Being Louis

or Louis in Wonderland.
I was wondering what all that fuss was about, so I put on my best Louis Theroux voice. I wanted to understand Louis, so I set off to enter Louis’s mind. I tried to think like Louis…..I wondered if Louis felt uncomfortable, as a human being, that the filmmakers used the word ‘Zionist’ pejoratively, and selected the most controversial sound-bites for their ubiquitous trailer? Then I realised – it’s the ratings, stupid.

I was wondering whether Louis was worried that the film might inadvertently lure antisemites from their lairs. Then I remembered the subtle backtracking I had noticed earlier, and I thought I understood.

I wondered whether Louis felt uncomfortable, on a human level, for asking settlers if they felt guilty over stealing Palestinian land, when his film actually stated, ” It [an Arab area] used to be Jewish till all the Jews were violently driven out 1920s during a pogrom.”
I wondered if Louis felt uneasy perpetuating myths about Jews stealing Arab land, when the opposite is nearer to the truth. Then it occured to me that the filmmakers forgot to edit that bit out and hoped no-one would notice. It was revealing, yes, but also so fleeting, so momentary, so easily missable; few would have noticed.

I began to wonder whether Louis had done any homework, before embarking on a film which he had waited ten years to make. Then I remembered, studying the Guardian and the BBC would have provided all the education Louis needed.

Louis chatted to the head of security of the Hebron Jewish community, named Yoni. Louis began a series of questions that were cunningly designed to highlight the Palestinians’ inequality. Louis seemed to be exposing injustice, but I was wondering if the injustice Louis perceived was the injustice that prevents Palestinians with murderous intent being allowed to import knives and guns, freely and democratically into Israeli residential areas. Was that the injustice Louis perceived, I asked myself?
I thought I detected some clumsy editing. I noticed an abrupt jump from Yoni’s half-finished answer to Louis’s first question, ping, to Louis’s next question. Louis said: It’s been reported that Arabs suffered a campaign of harassment from Jewish settlers in Hebron, including graffiti, stone throwing, abuse – to which Yoni replied: There were incidents – of course there were incidents – unfortunately – but you cannot compare.. CUT!
I was wondering whether Yoni had actually said some more, and the editors had edited it out. Hmmm, I wondered.
If some Arabs threw stones at Jewish settlers, the settlers would do what? asked Louis. If Yoni had said something that the editors didn’t like, the editors would do what? I wondered.

You may now stop thinking in the Louis Theroux voice. Snap! You’re back in the room!

Most of the Jews in the film seemed engaging and human. The Palestinians, on the other hand appeared to be bristling with hate and spittle, or sitting puffing a fag all day getting fatter and fatter and wondering why they couldn’t sell something and own it at the same time.
I’m not saying all Palestinians are like that by the way. I’m talking about the way they were shown on Louis’s film.

Is it fair to transfer Jews into Palestinian areas that had been won in war? asked Louis.

Is it fair not to mention that the wars in question were, in fact, wars of aggression, started by Arabs with the sole object of obliterating Israel?
Not a lot of people know that, Louis. And Louis, if you were given the chance to enlighten them, why didn’t you?

Bookmark the permalink.

37 Responses to Being Louis

  1. john in cheshire says:

    I stopped watching Mr Theroux after I first saw him several years ago. He is not a very nice person. He is the journalistic cuckoo in the nest. He appears to be a nice, innocent person, who only wants enlightenment, whereas in fact he has an ulterior motive in everything he does; and it is not nice. he is the love child of the bbc.


  2. Phil says:

    I’m not going to get blown up and killed on train or a bus in the UK by an ultra-Zionist.

    Posh BBC public schoolboy Louis Theroux is just a BBC yes man who knows what he has to do and say in order to get his money from the corporation.


