Media Disinformation regarding Israel's Murderous Assault in International Waters
The Role of the BBC
by William Bowles
In Yiddish it’s called Chutzpah, to have the nerve to say something outrageous, the perfect description—if what was said wasn’t so odious—by Israeli propagandists. I’m talking here about an Israeli spokeman on RT.com the other night, attempting to justify the murderous assault on the Gaza aid activists. Attack becomes “defence”, international waters become Israeli, or not as the case may be. Actually Chutzpah doesn’t even begin to describe the venomous and hysterical rantings of the Israeli spokesman. Eventually it just got too much for me to watch. On the other hand we have the ‘measured tones’ of your standard BBC model, allegedly impartial and objective, yet they’re both united by a common worldview. In the first, the Israeli one, we have the archetypal ‘Goebbels’ style, repeat the lies often enough, shout it even and the job is done. Sheer brute force stamps the Zionist reality on your forebrain. In the second, it’s the ‘measured tones’ of the BBC repeated ad infinitum that do the trick, for underpinning both is the ideology of superiority, both racial and cultural. The BBC method is more subtle, it has all the marks of a reasoned approach to the event but amounts to the same thing; a justification for barbarism. I think it’s worth analyzing a complete ‘analysis’ by the BBC’s diplomatic correspondent [sic] Jonathan Marcus as to how they pull off the stunt of pulling the wool over the reader’s eyes. First off, the piece below completely avoids mentioning anything about the illegal and murderous actions of the IDF, instead it concentrates on the public relations problems the Israelis have created for themselves by their actions. But is this the purpose of BBC’s ‘objective’ reporting method? In other words, is this article news or blatant propaganda for Israel? The entire piece reads as if the BBC has a lot invested in what Israel does, which when you think about it, is exactly right. After all, the bulk of the BBC’s ‘news’ consists of official Israeli propaganda, and is reprinted without even bothering to insert ‘allegedly’ before regurgitating Israel’s outrageous newsspeak. Here is the BBC article in its entirety, broken up by my observations:
Note that the human repercussions of the murderous attack doesn’t figure, the writer is only concerned with the PR.
No doubt the writer speaks from experience? Resist? A ship in international waters is attacked from the air and the sea with guns firing and all the writer is concerned with is how difficult the operation is! It doesn’t occur to him that in fact the people onboard had every right to defend themselves.
But I doubt that you’ll read them on the BBC Website and again as with the entire article the writer ignores the human damage done.
But not if the BBC has anything to do with what is legally an Act of War against the sovereign state of Turkey. “Calamity” is an odd choice of words for the BBC, not one it applies to the deaths of innocents on the high seas but to the problems it creates in selling the state of Israel!
Now this invites speculation on what these ramifications are for Israel. Unfortunately the writer seems to have run out of words to describe what these ramifications could be. Instead, we find the writer speculating on what effect it could have on NATO member Turkey, also a strong supporter of Israel, until now that is.
At last, we get down to the nub of this BBC spin piece. What matters is not the actions of the Israelis, but the fact that it creates problems for the Empire. It threatens to unravel the carefully constructed story erected around the settler state called Israel and the ‘terrorists’. Question this and ergo, one has to question all the rationales for the Empire’s actions, clearly a step too far for the BBC, so deeply enmeshed is it in the affairs of the Empire.
The open prison that is the Gaza Strip, where 1.5 million people are denied the basics of life, shot at and bombed virtually every day, is as far as the BBC is concerned merely “unfinished business”.
