Slap in the Face

Blogger Restoring Britain commented yesterday on Monday’s Open thread about the BBC’s treatment of yet another story which seizes on the Israeli retaliation while ignoring the build-up that led to it.

Here is our old friend Yolande Knell, who might have picked up some of her material from this AP report, which also contains the usual emotive anti-Israel language. For example :

“Israel has branded the activists “provocateurs” who posed a security threat to the country. Calling itself the Middle East’s only democracy, it says the protesters have their priorities wrong and should instead focus on rampant human rights violations in neighboring Arab countries.”

With the Mavi Marmara incident in mind, these activists are undoubtedly provocateurs, it’s not really necessary to use the sneering: “Israel has branded” they ARE provocateurs. End of, as they say in Eastenders. Same goes for “Calling itself”. It IS the Middle East’s only democracy. Get over it, as they say elsewhere.

“In the video, Lt. Col. Shalom Eisner is seen smashing a Danish activist in the face with his M-16 rifle.”

To me that looks distinctly over the top. “Smashing” indicates something is broken. I think the poor fellow had stitches in his lip. Painful, but not exactly smashing.

However the AP article does go into more detail, so sneering aside, we are told:

 “The officer, through his confidantes, claimed the activist had previously struck him with a stick, breaking two of his fingers, Israeli media reported. One newspaper ran a photo of him with a bandage on his hand.”

Yolande Knell has:

“After an exchange, the video shows Lt Col Eisner suddenly slamming his M-16 rifle into a demonstrator’s face in an apparently unprovoked attack.”


In her defence, the video does appear to show an unprovoked attack. Probably because that’s the bit they filmed.

This isn’t the first time the press has seized upon such a thing and presented it as though pro Palestinian activists are angels of mercy, and the IDF are brutes. It isn’t the first time Israeli governments have condemned an errant Israeli before the facts have been fully examined. Remember Mohammad Al Dura.

In conclusion, this isn’t the first time the BBC has shown little or no interest in the background to a provocative pantomime by Israel-bashers and useful idiots, but expressed indignation the moment Israel responds.

This blogger has written a series of detailed articles exploiting this incident. He seems particularly upset that several Israelis have been praising Col Eisner, but check out the tenor of the comments to see what sort of attitude they reveal.


If Col Eisner’s bad-tempered face-butt was really representative of IDF behaviour and the shy Dane who was afraid to give his name – (“don’t tell ‘em, Andreas Ias”) – was really an innocent bicycle rider and songsmith, I’ll take it all back and apologise.

Tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

26 Responses to Slap in the Face

  1. Jim Dandy says:

    Even Netanyahu criticised him. The piece linked to is straight.


    • Sue says:

      Jim lad,
      “Even Netanyahu criticised him”
      Duh! (One of those faces kids make when they bunch their tongues inside their lower lip.) (Denotes idiocy)
      “It isn’t the first time Israeli governments have condemned an errant Israeli before the facts have been fully examined. Remember Mohammad al Dura.”

      “The piece linked to is straight.”
      Methinks you haven’t even read it.

      By the way there must be a deeper reason for Netanyahu’s reaction than that he simply assumes that the Israel-bashing film clip must be right. There’s the small matter of Israel’s image abroad, which means any knee-jerk ‘Israel firster‘ response from the Israeli government would arm the usual suspects. However, whenever they’ve done a similar thing in the past it has backfired. Think Mohhamad al Durah. Once you’ve stuck your neck out, it’s pretty hard to retract.
      It’s a bit like University Challenge. “I’ll have to take your first answer”.


      • Jim Dandy says:

        In what is a pretty tough neighbourhood, this is a minor incident. I don’t think the BBC is to blame for given it undue prominence given coverage across the msm. But I couldn’t quite figure why anyone gave much if a sh1t.


    • alan says:

      If the Dane did break the officer’s fingers then the officer’s reaction is entirely blameless….you can hardly be a victim of brutality if you instigated it.

      His professionlaism and self control in the circumstances are questionable when you know that this is precisely the reaction the ‘protesters’ aim to incite…but of course being on the ground is an entirely different matter to being sat at a computer terminal tapping away.

      However it doesn’t need to be said that if it was unprovoked then he will face the music…..not only for the violence but also for damaging Israel’s reputation….even more….and giving the anti-Semites yet another excuse to bash Israel.

      And I chose ‘anti-Semites’ deliberately…..where do you find the same people protesting about the creation of Pakistan or Syria’s previous 30 year occupation of Lebanon?


  2. alan says:

    Israel is clearly the provocateur…just by existing.

    (just don’t mention Pakistan…the Muslim ‘Zionist’ state that created the Taliban, has over 300 terrorist training camps inside its borders, that sponsors terror attacks against India and spread nuclear technology to the usual suspects…and never mind Syria that occupied Lebanon for 30 years)


  3. deegee says:

    Eisner will be thoroughly and transparently investigated. Boogie Yaalon deputy PM and former Chief of the General Staff said so yesterday. The truth one way or another will come out.

    Unfortunately, the short piece of video is compelling TV. It’s not exactly a surprise the BBC is running with it.

    Let’s keep a track of this to see that if Eisner is cleared and/or evidence comes out of an attack by the ‘victim’ provoking his response. If the BBC runs to form they will ignore it, leaving the accusation as history and the acquittal in the dustbin.


