Last night BBC2 aired the first part of its three-part series ‘Israel and the Arabs: Elusive Peace’. Comments are going strong on our earlier post; here are two other statements from HR subscribers:
1) J.H. wrote a fine letter to BBC’s Complaints Board:
Dear Ms Boaden
Unfortunately there were several serious examples of omissions, one-sidedness and lack of balance in this episode which I think you should investigate.
1) The only explanation given for the cause of the “Intifada” was Sharon’s walk on the Temple Mount and Israeli police subsequently “opening fire on protestors”. The documentary makers ignored credible evidence that the Intifada was pre-planned and co-ordinated by the Palestinian leadership.
Moreover, the fact that the “protestors” were engaged in a violent confrontation, which threatened the lives of police, was ignored. Hence the impression was given that Israelis fired on non-combatants and without justification.
2) Palestinian consternation at the building of homes in the Jerusalem suburb of Maale Adumim in the lead up to the Camp David talks was mentioned. But Israeli consternation at Arafat’s refusal to end anti-Semitic hatred and incitement in PA run media and schools and his support for groups and individuals engaged in acts of terror against Israeli civilians was ignored.
This is an example of one-sidedness and lack of balance.
3) Maale Adumim was described as “Palestinian land”. This is factually inaccurate. Prior to 1967 Jordan occupied the territories. The sovereign status of the territory has yet to be determined by negotiated settlement. Maale Adumim was not built on privately owned Palestinian land.
Describing the territory as “Palestinian land” sides against Israel’s credible legal claims to sovereignty over all or parts of the territories and pre-judges permanent status negotiations.
4) Regarding the Clinton Proposals, the impression was given that sovereignty over the temple mount was the only barrier to agreement. However, Arafat’s refusal to compromise over every other issue (Dennis Ross, Fox News, 21.4.02) in particular the Palestinian so called “Right of Return” (which would effectively lead to the eradication of Israel) was not mentioned by the documentary makers.
5) The documentary makers omitted the views of US chief negotiator, Dennis Ross. This is significant since Dennis Ross has continually expressed the view that Arafat was unwilling to make peace under any circumstances.
“Arafat was never serious about making a peace deal at Camp David. Whenever Arafat gets in trouble with his own people, to divert attention to this, he always incites them against Israel. This is a common tactic among dictators. Arafat knew, he couldn’t do this no more, if he agreed to peace…There’s no doubt in my mind that he thought the violence would create pressure on the Israelis and maybe the rest of the world. Arafat wanted to re-establish the Palestinians as a victim, and started this horrific war.” Dennis Ross, Fox News, 21.4.02
Dennis Ross’s account of Arafat’s refusal to accept any Jewish historical connection with Jerusalem was also a notable omission by the documentary makers.
6) The narrator used the term “Wailing Wall” throughout. This term is offensive. It was coined by the British during the Mandate era and is based on an ignorant and disparaging reference to the Jewish mode of prayer.
Yours sincerely
Jonathan H
2) G.B. comments:
Tonight (as HR warned) the BBC showed their usual attempt to blame Israel for collapsing the so called peace processes despite all the evidence.
What I did notice however, was that during the “inevitable” upsurge in violence from the offended arabs after Sharon’s walk around Jerusalem they used the central clip from the “Pallywood” video showing the man “hit” in the leg while standing next to a jeep. (55 mins in and 5 mins from the end)
See the latest investigation/debunking of the al Dura tale from The Second Draft.
