What is “dangerous and alarming” to the BBC – and what is not

Here is a BBC News website article from December 17th entitled “Israel approves East Jerusalem settlement plans” which opens with the statement: 

“The Israeli authorities have approved plans to build 1,500 more homes at a Jewish settlement in East Jerusalem.”

The article actually relates to preliminary planning permission having been granted by the District Planning Commission for the potential construction of 1,500 new housing units in the existing Ramat Shlomo neighbourhood – some 21 minutes’ drive from Jerusalem city centre – which, under any possible scenario, would remain under Israeli control.

Ramat Shlomo

The BBC saw fit to quote Saeb Erekat of the Palestinian Authority: [emphasis added]

” “We condemn in the strongest possible terms these Israeli actions and the determination of Israel to continue expanding settlements and in the process undermining the two-state solution,” chief negotiator Saeb Erekat told the Reuters news agency.

These are very dangerous and alarming steps. The Israeli government is showing its determination to contravene the will of the international community,” he added.”

Interestingly, the BBC did not see fit to inform its audiences at all about another development in the region which took place a couple of days beforehand. 

“Youngsters who identify themselves with the Hamas, Islamic Jihad and Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine terrorist organizations have joined forced with supporters of Fatah, according to a video uploaded to the Internet Friday, in order to fight against Israel.

“This is the beginning of the third Palestinian intifada, which erupts from the heart of Hebron and spreads to all of Palestine,” they said.”

Average British viewers might consider that and other related news currently coming out of PA-controlled areas to be more likely to “undermine the two-state solution” than the granting of preliminary planning permission. But of course if they get their news solely from the BBC, they will only know about the “very dangerous and alarming” things done by District Planning Committees. 

25 comments on “What is “dangerous and alarming” to the BBC – and what is not

  1. Pingback: What is “dangerous and alarming” to the BBC – and what is not | Blogs about Israel aggregation

  2. What is dangerous and alarming is ‘BBC Watch”s lack of knowledge of international humanitarian law.

    Israeli settlements built beyond the ‘Green Line’ (1967 borders) in the territory of Palestine are a violation of article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention, and are therefore considered illegal. This includes Ramat Shlomo, which is not a “neighbourhood’ but a settlement.

    • Yet again, the ‘Green Line’ has never been a border, it is the 1949 armistice line, so the geographical areas of Judea and Samaria cannot be legally construed as occupied territory.

      At the insistence of Jordan and other Arab countries, who signed the 1949 armistice with Israel, “no provision of this Agreement shall in any way prejudice the rights, claims and positions of either Party hereto in the ultimate peaceful settlement of the Palestine question, the provisions of this Agreement being dictated exclusively by military considerations.”. This wording may have suited the Arab countries in 1949, less so after 1967 – tough luck, they should have thought about that when they dictated the terms of the armistice.

      Therefore the only legally-binding international boundary that lies to the east of Israel is the one agreed as part of the 1994 Peace Treaty with Jordan, and arguably the 1922 boundary along the Jordan river and the Dead Sea.

      Notwithstanding the above, Israel is more than happy to negotiate over the future of Judea and Samaria, and it has made generous offers on more than one occasion. Not only did the Palestinian leadership refuse to entertain these offers with a counteroffer, as any reasonable negotiating team would do, they responded by walking out of the room and resuming violence.

      The Palestinian strategy is clear: Get Israel to make concessions, then once obtained, resume violence until negotiations resume and Israel makes more concessions.

    • Gnat, you have neither an understanding of international law, nor history.

      Palestine had no “territory” because it was not a state. The “1967 borders” as you call them are neither borders (never recognized as such by any legal entity) nor do they date from 1967 – they are the 1948 armistice lines – where the Jordanian army was stopped.

      • Dear Adam,

        all Israeli settlements built beyond the ‘Green Line’ (1967 borders) in the territory of Palestine are a violation of article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention, whhich states that “The Occupying Power shall not deport or transfer parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies”. These settlements are therefore illegal.

        The International Court of Justice, the United Nations, the European Union, the ICRC, the High Contracting Parties to the Fourth Geneva Convention… all agree that Israel’s settlements in the Palestinian territory are illegal.

        What one Adam Levick thinks cannot change international law.

        http://www.haaretz.com/opinion/the-levy-report-vs-international-law-1.474129

        • Nat definitely has a reading comprehension problem, doesn’t he? In addition to all his “misunderstandings” of the legal position of the territories beyond the Green Line, he refuses to accept that there might be more than one Adam in the world who refutes anti-Israel lies.

          Very amusing.

        • Nat, they are NOT BORDERS – please get an education. Israel is not an occupying power, because it is not occupied FROM anyone else. The UN is antisemitic, the EU financially supports groups advocating terrorism against Jews,the ICRC ruling comes from a Chinese judge (who is from a judicial system which executes more people than the rest of the world combined, and occupies Tibet) – so I don’t give a flying fig what any of these moral lowlifes think – including you.

          • Dear Adam,

            The International Court of Justice, the United Nations, the European Union, the ICRC, the High Contracting Parties to the Fourth Geneva Convention… all agree that Israel’s settlements in the Palestinian territory are illegal.

            What tou think cannot change international law.

            Are you not aware that the entire international community – and some Israeli politicians – expressed dismay at the Israeli settlement policy this week?

            Israeli settlements built beyond the ‘Green Line’ (1967 borders) in the territory of Palestine are a violation of article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention, whhich states that “The Occupying Power shall not deport or transfer parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies”. These settlements are therefore considered illegal.

            http://www.haaretz.com/opinion/the-levy-report-vs-international-law-1.474129

            Reply

  3. Quoting Saeb Erekat, the veteran Palestinian professional liar and pr man, is symptomatic of the BBC’s methods of news gathering.

    With sources like him, why do the BBC even need a bureau in the region? Erekat would no doubt be delighted to provide them with all the copy they need – he could simply email it to them, along with any video footage Pallywood produced.

    An immediate saving of hundreds of thousands of pounds, the identical coverage and no BBC personnel put at risk (of sunburn, hangovers, food poisoning, or standing too close to a cameraman in a war zone when his camera is mistaken for a gun by an Israeli tank gunner).

    Some of that money saved should rightly be spent on counselling for journos severely affected by their war experiences.

  4. More dishonest hair-splitting. Yet more evidence of your callous de-humanised attitude towards Palestinians. Save your legalese  for the International court when Barak has to answer for his crimes against humanity.

    ________________________________

  5. Those that say the armistice lines didn’t solidify into borders needs to………

    Buy an atlas

    read Moshe Dayans aurobiography particularly page 117

    check with the FO

    check with every FO equivalent in the world

    check with the UN

    • “check with the UN”

      Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha! Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha! Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha! {gasp} Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha! Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!
      Oh stop it, my sides are killing me!

Comments are closed.