Guardian: No Israeli Nobel Peace Prize Winners – ever!


This is a cross post from Dov of dayvidsaffer.com

British broadsheet The Guardian has not been known of late as a friend of Israel, but their latest attempt to remove from the history books Israeli achievements is disgusting.

In a piece entitled Nobel peace prize winners list: how does Barack Obama compare? the Guardian removes from the list three recipients to the award, who happen to be Israeli (1978 Menachem Begin, 1994 Shimon Peres and Yitzhak Rabin).

Below are the screen shots just in case they update their site.

The columns on the table are: Year, Winner 1, Shared Winner 2, Country 1, Country 2, Sex 1, Sex 2

1978

1994

The Guardian should be ashamed of themselves.

UPDATE 15.57 GMT

Just noticed that the Guardian has finally realised that Israelis have won the Peace prize.

Whether the initial exclusion was intentional or not I don’t know – but with their track record one can only speculate.

Good thing I have those original screen shots!

UPDATE 2 16.20 GMT

Simon Rogers from the Guardian is arguing over at Harry’s Place that this was a simple mistake:

The errors happened when we decided to put joint winners in two columns – which is why the country reference survived, but the name didn’t, ie you see “Israel” but not Shimon Peres and Yitzhak Rabin. When the table first went up this lunchtime, it also missed out John Raleigh Mott, The Quakers and the League of Red Cross Societies. We assumed all the errors were at the top but unfortunately they weren’t.

Here is my response:

Sorry, don’t buy it.

26 double entries seem to have been logged correctly, including the years directly before and after the Arafat/Rabin/Peres win.

How can you get it right so many times and wrong when Israelis are meant to be listed?

77 comments on “Guardian: No Israeli Nobel Peace Prize Winners – ever!

  1. Martyn

    “..I have not omitted nor avoided the question, because as far I know, no one here has ever asked me that question, or qualified that question with any context..

    Why do you need to be asked?

    And why should the question need a context? Let me ask you:

    “Has Israel been treated fairly?” on CiF?

    If so, in which way(s)?

    If not, please explain how not.

    These are simple enough questions to someone with a modicum of intelligence are they not?

  2. Is Martyn actually MartyninEurope, the vanguard of the second wave from Cesspit is Free sent to try to romance AKUS back there (Berchmans having singularly failed), or fool us into believing that CiF and the Henry coven are reasonable people really?

    If that is the case, note how he admits that the Guardian is “sloppy.”

    It’s a beginning.

    Hang around here, Martyn, and we’ll make a convert of you yet!

  3. Roland:

    Martyn

    “..I have not omitted nor avoided the question, because as far I know, no one here has ever asked me that question, or qualified that question with any context..

    Why do you need to be asked?

    And why should the question need a context? Let me ask you:

    “Has Israel been treated fairly?” on CiF?

    If so, in which way(s)?

    If not, please explain how not.

    These are simple enough questions to someone with a modicum of intelligence are they not?

    Roland, if you had asked me the same questions, without the condescension, I would have happily answered your questions.

    Cheers, Martyn

  4. Martyn with all your ‘intelligence’ haven’t you understood that the purpose of this site is to look at a specific anti-Israel agenda perpetrated by the Guardian? If so, given the weight of many other instances of misleading reporting on the subject, what might be considered a ‘mistake’ by a more honest media outlet, in this case becomes just another example of twisted facts.
    Earlier on in this thread I showed an example of Guardian reporting Key Events in the Middle East where they ignored MAJOR EVENTS for a specific year just to show an exceptional one where a Jew did the same to the Palestinians as they are doing or attempting to do to the Jews on a daily basis.
    With your ‘intelligence’ were you aware of the other key events for that year, and do you think most other ‘intelligent’ beings are? I would think that most ‘intelligent’ beings wouldn’t rely on the Guardian for their news, but observe it, and the BBC, to see what the current tactic of the leftwing Islamist appeasing media is.
    Have you ever wondered what the purpose of Holocaust denial is? MOST INTELLIGENT PEOPLE are aware that it happened, so why are so many Islamists and their cohorts exerting influence to deny it? Don’t you think it works in the arena they try to influence? If yes, then with your ‘intelligence’ you too should be concerned about this present ‘mistake’ by the Guardian, in light of the many others detailed on this site – all aimed to mislead and instil anti-Israel sentiments.

  5. LicketySplit:

    Let me see ….

