Introduction
The B’Tselem project “East Jerusalem: Six Voices”, suffers from numerous academic shortfalls, congruent with that organization’s bias regarding the Israeli/Arab conflict. This paper identifies four main problems with the project: its falsification and distortion of data, its support for ideologically driven political organizations, its vilification of Israelis, and its disregard for facts evidenced in its use of emotions to persuade.
The Falsification and Distortion of Data
The one-sided analysis that B’Tselem presents in these videos will undoubtedly result in the viewer being overcome by disdain towards Israel. Consider, for example, the statement in Yonatan Mizrachi’s video that reads, “Rioting breaks out in Silwan following the shooting of a resident by a settler security guard.”; the two serious problems with this concern the accuracy of the actual statement, and the misleading nature of the statement. Firstly, as reported in the Guardian (Israeli security guard shoots dead Palestinian man), as well as in the Zuheir a-Rajabi video, the guard was not a settler, but a private contractor to whom the setters also objected. Secondly, following the other videos’ description of the occupant’s supposed ‘crimes’, the statement would apparently indicates that the man was shot in cold blood. However, according to the Jerusalem District Police Commander, Aharon Franco, “the guard encountered a preplanned ambush which put his life in danger, prompting him to open fire.” (Security tightened in Jerusalem in the wake of rioting). While the Zuheir a-Rajabi video claims that the guard could have escaped, the video does not actually show the scene where the shooting took place. This means that it is plausible that the Arabs could have blocked the exit route with their presence, and not with physical objects, leaving the guard in danger. This possibility was not even mentioned, taking the non-conclusive video ‘evidence’ as evidence that it was first-degree murder. Similar factual laxness is apparent in other videos, such as the Muna and Muhammad al-Qurd, and the Thaer Qirresh videos, which discuss security threats and freedom of movement for the Arabs who live in and around Jewish areas. It does not discuss the security threats and the lack of freedom of movement faced by Jews in those areas. Finally, the videos only showcase the opinions of people who believe that the land is ‘occupied’, without presenting the story of Israelis who have alternative views. This one-sided presentation completely undermines the entire argument of the B’Tselem project. It goes against the B’Tselem’s description of itself as an an organization that presents “responses from the relevant authorities in its reports whenever we get them, so you can evaluate both our findings and those of the government and make your own judgment.” By falsifying and distorting the reality, B’Tselem is not only going against its raison d’etre, but is also creating a perverted narrative of events in eastern Jerusalem.
Supporting Ideologically Driven Political Organizations
The six videos clearly indicate that B’Tselem is propagating the idea that Israeli Jews should not be allowed to live in the eastern part of Jerusalem. This is best seen in Sara Benninga’s video; Benninga, a far-left activist, is one of the main organizers of the Sheikh Jarrah Solidarity Movement. This movement is not a human rights organization, but rather, an organization that calls for the prevention of “Jewish enclaves” in East Jerusalem, due to their belief in the “division of the city”. By presenting such a video, B’Tselem is giving tacit support for this political outcome, contrary to their stated aim of “not weigh[ing] in on political matters, except to comment on their implications on human rights.” It is deeply problematic for a human rights organization to have a political agenda. The future of Jerusalem, as a unified or divided city, is a political decision; the treatment of that city’s inhabitants, if inhumane, is the province of human rights organizations, and B’Tselem should appreciate this distinction.
Vilification of Israelis
The videos explicitly vilify Israelis. In Thaer Qirresh’s video he states that that the Jewish residence are taking his uncle’s furniture, while filming a resident moving what looks like furniture. Thus, without any actual evidence, the Jewish Israelis are depicted as thieves, who want to exploit the Arabs for all that they have. This message is intensified in Abd al-Fatah’s video where, in discussing supposed Israeli efforts to take his land, he says that “Their goal is money. They want money. They want land. They want everything.” These statements are in line with the anti-Semitic belief that Jews want money and control. These uncorroborated statements that vilify one side, with their hints of anti-Semitism, should have been edited out by B’Tselem. Finally, in Sara Benninga’s video, her father expresses his opinion that the state is an evil force, and that the police are on the wrong side. There is no doubt that such statements vilify Israel, and, therefore, push through a narrative that because evil is wrong, Israel is wrong.
Using Emotions to Sell Stories, not Facts
A further problem with the project B’Tselem’s use of emotion, rather than factual evidence, to persuade. All the six videos that were released demonstrate this, but it is most evident in their use of children. In Muna and Muhammad’s video, the little boy expresses opinions such as, “Sheikh Jarrah feels like a military zone” or that he is scared to get close to where Israeli Jews live, and he runs away as soon as he gets close to the residence. To intensify the impression, the child states that Palestinian children are not allowed to play in the Israeli playground, and that if they venture in, they will be physically attacked. The use of a little kid to push through a narrative is morally wrong, but for a human rights organization that claims to “conduct first-class research” to do so puts it in contravention of its own ethos. By promoting such a project, B’Tselem crosses the line from a human rights organization to that of a politically motivated organization.
Conclusion
An analysis of B’Tselem’s project “East Jerusalem: Six Voices” clearly indicates that B’Tselem has developed from an organization that is focused on human rights, to one that is trying to push a political opinion. B’Tselem’s falsification and distortion of facts and reality, as well as its use of vilification and emotions to sell a narrative indicates that it can no longer be trusted to provide a balanced approach to the issues facing Israel, becoming instead an organization that is pushing its own agenda, under the cover of concern for human rights.