Harry's Place

Everyone on it is an anti-semite.

Anyone who dares mention Israel is an anti-semite.

Israel Uber Alles !

I’m not sure I can take another half hour of this.

Not bothering to watch.

I repeat a point I made elsewhere pre-programme:-

We were shocked Cameron made no reference in his speech to the massive destruction it caused, or the 1,370 deaths that resulted, or for that matter the invasion itself. Indeed, our likely future prime minister went out of his way to praise Israel because it “strives to protect innocent life”. This remark was not intended satirically.

Says Osborne in his item in CiF.

This single paragraph defines the program-maker as the sole arbiter of a moral standard. Once the program maker takes this stance then the whole program is tainted by the pre-determined opinion and becomes a simple witch-hunt for an agenda we can guess at. This is a program called “Why Peter Osborne doesn’t like Israel and is shocked that people don’t share his opinion.

I add that Hague was very critical of Israel in Gaza and The Lebanon where he said that Israel’s response was “disproportionate”

I’m taking an antidote as I write. Two matzos with chopped liver, three giant fresh fried latkes and a whole new green. Ain’t nothing can touch me!

Creepy music!

What a laughably bad piece of journalism so far. He seems to have taken an hour to say that some rich people finance politicians, some of them are Jews and some of those are pro Israel.

I liked the way he mentioned the Bowen investigation, but failed to mention the decision.

Notice how all the ‘goodies’ – Rusbridger, the ex-BBC man, Oborne himself – are filmed in cosy book lined rooms. Meanwhile, the Jews are all filmed in ‘hidden camera’ style, like furtive footage of Mafia bosses getting in and out of cars – even the pics of Cameron were jerky – and put to a soundtrack straight out of a John Le Carre Cold War drama.

And the BNP will be delighted with those end titles!

ironic – Ch 4 announces 3D week after a monodimensional programme.

Well… that was a complete waste of time. An utterly pointless and dull use of Dispatches resources… Didn’t they realise this was just an Oborne bugbear?

Still, the superimposing of the Star of David over the Union Jack was a lovely subtle touch…

The sound of hatchets being buried. Rusbridger, Bowen, Guerlin – thwack, thwack, thwack. Creepy music.

Seems entirely fair enough – Oborne’s saying that there are a small number of wealthy individuals engaged in buying influence with British politicians through favours, cheerful sucking up and glorified cheese and wine bashes. This is called “Lobbying,” a shamefully common practice in Parliament.

Further, I’m glad he’s pointed out that what we’re talking about isn’t a “Jewish lobby” or even an “Israeli lobby” – it’s a very right wing loony Israel lobby, representing the aims of that country’s most hawkish wingnuts. Its aim is to garner support for the most mental wing of bomb-’em-all-and-let-God-sort-’em-out Israeli policy, regardless of whether this is in the interests of either Britain or Israel.

Pretty sober, intelligent and sensible, all told, although the stuff on Honest Reporting was pretty hilarious. Can’t really see any reasonable objections to the content.

If you go to CiFWatch you will discover that one of the moderators with an anti-Israel (and possibly antisemitic) bias is Rusbridgers daughter using her mother’s maiden name.

Just been to look at Oborne’s article in the Guardian – they’ve already shut down the comments.

what a load of shite-nothing new or that revolutionary

all “new” evidence was already known

He seems to have aimed his guns not so much at Israel, more at Jews in the western world, particularly the UK. It’s the same old scenario of powerful, rich, secretive Jews buying our government and controlling the media. We’ve seen it before, and we know how it plays out.

Catsmeow, that’s a very interesting observation.

These comments aren’t appearing in the order they were posted, btw (unless it’s my computer being weird).

In that case, Catsmeow, I meant your observation about book filled rooms etc.

Of course, if you give Jews a chance to show you their book filled rooms, you don’t stand a chance…

I haven’t been able to watch it yet, but will do once it’s available for download. However, going by Osborne’s article in the Guardian, the premise is the same as the Walt and Meirsheimer thesis, which is that they simply cannot conceive that people’s support for Israel could be sincere: therefore there must be coercion. Everything and anything else can and does follow from this ideologically-based assumption.

Still, I’ll watch it anyway. There’s a good analysis of Osborne’s piece over at the CST blog.

Jews gobbling up Palestinian babies.

“Of course, if you give Jews a chance to show you their book filled rooms, you don’t stand a chance…”

That’s both funny and illuminating.

For what is almost a transcript of the programme, see here:
http://www.opendemocracy.net/ourkingdom/peter-oborne-james-jones/pro-israel-lobby-in-britain-full-text

Yes, Monty, I noticed that.

Ah right, this is the channel who broadcasted the Ahmadinejad 2008 New Year Greeting and the obligatory Gaza appeal.

I just wonder what personal payment Peter Oborne has received from various Islamic lobbies in the UK to add oil into the conspiracy theories against the Jews in the UK; it’s 1930s all over again.

This is coming from the channel that brought you Ahmadinerjad’s Alternative Christmas Message to the Queen.

I only saw the last half but what I did see was risible.

a) The attempt to portray the BBC as being at the beck-and-call of the “Israel lobby” was pathetic considering the BBC has censored an internal investigation into its own bias inter-alia the Israel/Palestine question.

b) Emotive alluding to the Sabra/Shatilla massacre without mention that Elias Hobieka was promoted to being a Lebanese government minister, after the fact, whilst Syria was still in charge of Lebanon.

It was lightweight program which IMHO was not damaging in pr terms to Israel.

But that’s only because I have been brainwashed by the Zionist media and have no opinion of my own.

Oborne was shocked that Cameron said nothing about Cast Lead.

On the other hand, I would be completely unsurprised to be advised that Oborne provided absolutely no context to Cast Lead — i.e. Hamas bombarding Sderot continually for what — five or more years, with quite the spike in rocket attacks immediately prior to Cast Lead, not to mention the result of Israel retreating before properly neutralizing Hezbollah in the summer of 2006 in response to all the hew and cry over the damage to Hezbollah strongholds in south Lebanon:

“UNIFIL was first established in 1978 to confirm the withdrawal of Israeli troops from Lebanon; Israel had invaded the country in an effort to destroy Palestinian guerrillas and their bases south of the Litani River. After the 2006 Lebanon War, however, UNIFIL was expanded and essentially taken over by Europeans who were angry with US President George W Bush for his refusal to pressure Israel to halt its military retaliation against Hezbollah provocations.

At the time, most European leaders did not even pretend even-handedness, and many waxed lyrical about “the disproportionate use of force” by Israel. By far the most vocal European critic of Israel was Zapatero, a self-described post-modern feminist pacifist who believes that “no counter-terrorism offensive can ever be justified if it involves the loss of innocent human life.”

In an effort to prove his pro-Palestinian bona fides, Zapatero gave the keynote address at an anti-Israel rally in Alicante that took place during the war. After demonizing Israel for acting “illegally”, Zapatero famously allowed himself to be photographed wearing a Palestinian kaffiyeh. Pressed by critics who feared that Zapatero was inciting Spanish society, which has a well-documented historical predisposition to anti-Semitism, Zapatero said he did not regret posing for the photo and would do so again. Fair enough.

As early as October 2006, Terje Roed-Larsen, the special UN envoy for Lebanon, reported that “there have been arms coming across the border into Lebanon.” In April 2007, Walid Jumblatt, a senior Lebanese politician, told Al-Jazeera television that Lebanese security agents were helping Hezbollah guerrillas smuggle weapons across the porous border with Syria. In June of that year, Roed-Larsen again warned the Security Council of an “alarming and deeply disturbing picture” of “a steady flow of weapons and armed elements across the border from Syria.”

http://www.hudsonny.org/2009/11/spain-israel-and-the-row-over-unifil.php

The editing is pretty interesting too. Multiple banquet scenes, when Oborne is talking about receptions held by the Friends of Israel. Cleverly interlaced with scenes of bloodshed and crying children in Gaza. Presumably we are being led to associate Jewish feasting with dead gentile children in the time-honoured way.

Liked the random cutaway to a pile of pork pies. Good editing.

I get the impression that every Antisemitic icon was played as if this were a Leni Riefenstahl or Goebbels production.

Any film of cockroaches or rats scurrying. I didn’t watch because I don’t have to make myself angry and use the “c” word in front of my family (I’ve been told!)

All that money and Blighty still wouldn’t vote “No” on Goldstone…can’t be that effective…..

Catsmeow, you’re wrong on the BNP. The BNP, whether we like it or not, are more pro-Israel than the Tories or Labour. Remember Gaza earlier in the year? Remember the BNP’s principled line! Or do can you only remember the dithering support from the Tories and Labour.

