck off.
jlw | 29.08.06 – 1:50 pm
If the palis had any gumption they could be prosperous as well as prosecuting their case about land.
If they didn’t resort to obviously ineffective violence, didn’t spend so much on arms and tried to develop a reasonable economy they would gain some respect instead of the politically motivated exploitation by the left (inc the beeb) who want them to remain as victims for use in decrying Israel and the US.
If the palis had any brains they would realise they are beating themselves to death and would get up off their knees and try to make a go of their land.
Biodegradeable A simple question, just interested to see how objective Edna is. Now why don’t you fuck off and stop insulting anyone who doesn’t agree with you. Moron.
I’d read somewhere that ‘Orla’ means ‘foreskin’ in hebrew – if true, it might explain her anti-Jewish bias…
“So this brings me to my question – if the BBC just came out and said we’re scrapping the licence fee and yip we want to see Israel “wiped off the map”, would that be a satisfactory outcome for you ?”
in other words – privatise the BBC.
I have no problem with that whatsoever. I can then choose not to watch the BBC , and therefore not contribute to their funding.
At the present time, if i refuse to pay my license fee i will end up with a criminal record and face a period in jail. that is what i object to – forced funding of an organisation that constantly peddles anti-western, anti-American, anti-israel propaganda, and refuses to confront Islamism head on.
jlw
“I find it a bit rich that you should all claim Israel is the victim of state funded propaganda and mis information when Israel with .001 % of the worlds population and the 16th wealthiest country in the world is the recipient of 1/3 of the total US foreign aid and has cost the US taxpayer £135 billion dollars (so far).”
Non sequitur. This is about publicly funded UK broadcasting, not US taxes.
“Meanwhile a million people some of whom are directly descended from those ‘removed’ from their land to create Israel”
Whose fault it that? The Palestinians could have been preparing to celebrate the 60th anniversary of their State if they and their Arab neighbours had accepted that a tiny amount of land would be dedicated to creating Israel. Come to think of it, the Palestinians could have had a state any time between 1948 and 1967 (if the Jordanians and Egyptians had wanted to give it to them) or even in 2000.
“live in abject poverty”
If the $ billions of aid money donated by the UN, the US, the EU and yes, by Israel, had found its way into Palestinian infrastructure and industry and not into the pockets of Arafat and his cronies, then Palestinians wouldn’t need to live in poverty.
“behind a huge “fence””
Security barrier. Which wouldn’t be necessary if they’d give up terrorism.
And as for 1 million Palestinians being “forced off” land, how come there’s over a million Arab Israelis most of whom are living in towns and properties in which their families have lived for generations? Sure, Israeli society isn’t perfect, and injustices exist.
But the displacement of many Palestinians in 1948 was not all forced by the Israelis.
Unlike the expulsion of 1 million Jews from Arab countries at the same time.
The difference, jlw, is that whereas Israel accepted the UN mandate, declared statehood, and welcomed the refugees who then made lives for themselves in Israel, Arab states refused the opportunity for statehood, and condemned Palestinians to a stateless refugeehood in order to try to further their aim of destroying Israel.
Israel a privileged state? Try being an Israeli, and see how privileged it feels when the world attacks you for defending your citizens against annihilatory threats from your neighbours.
Biodegradeable And read this for what most sensible Israelis think. I would take their opinion any day over some paranoid fascist like you living in England who spends his spare time making insulting comments about BBC reporters who don’t think muslims are all murderous barbarians.
Although I’m sure you’ve already read it of course, but read it again.
‘I find it a bit rich that you should all claim Israel is the victim of state funded propaganda and mis information when Israel with .001 % of the worlds population and the 16th wealthiest country in the world is the recipient of 1/3 of the total US foreign aid and has cost the US taxpayer £135 billion dollars (so far).’
How does being a wealthy country that receives US aid stop you being a victim of state funded propaganda? Is it OK for news reporters to lie about Israel because of its wealth and who supports it?
And of course the ‘Palestinians’ have had millions in aid and to show for it…
‘Meanwhile a million people some of whom are directly descended from those ‘removed’ from their land to create Israel (even Yizhak Rabin said so before you all start)’
Untrue but people have been displaced all over the planet yet only the ‘Palestinians’ get all the attention. Any idea why?
‘live in abject poverty behind a huge “fence”, under daily threat of Israeli attack and with no control over any of their resources.’
The fence and the Israeli attacks are a response to their actions.
‘But the most vile thing about all of this is that it is held by you lot to be their own fault.’
It is.
