Israel/Capital
Mark Urban on Newsnight referred to Jerusalem as ‘Israel’s capital’….apparently this was cause for complaint and the BBC duly prostrated itself and issued forth with a correction…
Newsnight, BBC2, 14 October 2015: Finding by the Editorial Complaints Unit
Complaint
A viewer complained that Mark Urban incorrectly referred to Jerusalem as “Israel’s capital”.
Outcome
His wording suggested that Jerusalem was the undisputed capital of Israel, which is not the case. However, the programme-makers had acknowledged the inaccuracy and posted a correction on the BBC’s website and Twitter. In the Unit’s view, this sufficed to resolve the issue of complaint.
Resolved
Why did the BBC ‘resolve’ the issue? There is no issue…Jerusalem is the Israeli capital regardless of who else claims part of it…just as Israel is ‘Israel’ regardless of who wants to wipe it off the map. Does the BBC ‘acknowledge the inaccuracy’ of calling Israel ‘Israel’?
Amazing and shows why the BBC is not fit for purpose (any purpose except evil). Many on here have detailed how difficult it is to get genuine complaints dealt with properly and appropriately when there is a genuine outbreak of bias or anti-semitism. However, a spurious complaint on a non-issue from a racist bigot of their own mind-set gets expedited and incorrected (that is amended from being right to being wrong) with grovelling apologies.
The BBC needs to be abolished NOW!
Re-education for that man!
He needs the same treatment as was given to those miserable heretics who allowed Quentin Letts to say on air that the Met Office’s climate catastrophe had not come to pass.
Is there any rational reason why Israel would want to change its capital to Jerusalem anyway?
^What do you mean, Ned?
Edward why would England want to change its capital to London, or France to Paris, or Egypt to Cairo?
Oh I see – like Australia to Canberra, Canada to Ottawa, USA to Washington DC.
Nope, still can’t see a connection there. Please help.
You clearly do need help. For the hard of understanding: Jerusalem is Israel’s capital.
So the BBC reporter did not make a mistake – the only mistakes were in the “correction” and apology.
Well, I would say Birmingham is the capital of England seeing as it’s the largest city, but most people wouldn’t recognise this. Just as almost every nation on earth does not (officially) recognise Jerusalem as the capital of Israel.
Birmingham bigger than London? Your geographical knowledge is getting worse. I would give up at this point if I were you.
City of London population: 7,375
City of Birmingham population: 1,101,360
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/City_of_London
Geographical knowledge? I have plenty.
You have missed the biggest part of London. Your stupidity reaches new heights.
No I haven’t. The London you are referring to is the ‘conurbation’ – Greater London is an administrative area that is named after the City. Depending on which source you find, the population of London can range between 7,375 and 12,000,000.
“Your stupidity reaches new heights.”
Some people know when they’re being stupid, some people don’t know when they’re being stupid, and some people give the impression they’re being stupid.
Greetings Edward
May I enquire if you work for Al Beeb or are you just a troll?
When did population size have anything to do with the choice of a capital city? I have decided that Lincoln, Nebraska is the real capital of the USA. Not for any good reason, but it is sort of in the middle.
That’s the point I was trying to make to Demon when I said “Oh I see – like Australia to Canberra, Canada to Ottawa, USA to Washington DC.” Those cities are not the largest.
But they ARE the capitals of those countries like Jerusalem IS the capital of Israel, which is only denied by people who think Jews cannot be allowed to make their own decisions.
The Knesset is in Jerusalem, the only vestige of true democracy in thousands of neighbouring square miles.
The problem with democracy is that everyone praises it, and everyone tries to subvert it.
Nobody is satisfied with a majority vote, unless it is for them.
Hence multiple IslamoCancer votes in Labour areas.
This problem was pointed out by JS Mill in c19, he may have had predecessors.
Alan!!
Considering the amount of moaning and wailing over press inaccuracies (inferred or de facto) that CAMERA is responsible for, it’s a tad hypocritical to point and laugh when the ‘enemy’ play that game.
But alas, I know exactly what this site is, and much of it gives me great joy – so I’ll just have to take the rough with the smooth.
The BBC is not always so pedantic when it comes to capital cities.
Here is a BBC London page on Facebook which describes London as the UK’s capital city.
But the UK has no official capital city, and neither does England.
The term ‘capital city’ has no legal or official status in England.
Here is some pointless EU waffle about the subject.
