Anti-Semitic BBC Strikes Again? Or just incompetence?

[Martinus]

Indeed. And while I don't think there is a separate crime of "selling secrets to Israel" in the UK legal system, it is not inconceivable that there is a separate crime of "selling secrets to a foreign country" as opposed to "selling secrets to some unaffiliated dude", hence the distinction whether he thought he was selling the secrets to an Israeli agent or not is important.

Since this is a US citizen charged with committing a crime under US law, what does the UK legal system have to do with it?

Sorry, make it US law. I thought this was a UK story.

[crazy canuck]

Not sure what your beef is Grumbler.  According to the article he tried to sell secrets for money.  He thought he was selling the secrets to Israel.  The charges he faced we based on those facts.  If he was convicted on all charges he would have faced the death penalty. 

The headline seems pretty accurate with the possible exception that it might lead someone who does not actually read the article to think Isreal was trying to buy US secrets.  But since a headline is designed to get people to read the article and only a moron would conclude such a thing after getting a few lines into the story I think your allegation of anti-semitism is entirely overblown.

[grumbler]

I'm not sure what your point is.  When you are charged with attempted murder the crime isn't "attempted murder of Ed Anger", it's simply attempted murder.  The word "Israel" offers context.  If they wrote charged with attempted murder, the first question someone would as would be attempted murder of who.  I agree the headline is bunk, but adding in who he was attempting to sell secrets is to is a natural question in such a case and appropriate even if that party was not actually involved.

I am not sure what your objection is.  If a man tries to kill his neighbor Joe thinking that Joe is an alien, he is not charged with attempting to kill an alien, and no competent headline writer or story-summarizer will claim that he tried to kill and alien or was charged with attempting to kill an alien.  The BBC might...

[Razgovory]

I'm not sure what your point is.  When you are charged with attempted murder the crime isn't "attempted murder of Ed Anger", it's simply attempted murder.  The word "Israel" offers context.  If they wrote charged with attempted murder, the first question someone would as would be attempted murder of who.  I agree the headline is bunk, but adding in who he was attempting to sell secrets is to is a natural question in such a case and appropriate even if that party was not actually involved.

I am not sure what your objection is.  If a man tries to kill his neighbor Joe thinking that Joe is an alien, he is not charged with attempting to kill an alien, and no competent headline writer or story-summarizer will claim that he tried to kill and alien or was charged with attempting to kill an alien.  The BBC might...

If a man tries to kill his neighbor Joe and is set up in a sting operation where he can't possibly harm Joe but goes through with the act thinking he going to kill Joe, I don't see a problem with a newspaper story claiming he tried to kill Joe (even if Joe was out of the country or in FBI protection).

[grumbler]

Not sure what your beef is Grumbler.  According to the article he tried to sell secrets for money.  He thought he was selling the secrets to Israel.  The charges he faced we based on those facts.  If he was convicted on all charges he would have faced the death penalty. 

My beef is as I have stated it.  What words didn't you understand, that you cannot follow my complaint that the headline, link, and summary are all false?

The headline seems pretty accurate with the possible exception that it might lead someone who does not actually read the article to think Isreal was trying to buy US secrets.  But since a headline is designed to get people to read the article and only a moron would conclude such a thing after getting a few lines into the story I think your allegation of anti-semitism is entirely overblown.

The headline is "pretty accurate" except where it is false.  I am not beefing about the accurate parts.

If the headline is written to get people to read the story, at the expense of saying untrue things, then the headline writer is thinking more people will read the story because it contains Israeli misdeeds then will read it if it does not.  That isn't journalism, at least by my standards.  That's tabloid shit.

I made no allegations of antisemitism, btw.  Read the OP again.  Your allegation about my allegation is entirely overblown.

[Razgovory]

So was the title "Anti-Semitic BBC Strikes Again?" just an idle question and not an accusation of bad faith?

[grumbler]

If a man tries to kill his neighbor Joe and is set up in a sting operation where he can't possibly harm Joe but goes through with the act thinking he going to kill Joe, I don't see a problem with a newspaper story claiming he tried to kill Joe (even if Joe was out of the country or in FBI protection).

The actual equivalent in your scenario is for the man to attempt to kill an FBI agent who he thinks is Joe, and you having no problem with the newspaper headline reading "Man Attempts to Kill Joe."  I would have a problem with that headline - it would be a lie.

[grumbler]

So was the title "Anti-Semitic BBC Strikes Again?" just an idle question and not an accusation of bad faith?

That isn't the title.

[Martinus]

So was the title "Anti-Semitic BBC Strikes Again?" just an idle question and not an accusation of bad faith?

Maybe it was written to get people to read the thread?

Alternatively, grumbler may be anti-BBC or an idiot.

[The Brain]

If a man tries to kill his neighbor Joe and is set up in a sting operation where he can't possibly harm Joe but goes through with the act thinking he going to kill Joe, I don't see a problem with a newspaper story claiming he tried to kill Joe (even if Joe was out of the country or in FBI protection).

The actual equivalent in your scenario is for the man to attempt to kill an FBI agent who he thinks is Joe, and you having no problem with the newspaper headline reading "Man Attempts to Kill Joe."  I would have a problem with that headline - it would be a lie.

[Valmy]

I do have to admit if I saw an article titled 'dude admits to spying for Israel' I would think that Israel was spying on the US somehow.

[grumbler]

I do have to admit if I saw an article titled 'dude admits to spying for Israel' I would think that Israel was spying on the US somehow.

The question is whether that was, indeed, the intent of the headline writer, or whether he was, as Warspite says, simply trying to get people to read the story by making up the facts.

[crazy canuck]

I made no allegations of antisemitism, btw.

Grumbler, read the title of the thread.

I can now understand your confusion.  You are not even sure what you are saying.

[Razgovory]

If a man tries to kill his neighbor Joe and is set up in a sting operation where he can't possibly harm Joe but goes through with the act thinking he going to kill Joe, I don't see a problem with a newspaper story claiming he tried to kill Joe (even if Joe was out of the country or in FBI protection).

The actual equivalent in your scenario is for the man to attempt to kill an FBI agent who he thinks is Joe, and you having no problem with the newspaper headline reading "Man Attempts to Kill Joe."  I would have a problem with that headline - it would be a lie.

Your example doesn't work as well since presumably the person could kill the FBI agent.  In this situation the defendant can't do any harm.  It's more like trying to shoot a dummy he thinks is Joe or attempting to kill Joe with a gun that isn't loaded (there was a case where this actually happened.  The defendant argued it was impossible to shoot his wife with an unloaded gun and so he couldn't be charged with attempted murder.  The Judge disagreed.)  The intent is the main thing.  And a newspaper reporting what the suspect intended to do is fully justified.  Alan Dershowitz tried just such a case (attempted murder when the victim was already dead), eventually the defendant was found guilty of attempted murder despite it being physically impossible to do it.

[Razgovory]

So was the title "Anti-Semitic BBC Strikes Again?" just an idle question and not an accusation of bad faith?

That isn't the title.

  It's the title of this thread!