‘To most people without a bias one way or the other it would seem as though Israel enjoys a very priveleged position indeed. Most people quickly become aware that one side is rich and powerful and the other is marginalised and impoverished. Whatever else you may say about the middle east – these are the bare facts. ‘
That is insulting drivel. There are millions of poor people around the world who deserve international support a lot more than the ‘Palestinians’ who wont get it because it goes to the ‘Palestinians’.
http://www.circumstitions.com/Jewish-kolnidre.html
Unfortunately, because of a computer glitch, Rabbi Nathan Segal had to give his serrmon “Sex, Sin, Circumcision and Tradition” off the cuff. His sermon covered, among other things: the inherent orgiastic and erectile qualities of the newborn (if not fetal) penis which should not be tampered with; the holiness of sex; ambiguous genitalia; and the definition of orla (Hebrew for “foreskin”) which means not necessarily the foreskin of the penis, but also the heart or the ear, so that one interpretation of the commandment to circumcise might mean to open one’s heart, etc. to holiness.
(My emphasis added.)
Fran
“the displacement of many Palestinians in 1948 was not all forced by the Israelis. ”
True. Many – perhaps most – ran away from what had become a war zone in order to spare themselves and their families from becoming ‘collateral damage’.
Yet because they ran away people like you and Biodegradable have no sympathy for them and say they shouldn’t be allowed back.
But when Lebanese civilians do not run away and instead perish in air strikes – you say you have no sympathy for them because they were warned by the IDF and should have run away.
Having it both ways?
Ralph That is insulting drivel. There are millions of poor people around the world who deserve international support a lot more than the ‘Palestinians’ who wont get it because it goes to the ‘Palestinians’.
Then surely they must also desrve it more than the Israelis who aren’t even poor.
The irony is that Israelis – yes, people actually living in Israel, not paranoid reactionary jewish people posting on blogs about the bbc being bias and thinking they are doing Israel a service (Biodegradeable) – have already started thinking about the long term viability of Israel and their increasing dependancy upon the US. This entire story of the clash of civilizations one which you all seem to so blindly advocate, is nothing but an ideological cover for something that has no connection with ideas and values at all. That being the determination of the United States to dominate the world’s resources, and especially oil.
What happens when the oil runs out ? The US will not continue to hand a blank cheque book to Israel.
“What happens when the oil runs out ? The US will not continue to hand a blank cheque book to Israel.”
israel has no oil.
and that “blank cheque book” you mention – Egypt gets more.
JLW – for I think it is you.
“True. Many – perhaps most – ran away from what had become a war zone in order to spare themselves and their families from becoming ‘collateral damage’.”
Who made it a war zone, JLW? Who attacked whom? It was not the Israelis, but the Arabs who created the war zone in 1948. And Arab leaders encouraged Palestinians to flee from the mayhem THEY intended to wreak upon the Jews. Many Jews had begged Arabs to remain and be part of Israel.
“Yet because they ran away people like you and Biodegradable have no sympathy for them and say they shouldn’t be allowed back.”
How do YOU know I have no sympathy for Palestinians? You have no idea what I feel for Palestinians, for I have only expressed my opinion on the reasons for their miserable condition today.
Their situation is pitiable, the more so as they have been the dupes of unscrupulous leaders and so called friends who have used Palestinian misery to further the end of destroying Israel. And those leaders and “friends” have made their point not at their own expense but at the expense of the Palestinians.
However, I will not stand by and allow Israel to be held solely responsible for their situation.
Palestinians are not helpless victims, and I doubt that they would want to be thought so. But they have to start being honest about the reasons why they are so impoverished.
And the existence of Israel is NOT the main reason for that poverty.
Interesting news about collusion between Lebanon and Hezb’Allah regarding the attack on the israeli frigate.
http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htsurf/articles/20060829.aspx
“The C-802 needs to work with a radar that can track the target. The C-802 apparently used Lebanese government coastal radars for this. The Israelis destroyed those radars after their ship was hit, and no more C-802s were fired.”
Do the Palestinians have any form of income other than foreign aid? Real question. Do they make anything, perform any services? If that tiny sliver of land becomes a country, how does it plan to support itself?
archduke
israel has no oil.
Indeed it does not. Very observant of you, so it can’t be for access to oil then that the US supports Israel.
and that “blank cheque book” you mention – Egypt gets more.
Not it doesn’t. Not from the US.
What happens when the oil runs out ? The US will not continue to hand a blank cheque book to Israel.
jlw
We have had that question before from an Israel hating commenter on this site.
Was it jlw? Was it the same person using another name? Or are there several all singing from the same hymn sheet (who co-incidentally arrive at B-BBC at about the same time)?
It just shows the pointlessness of responding to this/these person/people who are causing this site to be like thousands of others where lefty Israel/Jew haters slug it out with opponents.
“That being the determination of the United States to dominate the world’s resources, and especially oil.”
Huh??? Does this even mean anything, except some sort of knee-jerk Eurotrash Institutionally Leftist verbiage?
And even if it were true, well, they’re not doing a very good job are they?
Being that the cartel known as OPEC sets the price of crude oil. And the price at the pump rocketing in the US and being a factor in the mid-term elections. Damaging the current administration.