More newsspeak from the BBC, that having spent years helping to demonize (democratically elected) Hamas, is clearly worried that Israel’s actions threaten to undo all the ‘good work’ the BBC has done on behalf of it patron, Israel. Note too that the writer finally manages to mention the “ordinary people of Gaza”, not that he is worried about their plight, but that the Israeli attack puts them “firmly into the spotlight”, obviously the last thing the BBC wants to happen. | ||||
William Bowles is a frequent contributor to Global Research. Global Research Articles by William Bowles Israel’s Explanation for Deadly Gaza Aid Attack "Full of Holes as a Window Screen"–Former US Ambassador Edward Peck Former US Ambassador Edward Peck was on the Gaza aid flotilla that came under attack by Israeli forces. At least nine people were killed and dozens wounded. Peck says Israel’s explanation for the attack is "twisting the truth" and is "as full of holes as a window screen." [includes rush transcript] Yahoo and AP caught manipulating user comments"If this was merely a question of unethical behavior or slanted coverage, that’s par for the course. We’ve come to expect little more from Yahoo and AP or, for that matter, any other MSM outlet. But this is blatant fraud and it’s not just fraud against readers; it’s corporate fraud. Because the number of comments generated is one of the metrics Yahoo uses to cook the numbers to exaggerate user participation and it uses those numbers to defraud advertisers. The same goes for AP, which is obviously complicit in this racket." It was like déjà vu all over again. I’d go from one Yahoo article to another and notice that regardless of the subject matter, the first user comment was always the same - at least on Associated Press (AP) articles covering the Israeli/Palestinian conflict. The comment that kept reappearing was posted by “Robert” and it was a one liner. “Hamas is now in control of the Gaza Strip after winning an election there against Abbas Palestinian Authority.” That was it. Fair enough - I’ve got no quarrel with the messenger or the message. But somehow that one comment generated an incredible 184 responses and, last I checked, readers had given it 3212 thumbs up and 2525 thumbs down. I got a little curious about why Robert’s one liner had generated so much controversy. I’ve written hundreds of articles and never got anywhere near that kind of attention. Frankly, I was full of envy. How did ‘Robert’ pull this off with one miserly line? Then I noticed the strangest thing - it was dated March 09, 2010. The comment was two months old and was the lead comment of 40,000 responses. That seemed a little high considering the fact that the AP article I was reading had only been posted for thirty minutes. What were Yahoo and AP up to? The answer is simple - they were porting comments from one article to another and, in this particular case, they’ve been doing it for two months. It took a little research till I realized that the first few hundred comments were related to Biden’s ill-fated visit to Jerusalem. It was an ancient story and quite unrelated to the posting I was reading which was a slanted AP article white washing the murderous Israeli assault on the Gaza Freedom Flotilla. So why is this important? Well, you see, the default setting on comments for Yahoo articles is that readers get to see the oldest comments first. To see the newest comments, you have to know enough to change the default to engage other readers. Otherwise, you have to wade through tens of thousands of comments to get to the ones relating to the story. Just to make sure that I was seeing what I thought I was seeing, I decided to do a little forensic analysis. I put an audit trail in and now have documented proof that Yahoo was porting tens of thousands of comments from one article to another including thousands of outrageously racist and derogatory comments that violated Yahoo's terms of use. So I came up with an idea - I repeatedly responded to Robert’s one liner when I saw it appear on whatever AP article I happened to encounter. And sure enough, my comments were also ported from one article to another. Each of my comments specified the article I posted it from, the date, the title and the journalist who wrote it. Now it’s time to name names. Among others, the AP journalists whose articles involved in this scam were Associated Press Writers Tia Goldenberg aboard the Israeli warship INS Kidon, Selcan Hacaoglu in Ankara, Rob Gillies in Toronto and Edith M. Lederer at the United Nations. Steven Gutkin and Amy Teibel also have their handprints on this scam. I haven’t come up with the names of the Yahoo participants yet but it’s unlikely that Yahoo management didn’t understand and approve the conduct of their news staff. If this article gets any traction, their names will hopefully be publicly disclosed. Let there be no confusion, this was not a software glitch. Yahoo didn’t port comments to AFP or Reuters articles - only AP articles and as far as I can tell this practice was limited to selected content related to the Israeli/Palestinian conflict. Put aside that many of the ported comments were inane and blatantly racist. Some went so far as to incite violence and advocate genocide. But that’s not the issue here. We’re all believers in the First Amendment and, with the possible exception of comments that incite violence, Yahoo is entitled to propagate racist graffiti. After all, that’s one of the trademarks that distinguish the Yahoo brand name. If this was merely a question of unethical behavior or slanted coverage, that’s par for the course. We’ve come to expect little more from Yahoo and AP or, for that matter, any other MSM outlet. But this is blatant fraud and it’s not just fraud against readers; it’s corporate fraud. Because