  3. TrueToo says:

    Here’s the incomparable Caroline Glick exposing the motive behind the self-censorship of “journalists” covering the Israeli-Arab conflict:

    If the media reported on the overwhelming Jew hatred in the Arab world generally and in Egypt specifically, it would ruin the narrative of the Arab conflict with Israel. That narrative explains the roots of the conflict as frustrated Arab-Palestinian nationalism. It steadfastly denies any more deeply seated antipathy of Jews that is projected onto the Jewish state. The fact that the one Jewish state stands alone against 23 Arab states and 57 Muslim states whose populations are united in their hatred of Jews necessarily requires a revision of the narrative. And so their hatred is ignored.

    But Israelis don’t need CNN to tell us how our neighbors feel about us. We know already. And because we know, while we wish them the best of luck with their democracy movements, and would welcome the advent of a tolerant society in Egypt, we recognize that that tolerance will end when it comes to the Jews. And so whether they are democrats or autocrats, we fully expect they will continue to hate us.

    As always, she nails it.


  4. Smoking Hot says:

    l actually get pleasure from watching these progs … the pleasure comes from ripping all the lies apart that are being put forward as the truth


    • john in cheshire says:

      Fine, but you don’t have the benefit of refuting the lies to all the millions who have watched. Who will rid us of the lying, dissembling miscreants who pervade the bbc?


  5. Marky says:

    I’ve lived in the occupied territories of Edgware & Walthamstow. Had I thrown stones, terrorised, assaulted, murdered the Arabic / Muslim invaders would the BBC interview the Arabic / Muslim invaders putting the point to them that it’s them exacerbating my anger by buying up property in London? These Muslim settlers even went as far as setting up a bomb making factory just a couple of hundred yards from from where I lived with the aim of killing as many people as possible for their religion… At least the Jews have a good claim on the land they’re occupying.


  6. Cassandra King says:

    There was made in Germany a film called the ‘eternal Jew’, this film was created by some of the finest minds in German media, it was not some on the spot hate lash up by uneducated knuggle dragging brownshirts.

    The film was the culmination of a long carefully prepared and designed process carried out over years. The aim to delegitimize and dehumanize and demonize did not just kick off ad hoc on the back of an envelope.

    The BBC is engaged in a predetermined and very carefully planned process against the Jews and Israel, these films are not just born on the spot that stand on their own, each film is a piece of a puzzle and each piece is expertly designed to enhance the previous and the next piece of the puzzle lovingly being assembled.

    The end of the road will be another film like the eternal Jew, it is an evolutionary road and the BBC knows full well where the road goes because they designed it to go there. Hate has to be nurtured carefully and slowly, the gas chambers did not just appear because someone thought it up on the spur of the moment, it began years earlier and was simply an obvious evolution.

    If the BBC are not stopped soon the hatred they lovingly nuture will trip a tragedy beyond imagination, the eternal Jew was a creation that only the BBC could hope to emulate, the mindsets and skills are the same and the objectives are the same. The cream of the German visual media was involved in creating the eternal Jew, they were the equivalent of the BBC.


    • Grant says:

      You are right. I don’t say this lightly, but Beeboids are the new Nazis. It is not just their anti-semitism. It is their whole mindset which is Nazi.


      • Cassandra King says:

        Thanks Grant,

        The Holocaust was the final destination of a road, that road firstly had to be imagined then designed then enacted and built, the finest minds and the most educated of what you might call the executive elites and the technocracy were not just involved in isolated minor ways these classes were the driving force in creating the road to the industrial murder of a race.

        The designers of this road were perhaps the most qualified products of the finest educational institutions, the brightest minds of their generation taught by the finest minds of the previous one.

        A concerted effort has been made to rewrite history, to erase the roles and values of this highest class of people and no wonder!
        Many of the executive top management of the holocaust were practising or lapsed Catholics from wealthy or upper middle class backgrounds, this set of people were not recruited they volounteerd their services and did so with eagerness yet still most people are led to imagine that the holocaust was perpetrated by a gang of stupid and dense and thick lower order thugs with the intelligence of stunned slugs. Nothing could be further from the truth.

