Note: Has any British magazine run on its cover the illustration of a Muslim scimitar piercing the Union Jack, like the New Statesman did in 2002 of the Star of David piercing the British flag for an article on Britain’s pro-Israeli lobby?

When was Israel-Palestine much less than 13% of news of foreign wars in the last 8 years?

Extremely negative reporting of Israel, much of it state funded.

“No, this is about money.”

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.

I for one stand full square against privatization of the BBC: it would undermine and damage probably the finest news-gathering and distributing body in the world. Frankly the publicly funded BBC is the one thing in this country that I feel a real pride of.

Also, Peter Oborne is by no means “on the left”: he is a crusty old conservative who was the political editor of The Spectator and I have been led believe writes for the Daily Mail.

Sorry to undermine the focus of this wildly irrational (and frankly, loony) thread with some facts :)

As for Arab petrodollars, that is not incompatible. On the contrary, Israel and the Gulf monarchs openly run joint candidates for President of the United States (Bush, Clinton), and wars are duly fought by other people (Britons, Americans, &c) in the identical interests of both of them.

Because of the unique relationship between Israel and the Anglo-Jewish community.

So, what?

What would be the point? Their main goal is to garner Anglo-Jewish support. It’s relatively easy to do. Only Israel unites most Anglo-Jews. Show sympathy for Israel, and you at least do not alienate Anglo-Jews.

As for funding, we’ll see if they actually asked BMOI any questions.

In any case, it is likely to be a mixture of funding. Some is likely to be Israeli, some Anglo-Jewish. Sometime it may be in the person of Anglo-Israeli Jews, so impossible to distinguish.

The question is whether this was “hidden”, or undisclosed for some nefarious purpose.

In any case, it seems to me Osbourne’s problem is with Anglo-Jewish support for Israel, and British politicians’ garnering Anglo-Jewish support for acknowledging it.

And it is likely to be no more than Arab or Islamic petro-pounds, over the years.

“This is partly because the present obscurity surrounding it can, paradoxically, give rise to conspiracy theories that have no basis in fact.”

Yeah, right. Talk about a disingenuous motive.

“For instance, Conservative Friends of Israel (CFI) – once described by the famous Conservative politician and historian as “the largest organisation in western Europe dedicated to the cause of the people of Israel” – claims that 80% of all Tory MPs are members. The Labour Friends of Israel is equally formidable. In 2001, Jon Mendelsohn, a former chairman of LFI and now Gordon Brown’s chief election fundraiser, was quoted in the Jerusalem Post as saying that “Zionism is pervasive in New Labour. It is automatic that Blair will come to Labour Friends of Israel meetings.”

Since 2001, LFI has arranged more than 60 free trips to Israel for MPs. LFI and CFI trips account for an astonishing 13% of all funded trips abroad for MPs and candidates. That’s more trips to Israel, with a population smaller than London’s, than to any other country.

Furthermore, those in many sensitive foreign affairs, defence and intelligence posts in the Commons are often Labour or Conservative Friends of Israel. Mike Gapes, chair of the foreign affairs select committee, is a former deputy chair of the LFI. Kim Howells, chair of the intelligence and security committee (and a former Middle East minister), used to chair LFI. James Arbuthnot, chair of the powerful Commons defence select committee, is also the serving parliamentary chair of the CFI.”

Which past of this is not the case? Unless at least some of it is, then yes, we are talking about a very formidable lobby indeed. As Oborne concludes:

“The pro-Israel lobby, in common with other lobbies, has every right to operate and indeed to flourish in Britain. But it needs to be far more open about how it is funded and what it does. This is partly because the present obscurity surrounding it can, paradoxically, give rise to conspiracy theories that have no basis in fact. But it is mainly because politics in a democracy should never take place behind closed doors. It should be out in the open for all to see.”

Shouldn’t it? If not, why not?