the number of comments generated is one of the metrics Yahoo uses to cook the numbers to exaggerate user participation and it uses those numbers to defraud advertisers. The same goes for AP, which is obviously complicit in this racket. What about the journalists involved in this scam, if you can call them journalists. Didn’t they notice that their articles were generating tens of thousands of comments the minute they appeared on Yahoo news? Is it possible that they didn’t keep reading Robert’s one liner over and over again? Now, before the boys in Yahoo’s boiler room try to scrub their boards, let me go on record and advise them that I have documented evidence and an audit trail. I’ve seen my own comments ported from one article to the next and I’ve taken the liberty of putting the evidence in a safe place. There is something else that’s worth bringing up. This pattern of media manipulation could very well be an Israeli Hasbara project coordinated with Yahoo and the AP. It’s no secret that Israel has ratcheted up its use of media operatives in the last few months. Are the boys in Yahoo’s boiler room working with AIPAC operatives and graduates of the Hasbara fellowship program? Have Yahoo and AP joined the ranks of the pro-Israeli activists that camp out on message boards to disseminate their canards and their venomous anti-Palestinian diatribes? Just so we’re clear about this. I told the boys in Yahoo’s backroom that I would be writing about this but they didn’t seem to care. I gave them fair warning in a number of messages that are still being ported from one AP article to another. I guarantee you one thing - those AP journalist involved in this racket know exactly how to get to the bottom of this. If they have a shred of integrity left, they might want to publicly reveal how they got ensnared in this racket. Because a lot of parties have a lot of explaining to do. Attack on humanitarian flotilla prompts little media skepticismFAIROn May 31, the Israeli military attacked a flotilla of boats full of civilians attempting to deliver humanitarian supplies to the Gaza Strip. Reports indicate that at least nine and as many as 16 of the activists on board were killed, though details remain sketchy due to Israel's censorious limitations on media coverage. Much of the U.S. media coverage has been remarkably unskeptical of Israel's account of events and their context, and has paid little regard to international law. The New York Times (6/1/10) glossed over the facts of the devastating Israeli siege of Gaza, where 1.5 million people live in extreme poverty. As reporter Isabel Kershner wrote, "Despite sporadic rocket fire from the Palestinian territory against southern Israel, Israel says it allows enough basic supplies through border crossings to avoid any acute humanitarian crisis." Asking Israel to explain the effects of its embargo on the people of Gaza makes little sense, especially when there are plenty of other resources available. The U.N. Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs reported (IRIN, 5/18/10): "As a consequence of Israel's blockade of the Gaza Strip, 98 percent of industrial operations have been shut down since 2007 and there are acute shortages of fuel, cash, cooking gas, and other basic supplies. . . . Water-related health problems are widespread in the Strip because of the blockade and Israel's military operation in Gaza, which destroyed water and sanitation infrastructure, including reservoirs, wells, and thousands of kilometres of piping. . . . Chronic malnutrition has risen in Gaza over the past few years to reach 10.2 percent. . . . In Gaza, Israel's blockade is debilitating the healthcare system, limiting medical supplies and the training of medical personnel and preventing serious medical cases from travelling outside the Strip for specialized treatment. Israel's 2008-2009 military operation damaged 15 of the Strip's 27 hospitals and damaged or destroyed 43 of its 110 primary healthcare facilities, none of which have been repaired or rebuilt because of the construction materials ban. Some 15-20 percent of essential medicines are commonly out of stock and there are shortages of essential spare parts for many items of medical equipment." Those facts, though, aren't persuasive to everyone. The Washington Post's June 1 editorial page had one of the most appalling takes on the killings: "We have no sympathy for the motives of the participants in the flotilla -- a motley collection that included European sympathizers with the Palestinian cause, Israeli Arab leaders, and Turkish Islamic activists." Many of the analysis pieces in major papers focused on the fallout for Israel and the United States, rather than the civilians killed or the humanitarian crisis they were trying to address. The Post's Glenn Kessler (6/1/10) framed the U.S. response, not the Israeli attack, as the complicating factor: "Condemnation of Israeli Assault Complicates Relations With U.S." Kessler lamented, "The timing of the incident is remarkably bad for Israel and the United States," while a Los Angeles Times account (6/1/10) called the raid "a public relations nightmare for Israel." The New York Times' Kershner wrote (NYTimes.com, 5/31/10) that "the criticism [of Israel over the attack] offered a propaganda coup to Israel's foes, particularly the Hamas group that holds sway in Gaza." Other news accounts presented misleading context about the circumstances leading to Israel's blockade. Kershner ( New York Times, 6/1/10) stressed that "Israel had vowed not to let the flotilla reach the shores of Gaza, where Hamas, an organization sworn to Israel's destruction, took over by force in 2007." The Associated Press (6/1/10) reported that "Israel and Egypt sealed Gaza's borders after Hamas overran the territory in 2007, wresting