        See the similarities here? The upper executive classes and the upper middle class elites have found a tribal home in the BBC, a groupthink paradise where their race hatreds can prosper among friends, they are intelligent and incisive and utterly dangerous. I see a storm coming, I see it on the horizon and it seems nobody else even the potential victims cannot see it YET.

        The BBC is the incubator of the next holocaust, the finest minds that generated the first road to hell are gone, the next generation is designing its own road right now.


  7. Charlie says:

    The Prime Minister will say that the doctrine of multi-culturalism has failed during a speech in which he calls for “muscular liberalism” in defence of Western values.
    He will also blame the radicalisation of Muslim youths and the phenomenon of home-grown terrorism on a “hands-off tolerance” from the authorities.

    About time.


    • Guest Who says:

      Can’t speak for the BBC, but just had to write to SKY news requesting clarification on the claim made just now that the PM is ‘under fire’ for this.

      Having headlined the story in this manner, there was no mention who was saying this, which also spared the need to provide any context to background.

      I am sure there will be some usual suspects getting angry/offended, but often the MSM simply makes up a row internally.

      I am tiring of media stirring up ‘news’ as opposed to reporting it.


    • Grant says:

      Sure, Charlie, but he will do damn all about it. Cameron is just full of talk and nothing else.


  8. Johnny Norfolk says:

    All the BBC now does is promote its own thoughts and opinions. It breaks its charter all the time and nothing is done about it. Why are they allowed to do this. ?


    • hippiepooter says:

      Because they’re very powerful and noone wants their propaganda guns turned against them, especially with the stormtrooper regiments of the Guardian and the Independent to buttress them.


  9. Grant says:

    Louis Theroux is a nasty, superficial,worthless, rather dim, piece of BBC celebrity trash. I wouldn’t waste a minute even thinking about him.


    • hippiepooter says:

      I think he’s a top man.  I watched his doc on Youtube.  It’s obvious he’s very influenced by the BBC/MSM narrative on Israel, but I didn’t sense the slightest bit of antagonism from him towards the hardcore Zionists he was dealing with.

      I thought the final comment from the Zionist leader was unfortunate.  That was one thing that would play into the hands of the BBC anti-Israel narrative.  Braggadacio doesn’t go down well with anyone at the best of times, and I think that’s how it will come over to most neutral observers.  The guy appeared to be having a stressful day with a lot on his plate and I’m guessing he would regret his comment in retrospect.


  10. spooky says:

    Probably the opposite of what the BBC intended, but seeing how calm and good humoured the Israel troops were under the abuse and stoning from the Palestinan occupiers of the land, gave me a lot of respect for how they do their jobs. Interesting to see how the “arab” crowd had so many European faces. As for the Danish (?) neo-Nazi they arrested lets hope they kicked him straight out of their country.


    • Charlie says:

      Yes. He will be in our country very shortly.


    • hippiepooter says:

      I must confess, seeing that sanctimonious left-wing Danish Nazi eventually get arrested in no uncertain terms was a cathartic moment.  I went into football supporter mode of the Israel forces at that point.


  11. 1327 says:

    I watched most of this show (I missed the first 10 minutes) and it wasn’t as bad as I expected. Saying that I think Louis wanted to make his usual rubbish but the settlers knew what was coming and counted him. Despite some very odd editing none of the settlers came close to saying what I think Louis and the production team wanted. As a result they had to transmit something and in my mind the settlers came out of it quite well. They came across as positive people keen to build and improve while the on screen Palestinians sat there yelling abuse or had their kids throwing stones. The IDF didn’t come across as baby killing monsters but bored conscripts who were restained when dealing with stone throwing kids.

