But they had reported it, albeit in a rather low-key fashion, lumped together with some other countries under the heading ‘pledges’. The IDF said it was sending the 260-member mission to provide immediate search and rescue assistance and medical aid.
"An advanced multi-department medical facility, equipped with approximately 95 tons of humanitarian and medical supplies from Israel and a medical staff of 122 doctors, nurses and paramedics, will be rapidly established in the city of Kathmandu to provide medical care for disaster casualties," the military said.”
As soon as some of Israel’s most vitriolic detractors got their claws into this information they had to turn something that was in danger of looking like a positive - into an extremely nasty negative.
They condemned the Israeli aid initiative as self-serving, hypocritical - and remember the rumour about organ harvesting that was doing the rounds during the Haiti disaster? Well, that too.
Maybe it's because Nepal is not ruled by a terrorist group sworn to the murder of Jews & destruction of their state? pic.twitter.com/oUsucbVwpU
— Yair Rosenberg (@Yair_Rosenberg) April 26, 2015
Over 1,000 dead in Nepal. Look out for the Israeli organ harvesting humanitarian team.
— David Carter (@SplottDave) April 25, 2015
So we’ll have to wait and see if the BBC manages to report Israel’s contribution to the rescue mission in Nepal more fully. Given the BBC’s fixation with the Jewish State, you might think someone in an editorial department would be interested enough to mention it. It’s not worth holding your breath though.
By the same token, I was thinking about Andrew Marr’s apology, which did seem to have brought on an involuntary spasm, quite like the one that beset Norman Smith when he was unexpectedly confronted with an awkward question.
Whether tis nobler to bluster through or take a short coughie break, that is the question.
Anyway, Andrew did apologise, and I’m thinking, if we can’t accept an apology with good grace, are we, too, turning a positive into a negative, and being disingenuous, truculent or ungrateful?
Are we committing the equivalent of a blood libel? Hmm. Hold on; before I answer that I must deal with some problematic phlegm.