I was struck by this BBC headline “Rare suicide bombing hits Israel” prominently displayed on its Middle-Eastern news page. Consider the details and then ask yourself if “Rare” is the word you would choose to describe what has happened.
“A suicide bomber has killed a woman in the southern Israeli town of Dimona, the first such attack in over a year. Police said a second suicide attacker was shot dead before he was able to detonate his explosives belt. “We heard a large explosion and people started to run. I saw pieces of flesh flying in the air,” a witness told army radio.
Several point here. Despite what the BBC alleges, the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigade terror group is an integral part of the Fatah organisation, led by Mahmoud Abbas. So why does the BBC try to distance it from their favourite “man of peace”, the holocaust denier Abbas, by claiming it is some sort of “violent off-shoot”? Next, this is a SAVAGE terrorist attack. The frequency of it is neither here nor there. By suggesting this is a rare event (which it isn’t since Palestinians have carried out many homicide bomber attacks over the years) it is in danger of being seen to try and somehow ameliorate the barbarism and naked hatred that lay behind this outrage. Finally, I note that both Hamas and Fatah get to comment on this, both of them predictably explaining that the bad Jews brought it upon themselves. Curiously, comment from the Israeli government is missing. Fair and balanced????
p.s I also note that the BBC initial report makes no mention of those other people who were injured and traumatised by this vicious act of terrorism. More amelioration?
Update by Natalie:The word “rare” has now been stealth-edited out.
You and me both. I was just about to e mail it to you , but you beat me to it. So typical of the BBC.
“Rare” as in a rare suicide bombing on the tube in London? Would they dare try that one?
Hear,hear, David.
Can JR justify this please? Can he explain ‘rare’ in this context? And then explain why the BBC deems it unnecessary to give the reasons WHY it is rare?
IMHO the headline demands an explanation of its wording in the article. Otherwise it has no meaning and is superfluous-bad,bad journalism.
Reith/Gregory…Lets hear what you have to say about this.
It is a curious headline, for sure, because the article does not give any indication why suicide bombings are “rare”.
Are suicide bombings in Israel ‘rare’ because there is a thirst for peace in the Palestinian territories and such attacks are no long de rigeur? Was this bombing carried out by a rogue element?
Or was this bombing ‘rare’ because increased Israel security measures have managed to thwart such attacks in recent years?
We are not told.
This really is indefensible, though I suspect that Mr Gregory will attempt to do so.
Edna | 04.02.08 – 1:39 pm
It seems rather tasteless to me to put the rarity factor in the headline.
Thanks JR. But ‘tasteless’ is not the word I would use. It is actually poor journalism not to explain what it means, and in context.
It is biased, not ‘tasteless’.
And you are avoiding the issue, yet again.
If BBC can say the suicide bombing is rare then they should also use the word ‘common’for Hamas rocket attacks. Instead they completely ignore 99% of the attacks in their headlines. This makes an everyday rocket attack less prominant than a suicide bomber.
Not only the word “rare” seems odd,
but also there is no mention as to what happened to make “rare” a term even BBC can use (however contentiously) – The SECURITY BARRIER was finished in 2006! Of course – that is an “apartheid wall” for BBC propagandists.
Hamas was only able to get into Israel via Egyptian border after they had access to Sinai.
Israel was pummelled by series of suicide bombings in the 1990s and 2000s, peaking after the Palestinian intifada or uprising broke out in 2000.
However, there were only two such attacks between April 2006 and now, the last being in January 2007 when a bomber blew himself up in a bakery in Eilat, killing three people.
So, they are actively avoiding to mention that the security barrier was finished in early 2006, they know very well what changed in 2005-2006. This is truly unbelievable!
“Israel was pummelled by series of suicide bombings in the 1990s and 2000s, peaking after the Palestinian intifada or uprising broke out in 2000.
However, there were only two such attacks between April 2006 and now …”
Perhaps the BBC would like to say why ? They’re quick enough to mention the security fence/wall when Banksy’s painting it.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_pictures/7125611.stm
Edna | 04.02.08 – 2:03 pm
Thanks JR. But ‘tasteless’ is not the word I would use.
Well it is the word I would use.
It is actually poor journalism not to explain what it means..
If you read the piece, it does explain. Though not very well.