    Possibly because of his pre-conceived plans for the show I thought Louis missed some opportunities to enlighten the viewers. The section where the settler explained how he bought from an Arab who then left in the night was fascinating. It would have been interesting to look into this deeper and find out why the Arabs do this and just how much a settler pays for a property. Likewise the part that mentioned the pogrom in the 1920’s driving out the Jews from the village they took the guided tour of was intriguing. You could make a fascinating documentary on how long those Jews had been there , why the pogrom occured , how many died , where the survivors went and who the Arabs were who took over their properties. Funnily enough I don’t expect to see it on TV anytime soon !


  12. hippiepooter says:

    Richard Bacon interviewed Louis 03.02.11

    His interview begins at 9:21.  You may wish to catch the report from John Lines from Cairo before that (and during the Theroux interview).  You can’t get a better example of a wantonly partisan beeboid … back to the main theme … Early on Theroux states:-

    “Settlements deemed illegal under Israeli law are protected by the Israeli Army.  This surprised and disappointed me”.

    This is a pretty dumb comment by Louis.  Even if people are breaking the law they are still entitled to protection from murder and violence.

    I don’t attribute any malice towards Louis expressing this opinion, merely short-sightedness.  I do so because the rest of the interview makes it patently evident he has no time for anti-Semitism, least of all the cesspit of anti-Semitism that appeared to me to be brewing not too far below Bacon’s surface.

    @ 27:32mins Bacon plays a second excerpt from Louis’ programme.   A settler says:-

    “We either pack our bags and go back to the ovens of Auschwitz and/or go back to the shores of Australia, or this is our land and it means fighting for it.”  ..



    • hippiepooter says:


      At the end of the excerpt the conversation goes:-

      BACON:  That mindset is extraordinary.  It’s a straight choice between going back to Auschwitz or taking land off Palestinians and living in these [their?] homes.

      THEROUX:   Although he throws in Australia as a third option ..

      BACON:   Oh he did didn’t he [derisive tone].

      THEROUX:  So it’s a three way choice.  But not to – we shouldn’t make light of it and in fact to make his case for a second, you know its true that the impulse is not very different from what Jews did in the 40’s who went out there before it was a sovereign State that had been recognized internationally and as adventurers and pioneers built a nation, you know, very bravely … and that was recognised legally and now that’s the State of Israel.   ../..

      I got the impression that Theroux detected the enmity towards the Jewish people behind Bacon’s derisive snort and set out to make clear to Bacon that he wasn’t going to let the interview go that way.

      What Louis could have mentioned as well is that these Settlers haven’t taken land off Palestinians, they’ve bought it (please correct me someone if my understanding is wrong?).

      I think Louis is a really good guy.  Sue indicated in his previous post that he seemed to realise that the bigot contingent amongst his colleagues (a substantial number) were looking to make anti-Semitic hay out of his programme.

      It’s on youtube as well, so I’ll have a look at it after I’ve heard the Bacon interview.  .. Another quiet day at work!


      • sue says:

        I don’t especially dislike Louis Theroux, much as it might seem otherwise. As H/p says, I think he regretted that  the trailer’s sensationalised  editing had sparked off a bit more racist invective than anticipated.
        Maybe I’ve done the same thing here – sparking off a bit more Louis-bashing than I meant to.
        I imagine he barged in lazily, knowing only the so-called Palestinian narrative, – stolen land, Palestinian land, Muslim land. That’s unintended antisemitism – very common – and most of the perpetrators are horrified if accused of it.  He really should have done his homework.

        People who make films like this are generally agenda-driven, like Michael Moore, John Pilger or Al Gore, and usually from the political left. But Louis seems to be trying to be a celebrity, more of a humourless Ali G, exposing hypocrisy and evil, and do-gooding in general.

        In other words he’s completely out of his depth with the I / P conflict.


        • hippiepooter says:

          I dont know how much of Louis you’ve watched.  I’ve found him very humourous.  I also found the questions he was putting very intelligent, although his understanding of the Arab/Israeli conflict seemed very dependent on BBC information, which makes anyone sound ignorant.