This programme was too anecdotal (and covertly anti-semitic) to be taken seriously. It’s the usual conspiracy stuff. Also did you notice how he failed to mention the way Israelis looked in the settlements compared to the Palestinians. If the Palestinians can’t run an economy in their own “land” why should Israelis give up their settlements?

The comments are appearing in random order. Which adds to the fun.

We are ineffective, but note that if we were, and if Britain did vote no on the shameful Goldstone Report for instance, it would be blamed on the nefarious Jews controlling the world governments.

We lose, or we lose.

Or in this case, we double-lose.

Not having a television I have yet to see the programme so must refrain from commenting on that until I have. The “dossier” associated with the programme is available through the Channel 4 website and is worth reading, some of it was new to me. The bit about Jeremy Bowen’s original article on the 1967 war still being available on the JC website while it the BBC that was the target of the campaign was quite telling.

Pretty sober, intelligent and sensible, all told… Can’t really see any reasonable objections to the content.

Not even the Star of David being superimposed over the Union Jack?

I agree – the content was extremely anodyne. Which was at odds with its presentation.

“Further, I’m glad he’s pointed out that what we’re talking about isn’t a “Jewish lobby” or even an “Israeli lobby” – it’s a very right wing loony Israel lobby, representing the aims of that country’s most hawkish wingnuts.”

Hate to break it to ya, but the “hawkish wingnuts” (are you typing through babelfish?) are in charge.

I am getting another impression. This is NOT about the “Israeli Lobby” but a politically charged anti-Israel programme that tries to show Israel in a bad light, without any balance of reply, and then transposes it with the idea that “look at the scum who support these Israel massacres because they are paid to”.

It seems to be a thinly disguised attack on Israel’s behaviour under a different guise.

I am getting a feeling that the programme makers are the ones who will find themselves in trouble for a complete lack of balance and a biased agenda rather than investigative reporting. Juxtaposing children of Gaza with a banquet contributes nothing to an examination of pro-Israeli lobbying. How did Sabra & Shatilla get mentioned? What has it got to do with lobbying.

Is the impression being created that everything Israel does is bad and so its morally corrupt for anyone to support Israel?

From the transcript:

http://www.opendemocracy.net/ourkingdom/peter-oborne-james-jones/pro-israel-lobby-in-britain-full-text

“There is a question too of whether journalists should accept free trips from an organisation representing only one side in such a controversial conflict.”

Presumably that goes for trips to the West Bank and Gaza, too.

This seems to me the part with the most substance:

“BICOM, the Britain Israel Communications and Research Centre, is Britain’s major pro-Israel lobby. Founded in 2001 as an equivalent to America’s hugely influential AIPAC, it is bankrolled by its Chairman Poju Zabludowicz, a Finnish billionaire and former arms dealer. Over the past three years Zabludowicz has given over two million pounds in donations. This year, they sent thirty representatives to the AIPAC conference in America, a sign of BICOM’s growing ambition.

Incredibly, almost no one we interviewed for the film had even heard of Zabludowicz, a key player at the heart of the pro-Israel lobby in Britain. Our questions continually met with blank expressions from senior politicians and people in the Jewish community. Zabludowicz fiercely guards his privacy and does so with great success despite his wife being a renowned art collector, and counting Madonna and other A-list celebrities among close personal friends.

Zabludowicz’s father, Shlomo Zabludowicz, made his money through Israeli arms manufacturers Soltam Systems, a company, which continues to thrive and recently provided the IDF with artillery for its Gaza campaign. Poju Zabludowicz also ran Soltam, but has since moved his money from arms into property. He is now estimated to own around forty percent of downtown Las Vegas.

Far more significantly, we have discovered that he owns property in the illegal settlements in the West Bank. He has a stake in a shopping centre in Ma’ale Adumim, a settlement which is seen as strategically crucial in ensuring Jerusalem remains in Israeli hands. So much so that Netanyahu launched his election campaign in the settlement in 2005. “Starting my campaign here is not coincidental [it is] because Jerusalem is in danger.”

But it should also be mentioned that the Geneva Accords allow for Israel’s keeping Ma’ale Adumim in exchange for Israeli territory elsewhere.

In any case, is there any evidence that Zabludowicz or BICOM forced this down anyone’s throat?

“After the Lebanon war in 1982 Thatcher took an unprecedented stand by joining other European countries in imposing an arms embargo on Israel, which lasted twelve years until it was ended in 1994. Again this action contrasts with the reaction to the Lebanon war of 2006. Afterwards, British arms exports to Israel increased.”

Well, Hizbullah was clearly the aggressor and Israel was far more reluctant to launch a ground offensive.

Also, it would have been a built difficult for a government involved in Iraq or Afghanistan in the war on terror.

Or which said nothing about Russia in Chechnya, Sri Lanka and the Tamils etc.

What a surprise that FlyingFuckwit thinks a programme with blatant anti-semitic themes to his liking.

And one of those rich and powerful Jews used the word ‘arse’ when talking to Alan Rusbridger who looked pale with shock years after the event.

Well, thats 58 minutes I’ll never get back.

Watched the programme looking for some valuable information on how to be a successful lobbyist, some heavily guarded secrets were set to be revealed.

And what do I find…..

Successfull lobbying is about writing an angry letter to The Spectator (Lord Kalms) telling a newspaper editor that he’s gone too far, and getting some teenagers with kippot to run a blog out of some serviced offices.

Those fxxkin jews…I knew that they’d keep all their real secrets ‘in the tribe’.

“”what are the rules of British political behaviour that cause the Tory leader, his mass of MPs and parliamentary candidates to flock to the Friends of Israel lunch in the year of the Gaza invasion?? they ask incredulously. What could it be?” ”

A pre-existing dinner arrangement? Absence of a Pavlovian assumption that Israel must always be in the wrong? The assumption that, even if one disagrees with aspects of Israeli policy, it doesn’t negate Israel’s fundamental legitimacy, or the legitimacy of Anglo-Jewish pro-Israel sympathies? Anxiety to show Anglo-Jews that, despite the pasting Israel is getting in the media, British politicians are sensitive to their concerns, and that they are aware that Israel has a case as much as the Palestinians?

Something as nefarious as these, perhaps?

BTW, William Hague, the Shadow Foreign Secretary, January 2009:

‘We deeply regret the loss of civilian life in Gaza today. We call on the Israeli government to show restraint. At the same time we call on Hamas to stop the rocket attacks which are an unacceptable threat to Israel?s security, so that the ceasefire, which Hamas failed to renew, can be urgently restored’.

‘I am gravely concerned about the continuing violence in Gaza and the numbers of civilians killed and injured. The crisis is exacting a terrible human toll on both sides and it is imperative that further loss of life is avoided. I join the Security Council?s call for an immediate ceasefire and call on Arab countries to use their influence to urge Hamas to end rocket attacks on Israel. I also call on Israel to work with the international community so that the humanitarian relief so desperately needed in Gaza can be provided. The British Government must work with the United States and other members of the Middle East Quartet to secure an early return to negotiations in 2009. The only long-term solution is a negotiated two-state agreement that achieves a viable and secure Palestinian state living alongside a secure Israel with her right to live in peace and security recognised by all her neighbours. The world looks to the new President of the United States to place these negotiations at the top of his foreign policy agenda and to pursue them with vigour and determination from the very outset.’

‘The shelling of the UN Headquarters in Gaza is unacceptable. This undercuts efforts to bring relief to the people of Gaza and is against Israel’s own interests. The UNWRA provides food and aid to over a million Palestinian refugees in Gaza. The suspension of its operations will bring more misery to civilians. We desperately need a ceasefire by both sides, not further escalation. Both sides must meet their obligations to protect aid workers at all times.’

Can anything be in response to Channel 4 for their history of hatred and incitement?

“Israel is a wonderful and extraordinary country with a rich and flourishing democratic history. Founded in terrible circumstances in the immediate aftermath of the Holocaust and World War Two, it has a profound right to exist. But this moral legitimacy does not mean that the foreign and internal policies of Israel should be exempt from the same kind of probing criticism that any independent state must expect. Nor does it mean that the rights of Palestinians to their own state can be ignored.”

Now I’m really confused……….on the one hand, Oborne goes on and on and on and on about how the Lobby spends its time and money grooming MPs; i.e. a (legitimate) political activity; but then “concludes” with the idea that it is not politics at all, but “morality” the Holocaust that stops “criticism” of Israel; a morality that Oborne implies is self-censoring. And, since Obrone is not arguing that rich fat feeding Zionists do not exploit the Holocaust for their own hooken-nose purposes, the conclusion is that all those rich feasting Jews are wasting their money!

Maybe, that’s the punchline!

No Cookie, the impression being created is that British Jews, some of whom are named, are very rich, powerful, secretive, manipulative, and working solely in the interest of a foreign government.

I suppose, at some point, someone is going to mention Transparency and Daddy’s Little Girl, Isabella, in the same breath?