’33. In some countries, capital city status is based exclusively on longstanding traditions or on the importance enjoyed by the relevant city in the country concerned. Therefore, while the practice of designating the capital in European constitutions may be widespread, capital status in these states is enshrined neither by the fundamental law nor by any other statutory regulation. Thus, Nicosia in Cyprus, Copenhagen in Denmark, Helsinki in Finland, Paris in France, Lisbon in Portugal and London in Britain are, let us say, conventional capital cities without any legal recognition. ‘
https://wcd.coe.int/ViewDoc.jsp?id=1160319&Site=CM
Oxford Dictionary
capital
noun
(also capital city or town)
The city or town that functions as the seat of government and administrative centre of a country or region:
Warsaw is the capital of Poland
Israel’s parliament, the Knesset, is in Jerusalem as is the official residence of the head of state and the prime minister. All government departments are located in Jerusalem. The Supreme Court is located in Jerusalem. There is nothing in any definition that I have found that requires the assent of any other nation for the location of a nation’s capital. Nor is there any requirement that a media organisation need agree with that nation’s choice.
Israel legislated in Basic Law: Jerusalem, the Capital of Israel (1980) that Jerusalem is Israel’s capital.
Intriguingly, Oxford Dictionaries for Children have teamed up with BBC Radio 2’s 500 Words to find the most talented young writers. Perhaps it is the Adult Oxford Dictionary that the BBC objects to?
The BBC’s decision that Jerusalem is not Israel’s capital is wrong semantically, in law and in common practice.
The BBC decision was listed as 14 October 2015. Why did it take almost five months before it became a BiasedBBC discussion?
Just asking.
It is for Israel to decide what is their capital, as it is for any country. It’s absurd in the nth degree that anybody outside, least of all the BBC and their convoluted and irrelevant ideas about legality to determine another country’s capital city. Putting aside their tediously routine Israel bashing stance, this is BBC arrogance at its most odious.
No point arguing with stupidity, but it is matched by his arrogance. He thinks it’s for him to decide where Israel’s capital is and not the Israelis themselves.
Demon, this issue isn’t about what the capital of Israel is (I don’t know myself!) but why the BBC made a correction. There is obviously a very good reason why this should happen. Can you give me that reason?
If there is absolutely no reason for the BBC to make the correction, then we need to put in a counter-claim.
There is no reason for the BBC to make a correction short of their own institutional anti-semitism which clearly affects their employees like you. Why do the fascists at the BBC believe that the Jewish state of Israel is the only country in the world that is not allowed to choose where they have their own capital. Why do the BBC think that only they can choose! (btw no question marks mean the questions are rhetorical).
As far as I understand it, Israel does not currently have sovereignty over Jerusalem as it is disputed territory. The vision the UN has for Jerusalem is that it will become the capital city of both Israel and Palestine.
There’s nothing anti-Semitic about that.
What claim does Islam have on Jerusalem Edward?
Unless you count “because the Jews claim it, so they`re not getting it”
Jerusalem was built by the Jews, for the Judean people…Bethel was similarly designated for Israel as I recall…but Israel now is one nation.
Or at least it was until the Romans cast the Jewish people to the four winds a few years after Jesus had risen from the dead.
Throughout all this time, the Arabs were way down Saudi way, and no Arab claim was made on the area that now constitutes the Middle East as we know it.
There WERE competing Semitic tribes-but Muslim they weren`t.
The current nation of Israel was created as part of the WW1 settlement, enshrined in law since 1948.
So Israel is Jewish-and Jerusalem has been its capital , as nominated by the democratically constituted. legal and designated offices of the UN-by the Government and people of Israel themselves.
As for Islams claim-I`1ll save you the trouble of checking.
Muhammad apparently had a night vision where he saw himself ascending into heaven on a winged horse from a tower in Jerusalem.
Let`s hope the Calais jungles don`t dream the same for themselves eh?…or else the Muslim Brotherhood will be claiming the Post Office Tower as their NEXT Holy Place to be wrested from the British.
Your understanding is incorrect as Jerusalem is not disputed territory – it is not claimed by any other state. Prior to 1967, the Eastern part was under the control of Jordan, which seized it following the recreation of Israel and as such it was ‘disputed territory’. However, Jordan has since formally given up any claim of sovereignty over Jerusalem, or the parts of Judea and Sumeria referred to by the likes of the BBC as ‘the West Bank’. Jerusalem is unambiguously the capital of Israel.
Edward, you also don’t understand the concept of rhetorical questions. Your lack of knowledge fits you well for your BBC job. Name all the countries in the world where the BBC has decided the people are not allowed to choose their own capital. I’ll give you a clue – there’s less than two. In fact all muslim countries can choose their own capital but noJewish one. That looks remarkably anti-semitic to anyone with an open mind. (That clearly discounts you, Edward.)
Well said IR.
The BBC also prostrated itself before the anti-Israel crew some time back when one of its staff referred to Jerusalem as Israel’s capital. It made an abject apology when the whiners complained.