By the way…
TOP SUPPLIERS OF OIL TO THE US..
1. MEXICO
2. CANADA
3. VENEZUELA
Saudi Arabia is 7. Iraq isn’t even on the list. So much for the Middle-East.
Please explain how the “country” of the United States (as opposed to OPEC and the mega companies like BP) “dominates” oil?
Except by being a major customer who is dependent on a foreign product as the political elites in the US refuse to open up the vast oil reserves on their own soil, and in their own waters?
Try to think outside the quasi-marxist craptrap mindset that has been force-fed into you by the likes of the BBC since birth. Please.
jlw:
Biodegradeable A simple question, just interested to see how objective Edna is.
Oh right. If she’s Jewish she can’t be objective. So how does that square with your Jewish neighbour in Manchester who didn’t think Israel had a right to exist? I guess you have no problem with his objectivity.
jlw:
Biodegradeable And read this for what most sensible Israelis think.
How do you know what most “sensible” Israelis think?
I would take their opinion any day over some paranoid fascist like you living in England who spends his spare time making insulting comments about BBC reporters who don’t think muslims are all murderous barbarians.
a) I don’t live in England, or any other part of the UK
b) You’ll find I haven’t insulted any BBC reporters. Find me a quote and prove me wrong.
The irony is that Israelis – yes, people actually living in Israel, not paranoid reactionary jewish people posting on blogs about the bbc being bias and thinking they are doing Israel a service (Biodegradeable)
Do you know where I live? do you know how many of my family live in Israel?
Do you think you are doing Israel a service? If not do you realise who you are serving?
What happens when the oil runs out ? The US will not continue to hand a blank cheque book to Israel.
jlw | 29.08.06 – 3:04 pm
Another troll recently asked the very same question with those same words. How many names are you posting under?
Regarding refugees see the link below.
Bio
this jlw entity sounds like one ignorant jerk on every subject..
Only a fool could possibly write “when the oil runs out.”
What a moron.
He/she/it doesn’t know that in Colorado alone, the US has 4 times the total known oil reserves of Saudi Arabia.
They just can’t keep up with the constant discoveries of more oil reserves.
This planet is AWASH with the stuff. That’s because the Earth produces it.
What a dolt he/she/it is.
“The irony is that Israelis…have already started thinking about the long term viability of Israel and their increasing dependancy upon the US.”
Let’s leave aside the Guerin-esque hypothesising about what people are ‘thinking’ contained in this statement for now.
Your near neighbour is developing a nuclear programme and is talking about wiping you from the pages of history; your other neighbours are teaching their children that it is their duty to kill you because of your ethnicity.
I would wonder about the long-term ‘viability’ of my country too. Wouldn’t you?
It was former BBC reporter Tim Llewellyn who could not understand why the ‘abolition’ of Israel is a viewed as unthinkable by so many people. Now, many on the left (stand up, Andrew Murray) and the far-right openly talk about this proposition yet little is said about precisely what this means.
Israel might well ‘abolish’ itself in the future – is this what Israelis are pondering when you inform us that they are thinking about their “long term “viability”?
I love these euphemisms. As Kenny Everett didn’t say: “Let’s question the long-term viability of Russia!”
“It was former BBC reporter Tim Llewellyn who could not understand why the ‘abolition’ of Israel is a viewed as unthinkable by so many people.”
Hey, thanks Tim… I was only thinking that the other day. Only I was thinking of abolishing Wales.
Who could object to that.
No two people could possibly come to the “radical” conclusion that it is not in Israels long term interests to pursue a policy that renders it a US client. Do me a favour.
Jack Bauer
Proved oil reserves are those quantities of oil that geological information indicates can be with reasonable certainty recovered in the future from known reservoirs. Of the trillion barrels currently estimated, 6% are in North America, 9% in Central and Latin America, 2% in Europe, 4% in Asia Pacific, 7% in Africa, 6% in the Former Soviet Union.
Today, 66% of global oil reserves are in the hands of Middle Eastern regimes: Saudi Arabia (25%), Iraq (11%), Iran (8%), UAE (9%), Kuwait (9%), and Libya (2%).
It is estimated that between now and 2020 demand for oil will rise by 60%. Washington’s search for reliable oil suppliers outside the Middle East has brought about an oil boom in many African countries like Angola, Nigeria, Guinea and Chad. Given their proven reserves their longterm effect on global oil supply looks decidely dim.
Now then, only a “dolt” would fail to see the strategic significance of the middle east in this rosy picture.
Jack Bauer,
Even if it was “all about oil” (which we know it isn’t) so what? We all need the stuff. To paraphrase Ann Coulter, how does jlw think his cocaine and pot is delivered to him?
He needs to learn about The History of the Middle East… in a couple of minutes. Or if that’s too much strain on his attention span here’s The Middle East In A Nutshell