Monty, thanks for your take. I think “rich Jews” should apologise for being so successful and retire to give others a chance. (irony)

Just think about the contributions to the UK economy of Phillip Green, Sir Alan Sugar, Sir Jack Cohen and Stanley Kalms. How many people are employed by them?

Alan Sugar started on market stalls. Phillip Green was just a shop gofer. Stanley Kalms grew Dixons/Currys/PC World from a single store. Sir Jack Cohen (founder of Tesco) started as a tailor for his immigrant father.

Not good enough – Jew!

The only way one could have a decent programme on the “Israel Lobby” is by debunking it.
But, in the meantime, the fuckwits will quote it, the Jews who think that they are so cooooool on Israel will quote it as if they have a real ruling-class to oppose, and all those who recognise the programme for the shoddy and dishonest journalism that it is, will be accused of calling all critics of Israe “antisemitic” – and so it goes on.

It’s shit, but in that, it expresses exactly the times we are living in and through.

Something else confused me.

You know the bit where Rusbridger was talking about some jewish bloke telling him he had crossed the line after ‘Israeli Apartheid’ week back in 2006.

Didn’t the piece actually run in the paper? Isn’t Rusbridger still The Editor of The Guardian?

In which case….WTF was he on about?

Most of the viewers watching that program, are not members of this forum. They will be unaware of the track-record of CiF. All they can see is Rusbridger on their screens, looking very patrician, sounding very reasonable, relating his tale of woe about his encounter with Gerald Ronson. Not a word about the serious accusations concerning anti-semitic commentary routinely allowed on the CiF site. Or the fact that one of the worst offenders is Rusbridger’s daughter.

“But, in the meantime, the fuckwits will quote it, the Jews who think that they are so cooooool on Israel will quote it as if they have a real ruling-class to oppose, and all those who recognise the programme for the shoddy and dishonest journalism that it is, will be accused of calling all critics of Israel “antisemitic”

That’s pretty much it.

Bemused Lobbyist (aka MattG)

Monty

That was one of the most awful things about the programme. The assumption that any accusation of anti-semitism directed at CiF, for example, was a strategy to silnece criticism of Israel. It could not possibly have any merit.

Similarly, the assumption that any politician sympathetic to Israel must have been bought.

Ugly, dishonest and yes, poor, poor journalism.

MattG

No Monty, the impression was that those named were very rich, powerful, secretive, manipulative, and working solely in the interest of a foreign government. Which is perectly true. And they use Gerald Ronson as their enforcer. If necessary, Google him.

The “foreign government” bit is the point. It doesn’t matter which foreign government it is. It’s the principle. Eighty per cent of Tory MPs are members of CFI? The Tories are currently driven back to their shire heartlands. How is CFI representative of that?

Even leaving aside that the Tories are supposed to be a force moderating the whole process in the cause of (among other things) national sovereignty, just as Labour is supposed to be a force moderating the whole process in the cause of (among other things) peace.

Bemused Lobbyist, this is the part you mean:

“Ronson and Grunwald were dispatched to visit Alan Rusbridger in his office to convey their feelings. According to Rusbridger, Ronson didn’t even take his coat off: “He began by saying, I think his phrase was ‘I’ve always said opinions are like arseholes, everyone’s got one’, and then he effectively said ‘I’m in favour of free speech but there is a line which can’t be crossed and, as far as I’m concerned, you’ve crossed it, and you must stop this’.”

Who knows what happened, they didn’t ask any of the opposition, did they?

This was McGreal’s two part report:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2006/feb/07/southafrica.israel

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2006/feb/06/southafrica.israel

It clearly is attempting to equate Israel with apartheid South Africa.

It is highly polemical, biased and contestable (which doesn’t make it illegitimate). But there were and are plenty of British experts, academic and non academic, Jewish and non-Jewish, who would criticise and would have criticised McGreal.

Did The Guardian let them respond?

If not, The Guardian was plugging its anti-Zionist world view, which not only BICOM would have found objectionable, but many other far less organizationally politicised Britons, mainly Jewish, probably, but also others.

What did Rusbridger expect? Humble acquiescence and submission?

If the Israeli lobby is so powerful how is it that there have been no Royal Visits to Israel in sixty years, while not a week goes by without a Prince or Princess gadhopping about on a horse somewhere in the Middle East?

It’s all about horses, innit?

Matt G,
“Similarly, the assumption that any politician sympathetic to Israel must have been bought.”

That is it in the nut shell.
These guys are so convinced of the complete evilness of Israel that they cannot believe that anyone would support that country for purely political reasons or for any other reason. Because they are so blind to their own prejudices, the only explanation they can give is conspiracy. Aha, they can’t reall support Israel – no-one can, there must be another reason. And, that other reason is Jewish power.
It’s as old as the hills, but people still fall for it.
After all, it was not that long ago that non-Jewish politicians in Europe was accused of being on pay of the Jews in their support of emancipation, as if it was impossible to believe that non-Jew would, on sound political principles, support Jewish emancipation.
The wheel turns, but little changes (at least when it comes to views and visions of “the Jews”.)

Haha @ Birtwhistle.

Only the Jewish horses!

Chris McGreal is right, in that there is discrimination and racism in Israel. But there is among her enemies too, including if not especially among Palestinians. Why does Israel have to be perfect, or more perfect?

zkharya

yep, Im aware of all that. I remember the articles in question.

I was (and still am) simply bemused as to what the bit about Ronson being pissed of about the article (but not actually willing or able to do anything about it) told us about the secretive and powerful nature of the Zionist lobby.

The whole 5 minutes on that was just plain weird. As was the 9 minutes spent on that wealthy guy who had a minority stake in a company which (amongst its vast property portfolio) owned a shopping mall in the west bank. I guess it was a good excuse to have some pics of lush settler lawns interspersed with an arab boy hitting donkeys with a stick.

MattG

question: does the show expose anything illegal or at least unethical about these lobbies? If not, then basically wouldn’t that make their actions lobbying?

I wonder what McGreal thinks of Judge Goldstone? Is he evil because he did not speak out against apartheid in South Africa (McGreal is appalled that not all South African Jews were anti-apartheid – Jews should know better)or is he a righteous man and now redeemed for sticking it to the Israelis?

The bit about Ronson was in simply because he had made Rusbridger very very angry.

http://www.channel4.com/programmes/dispatches/episode-guide/series-42/episode-1

It seems there are a great deal of people totally in awe of the programme.

Even before it had aired in fact.

http://www.channel4.com/programmes/dispatches/episode-guide/series-42/episode-1

It seems there are a great deal of people totally in awe of the programme.

Even before it had aired in fact.

“If not, then basically wouldn’t that make their actions lobbying?”

Ah yes, but Jewish Lobbying has a “history”. that’s why it sells in a way that, say, Beetroot Assoc, lobbying does not. It’s in the DNA of the past century and a half!

And it is especially damaging to insist that Israel be more perfect, given the (at time genocidal) hatred in which she is universally held by her Palestinians and her neighbours.

But McGreal knows that. That’s why he does it.

Goldstone’s record in Yugoslavia and Rwanda does not inspire confidence.

Like South-West Norfolk, after this evening’s Dispatches Watford also needs, even more urgently than everywhere else, a candidate of any party or, far more probably, none who has an absolute commitment to the monarchy, the organic Constitution, national sovereignty, the Union, the Commonwealth, the countryside, grammar schools, traditional moral and social values, controlled importation and immigration, and a realistic foreign policy.

Who has a no less absolute commitment to the Welfare State, workers’ rights, consumer protection, strong communities, conservation (not environmentalism), fair taxation, full employment, proper local government, a powerful Parliament, and a base of real property from which every household can resist both over-mighty commercial interests and an over-mighty State.

Who, unlike Claire Ward, does not feel the need for a second home on expenses in order to represent a constituency a mere twenty minutes from Euston and very largely inhabited by London commuters.

And who, unlike Richard Harrington, sees neither national sovereignty, nor foreign policy realism, nor a strong Parliament as compatible with the purchase of British politics by the Israeli Hard Right or by any other foreigner whatever. What is he going to do? Send round Gerald Ronson?

If the Israeli lobby is so powerful how is it that there have been no Royal Visits to Israel in sixty years, while not a week goes by without a Prince or Princess gadhopping about on a horse somewhere in the Middle East?

Prince Charles attended Rabin’s funeral in Jerusalem in 1995, but then that was also the only occasion Hosni Mubarak ever deigned to visit Israel.

Wasn’t ‘dispatches’ largely the ‘world in action’ production team when it started? Anyway that reminded me a lot of the old World in Action programmes of fond memory… Especially the synthesised ‘chimes of doom’ sound fx as the ‘victims’ images freeze framed to high contrast monochrome and slow zoom. Yeah sometimes even the WIA came up with nothing interesting to report and had to jazz it up in post production in the hope of distracting the audience into not realising too.

