A not so subtle propaganda exercise Ottolenghi’s Mediterranean Feast, Episode 6: Israel Channel 4, played on Choice TV, Thursday 16 May 2013, 8:30 p.m.
When he unleashed his infamous foam-flecked rant against Hezbollah a few years ago, Anthony Bourdain established himself as the most aggressively ignorant of all celebrity chefs. The London-domiciled Israeli chef and restaurateur Yotam Ottolenghi is without doubt a more intelligent, personable and humane person than the coke-snorting, foul-mouthed, self-involved Bourdain.
Ottolenghi’s exploration of the delights of Israeli cuisine made for a highly interesting, engaging show. However, it contained a couple of outrageous, politically charged statements, one of them an outright lie, and some carefully managed evasions of the actual situation in Israel.
The outright lie comes first, as we see Ottolenghi speeding along a highway, enthusing about the hour of gustatory pleasures ahead of us: “I was brought up in the capital—JERUSALEM,” he shouts excitedly. “But the most dynamic city in Israel is Tel Aviv!” Cut to evocative shots of vibrant, bustling cafetarias and bars. It might be Italy, or Portugal, or Barcelona.
It seems like a small matter, an oversight, a mere mistake perhaps, to say that Jerusalem is the capital of Israel. But Ottolenghi understood perfectly well what he was saying. Deliberately, flagrantly insisting that Jerusalem is the capital of Israel was the first of several little dishonesties to mar this program and take it beyond mere entertainment into the more sinister realm of state propaganda.
Ottolenghi might be an obvious and shameless liar, but he is a great guide to food and Israeli culture. The food he shows us is mouthwateringly gorgeous: hummus, flat breads, beef shakshuka, herb and ginger fishcakes with beetroot sauce, fig and goat-cheese tart with lemon icing, tomato and pomegranate salad. The men who cook these dishes are characters in their own right: smiling, affable, good-humored. But on his way out to the pomegranate farm of a chef called Shlomo, Ottolenghi casually drops another of his little propaganda bombs; as their car speeds past lush fields, he remarks that “until recently, this land was largely uncultivated.”
In Ottolenghi World, Jerusalem is simply beautiful, and ancient and mystical; an aesthetic and spiritual experience. We see extended coverage of Ottolenghi gathering herbs in the hills, which are, needless to say, picturesque, quiet and Palästinensischerfrei. There is not the slightest hint that there might be anything wrong; all views of the illegal, ugly, internationally condemned annexation wall have been meticulously excluded.
Then it’s back to the restaurant for pancakes stuffed with apple, sugar and goat’s cheese.
He’s an Israeli. As far as most Israelis are concerned, Jerusalem is the capital even if it isn’t internationally recognised as such. Hell, most Aucklanders are convinced Auckland is the capital of New Zealand. Not sure what your problem with Bourdain is – not enough Aryan baby blood in the motza balls?
So, in short, the vast majority of Israelies as practicing Jews are “terminally stupid” because as mandated by their faith in their worldview Jerusalem is the capital of the Jewish nation. And you don’t like anyone remotely popular. Especially if they’re Jewish….
Of the 88 cases mentioned 27 were found to have had no information intercepted.
The remaining were said to involve the collection of metadata and the Inspector-General formed the view that there had arguably been no breach, noting once again that the law is unclear.
Metadata is the information surrounding a communication as opposed to the communication itself. For instance in an email it would involve the sender, receiver, and time of transmission. The content of the email itself would not be included.
I am not sure that the legal situation is unclear, section 14 of the GCSB Act prohibits the “intercepting the communications of a person (not being a foreign organisation or a foreign person) who is a New Zealand citizen or a permanent resident”. Overseas cases have always treated the metadata (for instance a phone number) as less worthy of privacy.
But if this is the case why doesn’t the Government just clarify this rather than give the GCSB open access?
But if this is the case why doesn’t the Government just clarify this rather than give the GCSB open access?
Because clarification is the last thing they want – instead, they want an uncertainty maintained and excuses – and a hand-picked crony has given exactly that. This is just perpetuating what’s already gone before.
What this country needs is a constitutional watchdog with teeth, but the Governor General is just another sock puppet and considering Goff’s actions over Peter Ellis and Ahmed Zaoui, as long as he’s in Labour, the “main opposition party” won’t do anything to change that once it’s “their turn” either.
Ottolenghi’s Mediterranean Feast, Episode 6: Israel
Channel 4, played on Choice TV, Thursday 16 May 2013, 8:30 p.m.