And, driven by its implacable bias, it would not give Israel a capital at all in its listing of countries for the 2012 Olympics, but gave East Jerusalem to ‘Palestine’ as a capital.
http://www.timesofisrael.com/bbc-gives-east-jerusalem-to-palestine-as-capital/
It then ‘corrected’ its ‘mistake’ by listing neither Israel nor ‘Palestine’ with a capital city:
http://www.timesofisrael.com/jerusalem-is-nobodys-capital-for-bbc-now/
“No amount of insisting that all of Jerusalem is Israel’s “undivided and eternal capital” will change the reality that it never will be. “
http://ncronline.org/blogs/ncr-today/controversial-sovereignty-over-city-jerusalem
Edward, The area of Jerusalem in which the Knesset and the Presidents office stands, is not disputed territory, nor is there any controversy about its capital city status.
The article you have cited makes clear that part of the reasoning for the US governments position as described is the appeasement of global muslim interests (I guess that means Gulf state sovereign wealth and the ever present threat of violence that we are becoming accustomed to when dealing with matters of interest to the umma).
This is the process known as “islamisation”.
The Israeli capital city status of Jerusalem is of course also disputed by Hamas and other terrorists and their sympathisers (many of whom are actually covert antisemites who use the Palestinian Arabs as a handy proxy) who wish to see a “Judenrein” middle east.
“Palestine free from river to sea” is shorthand for this genocidal aspiration.
The BBC lies down with dogs, and repeatedly gets up with fleas.
I’m only going by what the ‘international community’ implies. Of course, this is a complicated matter of which I don’t fully understand, but if the world outside of Israel refuses to recognise Jerusalem as a capital city (Jewish or Palestinian) there must be a good reason for it.
Or maybe the entire world, apart from Israel, is wrong and Israel is right.
To put it into context for the benefit of myself, I see it on a par with someone calling themselves an ‘artist’ but unable to sell any paintings. The self-proclamation of status is cast into doubt if no one gives recognition to such status.
The US (Israel’s closest ally) fears a collapse in foreign relationships if it was to relocate its embassy to Jerusalem, which is wholly understandable. The same goes for every other nation on earth. Israel is free to claim any of its cities as its capital, but if no one gives recognition to Jerusalem’s status as capital of Israel, apart from the Israelis, then the status isn’t fit for purpose.
I know some people here are accusing me of being anti-Semitic, that’s how emotive this issue is! I’m non-religious so I don’t have any personal religious gripe either way. As far as I’m concerned they’re all as bad as each other.
This is a political issue poisoned by religion.
Interesting you should think that. I used to be the same. You would benefit from learning something about the religion (or ‘so-called’ religion as the BBC should refer to it if they were even slightly consistent) of Islam.
This is as similar to Christianity as Adolf Hitler is similar to Mother Teresa – both human beings so surely one must be as bad as the other? I would say Islam is a political ideology with some elements of religion included (belief in a god-like entity which created everything etc). Apart from some of the bible stories, copied when Islam was invented, Christianity and Islam have very little else in common.
The acceptance that Islam is broadly the same as other religions is one of the main reasons the western world cannot understand that Islam is such a harmful influence on the world, and especially on the civilised world.
It should be the duty of the BBC to unravel Islam for the population of the UK. Naturally, they do not see this as their role and instead believe they must hide the true nature of Islam at all costs.
I’m not talking about the differences between religions – I’m talking about the potential to do harm in the name of religion. You have to admit that all mainstream religions have their terrorists. Islamic terrorism is the flavour of our generation. When I was a kid it was the IRA, again a political movement poisoned by religion.
Your argument is the usual ‘Islam is more dangerous than Christianity therefore Christianity is good, Islam is evil’. They are not mutually exclusive.
Name me any Christian terror attack in the last month?
Here’s Islam’s (from http://www.religionofpeace.com)
Attacks 143
Killed 1528
Injured 1737
Suicide Blasts 38
Countries 20
Again, that’s not my point. I’m talking about ‘potential’ for terrorism. Yeah, I know Islamist terrorists are ‘the flavour of our generation’ – I just said that!
You also tried to compare the IRA with Islam.
Islamic aggression hasn`t just been “the flavour our generation” read the history.
Aggression from the very start, waxing and waning depending on the strength of its rivals.
Currently its rivals are weak, hence its resurgence on a global scale.
The IRA sought power over a small patch of Ireland. Brutal and dangerous they were but not on the scale of the movement for the caliphate and its partners the movement for islamisation of the west.
It is noticeable that Sinn Fein were happy to be involved in violent protests against PEGIDA in Dublin last weekend, so perhaps they`ve decided which way they think the wind is blowing.
http://www.religionofpeace.com/ does not exist.