The programme was actually really about Oborne’s well connected friends settling scores. And bitter and twisted because the banquets they attend serve lousy food.

Channel Four likes to think of itself as “Left Wing”
which means controversy for its own sake.
To its credit, it produced “Undercover Mosque”,
an old style, decent Left Programme.

Oborne is one of the few old style “Right Wingers”
around.
Accordingly, Channel Four see him as “Alternative”
Like Richard Ingrams, he’s no Holocaust denier,
just one of those chaps who thinks Jews are no better
than muslims. And best not apply to join their golf clubs.

This programme is less sinister than the day by day
hatred of Israel evinced by the BBC/Guardian/Independent etc
& its concomitant appeasement of muslims.

At least some public money ‘invested’ in television was well spent on yesterday’s BBC 1, always worthwhile, The Big Questions. This among other issues discussed Has Britain become more anti Semitic? (answer: sadly yes). Tony Greenstein of, among other things, Jews For Boycotting Israeli Goods, comes over all Brian Haw like in the item which starts at 41.30 on this BBC Iplayer link.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00p1gtv/The_Big_Questions_Series_2_Episode_41/

“No Monty, the impression was that those named were very rich, powerful, secretive, manipulative, and working solely in the interest of a foreign government. Which is perfectly true. And they use Gerald Ronson as their enforcer. If necessary, Google him.

The “foreign government” bit is the point. It doesn’t matter which foreign government it is. It’s the principle. Eighty per cent of Tory MPs are members of CFI? The Tories are currently driven back to their shire heartlands. How is CFI representative of that?

Even leaving aside that the Tories are supposed to be a force moderating the whole process in the cause of (among other things) national sovereignty, just as Labour is supposed to be a force moderating the whole process in the cause of (among other things) peace” (DL)

I think right from the beginning there was a big inaccuracy with all of this – there is no “Pro Israel” lobby as such which “Israel”? whose “Israel”? – this was about the pro continued occupation of Palestinian territories, pro settlement expansion, pro expulsion of Palestinians lobby….what a mouthful..maybe thats why they shortened it to Pro Israel…?

These guys are so convinced of the complete evilness of Israel that they cannot believe that anyone would support that country for purely political reasons or for any other reason.

I’d just like to say that personally am so convinced of the complete evilness of politicians that I cannot believe that anyone of them would support (or object to) any topic what so ever (especially foreign affairs) for purely political reasons or for any other reason other than being on some interested organization/person payroll (or voting power).

I watched it. The message was familiar – Jews with money with undue influence seeking to influence British Foreign policy. Unphotogenic jews at that. The create the pretence of balance Oborne went to 2 or 3 jews who are known to be ardent critics of Israel including one Liberal Rabbi who’se an outspoken critic of Israel.
Also the familiar accusation of pro-Israel Jews trying to silence critics with accusations of antisemitsm which as always is totally unfounded and Rich jews trying to silence such balanced Media’s that cover ME conflict such as the Guardian – and blogs directing the critism of BBC etc all controlled by Jerusalem. The Producer Oborne finishes his programme with the assertion.Ofcourse I’m not alleging that there’s a conspiracy ??? To criticise Despatches for its obvious anti-Israel agenda would lead to the suggestion that “Yes, Jews do control the media etc ” So probably it’s best ignored.

Apologies for the obvious typos.

Everyone on it is an anti-semite.

Israel Uber Alles !

Anyone who compares Israel to the Nazis, as you have just done, is indeed an antisemite. It’s as simple as that.

The whole program appeared to me as a nasty piece of anti-Israeli propaganda. Some of the claims are not verifiable (for instance, the 10 million pounds donated over 8 years, which in any case is not an extraordinarily large sum- and btw political parties surely receive much larger donations from other donors ) and there were no voices that defended the (perfectly legitimate) actions of the ‘lobby’. Finally, Oborne could not find one single example of a person, or an organization, which could have an anti-Israel agenda; according to his world-view each and everyone, but the Jew, is a honest player. This world view therefore, is not different from that of Gobbles’s.

I think Gordon Bennett should have the copyright to the Username – Ignorance is Bliss – since it suits him.

“(or voting power)”

What voting power? There are only three hundred thousand Jews in this country, there are extremely few individual constituencies in which they are particularly numerous, and very many of them do not agree with these agenda.

Can I point out that BellaM, the CiF moderator, was exposed first – over two years ago – by Private Eye as Rusbridger’s daughter; and not recently by CiFWatch?

Thanks.

I agree with Martin. Oborne made unsubstantiated suggestions that rich jews were bankrolling the political parties be it Labour or Conservatives with unsubstantiated figure and concealed his agenda with the pretence that he was interested in transparency. There are 3m Muslim voters in the UK against less that 300,000 Jews and the British Government refused to vote in the UN Goldstone Report so the rich Jews obviously failed to influence a Jewish foreign Minister. Oborne will continue implying that there’s a”kosher conspiracy to influence British politicians on the ME

No Monty, the impression was that those named were very rich, powerful, secretive, manipulative, and working solely in the interest of a foreign government. Which is perectly true.

No, it is the ramblings of a diseased mind. Those people are loyal Brits who support a democratic and free country which is being demonised by racists like you.

I misread Gordon Bennet’s comment.He’s OK .It’s Lee John Barnes who shoudl have the copyright to the name IgnorantisBliss.My apolgies to him if he’s still reading.

Leonard, no problem, it’s easy to misattribute italicised quotes :)

I wish I knew how to do boxed quotes.

Oborne’s suggestion that somehow the criticism of BBC impartiality of the conflict was unfounded and that they were beyond criticism was also laughable.He was forgetting the biased reporting of the pro-Palestinian journalist Orla Guerin and that other impartial journalist who was in tears as Arafats body was airlifted from the compound – not to mention Bowen’s attempts to re-write ME history to serve the Palestinian narrative.

“Can I point out that BellaM, the CiF moderator, was exposed first – over two years ago – by Private Eye as Rusbridger’s daughter; and not recently by CiFWatch?”

Asides, Who knew? You?, No doubt. But not by Rusbridger.

That is in which transparency consists.

Nor did he expose her obvious prejudices i.e. her dad’s, significant in a moderator.

The response of CST, worth a read:

http://thecst.org.uk/blog/?p=888

So when will Channel 4 do a program on Saudi Arabia and the Islamist Lobby? (Sarcasm)

Oborne would be afraid to step foot in Saudi Arabia. He wouldn’t feel as safe as he does in Israel. He wouldn’t find any brave Saudi dissidents prepared to come forward.Israel’s soft touch.

They will never do a program on Saudi Arabia. But I would like them to try, so we could see who it is, who puts a stop to it.

The CST site confirms what I mentioned that whilst expressly denying that he is claiming that there’s a conspiracy theory – that is what the message of his programme is all about. Maybe Oborne’s the one that should be more transparent about his agenda ?

“Those people are loyal Brits who support a democratic and free country”

Not this one. That is the point.

Prince Charles attended Rabin’s funeral in Jerusalem in 1995, but then that was also the only occasion Hosni Mubarak ever deigned to visit Israel.

Prince Phillip has also visited Israel.

There are tens of countries that the Queen has not visited; why, therefore, should she visit a small, insignificant country and, in so doing, burnish the image of the country’s terrorism-supporting PM, when there is such a plentiful array of ‘nicer’ countries whose administrations don’t include at least one racist and a cheerleader for the deaths of British civilians?

So by your own admission you are not a loyal Brit, Lindsay? Thanks for confirming. Yes, your foam-flecked Jew-hatred is, indeed, against the true spirit of tolerant British culture.

Ah, Suleyman is another one who loves Jews as long as they know their place and don’t start getting uppity and demand to live freely in their own homeland and quite legitimately kick out the illegal British occupation.

“a plentiful array of ‘nicer’ countries whose administrations don’t include at least one racist ”

So, not many Arab or Islamic countries, then.

Why do you live here if you hate it so much and have somewhere else far more conducive to go? Your comment at 1:57 entirely negates the one at 12:55. You simply cannot be any less loyal to this country than to defend the likes of Irgun and Lehi.

Except, that is, to believe that the British political process should be controlled by their heirs. By that Israeli tradition, take note. Not by any other in that politically diverse country. No matter who runs Israel, the Stern Gang always runs Britain. That is “at the heart of New Labour”, according to Brown’s chief election fundraiser. And EIGHTY PER CENT of Tory MPs are members of CFI.