And you are avoiding the issue, yet again.
No, I am not.
It’s a poor headline and a bad judgment call on the part of whichever editor nodded it through.
Simple as that.
Or are you going to go all David Vance on me and claim a cabal of senior editors with a visceral bias against Israel gathered at dead of night and after ‘carefully considering’ the range of possible headlines, chose this one so as to do the most damage to the Zionist cause?
John Reith,
Please do not misrepresent my views. It’s a bore.
Better you deal with the substance made by those who have commented here, if you can. So far, I think we can see that you can’t.
John Reith | 04.02.08 – 2:52 pm
Or are you going to go all David Vance on me and claim a cabal of senior editors with a visceral bias against Israel gathered at dead of night and after ‘carefully considering’ the range of possible headlines, chose this one so as to do the most damage to the Zionist cause?
No, I was going to claim that the subeditor/journalist who produced this knew exactly what was expected of him/her and so didn’t need a direct order. To minimise or justify attacks on Israel while exaggerating or demonising Israel’s response is so common it is simply Standard Operating Procedure at the BBC.
It’s not very good is it? A bizarre word to include in a headline like that and it is only going to make sceptics wonder why it was chosen.
Particularly if you compare it to the way that is was reported on eg The World at One. The Israeli interviewed on that also took care to distance Al-Aqsa from Abbas.
Sarah-Jane,
Thanks for acknowledging the poor choice of headline. But what about the content that suggests Al Aqsa are somehow not an integral part of Fatah? And what are Palestinian “gun-men”? – terrorists is the correct word. And are “militants” that bombard Israeli civilians with Qassam rockets not better described as Islamic terrorists? Or are these the words that dare not speak their name?
Or are you going to go all David Vance on me and claim a cabal of senior editors with a visceral bias against Israel gathered at dead of night and after ‘carefully considering’ the range of possible headlines, chose this one so as to do the most damage to the Zionist cause?
John Reith | 04.02.08 – 2:52 pm |
No JR, SJ – it is the spirit within the organization that makes the junior editors write articles like this. They are only pumping out the Leftist/Guardian line, maybe Jeremy Bowen’s line as well.
In fact I think a senior editor is very soon going to see it and silently edit it! In the edited version, I also expect a mention as in “Israel says” of the security barrier.
Thanks again JR.
Yes,I know it’s the term you would use. You used it.
I, however, gave my point of view on the word, which I feel is inappropriate.
No-one has ever suggested a ‘cabal’ who decide on the bias-
Our point is that there is no-one at the BBC,it seems, who can even identify when the bias is there in order to eradicate it.
It’s visceral.
Which is what everyone here is trying to say.
You prove it every time you defend the bias by saying it’s ‘tasteless’ or ‘badly worded’ or ‘poor journalism’.
The BBC can do no wrong.
PS Balen report????
I am pasting the article so we can watch it for changes:
Rare suicide bombing hits Israel
The attack targeted a commercial area in the quiet town of Dimona
A suicide bomber has killed a woman in the southern Israeli town of Dimona, the first such attack in over a year.
Israeli police said a second suicide attacker was shot dead before he was able to detonate his explosives belt.
Palestinian militants said the two were from Gaza and had entered Israel via Egypt. Thousands surged into Egypt when the border was breached last month.
Hours later, Israeli aircraft bombed a car in northern Gaza, killing a senior commander of a militant group.
The Dimona explosion happened in a commercial centre a few kilometres from the base which houses Israel’s top-secret nuclear reactor.
“We heard a large explosion and people started to run. I saw pieces of flesh flying in the air,” a witness told army radio.
The attack came a day after Egyptian forces had finally resealed the border, two weeks after it was blown up by militants from the Hamas movement, de facto rulers of Gaza.
Border chaos
Crowds of Gazans used the border breach to cross into Egypt, stock up on much-needed supplies and return to their homes, which are under a tight Israeli blockade.
However, Israel had warned that Gaza-based militants could take advantage of the chaos to infiltrate its territory across the long and porous desert border between Egypt’s Sinai peninsula and the Negev Desert.
An al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades spokesman told a news conference that the operation had been planned for weeks, but was made possible after the Gaza border was blown up on 23 January.