control from Abbas-loyal forces" -- the latter a reference to Fatah forces affiliated with Mahmoud Abbas. Both accounts ignore the fact that Hamas won Palestinian elections in 2006, which led the United States and Israel to step up existing economic restrictions on Gaza. An attempt to stoke a civil war in Gaza by arming Fatah militants -- reported extensively by David Rose in Vanity Fair (4/08) -- backfired, and Hamas prevailed (Extra!, 9-10/07). Much of the U.S. press coverage takes Israeli government claims at face value, and is based largely on footage made available by Israeli authorities -- while Israel keeps the detained activists away from the media (not to mention from lawyers and worried family members). The Washington Post (6/1/10) reported the attack this way: "Upon touching down, the Israeli commandos, who were equipped with paint guns and pistols, were assaulted with steel poles, knives, and pepper spray. Video showed at least one commando being lifted up and dumped from the ship's upper deck to the lower deck. Some commandos later said they jumped into the water to escape being beaten. The Israeli military said some of the demonstrators fired live ammunition. Israeli officials said the activists had fired two guns stolen from the troops." As Salon.com's Glenn Greenwald wrote (5/31/10): "Just ponder what we'd be hearing if Iran had raided a humanitarian ship in international waters and killed 15 or so civilians aboard." The Times' June 1 report included seven paragraphs of Israel's account of what happened on board the Turkish ship, the Mavi Marmara, where the civilians were killed; the paper reported that "There were no immediate accounts available from the passengers of the Turkish ship" because the Israeli base they were taken to "was off limits to the news media and declared a closed military zone." The Times piece also showed little interest in international law, mentioning Israel's claim regarding the legality of their actions but providing no analysis from any international law experts to support or debunk the claim: "Israeli officials said that international law allowed for the capture of naval vessels in international waters if they were about to violate a blockade." According to Craig Murray (5/31/10), former British ambassador and specialist on maritime law, the legal position "is very plain": "To attack a foreign flagged vessel in international waters is illegal. It is not piracy, as the Israeli vessels carried a military commission. It is rather an act of illegal warfare." Source: http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=4081 CONTACT: New York Times Clark Hoyt, Public Editor public@nytimes.com Phone: (212) 556-7652 Washington Post Andy Alexander, Ombud ombudsman@washpost.com Phone: (202) 334-7582 One journalist beats Israeli censorship on the Gaza flotilla attackIt was difficult, if not impossible, for journalists to report freely on the attack by Israeli forces on the aid ships attempting to break the Gazablockade. But Al Jazeera's Jamal Elshayyal did manage to make this broadcast before communications were cut. He was on board the Mavi Marmara, the lead ship in the flotilla of six vessels, which was boarded by Israeli commandos who were lowered on to its deck from helicopters. Another Al Jazeera correspondent, Abbas Nasser, reported in his last call to his TV station's headquarters in Qatar: "Hundreds of Israeli soldiers attacked the flotilla and the captain of our boat is seriously injured." Al Jazeera later said it had lost contact with all seven of its reporters, in three teams, on board the boats. Press watchdogs have condemned the arrests of several journalists and the censorship. The International Press Institute reported that two journalists from Australia's Sydney Morning Herald - reporter Paul McGeough and photographer Kate Geraghty – were detained after being "transported" to the Israeli port of Ashdod. Two Bulgarian journalists working for the BTV television station - reporterSvetoslav Ivanov and cameraman Valentin Vassilev - were also arrested during the assault. Reporters Without Borders issued a statement saying: "We deplore this assault... The journalists who were on the flotilla to cover the humanitarian operation were put in harm's way by this disproportionate reaction. "We urge the Israeli authorities to release the detained journalists and allow them unrestricted access to the Gaza Strip." Gaza flotilla: How Israel’s ministry of foreign affairs fakes photos of seized weaponsPublié le juin 2, 2010 par ibnkafka On the Israeli ministry of foreign affairs’ Flickr page, the pictures of the so-called weapons seized on the ships taking part in the Gaza Freedom Flotilla provide ample evidence of the deviousness of those darned anti-semitic terrorists. Be forewarned: the following pictures are not for the faint-hearted. Exhibit A: bulletproof vests  Selon l'armée israëlienne, ce sont des armes A slight snag though: two commentators, probably anti-semitic, point out that this photo really is from February 2006:
Exhibit B: an axe  Ceci est une arme de destruction massive An axe on board a ship? Good grief.
Horror knows no bounds- exhibit C: pepper spray.  Futés ces Turcs pour utiliser des sprays au poivre toujours sous emballage The comments display the usual hateful fanaticism one can expect from islamo-fascists:
Again, be forewarned: this post isn’t for the faint-hearted. Which leads us to exhibit D: a keffieh, kitchen knives, a Saudi flag, and and some CD-roms.  Do not faint just yet, because here is exhibit E: an electric saw – on a ship! Really, those terrorists really are beyond the pale.  Une scie électrique, arme de guerre
Please bear with me, because here comes exhibit F: night vision equipment, of course utterly useless on high seas.  Attention: arme de guerre!