‘How did Sabra & Shatilla get mentioned? What has it got to do with lobbying.’
Sabra & Shatilla were mentioned in the context of the DEC appeal shown on the BBC in 1982 at the time of Israel’s invasion. Oborne compared that BBC decision favourably with their decision NOT to show the DEC appeal this January during Cast Lead.
The reference to Sabra & Shatila came towards the end of the programme, by which time cookie cutter, and quite a few others on this thread, were clearly in full green ink righteous indignation mode.

David Lindsay needs to take his meds and enjoy a good nap, then he might make sense.

From a previous thread:

zkharya:

“You mean Anglo-Jews are prosperous and organised? And know how to schmooze, wine and dine a lady?

Naturally a schlep like you resents that. They’ve got class, you’ve got none. They pull the birds, you pull yourself.”

Me:

“Money and class are not the same thing, zkharya…”

And if you have to be told that, then, well, you are certainly no Peter Oborne. After other news this evening and on future evenings, expect plenty of Turnip Taliban candidates against the Cameroons. Looks like they now have another plank to their platform.

Lindsay:

“Your comment at 1:57 entirely negates the one at 12:55.”

It’s only 00:15, now.

What the hell is going on? Even if this blog is stuck on GMT, 01:57 is nearly half an hour into the future.

In the time-travelling spirit of this website, let me say, Lindsay, that whatever you have to say next will be scurrilous, whenever you say it.

“No matter who runs Israel,The SternGang always runs Britain”says David Lindsay confirming to everyone his anti-semitic racist perspective. Has it ever occurred to you Mr Lindsay that perhaps MPs support Israel because they believe it to be the only democracy in the region surrounded by Feudal & autocratic dictatorships with shared values with the West. Your perspective is closer to that of Jihadist Islamists and neo-nazi’s than it is of the average Brit.

“The average Brit” (no self-respecting Briton would ever use that vulgar, ugly import, any more than he would write of “the Channel 4 Dispatches program”) does not support the control of his parliamentary process by a foreign country, regardless of which foreign country it is.

Never mind by one faction, by no means always in government and with a very violently anti-British history within living memory, in that foreign country.

But when both main British parties are under that control, what can he do?

In Britain at large, there is an abiding memory of the activities of those who set up the State of Israel. There is little active ill will after sixty years, but there is no affection. Such affection is very far from “average” in this country.

And if MPs would take your view anyway, then why do they need to be paid at all to do so, never mind quite so much?

All I could see from this report was that Mr Oborne was trying to prove a pre-conceived theory that pro-Israel lobbies control UK foreign policy through bribery (has anyone heard Miliband’s comments recently?!) which at the end of the day he is not able to reliably prove other than by saying that many transparent (yes transparent!) donations have been made to the conservatives, a party not even in power. The apparently monolithic power of this lobby is so great that the best they can do is to have one of their members to threaten to withdraw financial support – I’m shaking. Secondly, Mr Oborne analyses pro-Israel lobby groups and accuses them of basically doing good work according to their aims, with a few baseless accusations of dodgy workings along the way and assumptions of their awesome power, neither of which he provides any proof for. I’m not sure why so many people on this thread are getting so excited over such a poorly argued case.

Oh look, what a surprise. Hundal is parroting Oborne hook line and sinker.

Apologists for anti-reason homophobic and mysoginistic belief systems and now antisemitic cunts, both of them. Utter and complete scum. I wouldn’t cross the road to piss on either of them if they were on fire.

Whither the principled liberal secular left (or even right) now?

Fuckwits so in hoc with Islam and entrenched in hatred for the enlightenment (and its uber-manifestation the United States and the technological West) have succeded in shifting the cultural zeitgeist so far that anti-semitic conspiracy bollocks is now considered mainstream TV (and I have lost count of the number of guardian-reading aquaintenances who will parrot anti-semitic bollocks at the slightest opportunity)

Gay rights and sexual equality? Thrown out of the window as a mere “shibboleth”. Secularism, reason and science? Gone, to appease Islam.

Its absolutely fucking disgusting.

After watching Peter Oborne’s ‘Dispatches’ programme on the power of the Israel lobby in Britain, the scales have fallen from my eyes.

I now see things in an entirely different light. I now realise that the power of this unique cabal is so vast and unprecedented in its truly demonic power – a power given to no other lobby – that both the Labour government and Tory opposition slavishly and unquestioningly support Israel’s military actions and that the Guardian and the BBC have found themselves totally unable to publish or transmit anything other than wholehearted support for Israel.

I now realise that, every day, a cowed and intimidated Guardian publishes story after story in support of Israel, focusing relentlessly upon the beleaguerment of its citizens under the onslaught from Hamas while never carrying anything in favour of the Palestinians, presenting the Middle East entirely through a pro-Israel prism and never even reporting the Palestinian point of view except for a few contemptuous references suggesting that they are always lying.

http://www.spectator.co.uk/melaniephillips/5544851/everything-is-now-illuminated.thtml

Another fucking depressing sign of the times is that I used to read The Register. But not any more. Everytime an article that mentions a technological breakthrough by an Israeli company (quite often) is posted, the comments are immediately filled with disgusting anti-semitic bile.

The internet reaction to this documentary has been about what you would expect….the “Israel can do no wrong” brigade out in force with predictable outrage that someone dared to speak of such a thing as “pro Israel lobbyists” ( which, by the time they had finished misrepresenting the programme, became a “zionist cabal of millionaire businessmen” ) & the inevitable ( and totally irrelevant ) comments re the Holocaust, Iran, Islam & “my 80 yr old grandmother in Israel”.

Any support via internet commentary of the programme’s content regarded as “proof of alarming anti semitism in Britain”.

The programme was not alarmist, misleading or anti semitic, but many of the critics of the programme undoubtedly are. The jewish voices on the programme have been predictably ignored ( or dubbed “self hating jews” as Rabbi Goldberg wearily predicted ), the facts presented have been misrepresented as “conspiracy theories” & the issue of the programme, the role of pro Israel lobbyists in policy making & the media representation of Israel has been distorted…I doubt Oborne expected anything less.

Perhaps a law can be passed that all criticism of Israel is deemed hate speech…it would save journalists, such as Oborne, Jeremy Bowen, Robert Fisk, John Pilger et al wasting their time, jeopardising their careers, being subject to death threats or being spoken about in the same breath as Adolf Eichmann.

When journalists like Polly Toynbee are praised for expressing sentiments like “I am proud to be an Islamophobe”, you recognise that objectivity in journalism is now as rare as integrity in politics.

Josh, I deleted your off-topic post.

The whole thing was horribly transparent innuendo and indefensibly vague smear, complete with anxious and unwarranted denials of antisemitism; practically a Philip Glass soundtrack; and montages of Israeli battles and Palestinian victims edited between the unremarkable claims against rich Jews.

I haven’t seen the program or read this thread, but whatever Gordon Bennett has written, I think the opposite of that.

“The whole thing was horribly transparent innuendo and indefensibly vague smear, complete with anxious and unwarranted denials of antisemitism; practically a Philip Glass soundtrack; and montages of Israeli battles and Palestinian victims edited between the unremarkable claims against rich Jews.”

As you were no doubt happy to have the programme confirm your prejudices of those who are critical of pro Israel lobbyists, why are you complaining?

I often wonder whether Israel itself would not be better producing programmes such as these, considering that those who stand to benefit from their broadcast are Israel & its supporters.

There is no such thing as “anti Israel” journalism, since all criticism of Israel, however “vague” is met by counter criticism that serves only to strengthen the perceived victimisation of Israel.

It’s a fool proof system. Apparent condemnation is met by greater condemnation. As long as the target of the condemnation is better equipped to USE that condemnation to their advantage, then all condemnation is good.

Is it any wonder that those who are pro Israel have welcomed this programme? What possible use could a tv programme that is supportive of Israel be? It’s unlikely to convert those who are critical of Israel because their criticisms remain valid regardless. Israel is not looking for converts…it is looking for new opponents.

I am happy to be a vocal opponent of Israel & I am oblivious to accusations of anti semitism because, like Rabbi Goldberg, I don’t hate jews.

Well dom, (aot Dom tmk) I personally didn’t accuse you of antisemitism, for which my apologies, but I find it outrageous how selective people are in choosing targets, as you put it, to be vocal about.

“All I could see from this report was that Mr Oborne was trying to prove a pre-conceived theory that pro-Israel lobbies control UK foreign policy through bribery”

where in the programme did Oborne state that “pro Israel lobbies control UK foreign policy”? let alone “through bibery”.

there was no “theory” to be “proved”, simply an assertion that the pro Israel lobby ( if you wish to dub pro Israel lobbyists a “pro Israel lobby”…it seems a resonable enough way of refering to such people, though doubtless is considered anti semtic merely for including the words “Israel” & “lobby” ) was a powerful & influential group within British politics.

WHAT PART OF THAT DON’T YOU UNDERSTAND?