The spokesman said it was a joint operation between al-Aqsa, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, which supplied the bombers, and another lesser-known faction.
However, it is still not clear whether the bombers took part in the exodus from Rafah, or if it had just facilitated their mission.
Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, whose Fatah party the al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades profess loyalty to, condemned the bombing.
He also criticised an earlier military raid in the northern West Bank earlier in the day in which Israeli commandos killed two Palestinian gunmen.
A Hamas spokesman, Fawzi Barhoum, said the Dimona attack was “a natural reaction to months of killing” of Palestinians by the Israeli army.
‘Murderous terror’
Israel was pummelled by series of suicide bombings in the 1990s and 2000s, peaking after the Palestinian intifada or uprising broke out in 2000.
However, there were only two such attacks between April 2006 and now, the last being in January 2007 when a bomber blew himself up in a bakery in Eilat, killing three people.
Monday’s blast is also the first since renewed efforts to come to an Israeli-Palestinian peace deal were launched with US support last November.
Palestinian news agencies said Israel later assassinated Amer Qarmut, alias Abu Said, the most senior commander of the Popular Resistance Committees, in an air raid targeting his car.
His nephew, as well as a passerby, were wounded in the strike.
An Israeli foreign ministry spokesman said Israel would continue to “fight against this murderous terror”, but there was no word on whether the already-faltering peace talks would continue.
Israel argues that its restrictions on about four million Palestinians in Gaza and large parts of the occupied West Bank is necessary to prevent such attacks.
John Reith | 04.02.08 – 1:59 pm
It seems rather tasteless to me to put the rarity factor in the headline.
Sarah-Jane | 04.02.08 – 3:19 pm
A bizarre word to include in a headline like that and it is only going to make sceptics wonder why it was chosen.
Tasteless – bizarre but unfortunately not random.
Palestinian militants said the two were from Gaza and had entered Israel via Egypt. Thousands surged into Egypt when the border was breached last month.
Militants from what group?
Hours later, Israeli aircraft bombed a car in northern Gaza, killing a senior commander of a militant group.
B follows A therefore A caused B?
The Dimona explosion happened in a commercial centre a few kilometres from the base which houses Israel’s top-secret nuclear reactor.
This is relevant to the bombing, how exactly?
Hi David I think if you listen to the World at One report you will find it much more acceptable.
Do I need to say more? š
The Dimona explosion happened in a commercial centre a few kilometres from the base which houses Israel’s top-secret nuclear reactor.
What is this? An attempt to paint all civilians in Dimona as military targets?
I’m with JR – poor headline.
Looks to me like the author has tried to add some context and while doubt some here will claim it’s anti-semitic bias, I read the exact reverse.
It read to me like the author was trying to establish that the rarity and Israel’s hardline position on Gaza access were linked – a third of the article is devoted to talking about the border – which actually supports the Israeli position substantially.
Alan there is a thing called newsniffer which saves you having to do all that archiving. It tracks all the changes made to articles on News Online.
It read to me like the author was trying to establish that the rarity and Israel’s hardline position on Gaza access were linked – a third of the article is devoted to talking about the border – which actually supports the Israeli position substantially.
p and a tale of one chip | 04.02.08 – 3:39 pm |
Nice try PAATOOC, but wouldn’t mentioning the security fence and tightly monitored borders towards Gaza and the West Bank help.
C’mon people JR, SJ, PAATOOC, deep down you know this is wrong.
You are just shooting in the dark waiting for one of the defenses of the article to stick and make some sense at all. How about “Legal Considerations”. You’ve done that recently, have you explored that one, maybe that will stick.
I’m looking forward to hear more imaginative defenses. š
Alan there is a thing called newsniffer which saves you having to do all that archiving. It tracks all the changes made to articles on News Online.
Sarah-Jane | 04.02.08 – 3:40 pm |
You are right, however, that one is polling sites for updates – it is not what we call “(change) event driven”.
It can miss changes.
This article is priceless. I want it in the original form for posterity.
Event driven repositories have to be notified by the source of every change. The source is the BBC. Some bbcnews.com internal revision control system would do it, like the one the Wiki engine has.
But I doubt BBC will let us track their edits and who did them. The addiction to silent edits vs. official retractions is just too high right now.
Hi David I think if you listen to the World at One report you will find it much more acceptable.
