Despite wielding great influence among the highest realms of British politics and media, little is known about the individuals and groups which collectively are known as the pro-Israel lobby.

Political commentator Peter Oborne sets out to establish who they are, how they are funded, how they work and what influence they have, from the key groups to the wealthy individuals who help bankroll the lobbying.

He investigates how accountable, transparent and open to scrutiny the lobby is, particularly in regard to its funding and financial support of MPs.

The pro-Israel lobby aims to shape the debate about Britain’s relationship with Israel and future foreign policies relating to it.

Oborne examines how the lobby operates from within parliament and the tactics it employs behind the scenes when engaging with print and broadcast media.

of course you'd NEVER do such a thing cjcjc. If Sunny agrees with someone then he should either agree with everything the person has said, ever, or not at all. Or the hawk-eyed cjcjc will catch him out! Man, nothing can get past you these days eh…

(PS, I've praised Oborne here plenty of times. He's the sole DM columnist I have time for)

I thought all of this was obvious. It is isn't it? I was surprised he made the doco. Will Channel 4 be banned from Israeli press conferences? Another thing that surprised me was that they showed the guys house in Bishop's Avenue. Surely the Police would object to that no? I am sure the neighbours would as well. I used to wonder who's house that was when we were on posh squatting manoevers up that way.

It's often scurrilous and underhand and accuses legitimate criticism of Israel of being anti-semitic. It's like the editor of the Guardian said in the programme.

You know what these people are defending.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zIQZ1-RFq6A

Some rich people finance politicians, some of them are Jews and some of those are pro-Israel. Whatever next?

On top of this there is an organisation in the US called the ‘American Israel Public Affairs Committee’.

One can only wonder their dark intent…

But hold on a moment! Their website gives their ‘game’ away:

“America’s Pro-Israel Lobby.”

The plot thinnens.

Cue scary music and the Star of David superimposed over the Union Jack.

And the tin-hat brigade are properly stirred-up.

I’ve long understood that ‘Palestinianism’ is the preserve of Islamists, far-lefties, Jew haters and gullible types.

As clearly, are stupid conspiracy theories.

The Middle Eastern Foreign Policy issue is clear – the UK follows the US, who itself is heavily skewed in favour of Israel thanks to AIPAC etc. The question is, what activities take place on the domestic front (if any).

Nonsense.

Peter Oborne has many times before played fast and loose with the truth and this time his attack was unwarranted as the Tories did say they thought Israel's reaction to Gaza was disproportionate.

However, once again, Israel is an ally and a democracy and Cameron did call for stopping of settlements as well as called for a two state solution – he rightly does not see Israel and Hamas to be the same in his eyes and I agree with him. Further, should he become PM he does not want to lose the right to rebuke an ally in private and I thought his speech was on the mark. Should he have talked about the death toll in front of this audience – yes. But was he wrong not doing so. I don't think so.

Hams and Hezbollah are terrorist organisations and must be treated as such. And Peter Oborne has lied about Blair numerous times and he would do again. He is the political editor of Daily Mail after all. What do you expect?

Peter Oborne has many times before played fast and loose with the truth and this time his attack was unwarranted as the Tories did say they thought Israel's reaction to Gaza was disproportionate.

However, once again, Israel is an ally and a democracy and Cameron did call for stopping of settlements as well as called for a two state solution – he rightly does not see Israel and Hamas to be the same in his eyes and I agree with him. Further, should he become PM he does not want to lose the right to rebuke an ally in private and I thought his speech was on the mark. Should he have talked about the death toll in front of this audience – yes. But was he wrong not doing so. I don't think so.

Hams and Hezbollah are terrorist organisations and must be treated as such. And Peter Oborne has lied about Blair numerous times and he would do again. He is the political editor of Daily Mail after all. What do you expect?

That Israel has (supposedly influential) defenders in the UK.
Good.
So it should.

it's rarely raised by journalists gives an indication of it's power

Bwahahahaha

I was addressing Jones and Osborne’s comments in the link given:

“I was shocked to see that Cameron made no reference at all to the invasion of Gaza, the massive destruction it caused, or the 1,370 deaths that had resulted. Indeed, Cameron went out of his way to praise Israel because it “strives to protect innocent life”…”

Cameron was right to praise Israel for the reasons I gave below.

Throughout history, countless nations have come into existence at the expense of one group or another. You can’t turn back history. But you can make the most of the situation. Something the ‘Palestinianist’ alliance of Islamists, far-lefties, Jew haters and gullible liberals can’t seem to get their heads around.

Israel exists. It’s not going to stop existing. I’m glad it exists. And the Islamic world and Europe owe the Jews a homeland.

It is right for influential and powerful people both here and throughout the world to defend that country’s right to exist.

The fact that the Israel lobby can get away with buying our politicians and subverting the rules of governance (eg lobby head Lord Levy acting as “PM special envoy to the Middle East”, or CIF and LIF outside parliamentary procedures) and it's rarely raised by journalists gives an indication of it's power – as does the unwillingness of some many people to speak on the record to Oborne when invited.

The case of Jonathan Dimbleby was particularly instructive: he criticises the decision of the BBC Trust regarding its investigation into Jeremy Bowen, and now he's up for investigation with the same BBC Trust. There's a rather bitter irony that Dimbleby wrote his article for the Index on Censorship.

That certainly was worth highlighting.

(Obourne is one of the few Conservative journalists I have any time for BTW)