The part that dares to mention that a specific group of people have a interest in a particular country or its ideology & are involved in promoting said country or ideology by donating ( or bribing as you & many others will inevitably refer to “donations” ) money to political parties?

MY GOD! What a revelation! Jewish and/or pro Israel individuals offering to give money to oil the wheels of politics in their favour? Unheard of!

Had this documentary been about individuals giving backhanders to construction companies in Essex, no one would care. The fact that the issue of speaking ill of Israel is a “no go” area for ANYONE, let alone journalists, tends to colour the programme somewhat.

I hate to break it to you all, but jewish people are as capable of corruption, graft & wrong doing as the rest of us…it must come as a terrible shock to think of jewish people as anything other than perpetual victims but not all of us think like Julie Burchill, some of us actually don’t patronise jewish people & the state of Israel…you may not like that, but if you wish to gain our respect, you’ll need to acknowledge Israel’s wrong doing & acknowledge that you are not the only group of people on Earth to have suffered.

” some of us actually don’t patronise jewish people & the state of Israel…you may not like that, but if you wish to gain our respect, you’ll need to acknowledge…”

Laughable.

“Well dom, (aot Dom tmk) I personally didn’t accuse you of antisemitism, for which my apologies, but I find it outrageous how selective people are in choosing targets, as you put it, to be vocal about.”

Why not produce a documentary about pro Israel lobbyists? Why should that be cause for outrage? Israel is a controversial state, therefore its funding & support is a controversial subject.

It is only those who choose to equate criticism of Israel with anti jewish sentiment that would take issue with the programme. The historical mistreatment of jews is a separate issue, yet it is continually spoken of in reference to Israel as if it had some bearing on the views of those who criticise Israel.

As Rabbi Goldberg pointed out, “some opponents of Israel are anti semites”, yet he himself, like many other jewish people are opposed to Israel’s actions. Goldberg refered to the conditions in the West Bank as being “apartheid” conditions. To deny him a voice because it does not chime with the hardliners is not acceptable.

The assumption is that critics of Israel are anti semites. It is an assumption that both harms and undermines Israel. If Israel were not guilty of extreme wrongdoing, then a documentary such as this would be just another example of political corruption, common to ALL countries & peoples.

As for targets, some targets are easier to aim at than others, both figuratively & literally. Israel knows all about hitting targets & has always had significantly more arrows with which to hit them.

A name-and-shame for open supporters of Israel, a grubby tabloid treatment with barely any substance, might not be something you find despicable, but I’m sure you do understand the outrage. Yours, on the other hand, is a mystery.

Objections to the show surely come down to two issues, eh no?

1) Either groups like Conservative Friends of Israel etc. actually have little influence on politicians, in which case a) their donors should certainly demand their money back, since influencing politicians to deliver desired outcomes is the whole point of lobbying in the first place, and b) one of you guys should draft a complaint to Channel Four, since you’re accusing them of deliberate racist conspiracy*, or

2) Groups like CFoI are very good at lobbying and do in fact have a reasonable amount of influence on politicians, but this is one of those factually true issues that should not be directly addressed, because doing so would either encourage racism or be inherently racist in itself.

To which I can only say, good luck pushing 1), which is ridiculous on its face and almost certainly libellous; and good luck with 2), since Talking about facts is racist was your political foes’ response to Dispatches’ earlier show Undercover Mosque, a claim that HP correctly slated as being laughable bullshit.

*No wriggling on this point now. Anyone contending that it is racist to raise the issue of Israeli sympathisers organising politically to influence the opinions and policies of third parties, and doing so specifically in relation to Dispatches, is accusing a very large number of journalists, researchers, technical staff and Channel Four employees of anti-semitic fearmongering bordering on incitement. If you’re saying it, then own it.

One of the problems with McGreal’s opinions on the South African Jewish community is the fact that he completely ignores the enormous British ex-pat community in SA. Unlike the Jewish community which traces its roots to pre-Apartheid immigration, the British ex-pat community is to a large part a product of immigration in the 70s and 80s, the heyday of apartheid. Large numbers of Brits voluntarily moved to Apartheid SA, lured by high wages, low taxes and cheap domestic help, all without a twinge of their poltically-correct consciences. This massive immigration, mainly highly skilled and educated, provided the manpower and economic support to maintain the Apartheid regime for a generation.

So we have to believe that Chris McGreal didn’t notice the multitude of British accents during his stay in SA and never asked when these Brits arrived, how many came and what their contribution was to maintaining the SA Apartheid society. Not a word about his fellow countrymen in the Guardian !

But there is a Jewish community in SA …..

Whither the principled liberal secular left (or even right) now?

Fuckwits so in hoc with Islam and entrenched in hatred for the enlightenment (and its uber-manifestation the United States and the technological West) have succeded in shifting the cultural zeitgeist so far that anti-semitic conspiracy bollocks is now considered mainstream TV (and I have lost count of the number of guardian-reading aquaintenances who will parrot anti-semiticbollocks at the slightest opportunity)

Perhaps, but the really posh side of Britain, royals and some of those have always been antisemetic.

Oops didn’t mean to hit submit yet.

So anyway I always thought it was funny that British socialists follow the poshest of the posh in being antisemetic.

Upper upper crust.

“you may not like that, but if you wish to gain our respect,”

oh dear.

Either the Prime Minister or g-d is in the comments thread. And he is angry (or insane)

MattG

Perhaps a law can be passed that all criticism of Israel is deemed hate speech…it would save journalists, such as Oborne, Jeremy Bowen, Robert Fisk, John Pilger et al wasting their time, jeopardising their careers, being subject to death threats or being spoken about in the same breath as Adolf Eichmann.

dom, go and look-up UK law on racism and you will find that its scope includes ethnicities (such as Jews) and even countries can be regarded as groups against which race hate can be applied and charged as an offence.

If someone said “All Israelis are really Nazis” it could be classed as racial hatred under the law because of the definition.

Lindsay spreading his crap at the Spectator http://www.spectator.co.uk/melaniephillips/5544851/everything-is-now-illuminated.thtml

He’s obviously escaped the talons of “The Lobby”. Have you got an up to date will?

I didn’t see it, but I am absolutely fucking positive I can guess what the program was attempting to say, you see I have spent many years reading the filth the nazis sold to the masses in 1930s Europe, “the Jews are attempting to take over the world, the capitalist, socialist, communist, Bolsheviks control the media and the politicians and the banks” something along those lines was it?

I cannot believe this shit is being sold as “truth” again, are the majority going to fall for this evil bullshit again, are the people so fucking puerile as to fall for this disgusting bile, what has happened to people, what is wrong with our societies that we even allow this shit to be broadcast.

I didn’t see it, I didn’t have to, I have been able to spot this vileness for some time now, it has a smell all its own, it is unmistakable, it is nazi era Jew hatred.

I will second M*o*r*g*o*t*h, 17 November 2009, 2:35 am.

I am absolutely fucking disgusted.

http://cifwatch.com/2009/11/16/inside-channel-4%e2%80%99s-conspiracy-factory/

Once again we evade the searchlight! If only Oborne knew what we put in the egg and onion at those banquets! Bwahahahahahahaha!

It’s true what Joie says – Oborne interspersed his programme with unwarranted denials of antisemitism. Almost as if – he felt he had to defend himslef from the assertion. And his claim at the end that he wasn’t alleging any form of conspiracy when that was what the theme of the programme was all about sounded rather hollow. One could produce a programme exposing the calculated manipulative methods of Oborne.There’s alot of material to work with.

Dom
You are actually vain enough to think we want your respect. Down the years the Jews have unfortunately had to be obsequient in seeking the approval of their host nation to save themselves from being targetted – it did not work obviously. However now we have our own state and I live in (the “settlement” of) Maale Adumim with 38,000 other citizens – so we can actually say what we think.
“Why not produce a documentary about pro Israel lobbyists?” why not indeed if you produced a balanced programme with no pre-conceived notions and give the lobbyists equal time to explain on camera just what they do which BICOM offered to do and was rebuffed. The programme was months in the making and yet the lobbyists were contacted a matter of days before the programme was aired with all sorts of demands and all the usual suspects in place. Just because “rabbi” Goldberg expected the reaction that he said he would get does not make him any less of a self-serving self-hating Jew.The director of Honest Reporting was sent an email just one week before the programme was to be aired on the Sabbath when obviously he was not going to read it. The C4 camera crew then burst into Honest Reporting’s offices in Jerusalem on the Monday demanding to know where he was – he was actually in London. Israel has nothing to fear from tinpot reporters like Osborne however the criticism is not the making of the programme but that a programme is made that is so slanted to try and reach a preconceived thesis (i.e. don’t let the truth and accuracy get in the way of a good story) as can be seen from the pamphlet on the C4 website (which I have read) which portrays all of Osborne’s pre-conceived anti-Israel ideas which he is then given the opportunity to reinforce by a biased unbalanced programme over which anti-Semites are now rubbing their hands in glee – the so called “Jewish conspiracy” (which he fails to establish but who cares) is alive and well and the Jews are running Parliament – pre-World War II Germany incarnate – but this time it is acceptable. So dear sir whilst you profess not to hate the Jews that does not stop you from actually being a raving anti-Semite on the basis that if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck it most probably is one.