Do I need to say more?
Sarah-Jane | 04.02.08 – 3:38 pm
The World at One report is long gone, assigned to history, unless somebody like John Reith wishes us to “listen again”, the report on the website is still there.
How many people worldwide listen to the World at One compared to the number of people accessing the BBC news website even as we speak?
Do I need to say more?
Hi David I think if you listen to the World at One report you will find it much more acceptable.
Do I need to say more?
Sarah-Jane | 04.02.08 – 3:38 pm
The World at One report is long gone, assigned to the dustbin of history.
The BBC news website still carries the offending/offensive headline.
How many people heard the World at One report compared to the number of people worldwide accessing the website version even as we speak?
Do I need to say more?
BioD – ‘the need I say more?’ was meant to indicate my disapproval of the online article vis the World at One piece without me actually saying it. But I’ve said it now.
Doh!
It will still be there on listen again if anyone wants to hear it.
I spotted this at 0700hrs this morning and as usual our new master poster David has caught it, filleted it and hung it out to dry for all to see and comment. Another good spot by DV.
And yes, the first thing that struck me straight away was why was there no mention at all as to WHY such suicide bombings are now rare….
Bit like saying a person died and a bus was repaired afterwards without mentioning that said bus ran over said pedestrian!
It goes from bad to worse.
Updated BBC website- addition to last sentence-
“Israel argues that the restrictions it imposes on about 4 million Plestinians in Gaza and large parts of the occupied West Bank are crucial in preventing such attacks,THOUGH THE BLOCKADES HAVE BEEN CONDEMNED AS “COLLECTIVE PUNISHMENT” BY THE U.N.”
They’re really taking the mickey now!!
Talk about putting the story in context!!
Blinking eck! edna, just as I spot that you dive in as well!
And STILL nothing about the major reason for such ‘rare’ attacks!
Bottom. Kicking. The. Out. Of. Now. They. Are. (just to get THAT past the censors!)
PS What are Plestinians – are they from Plaistow? 8-)!!!!
Sarah-Jane:
BioD – ‘the need I say more?’ was meant to indicate my disapproval of the online article vis the World at One piece without me actually saying it. But I’ve said it now.
Doh!
Sarcasm, specially yours, does not come across well on the interwebnet, smilies or no smilies.
It will still be there on listen again if anyone wants to hear it.
Why bother.
The video clip from the front page shows “gazans” giving out sweets in celebration of their murderous acts – no mention of that in the original “report”.
Terror returns to Israel
John Reith | 04.02.08 – 2:52 pm |
It’s a poor headline and a bad judgment call on the part of whichever editor nodded it through.
Simple as that.
You probably won’t be surprised that I pretty much agree with you on this one. But please, consider this an example of one side not getting the same consideration as the other. That same sub-editor would know to take great care in a headline involving Muslims, Arabs, Palestinians, etc. The BBC has done staff education on this. Unfortunately, even though they ought to know better by now, these same people thoughtlessly display what appears to be ignorance, and does give a small hint of their viewpoint.
This is not anything like an isolated incident; we’ve been through this many times before. Why does the BBC continue to hire people who think this way? And I say for the umpteenth time: Why don’t your colleagues take even half as much care when it’s Israel or Jews involved? Why does it seem that there is less concern about offending Jews?
Or are you going to go all David Vance on me and claim a cabal of senior editors with a visceral bias against Israel gathered at dead of night and after ‘carefully considering’ the range of possible headlines, chose this one so as to do the most damage to the Zionist cause?
They do it at the morning story briefing, surely? Those people drink way too much to be doing any serious plotting in the dead of night.
The rareness of the Palestinian Suicide Bomb Attack:
List of Hamas suicide attacks
List of Palestinian Islamic Jihad suicide attacks
List of Al-Aqsa Martyrs’ Brigades suicide attacks
Palestinian Suicide Bombers: A Statistical Analysis
Suicide and Other Bombing Attacks in Israel Since the Declaration of Principles (Sept 1993)
It will still be there on listen again if anyone wants to hear it.
Why bother.
Biodegradable’s Ghost | 04.02.08 – 5:18 pm | #
Maybe because it provides a useful compare and contrast when complaining?