          • sue says:

            I’ve watched him a reasonable number of times. When one sympathises with his angle, for example his exposure of a ludicrous Nazi family, or some right-wing supremacists, his pretend-innocent approach is effective. It gives the impression that he is colluding with the audience, and flatters us that we’re being let in on the strategy. Bullies do that too, come to think of it.
            However, when he tackles a topic from the ‘wrong’ angle and misrepresents it through poor research and limited grasp, the technique backfires and makes Louis look foolish.
            I think there is an element of humour there, but not laugh out loud humour. More of a steely, ruthless, jeering kind of thing. 


        • kevin says:

          Louis Theroux show was not has bad that you think it was. To fair on him. he did try not be biased on them. It just too much for him to take.


      • TrueToo says:


        I believe it’s Jon Leyne in Cairo. He’s pathetic. I recall that during the Hamas-Fatah slaughter he wrote, The Israelis must be rubbing their hands in glee at what’s happening in Gaza.


        • Craig says:

          ‘Pathetic’ is the word. It’s only a few weeks since Leyne was reacting to the Tunisian uprising by saying he didn’t think it was very likely it would spread to Egypt as the Egyptians were unlikely to go out onto the streets and were more depressed than angry.

          He said that on the radio, but just checking the BBC website it turns out that he wrote an article called No sign Egypt will take the Tunisian road where he says much the same thing. Checking out Google News (which shows earlier alternative titles for articles), this piece was originally called Risk contained:

          The simple fact is that most Egyptians do not see any way that they can change their country or their lives through political action, be it voting, activism, or going out on the streets to demonstrate.

          How wrong can you be?


        • hippiepooter says:

          Phew, afterwards I saw someone refer to an interview with Birmingham Tory Councillor John Lines concerning the snub to a British war hero by Islamist councillors and I thought I’d got badly confused!

          Yeah, John Leyne did sound to me like a serial tosser, didn’t come over as a ‘one off’ incident.


  13. David Preiser (USA) says:

    What I don’t like is that saying there was no such thing as Palestinians or Palestinian land before 1967 is now an “ultra-Zionist belief” instead of the solid fact it actually is.  When facts are denied and presented as mere prejudiced opinion, we have a problem.


    • sue says:

      Yes, it’s the ratchet effect. As soon as some outrageous allegation is made by the Palestinians and accepted by pro-Palestinians, it’s banked, and the ratchet is tightened, never to be rescinded.
      Bit like ‘illegal under international law’ and ‘the massacre of thousands of babies’ and much much more….


      • David Preiser (USA) says:

        This is vastly different from the debate about the legality of settlements and how many Palestinian casualties there are.

        It’s a fact that there was no such thing as Palestinian land before 1967.  They were Jordanians.  This isn’t an opinion or political position.  Yet, as presented here, it becomes not only an opinon, but an extremist position.  It’s an Orwellian revision of historical fact, and contributes the demonization of Jews world wide.

        If I knew how to take the BBC to court over this, I would.


        • Biodegradable says:

          The BBC seems to have dropped completely terms like “disputed territory” in favour of the unequivocal “Palestinian land”.  
          They’ve made their minds up and are intent on making their audience’s mind up too.


  14. Biodegradable says:

    BBC rows back on Louis Theroux publicityThe BBC has had to backtrack after it sent out an incorrect publicity notice describing hard-line Zionists featured in a Louis Theroux film as “possibly the biggest threat to world peace today”.

    A corrected version of the billing had to be resent after the JC contacted the BBC to ask about the description, which included the lines: “In part these men and women are a tiny group of religious extremists who claim they are acting on divine promises from thousands of years ago.
    “In part they are possibly the biggest threat to world peace today.”
    A BBC spokesperson said: “This billing for The Ultra Zionists did not reflect the programme accurately. As soon as the mistake was brought to our attention, we rectified the situation by replacing it with the correct billing.”