Guardian erkent verdraaien citaat in Palestine Papers

The Guardian, extremer anti-Israel dan de NRC, heeft een van haar fouten toegegeven. Het is een klassiek voorbeeld van hoe makkelijk het is om door weglating van een deel van een citaat de inhoud te veranderen en daarmee de lezers te misleiden. Volgens de Guardian zei Livni (dit verscheen in een kadertje bij een artikel over de palestine papers):

 

'The Israel policy is to take more and more land day after day and that at the end of the day we'll say that it is impossible, we already have the land and cannot create the state.' Tzipi Livni, then Israeli foreign minister said

 

In werkelijkheid zei ze:

 

'I understand the sentiments of the Palestinians when they see the settlements being built. The meaning from the Palestinian perspective is that Israel takes more land, that the Palestinian state will be impossible, the Israel policy is to take more and more land day after day and that at the end of the day we'll say that it is impossible, we already have the land and cannot create the state.'

 

Op internet staan honderden van dergelijke quotes van zionistische leiders waarin zij de meest vreselijke dingen zeggen of de Palestijnen gelijk geven. Soms is erin geknipt, soms zijn ze verzonnen, soms is een woord weggelaten of vervangen. Het is heel makkelijk om op deze manier te misleiden en bedriegen. En de Guardian, de NRC en vele andere kranten berichten elke dag weer zeer selectief over Israel-Palestina, en geven geen enkele contekst van Israels kant, bagatelliseren het radikalisme van Hamas, stellen de PA als gematigder voor dan zij is, etc.

Door informatie weg te laten of dingen anders te duiden kun je een totaal verwrongen beeld geven van een zaak. Door al deze grote en kleine leugens over Israel ontstaat een beeld van Israel als schurkenstaat, een land dat beter niet gesticht had kunnen worden, en een volk dat een ander aandoet wat het zelf is aangedaan. (NB deze laatste zin is door kwaadwillenden makkelijk te manipuleren: haal 'door al deze grote en kleine leugens' weg en citeer alleen de rest van de zin). Een kind kan de was doen! Daar heb je dus geen vierjarige opleiding journalistiek voor nodig. Elder of Ziyon geeft onder het artikel over de toegegeven fout van de Guardian nog een paar voorbeelden, voor het geval u onder de indruk zou zijn van de Guardians rectificatie.

 

RP

------------

 

Palestine papers: Guardian acknowledges misconstruing Livni quote

http://justjournalism.com/the-wire/palestine-papers-guardian-acknowledges-misconstruing-livni-quote/

Mon. 14 Feb. 2011 @ 10.58 

Corrections and clarifications column acknowledges pull quote about settlement policy 'cut in a way that may have given a misleading impression.'

On the first day of The Guardian's Palestine papers expose, on Monday 24 January, when Palestinian negotiators were attacked as 'weak' and 'craven', a quote from then foreign minister Tzipi Livni appeared in a box, titled, 'What they said…'. It read:

'The Israel policy is to take more and more land day after day and that at the end of the day we'll say that it is impossible, we already have the land and cannot create the state.' Tzipi Livni, then Israeli foreign minister

However, the newspaper on Saturday acknowledged that the full quote shows that Livni was characterising the Palestinian perception of Israeli policies, and not the policies themselves. What she actually said was:

'I understand the sentiments of the Palestinians when they see the settlements being built. The meaning from the Palestinian perspective is that Israel takes more land, that the Palestinian state will be impossible, the Israel policy is to take more and more land day after day and that at the end of the day we'll say that it is impossible, we already have the land and cannot create the state.'

By cutting the quote to exclude the first part of Tzipi Livni's sentence, The Guardian portrayed the Israeli politician as brazenly admitting a policy of making a Palestinian state impossible.

See also: 'Palestine papers: Guardian cites Just Journalism's analysis', on how The Guardian's blog acknowledged the broadsheet 'selectively quoted' Saeb Erekat.

------------

http://elderofziyon.blogspot.com/2011/02/guardian-admits-spinning-palpapers.html

The Guardian headlined an article "Palestinian negotiators accept Jewish state, papers reveal." yet the papers said no such thing. Instead they said that the PLO has no problem with how Israel defines itself, a position they have said publicly, but they would never accept that definition. In fact, they would never accept that there is something called "the Jewish people."

In that same article, they claimed that "Israeli leaders pressed for the highly controversial transfer of some of their own Arab citizens into a future Palestinian state." In reality, the Israeli leaders were saying that they did not want to have villages divided into two states, and the villages should be in one state or another. Moreover, the Guardian misuses the word "transfer" which is usually meant to indicate moving people from their homes.

The same article mischaracterizes Livni a third time by writing

[I]n an extraordinary comment in November 2007, Livni – who briefly had a British arrest warrant issued against her in 2009 over alleged war crimes in Gaza – is recorded as saying: "I was the minister of justice. I am a lawyer ... But I am against law – international law in particular. Law in general."

She made clear that what might have seemed to be a joke was meant more seriously by using the point to argue against international law as one of the terms of reference for the talks and insisting that "Palestinians don't really need international law". The Palestinian negotiators protested about the claim.

In fact she was referring to putting a reference to international law in the Terms of Reference of a joint statement at Annapolis - not saying she was against international law altogether, as the Guardian implies. They also put the "Palestinians don't really need international law" as a  Livni quote, when it was a paraphrase in the actual memo, again referring to the joint statement.