The BBC, honour killings in the UK and half a story…
Honour crime ‘is underestimated’
The true extent of so-called “honour” crime is being underestimated by the government, the Centre for Social Cohesion think-tank claims.
Based on some 80 interviews, its report says forced marriage, imprisonment and “honour” killings are not restricted to first generation immigrant families. Report author Salam Hafez said this was “being perpetuated within second and third immigrant generations”…
Women’s activists who sere interviewed said teachers, police and local authorities were afraid to take action to stop honour-based violence for fear of being called “racist” or “Islamophobic”. They also said radical Islamic groups have sought to limit the activities of women’s groups.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7225961.stm
As somebody who has read this report and linked it in the other day. Why am I not surprised over how the BBC brown-washes yet another report which is condemning of a certain faith. I must admit to a laugh over the claim that radical Islamic groups had sought to limit the activities of womans groups. Want to have a guess at the only Islamic group mentioned in that report it’s a group the BBC has no problem interviewing as the voice of Islam in the UK yet for some reason they don’t mention that group by name. Well here is a JPG of the relevant page from that report.
http://img267.imageshack.us/img267/6482/image1ur3.jpg
And as usual any report which paints Islam in a negative light isn’t linked. Pity I can’t say the same for any report which condemns the UK/US, Israel then it s links galore
The BBC, honour killings in the UK and half a story…
Maybe because it provides a useful compare and contrast when complaining?
Sarah-Jane | 04.02.08 – 5:37 pm |
Talking about contrasts:
“One dead in Gaza-Egypt shooting”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7226854.stm
instead for “Egypt kills a Palestinian man” as would be the case if Israeli soldiers killed him.
Maybe because it provides a useful compare and contrast when complaining?
Sarah-Jane | 04.02.08 – 5:37 pm
Of the three last complaints I’ve lodged I’ve only had one reply. They don’t care.
Anyway, as I’ve pointed out even though they may have got it half right in one news bulletin that relatively few people heard but it’s still wrong, and has been all day, on the website viewed by millions worldwide, and it’s being commented on by websites other than this one.
eg: http://www.spectator.co.uk/melaniephillips/485381/the-war-against-israel.thtml
Either the editors are still half asleep or they really don’t give a damn.
I plump for the latter.
It’s shit – I keep looking hoping someone has changed it – what more can I say?
pounce – you’re pushing it more than a bit there – that news online report clearly isn’t in favour of “honour” killings and promotes your view that they are being swept under the carpet.
I wonder whether Israel’s theft of its neighbours’ lands has anything to do with the indignation of these suicide attackers.
With regards to the BBC, to paraphrase that great Englishman, Sir Winston Churchill:
“The BBC is absolutely the worst media organization in the world, except, that is, for all the rest”.
I spied this and came straight to this site.
Outrageous anti-Israeli bias from the BBC, but what do we expect now?
Biodegradable ghost – excellent list of frequent suicide attacks. Would be good to send these to the cretins at BBC News online.
Those links again (hint: if I were to be unbanned we wouldn’t have these problems with proxies):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Hamas_suicide_attacks
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Palestinian_Islamic_Jihad_suicide_attacks
Me again, as was those last links:
http://www.ecaar.org/Newsletter/Nov04/saleh.htm
http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/Terrorism-+Obstacle+to+Peace/Palestinian+terror+since+2000/Suicide+and+Other+Bombing+Attacks+in+Israel+Since.htm
http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/Terrorism-+Obstacle+to+Peace/Palestinian+terror+since+2000/Suicide+and+Other+Bombing+Attacks+in+Israel+Since.htm
http://www.ecaar.org/Newsletter/Nov04/saleh.htm
Robin:
You’re just fucking pathetic!
The BBC doesn’t show us this:
http://news.yahoo.com/nphotos/slideshow/photo//080204/ids_photos_wl/r1478808195.jpg/
Why not?
Biodegradable’s ghost
I will treat your remark with the respect it deserves.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli-Palestinian-conflict gives some interesting figures:
Israeli deaths:
2005 48
2006 25
2007 13
TOTAL 86
Palestinian deaths:
2005 216
2006 678
2007 396
TOTAL 1290
The Israelis have murdered 15 Palestinians for every Israeli killed.
Robin….Well treat this remark as well,you leftie little twat!