    Is Martyn actually MartyninEurope

    Yes, Martyn Richard Jones is my real name, and I post as MartynInEurope on CiF .. my nick used to be MartynInSpain, I changed it to MartynInEurope after I was told that my nick changes were a problem .. I used to change it on certain blogs to reflect wherever I was working/living … MartynInSpain, MartynInUSA, MartynInGermany etc. now it’s simply MartynInEurope, and I’ve kept it as that for a few years now.

    the vanguard of the second wave from Cesspit is Free

    I wouldn’t consider myself “vanguard” when it comes to the internet, blogs or politics. In my work, well that’s another matter.

    sent to try to romance AKUS back there

    AKUS is his own man, and someone I respect, I don’t need to try and persuade him to do anything, nor in fact should I.

    (Berchmans having singularly failed),

    Didn’t see that. Although Berchie did try and get AKUS reinstated on CiF, but that’s something you need to take up with him if – you want.

    or fool us into believing that CiF and the Henry coven are reasonable people really?

    I can dish it out to them and they (usually) don’t take offence.

    If that is the case, note how he admits that the Guardian is “sloppy.”

    It’s a beginning.

    The Graun has always been a bit sloppy as well as occasionally sentimentally soppy, maybe that’s one reason I used to like reading the newspaper when I was much younger.

    Hang around here, Martyn, and we’ll make a convert of you yet!

    I’m not a “with you or against you person”, but essentially I’m not against CiFwatch. I like reasoned arguments and I also think anti-Semitism is still a problem in Europe, a problem (like all forms of racism) that must be constantly addressed, constantly fought. If you think CiFwatch is necessary then go for it, I’ll not stand in your way by any means.

    Anyway, I hope that answers at least some of the questions.

    Cheers, Martyn

  6. Teddy Bear:

    Martyn with all your ‘intelligence’ haven’t you understood that the purpose of this site is to look at a specific anti-Israel agenda perpetrated by the Guardian? If so, given the weight of many other instances of misleading reporting on the subject, what might be considered a ‘mistake’ by a more honest media outlet, in this case becomes just another example of twisted facts.

    I respect your opinion with respect to the Nobel Peace Prize table controversy, but I don’t share the degree of concern for this particular incident.

    I do have a problem with anti-Semitism in Europe, because it is a problem, but I don’t think it’s as big as some people claim, nor as small as others claim, but nonetheless it is an issue that needs addressing and a problem that needs fighting, we will probably never defeat racism, but at least we can beat it into a corner where it only damages the racists themselves.

    Hope that clears up some questions.

    Cheers, Martyn

  7. Teddy Bear:

    Have you ever wondered what the purpose of Holocaust denial is?

    Yes, I’m well aware of the various ways that people try and use Holocaust denial to further their perverse political agendas.

    What I could say about Holocaust denial has already been said far better, by people who are far more eloquent and experienced than me.

    Cheers, Martyn

  8. Martyn, I’m glad you now sound more reasoned and thoughtful and less pompous than you did in your original post. It puts peoples back up when you make claims to intelligence instead of just providing a reasoned argument and let others be the judge.

    My ‘concern’ on this particular thread is no more or less than any other – it’s just another brick in the wall. My greater concern is the overall direction and agenda of this kind of media propaganda. Along with many here, I recognize how powerful a tool it is when used in this way, and is one of those that led to the holocaust – among other things.

    Without a doubt, Islamist appeasing rags of which the Guardian is one, empowers terrorist regimes and forces, and increases misery and loss of life in many countries of the world today – on both sides.

  9. Teddy Bear:

    Many thanks for your kind words. I will try and keep those in mind when I contribute to this group.

    Best regards, Martyn.

  10. MartyninEurope you still haven’t explained why you have come here though. I am curious to know why, although you describe yourself as not being a with you or against you person, you seem to have done a 180 degree turn by posting here.

    It’s even more curious that, as you say, you can dish it out to them and they don’t usually take offence. Perhaps if you had spoken out more about your having problems with antisemitism in Europe you, too, would now be a member of the ex-CiF club…

    You have piqued my curiosity – what, to you, is the purpose of Holocaust denial? I am interested to know, whether or not others have said it far better.

    Teddy Bear I absolutely agree with you that Islamist-appeasing rags like the Guardian give power as well as support to terrorist regimes.

  11. To MartyninEurope:

    “Has Israel been treated fairly?” on CiF?

    If so, in which way(s)?

    If not, please explain how not.

    (Is that better? I shall be interested in your reply).