Why do you live here if you hate it so much

Yes, I thought that would go right over your head.
I don’t hate “it” so much. This is my country. I simply object to certain aspects of its colonial history. You know, having political opinions is still permitted in this country, although if little totalitarian chickenshits like you ever came to power I am sure it would be prohibited.

You simply cannot be any less loyal to this country than to defend the likes of Irgun and Lehi.

Yes, the moment little totalitarian chickenshits like you ever came to power I have no doubt that I would find myself tied to a post in front of a brick wall for treason to the fatherland.

The CST piece is very good indeed
http://thecst.org.uk/blog/?p=888

Anaximander 8:56 – absolutely. We were supposed to have eradicated this sick filth in spring 1945.

Oborne, Nachman. Perhaps a candidate for one of normblog’s namechiks:

Man after Oborne, Nachman?

Israel is a controversial state

This really sums up the antisemitic position. Jews having a country of their own, and doing all the usual things that every other country does to safeguard its interest? Jews??? Whatever next??!!

[Lindsay's] escaped the talons of “The Lobby”.

He must have also escaped the talons of Lee Jones Barnes’ wolf!

I look forward to a similar programme about Islamo-fascism and the cynical manoeverings of Hamas over the years – another Jeremy Bowen exclusive?

I look forward to a similar programme about Islamo-fascism and the cynical manoeuvrings of Hamas over the years – another Jeremy Bowen exclusive?

Participants on this thread do not seem to have realised that the Oborne programme is just one more indication that the last vestiges of credibility have been stripped from the pro-Israeli fanatics’ habitual response to critics that they are either “self hating Jews” or “anti-semites.” Quite simply no one buys it any more. But what they would like to know is why some genuinely anti-semitic scum are now able to pose as being pro-Israeli.

Michael Booth

I look forward to a similar programme about Islamo-fascism and the cynical manoeverings of Hamas over the years – another Jeremy Bowen exclusive?

Indeed Yes. I am sure that Seaton and Whitiker over at CI(F) are, as we … write, commissioning multiple articles about the vast number of Saudi financed groups that ‘hold meetings’ with various MPs and other civil servants.

They would be doing this as part of their ‘balanced approach’ to journalism.

>>what they would like to know is why some genuinely anti-semitic scum are now able to pose as being pro-Israeli.

Quite simply because the name of the game is to smear those who don’t pose and are genuinely pro-Israeli, and to damage their public reputation. It’s an old propaganda trick from the last century – one version of it (in the USSR) was known as “kompromat”.

John Palmer wants to know why some “genuinely anti-semitic scumare now able to pose as being pro-Israeli”. My answer to that is that they are vastly outnumbered by the “anti-semitic scum posing at being anti-Israeli”!

Birtwhistle to assist Nachman from the hebrew root nacham – to comfort – ok?!

Dom,

“To deny him (David Goldberg) a voice because it does not chime with the hardliners is not acceptable.”

Who’s denying him a voice?

Lindsay,

I never said money=class.

I’m back to savour the latest comedy dispatch from Gene Zitver.

Israel is Sweden and there is no pro-Israel lobby. Hence the “…” :-)

No one ever seeks to deny Rabbi David Goldberg a voice – he enjoys, thrives and seeks out publicity for his views, but like Gerald Ronson says – there are as many opinions as there are arseholes. Everyone has one.

Here is Gideon Levy, of Haartez, and ex-adviser to Shimon Peres, talking about Israel’s ‘addiction’ to occupation, and the twisted, bizarre, unprecedented, and unhealthy relationship with the US.

He notes that the “friendliest” US administrations are actually the worst for Israel (George W. Bush). He talks about a ‘powerful Jewish lobby’ which is actually acting against the the longer term interests of Israel. He says Israel needs to be taken to a drug rehabilitation centre, but the conservative Jewish establishment (AIPAC) would rather continue supplying the drugs.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AQNX07NyoDc

If you read the comments on the Channel 4 website for the programme, the commonest epithets by far are ‘courageous’ and ‘brave.’

Funny, I thought ‘brave’ and ‘courageous’ applied to people who continued their work despite police investigation on spurious charges and ‘exposure’ by rival news shows, not playing to a willing audience whose only criticism is that it didn’t go far enough in demonizing the ‘lesion on the forehead of humanity.’

This will be brief as its that kind of day. Anyways, I thought, beyond the ‘Yes there is an Israel lobby and it is jolly powerful’ bit, the key point was that one of the chaps who was a prominent CFI member, with a direct line to Cameron, was also a serious investor in business ventures in the Occupied West Bank and a vested interest in the status quo and avoiding any form of Palestinian Statehood anytime soon.

That certainly was worth highlighting.

(Obourne is one of the few Conservative journalists I have any time for BTW)

Monty

The editing is pretty interesting too. Multiple banquet scenes, when Oborne is talking about receptions held by the Friends of Israel. Cleverly interlaced with scenes of bloodshed and crying children in Gaza. Presumably we are being led to associate Jewish feasting with dead gentile children in the time-honoured way.

Well off course my dear dear Monty, the flesh of Palestinian children is so tasty and cheap.

But Christmas now is soon coming and i must go out to look with my friend Shylock for some goyim kinder to prepare to eat fur my Xmas supper – they’re bones are gristly!

but I must be careful in case that vigilant goy Oberon catcheth us with his ever so clever programme of Dispatches.

But to be seriously my dear dear friends …(smacking greasy lips and rubbing my hands) … this smaart Mr Oborne would have done mauch betta …. mauch betta … (eyes slyly shifting from side to side, intense odour of stale sweat and unwashed clothes enveloping you) to have included a chorus of …

“throw the Jew down the well … so my country can be free … so my country can be FREE”

at the end of this most clever programme of Dispatches.

because we all know that -

in my country there a problem and that problem is not transport

It was all so predictable, can’t see what all the fuss here is about. We already knew the Palastine Gazans and West-bankers would be porteayed as the ‘innocents’: Anti-Semitism would be blurred with Anti-Israeli government defence policy and so on, therefore all Jews bad.

The only worthwhile ‘revelation’ was to show how disingenuous and shallow are the UK Politicos and the media-for-hire posse when it’s time to get noses into the trough.

‘Your vote Counts’ – My ARSE!

An excellent and brave programme. The might and treachery of the israeli lobby in the UK is truely frightening. We should applaud the brave and courageous action of Dispatches and we can only hope more media and politicians can stand up to the out of control lobby, it’s our country after all.

Oborne is such a wanker – borat has already did this so many years ago and so much so much better

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vb3IMTJjzfo

come on everybody!! throw the Jew Down the Well!

Amused,

yes, you’re back, as addicted to HP and anonymity as ever.

How’s the PhD going?

“Participants on this thread do not seem to have realised that the Oborne programme is just one more indication that the last vestiges of credibility have been stripped from the pro-Israeli fanatics’ habitual response to critics that etc. etc. etc.”

No, it is just one more indication that absolutely nothing has changed in Britain since that nation collaborated in the Holocaust and acted in a manner in post-war Palestine that would have done credit to the SS.

it’s our country after all

Then learn correct English spelling and syntax.

“We were supposed to have eradicated this sick filth in spring 1945.”

Herzl had the answer to that:

“I believe that the question of the Jews is a very grave matter. Those who imagine that the incitement against the Jews is merely a fashionable phenomenon that may disappear from the world, are badly mistaken.” – From Theodor Herzl’s Diary Volume I (1895-1898)

I think that most of you have missed the point.

I normally like Oborne’s documentaries. However, this programme was poorly made, anodyne, dull, boring and had nothing new to say at all. If I was the Commissioning Editor at Channel 4, I would ask for my money back.

The only viewers who would not have switched off half way through would be those who love Israel and those who hate her. Being in the first camp, nothing in it worried me and I think that it would be wrong for any communal organisation to make a complaint. That is exactly what Oborne wants to prove his so-called theory. We should all just ignore him which would really, really, upset him.

HP is covered in the “aggressive” part @ around 27:00min

Most people understand that ‘Palestinianism’ is the preserve of Islamists, far-lefties, Jew haters and gullible liberals.

So I’m surprised that no one appreciates the inevitable effect that a rapidly growing Muslim demographic is going to have on Britain’s support for Israel.

Demographics is after all, the Achilles heel of democracy.

I disagree, Reza.

People are afraid. And if they think they can appease those whom they fear by sacrificing that which they do not value, they will do that first, before confronting their fear.