Finally, the smoking gun as it were: aa butterfly knife of sorts, with a blade slightly shorter than a thumb, a weapon ideally suited for use against marine commandos armed with high-velocity firearms:  If all this hard evidence isn’t enough to convince you of the legitimacy of the Israeli action, I rest my case. PS: Hurry up visiting that Flickr page, as I fear that some photos might be withdrawn soon Source: Israel's use of captured video draws criticism JERUSALEM — Israel's army has been using confiscated videos to justify its deadly raid against a Gaza-bound aid flotilla, and the Foreign Press Association wants it to stop. The organization, which represents hundreds of journalists in Israel and the Palestinian territories, says the military seized video and equipment from dozens of reporters on board the main ship. The FPA demanded Thursday that the military stop using the captured material without permission and identify the source of the video already released. The material appeared Wednesday on the army's YouTube site labeled as "captured." The FPA says the military is now selectively using footage to bolster its claims that commandos opened fire only after being attacked. THIS IS A BREAKING NEWS UPDATE. Check back soon for further information. AP's earlier story is below. JERUSALEM (AP) — Israel on Thursday rejected calls from the United Nations and others for an international investigation of its deadly raid on a Gaza-bound aid flotilla but left the door open to foreign involvement. Israel says the commandos used force, killing nine people, only after activists attacked them with knives, crowbars and clubs, as well as two pistols grabbed from raiders. Activists who had set sail for Gaza with tons of aid, hoping to break Israel's 3-year-old blockade of Gaza, say Israeli commandos fired first. Officials have insisted Israel's military already is investigating the raid and the country is capable of conducting a credible review. "It is our standard practice after military operations, especially operations in which there have been fatalities, to conduct a prompt, professional, transparent and objective investigation in accordance with the highest international standards," government spokesman Mark Regev said. Another official in the prime minister's office said there would be no separate international investigation. He spoke on condition of anonymity pending an official decision. Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman, however, proposed attaching international observers to an internal Israeli probe. He told the Ynet news website that he has proposed setting up a commission of inquiry, headed by a respected former Israeli Supreme Court judge. "If they'll ask to include foreign observers, we'll include them," Lieberman said. A junior Cabinet member, Binyamin Ben-Eliezer, went even further, saying, "an international commission of inquiry must be established because we have nothing to hide. "We must quell world criticism," Ynet quoted Ben-Eliezer as telling fellow Labor Party ministers. An inner Cabinet of ministers with security responsibilities must convene to discuss the matter. Israel has refused to cooperate with previous international probes, most recently the U.N. investigation into Israel's 2009 war in the Gaza Strip that concluded that both the Israelis and Hamas militants, who control Gaza, committed war crimes. Israel says the commission that ordered the probe has a record of anti-Israel conduct, and has rejected the investigation as fundamentally flawed. The international outrage over the deaths on board the flotilla's lead ship, the Mavi Marmara, has sparked a wave of protests across the diplomatic world and condemnations by a sheaf of countries. South Africa became the latest country to recall its ambassador to Israel, although it stressed it has no intention of expelling the Israeli ambassador or cutting diplomatic ties with the Jewish state. The raid has also provoked multiple demands for an international probe, and on Wednesday, U.N. chief Ban Ki-moon indicated he was headed in that direction. In a strongly worded statement, the Arab League called the raid "state piracy and terrorism" and said it threatened regional stability and security. Arab foreign ministers also urged the U.N. Security Council to force Israel to lift the blockade. Earlier this week, the 15-nation U.N Security Council called for a "prompt, impartial, credible and transparent investigation conforming to international standards" but stopped short of calling for an independent international investigation. The U.S., as a member of the council, supported that statement. Washington's special Mideast envoy, who is in the region to mediate another round of indirect talks between Israelis and Palestinians, said the raid "underscores the need to make progress in negotiations to lead to a two-state solution." "The tragedy of last week can not be allowed to spiral out of control and undermine the limited but real progress that has been made," envoy George Mitchell said Thursday at an investment conference in the West Bank city of Bethlehem. The activists on the flotilla want to end Israel's blockade of the Gaza Strip, imposed after the militant Hamas group violently seized power in the territory three years ago. Israel says the blockade is meant to keep weapons out of Gaza and to put pressure on its Hamas rulers to moderate. But weapons and other goods continue to reach Gaza through underground tunnels with Egypt and Gazans blame Israel, not Hamas, for their hardship. The activists already have another small Gaza-bound ship in the Mediterranean, which expects to arrive in the region early next week, and say they are organizing a new flotilla of at least three aid ships to try to breach the blockade in early fall. | ||||
No comments:
Post a Comment