This satiric version of the show's web-presentation re-dubs the motto of the Sabine Christiansen chat show: "There is nothing to say. Let's talk about it."
Last Sunday night, Sabine Christiansen (realistic, if not humble, self assessment: "Germany's most watched and most important political television presenter") hosted a chat show headed: "Wie weit darf Israel gehen?" (How far is Irael allowed to go?)
Christansen, a former Lufthansa ground hostess (or was it flight attendant?) turned news anchor, whose main qualification for her job as TV journalist had been her CDU-membership and who had allegedly been the only news anchor unable to write her own footage as colleages gleefully revealed, has turned the chat show named after herself into Germany's most successful TV event with a string of high-profile guests under her belly.
Last Sunday's guests included Shimon Peres, Minister for Foreign Aid Heidemarie Wieczorek-Zeul, Mohammed Nazzal from the Generaldelegation Palästinas, Manfred Lahnstein, President of the DIG, Ulrich Kienzle, journalist and Middle East expert and Tommy Lapid, former Israeli minister of justice.
Christiansen, who is so simple-minded that she makes a kindergarten teacher apprentice look like Condoleeza Rice, manages invariably to keep the objective of her show at the shallowest level possible and, I'd say out of principle if I'd think that woman knew what a principle IS, interrupts her guests at each and every interesting turn to ask another abysmally dumb question to make sure that the event is saved from becoming even remotely interesting, and don't get me started on her talking with her hands all the time as if Herbert von Karajan were conducting Richard Wagner's "Ride of the Valkyries".
The fact that millions of Germans are watching that downlevelling brainwash and that celebrities are queueing up to be interviewed by Christiansen does not speak for her but for the bottomless bilges to which intellectual level of the German mainstream has declined and the dire need of celebs to do anything (but ANYthing!) to get their mugs on air.
Now back on topic: What IS the reply to 'How far is Irael allowed to go?'
No, it is not: 'Why the hell aren't you asking how far Hamas or Hezbollah are allowed to go?'.
The answer is, of course: 'To Tehran!'
The idea wasn't mine. Thanks to Gudrun Eussner for the tip!
7 comments:
Great answer!
And thanks for keeping us informed on Germany.
How could you suggest such an awful thing? Everyone knows that the mighty Israeli hordes have for many years persecuted the poor deprived Arab/muslim minority in the Middle East! Did not the Arab states greet the founding of the modern state of Israel with applause which only turned to dismay when the infant behemoth immediately invaded all her neighbours simultaneously? Has not President Ahmadinejad repetedly stressed that Israel is an important and vital part of the Middle East? Does not the Religion of Peace TM repeatedly call for tolerance and equality for Jews?
I may have become confused and am very ignorant of history but it seems from the rhetoric of most western commentators and politicians (how long ago did "rhetorical commentator" stop being an oxymoron?) as though this must be true. In particular, looking through the UN resolutions relating to Israel it's clear that this Philistine of Nations, this Goliath amongst the Arab Davids, is single-handedly responsible for all the evils of the Middle East (and probably for the pogroms, the Stalinist purges and the Armenian massacres as well).
Still, thank goodness the BBC keeps us Brits so well-informed and is such a fount of unbiased news and classic reportage in an otherwise hate-filled world which even seeks to deny the integrity of Al Jazeera, The Guardian and the NYT.
Oh dear! I forgot to mention the independence of the inestimable Mr Fisk of the Independent. It's no wonder his name is now a byword for integrity and fact-checking amongst the blogging community.
I can see how you, living in a country without these standards of journalistic integrity (and with no respect for the unbiased nature of the UN) might fall into this egregious error, but I trust that now I've pointed you in the direction of, well, of sound direction, you'll see the light and commit no more of these sadly ignorant outrages.
"I can see how you, living in a country without these standards of journalistic integrity (and with no respect for the unbiased nature of the UN) might fall into this egregious error, but I trust that now I've pointed you in the direction of, well, of sound direction, you'll see the light and commit no more of these sadly ignorant outrages."
Oh not to worry about the journalistic integrity of the German media. Last week I listened to a discussion of the Middle East conflict at one of the major radio stations and they stopped just (but JUST!) short of the blood libel, which is pretty typical for the mainstream here. It would have been funny hadn't it been so sad. They actually blamed Israel for bringing their allies, Egypt and Jordan, into a situation where they (those allies) had some explaining to do. How un-nice of Israel!
Why don't those troublemaking Jews just go away?
"And thanks for keeping us informed on Germany."
You're welcome and thanks for your kind words!
"Oh not to worry about the journalistic integrity of the German media. Last week I listened to a discussion of the Middle East conflict at one of the major radio stations and they stopped just (but JUST!) short of the blood libel, which is pretty typical for the mainstream here. It would have been funny hadn't it been so sad. They actually blamed Israel for bringing their allies, Egypt and Jordan, into a situation where they (those allies) had some explaining to do. How un-nice of Israel!
Why don't those troublemaking Jews just go away?"
You must surely be mistaken! How could the media in a modern Western democracy make such a mistake. After all even the Poles haven't done this since 1946 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blood_libel_against_Jews#Kielce.2C_1946)
and the Arabs would never dream of making such a suggestion (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blood_libel_against_Jews#In_Arab_and_Muslim_nations)
Russia, of course, has long since outgrown such evil idiocy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blood_libel_against_Jews#In_Russia).
You are right. Germany would NEVER stoop as low as to use such such old and worn out clichés as those used in the "Protocols". Here, they call it "Jenin massacre", they mourn for Mohammed al Doura (who was seen alive and well in Gaza the other day), or liberal and leftist lawmakers meet a Hamas delegate against Chancellor merkel's explicit wishes -- and nobody laughs!
You said "Here, they call it "Jenin massacre"".
As I remarked, I'm very ignorant of history, but surely the BBC and the Guardian would never get it wrong?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/1937048.stm
And if they ever did they would gracefully admit their error:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/1957862.stm
Germany is clearly right to trust them.
I can't believe that anyone could criticise them.
Surely only biased and anti-western sources could publish something such as this:
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/001/218vnicq.asp
Post a Comment