And appeasement may work. For a while. But not for ever.

Then those whom they fear will be without excuse.

And their anger will be terrible.

zkharya

I think that you’re missing my point.

Hostility towards Israel is endemic among British Muslims and indeed Muslims everywhere.

A poll conducted for Channel 4 Dispatches suggested that almost half of all British Muslims believe that 9/11 was a conspiracy between the US and Israel.

http://www.imaginate.uk.com/MCC01_SURVEY/Site%20Download.pdf

Earlier this year the Labour MP, Shahid Malik , told the Guardian there was “immense anger” in British Muslim communities over developments in the Middle East. He said: “There is a real feeling of helplessness, hopelessness and powerlessness among Britain’s Muslims in the context of Gaza and the sense of grievance and injustice is both profoundly acute and obviously profoundly unhealthy.”

Already we can see that MPs in constituencies with large Muslim populations will inevitably play the anti-Israel card. After all, their careers depend on it. Jack Straw is a good example of this approach.

Now imagine, the British Muslim population growing to 20% or 30%.

Reza, I misunderstood you. But I think we are still talking at cross purposes, since I largely agree with you.

Reza’s point is a good one. With a rapidly declining jewish minority and rapidly expanding Muslim population – politicians will start appeasing element’s that they believe will give them the most votes regardless of the rights and wrongs of the issues concerned – misconceived popularism is on the increase. We aint seen nothing yet.

Oborne and Dispatches are doing what HP has been for yonks. Looking at funding, ideological linkages, associations etc. HP does it regarding Muslims, Oborne and Dispatches the pro-Israel lobby. Oborne and Dispatches are a lot more restrained and careful in research though.

Anyway, all this is odd. There is a body in the US called the American Israel Public Affairs Committee. Note the second word there. On its website it calls itself America’s Pro-Israel Lobby. Their words. It is quite open and explicit – no conspiracy there. It’s got a stack of money – again its quite open about that – no conspiracy there. It spends a load of money. Now, it seems to me the organisation, as an open and clear lobby group for Israel – lobby, their word – would be wasting a ton of money if it was not a successful lobby group for Israel – as it says on the tin.

Except, when you state the blindingly obvious, and question AIPAC’s outlook and ideas (not all Jews support AIPAC, for example), you are called antisemitic. But the notion that all Jews, indeed anyone else for that matter, should march in lockstep to AIPAC, is absurd.

I also should say I really appreciate your stance and admire your courage. I wish I had the same. I am not sure I do. But I do try, contrary to appearance, perhaps.

“Now imagine, the British Muslim population growing to 20% or 30%.”

I imagine that the British will get what they deserve.

Are we going to see a programme about CAABU (who have sponsored Mingus Campbell inter alia) or about the Palestine Solidarity Campaign & the latter’s influence on British Trades Unions – both Andy Gilchrist & Bob Crow are patrons of the PSC.

I am waiting for a Dispatches expose on Baroness Tonge-I fear she may be a secret spokesman for the Palestinian pro-suicide bomber lobby.

B xx

So how do you explain politicians with more Muslims than Jewish becoming friends of Israel?

Demographics mean nothing when money comes into play.

Mr M

I suspect that every politician has more Muslim constituents than Jewish ones considering the relative populations are 2.4 million and 280,000 respectively.

The problem arises when the Muslim constituents are so numerous that they can swing a vote.

The large Muslim electorate of Bethnal Green were happy to elect Oona King when they believed she was a ‘black’ Labour MP. But once Galloway & co publicised the fact that she was ‘Jewish’ her support slipped away very quickly.

As if that were the reason why, RezaV! Come on!

Anyway, we need a ballot line system, so that voters would be able to indicate that they were voting for a given candidate specifically as endorsed by a smaller party or other campaigning organisation. Those organisations might be trade unions, co-operatives, peace and disarmament movements, civil liberties groups, or environmental campaigns. Or they might be fighting for Crown and Commonwealth, for national sovereignty, for the countryside, for traditional family life, for the Armed Forces, or against expensive and socially disruptive wars with no British strategic interest at stake. Among numerous other possibilities. Including both Conservative Friends of Israel and Labour Friends of Israel.

The number of votes by ballot line would be recorded and published separately. If a candidate owed either success or failure to a particular campaigning organisation, whether national or local, then he would know it. And so would everyone else. Including the voter, who may not be altogether comfortable voting for a candidate endorsed by those dedicated to the overriding interest of a foreign state in general and of that state’s violently anti-British minority in particular. Nor for a party, such as the Tories now are, eighty per cent of whose sitting MPs are so endorsed, which is to say bought and paid for. How is that not treason?

The Tories have not always been the party of national sovereignty; in office, they never have been since the War. But they certainly see themselves as such now. Even before Blair, Labour’s record as the party of peace was patchy in practice; the Tories’ was at least as good. But it certainly sees itself as such in principle. However, the truth is that if we want a body of parliamentarians who will moderate the whole process as much in the cause of national sovereignty as in those such as family values, and as much in the cause of peace as in those such as social justice, then we are going to have to contrive and confect those parliamentarians for ourselves. The existing parties are worse than a waste of time.

Peter Oborne for Watford, against the ghastly Richard Harrington? It’s a thought…

Enough Already!

I can sense the outrage at such a biased and skewed program but I’m not sure that it has any consequences – except for the Islamist, Left, Guardian, Independent, Ch4 all having an early Christmas present.

Biased because it was a propoganda program against Israel, for teh Palestinians under the guise of a pro-Israel Lobby. You can address the idea of people supporting Israel and having wealth. However, to juxtapose it with the idea that such support stabs Palestinians in the head is plain propoganda and I believe the lack of balance can be challenged.

If only the Muslims and Arabs had some wealth and influence, eh GWB, GB and Obama? Is it a bowing contest in Saudi?

Like melanie Phillips articulated, its amazing the stranglehold the the Israeli Lobby has exercised over the the BBC, Guardian and Independent.

Mr. M:

If it came down to money alone, I expect that the ostensible supporters of the Palestinians have much deeper pockets and significant control over a vital energy resource.

Possibly, some of the support Israel receives is due to an understanding that it simply isn’t the apartheid nation that a cabal operating in the UN Gen Assembly have succeeded in painting Israel to be.

It would be really nice, if, some day, Mr. Oborne had a similar look at the lobbying activities of the Arab League and the Organization of the Islamic Conference and the impact these organizations have on European politics and the UN General Assembly.

“If it came down to money alone, I expect that the ostensible supporters of the Palestinians have much deeper pockets and significant control over a vital energy resource”

I don’t know where you get that one from. People from the Penninsula don’t really regard Levantines as Arabs at all. They and they alone are the Arabs so far as they are concerned. They don’t like even Sunnism as mostly practised there, never mind Shi’ism, Christianity or Druzism. And they run with the Israelis joint candidates (Bush, Clinton) for President of the United States, whose success resulted in the war against Iraq in both the Israeli and the Gulf interests, and whose failure will mercifully ensure no war against Iran in both of those interests.

Re. Oil an energy:

From Haaretz:
“an Israeli company has developed a method of generating electricy from road traffic. The system works by using generators implanted in the asphalt that create energy when cars drive over them. each generator produces 2,000 watts per hour which is stored in batteries alongside the road.”

David Lindsay:

You really are a total moonbat. The Saudis and other oil exporting nations from the region, and I’d include the non-Arab government of Iran don’t give a rat’s ass about the Palestinians and never have except for using them for political and economic purposes.

Regardless of being despised by “Gulf Arabs”, “Leventines”, Christian and Muslim, did consiously adopt the Arabic language and identity about a century or more ago, probably as much in protest of Ottoman rule as in protest of the influx of Jews.

I want to see how our lobby is going to turn this around, come my Zionite friends go forth and decimate.!!!

Those who stand to lose most out of Osborne’s Dispatches proramme are
the Palestinians. How come?

Out of a population of some 60 million, the progamme’s audience
(excluding worried Jews and rabid anti-Jews) would probably numbered
around 13 viewers.

Of the Jewish audience, one or two or more will have been convinced
that they and those dear to them should emigrate to Israel ASAP.

When will the Israel bashers (who are not the brightest lot – despite
them thinking they are) realise that every unwarrented attack on
Israel/Jews only ever adds to the flow of Jewish immigration to Israel?

Thank you Channel 4, Dispatches and Osborne.

Hang on a minute! Maybe that’s how sophisticated the Israel lobby
really is! Promote anti Israel rhetoric in the media so more Jews go
there!

Fagin I’ll vote for you.

So, do we think this was as shameless and grotesque a hatchet job as the Dispatches programmes on Ken Livingstone? And if so, has Oborne completely destroyed his own journalistic credibility, as Martin Bright did?