  12. In addition to declining to list the names of the three Israeli Nobel prize winers, the Guardian also changed the designation that was given to Yasser Arafat. Arafat’s award was given to him in his capacity as Chairman of the Palestine Authority. In 1994, there was no nation called Palestine that was a member state of the UN and there were no ambassadors to Palestine. The award itself referenced “The Palestine Authority”. But the Guardian changed even that. In its infamous list of winners, The Guardian refers to Yasser Arafat of “Palestine”. The Guardian managed to get all the names of joint winners where Israel was not involved. Can anyone actually believe that the Guardian could not do the same when Israelis were part of the joint winners? And can anyone believe that the refusal to list the Israeli winners was somehow missed by the fact checkers and editors of the Guardian? Maybe the Guardian editors and people like Simon Rogers simply do not know that Peres, Rabin and Begin all won the Nobel peace prize. Maybe they are actually that uninformed. But I suspect that the editors of the Guardian knew exactly what they were doing when they spiked mention of the Israeli winners.

  13. Roland:

    To MartyninEurope:

    “Has Israel been treated fairly?” on CiF?

    On this site I post as Martyn Jones (my full name is Martyn Richard Jones), I also post in The Guardian’s CiF blog as MartynInEurope, I think that much is clear.

    Do I think Israel has been fairly treated on CiF?

    To respond to that question I would have to make a generalisation, and you know some of us have an aversion to gross generalisations, for obvious historical reasons.

    Would you care to restate your question with that factor in mind?

    Cheers, Martyn.

  14. The Guardian’s omission of Israeli Nobel Prize winners was no accident. It was obviously a deliberate attempt to defame Israel. The Guardian says it was just a typographical error. They can not beleive that anyone is buying that song and dance. The Guardian was caught red handed and they know it.

  15. JubelFoster

    .

    ## The Guardian’s omission of Israeli Nobel Prize winners was no accident. It was obviously a deliberate attempt to defame Israel. The Guardian was caught red handed and “they” know it. ##

    .

    Todays Haaretz ‘s description of the Chemistry nominee who called for the release of all Palestinian prisoners rather negates your ” Gotcha” conspiracy theory. You hilariously think about a hundred individuals think identically . If “they” wanted to defame Israel they would have mentioned this lady eh no?

    Here is to CIFwatchers and to wish them well in their epic voyage to try to storm the Guardian. …This is a brave and noble cause ….”she is over there…no …that way”! :)

    TAD

    .

    Mita

    .

    ## Well spotted Wilbur ##

    .

    Is there not some free clinic that will give advice? :)

    .

    TAD

  16. Could it be a coincidence that the”typographical error” in the Guardian omitted all Israeli Nobel Prize winners but included all the co-winners from Egypt and Palestine Authority? If you believe that, next time you come to New York, call me and I will sell you the Brooklyn Bridge.

  17. “….You hilariously think about a hundred individuals think identically …

    Well, certain people do, don’t they, Berch?

    Look at the turnout at the HamasFest which mocked Gilad Shalit?

    Martyn, Roland’s question is not so difficult. Why are you trying to wriggle out of answering it?

    Roland: It might have been easier for Martyn to answer had you asked him to post the links here to threads where Israel had been treated fairly on CiF.

    What about it Martyn? It’s a bit like trying to find a needle in a haystack but I am sure you are up to the task.

  18. Received today from ArutzSheva

    http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/133785

    Oh dear.

    Eggy faces for Guardian editors..

    If it was an oversight (and like many here I very much doubt that it was) then it probably came about because of increased stress.

    Now, I wonder why al-Grauniad should be under the sort of strain that would incline them to such an almighty cock-up?

    Perhaps CiFWatch is making its presence felt (Oh, please heaven!)

  19. One thing’s for sure – Martyn certainly made Pollard look like an ignorant fool re. “Keep the Jews out!” on the JC website.

    Now I can appreciate people thinking that The Guardian just happening to miss out the Israeli winners looks distinctly dodgy – especially given its reputation.
    But deliberate?
    a) Why did they bother including “Israel” in the country margin?
    b) Any malevolent editor would obviously know the “mistake” would have to be corrected as soon as someone noticed it, i.e. immediately – so why even bother?

    Yes it might seem a strange and highly unlikely coincidence – but these things do happen.

  20. pretzelberg. Yes it might seem a strange and highly unlikely coincidence – but these things do happen.

    Yes. They do.

    However, give the Guardian’s obsessive demonization of Israel, one can be forgiven for being over sensitive.

Comments are closed.