Edward, you don`t say!
Meanwhile, Christian bakers are refusing to ice cakes with gay propaganda.
But like Edward says, all religions have the same potential to do harm!
All mainstream religions have their terrorists? The IRA were not ‘Christian Terrorists’. They were terrorists who just happened to be [nominally] Christians. They weren’t fighting upon orders of their God or religion, neither did they claim to have God on their side or leave ‘God is the Greatest’ signs all over their crime scenes.
The IRA demands were purely political ‘Brits out of Ireland’ and not motivated by their Catholicism but their belief that the British had no business being in Ireland.
The only ‘Christian Terrorists’ I can think of were/are the small groups of American zealouts who kill abortion clinic doctors. I agree these people appear religiously motivated but there are no mainstream Christian religious leaders who agree their actions are justified by the Bible.
Islam is different to all other religions I know about. It’s holy books contain direct instructions to believers to kill, hate and subjugate unbelievers merely for being unbelievers. Believers in Islam are required to follow the example of Mohammed in everything he did – right from how to settle a dispute to how to take a s**t.
You seem confused about the argument I’m making. You said all religions are as bad, I said they’re not – that does not mean I said that Christianity is good at all.
There are many, many examples of how negatively Islam effects the behaviour of people, they are going on all around the world as we speak. If you really can’t see that, or refuse to acknowledge it, I can only assume you are of the leftish persuasion. Never mind that, if you really know nothing about Islam it is not hard to educate yourself with the internet these days.
I’m not expressing a view on the debate here, or making a comparison, but the best example of Christian terrorists, I would suggest would be the Lord’s Resistance Army:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lord%27s_Resistance_Army
It can reasonably be argued that Islam is the first political ideology, or at least the first one that was written down. It defines objectives, the means of achieving them (conquest, war), the treatment of subjects, supremacism, laws and so on. Given the time it was written – the 7th Century – it is inevitable that much of this will be described using religious terminology, as political concepts in the modern term would be too abstract for that period and the audience. For it to have to longevity, it was necessary to have it based around a God rather than a temporal being such as a king or emperor. As pointed out, many of the religious aspects are derived from Judaism and Christianity. In one sense, the Quran can be considered alongside political tracts such as Plato’s Republic, Machiavelli’s The Prince and Discourses on Livy and of course, Engel and Marx’s Communist Manifesto. Western liberalism cannot understand it as politics, law, economics, morality and religion are integrated in a manner that they have not been in Europe since the Middle Ages.
The State of Israel like other states is able to choose its own capital. The fact that its capital isn`t recognised makes it exceptional, so the JEWISH state is exceptional in not being able to choose its own capital city on its own territory.
Its capital status is not “unfit for purpose” since any foreign diplomat who wishes to address the Knesset has to go and do it in Jerusalem.
The distance between Jerusalem and Tel Aviv is a short one and there are consulates in Jerusalem.
What is unusual is state recognition for terrorist groups who state their aim as the destruction of the Israeli state.
The Jewish state, treated as exceptional among the nations….why?
“The fact that its capital isn`t recognised makes it exceptional”
It says more about the countries that don’t recognise it than it does about Israel. The ones that don’t recognise it are the Muslim overlord states and the dhimmi states like Obama’s USA and, I believe, Cameron’s UK.
As I said, “Israel is free to claim any of its cities as its capital…” What’s the problem?
Well, that’s big of you to give them permission to do what they like in their own country. I hope they thank you for it.
Well, I’ve obviously upset a few people here like a bunch of mad looney ranting Mancunians who insist that Manchester is England’s second city when it’s actually Birmingham.
LOL!
Thanks for entertainment. Tada!
According to you it is as London is way down your list as you only include the Square Mile. Contradicting yourself again. A shame because on another post you made some valid and fair points. A shame you can’t be fair when it comes to Israel.
Edward
On the contrary , you have been entertaining us .
Thanks Ed .
This illustrates the BBC’s policy on the status of Jerusalem:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/newswatch/ukfs/hi/newsid_8370000/newsid_8374000/8374013.stm#jerusalem
http://www.bbc.co.uk/academy/journalism/article/art20130702112133696
It seems that even the US government occasionally accidentally refers to Jerusalem as Israel’s capital, before correcting itself. So its not surprising that there’s the occasional slip, but then complaints should be judged on their merits and not on who made them right?
Some people may assert that Jerusalem is Israel’s capital (they only seem to have that in common with Israel and Bolivia…. Bolivia’s embassy having been in the city suburbs, until they cut off diplomatic ties in 2009, and declared Israel a ‘terrorist state’), but agree or disagree with the BBC’s position, the above policy clearly shows an attempt to strive for impartiality.