  4. Cassandra King says:

    I would like to see the reaction of hamarse coppers to these ridiculous useful idiots if they were stupid enough to try it on.

    What these rent a rabble crowds do is simple, they set up photo ops for later publication showing how brutal the IDF and Israeli police are. Its a very organized tactic by what appears to be simply peaceful protesters but their mission is to try and provoke reactions from the troops/police which is then expertly filmed and framed to show a different reality

    The BBC knows whats going on, they use the same tactics themselves to skew and pervert reality by photo/film manipulation. The attack on the IDF man was not filmed was it? No and that is the whole point of protester provocation tactics, they have become experts in getting the film/photo to lie.

    One person leaps out of the crowd and assaults and/or hits a policeman/soldier and on site support rabble with film equipment film the reaction. Fake blood is sometimes used as in the London riots, hence pictures of protesters with fake blood all over their heads posing for the perfect shots in front of police lines.

    These are the tactics used to provoke violent reactions, its a fishing expedition where multiple provocations result in one or two framed shots, this is a propaganda war where one side has found that faked footage can be worth its weight in gold in the effort to demonize the enemy in the eyes of the world audience who have yet to learn that the picture often lies.


    • Phobic-ist says:

      The bastards were doing this sort of thing way back when at events such as the 1980s miners strike. I know cos I was there! Those same leftie students attached to the rent-a-mobs would film every police move but turn the lens away when officers were attacked. Old tactic but it seems to still be working in shaping perceptions.


  5. TrueToo says:

    From what I’ve heard, the “peace activists” were provoking the IDF for a long time before Eisner’s attack, insulting them and also walking up to them and staring at them without saying anything. It’s possible that’s what the Dane was about to do just before Eisner hit him.

    The IDF are supposed to have a cameraman with them during these confrontations so that they can at least have evidence that tells their side of the story. Evidently that was mishandled. Also it has to be said that a guy of Eisner’s rank and experience should have known better than to give the Israel-haters exactly what they wanted.

    Yes, it is a pity that Netanyahu and others jumped the gun and pandered to anti-Israel opinion by distancing themselves from Eisner. I fear they are going to throw the book at him.

    And here I was feeling chuffed at the letter they sent suggesting that the pro-Palestinian “peace activists” go and demonstrate in Syria or Iran. Now they’ve gone and spoilt that. Rather, Eisner did, but there you have it.


  6. chrisH says:

    What gives the International Peace Corps-self appointed-to go into the only democratic state in that hellish wasteland, and then stick their beaks into tense and fraught conflicts of which they know nothing?
    This Danish bloke would be better off giving out cartoons of Muhammad in Gaza-that would , at least, involve a bit of courage and patriotism, unlike his Rachel Corrie-type gestures…which can end in needless tragedy.
    And as wiser bloggers have said-where`s the lead up to this incident?


  7. Doggywoggy says:

    Sorry to be off topic, but I cannot find any reference to this on the BBC website at all:

    Why would the BBC not report Ken Livingstone’s horror at hearing Bin Laden had been shot?


  8. smell the glove says:

    Pity we didnt have a few people, like the soilder concerned during the riots last year.


    • jarwill101 says:

      Amen to that. And using the business end of the rifle to discourage Paul Mason’s ‘political trailblazers’ from torching shops & murdering elderly citizens as they put out fires in their dustbins. Rioting scum? Bang. Bang. Shoot to kill. Voice of the people. We will be heard.


  9. Daphne Anson says:

    Thank you, Sue, for another of your fine posts. I’d missed this particular piece of Yolandeana. Needless to say, there’s nothing in the Knell report about the fact that the officer claims that the activist had struck him and broken two of his fingers, and the fact that one of the “provocateurs” detained at Ben-Gurion Airport drew a swastika on the wall of his or her holding cell is of course also kept tightly under wraps.


  10. Craig says:

    Yes, it certainly is odd that Yolande Knell’s piece fails to mention the potentially mitigating claim of provocation, because other UK MSM sources do mention it.

    Sky News has:
    “Lt Col Eisner told military investigators that two of his fingers had been broken in an attack by the Danish campaigner before he retaliated with his weapon.”

    The Daily Telegraph has:
    “Israel said the group of about 200 activists was attempting to block a main highway and had provoked the soldiers.
    Israeli media reported that the officer, through his confidantes, claimed the activist had previously struck him with a stick, breaking two of his fingers.”

    Mail Online has:
    “But Israeli military spokesman Yoav Mordechai said that, although the officer’s behaviour was unacceptable and he had been suspended following an initial investigation, the edited video ‘did not reflect the whole story’.
    He said: ‘These are harsh pictures, but I still can’t divorce the filmed episodes from the incident that lasted over an hour. It included violence by the anarchists and Palestinians, (though) this does not justify what we see.'”

    Why does a license-fee funded news organisation that makes huge claims to greatness fail to give all the relevant angles to a story? It wasn’t hard to include a couple of paragraphs giving this other perspective.

    Having just re-checked, the BBC website still hasn’t updated its Yolande Knell article – the only one on the story – to include any of the above.

    It’s either biased reporting or just very shoddy reporting.


    • Guest Who says:

      ‘It’s either biased reporting or just very shoddy reporting.’

      Not too sure if that word ‘reporting’ should be in there at all, TBH, simply on the basis of accurate descriptive usage..