When it comes to finding instances of unambiguous BBC bias, you do not have to look very far. I was studying the main BBC news portal covering the conflict between Israel and Hamas and was being royally entertained by the..ahem... absolute neutrality of side-bar items such as “Grieving Palestinians struggle on” and “Grief and fear in Gaza” not forgetting “Israel’s mixed motives” when I spotted another item entitled “Aid worker diary -part three.” You should read it.
It is a diary of Hatem Shurrab who is an aid worker in Gaza with the British-based “charity” Islamic Relief Worldwide. Yes, you heard that right. In this third tear-jerking instalment of his diary, Hatem writes about the psychological impact of Israel’s air strikes on Gaza’s children. In fact all Hatem does is spout pro-Palestinian propaganda even sharing with us the shocking news that the brother of one of his work colleagues has been killed in an Israeli attack. Then again, quite a few Hamas terrorists have been killed in Israeli attacks, haven’t they, Hatem? Interesting that Islamic Relief manages to get its views embedded into the main BBC site – I can’t seem to find a balancing series of opinions from an Israeli point of view. Can you? The bias in the BBC output at the moment is shocking – every bit as as bad as it was when Hezbollah fought Israel back in 2006. It seems that the hatred of Israel runs deep in the BBC and such profound endemic anti-Semitism is reason enough to pull the license tax.
I have an observation and a question for the legally minded.
I have noticed that the BBC never put in their own articles such blatant lies as ‘Israel is an apartheid state’ or ‘Israel is continuously expanding its borders’. But they allow comments including such lies in every single HYS thread concerning Israel. Since these threads are invariably fully moderated, can the BBC be held responsible for them and sued for libel?
.
Anat,
Not sure, they are cute the way they feign distance from the outrageous commentary on their sites.
It’s interesting- the ‘counselling’ most Gazan children seem to get involves the glorification of the shahid and the villification of Israel.
Anat (Israel) | 30.12.08 – 9:46 pm |
There has been other examples of this – I think if the BBC could have been sued for it – it would have happened long ago. Alas the BBC is its own judge and jury.
” The BBC is refusing to remove a provocative and anti-Semitic message posted on one of its message boards despite a barrage of complaints.
The message was posted on the BBC Radio Web site message board following a discussion about a television program on anti-Semitism that screened on the UK’s Channel Four network last week.
The offensive message, left by someone using the alias “Iron Naz,” reads: “Zionism is a racist ideology where jews [sic] are given supremacy over all other races and faiths. This is found in the Talmud. There is a law called Baba Mezia which allows jews to lie as long as its to non-jews. Many pro jewish supporters will cringe at this being exposed because they know it exists, yet they keep quiet about it, hey frip, jla and co [the aliases of other people taking part in the discussion]. The Law of Baba Mezia!! Tsk tsk tsk! It’s in the Talmud.” . . .
The BBC obviously no longer recognizes anti-Semitism even when it slaps it in the face,” said Mark Gardiner, head of communications at the Community Security Trust (CST), an organization that ensures the safety and security of the Jewish community and monitors anti-Semitic incidents in the UK. “The BBC is a public body, funded by the British tax payer. It has legal obligations and we will pursue them.”
Gardiner added: “It is bad enough that it is up to readers to police what the BBC publish on their own Web sites, but it is far sadder that this public body should actively refuse to remove the filth, and give no explanation for their actions – or perhaps the BBC agree with the essential element of the posting, that Zionism is a racist ideology where Jews are given supremacy over all other races and faiths.”
http://blog.camera.org/archives/2007/07/bbc_refuses_to_remove_antisemi.html
Here’s a Palestinian opinion on the current conflict to which the BBC will never link:
Inured Palestinian girl: Hamas is the cause of all wars
HYS usually hold my comments all week until ten seconds before the debate is closed. They must have a delay timer on their “publish button”, it’s happened so many times.
What qualifications do you need to be an HYS moderator?
Has anyone noticed that Jeremy Bowen has one of those smirks on his face like Justin Webb has?
Well I’ve had the BBC News 24 on all night and the latest spokeman allowed to vent his spleen has been Riyadh Mansour who just happens to be Palestines rep at the UN.
REading anats first post he was allowed to bleat that Is-re-ale has killed over 2000 woman and children without correction. He said it again but this time added 2000 killed and wounded.
Which makes me wonder is the the so called UN spokesman who the bBC have been using as their cornerstone of UN accuses Israel of Genocide in Gaza?
And if any bBC fuckwits are reading this Not every jet in the IDF is an F16.
But its the only one the haters seem to know the name of.
Those pictures of jets flyignover hamastan happen to be F15 Eagle. (But rebuilt to Israeli standards)
Ref my last I meant to say that on reading Anats post I noticed that Riyadh Mansour was allowed to bleat 2000 dead without correction.
No offence meant at Anat.
Anyone else find the piece the BBC did about Callaghan and the RAF not having any bullets for their aircraft back in 1978 really funny?
1. Most of the Liebour party were members of the Communist party anyway and would have enjoyed the Commie’s invading us
2. Why did Callaghan need someone to blame. He was the fucking PM!! Yet another twat who can’t take responsibility.
3. Did you hear the female beeboid licking her lips at the thought that next year they will be releasing the records for Thatcher in 1979? She sounded really excited at the thought.
She also told a fucking lie by claiming that Callaghan allowed Thatcher to sneak ahead. No beeboid, the Labour party were fucked over by their Union mates who spent more time on strike than at work. The dead were left to rot as was the rubbish in the street.
islamic relief worldwide was founded by one Dr Hany El Banna
“IRW was founded in 1984 by Dr. Hany El Banna. He is a relative of Hassan El Banna, founder of the Muslim Brotherhood terrorist group–from which Hamas, Yasser Arafat, and Al-Qaeda’s second-in-command Ayman Al-Zawahiri emanated.
In May, Israel deported Ayaz Ali, IRW’s chief of operations in Gaza, after three weeks in jail. Israel said Ali gave money to Hamas and Al-Wafa and Al-Tzalah, both outlawed by Israel for laundering money to Hamas. He also stored images of Osama Bin Laden, Abu Musab Al-Zarqawi, Senior German Nazi officials, Nazi swastikas, and a “God Bless Hitler” banner on his computer.
Upon Ali’s deportation an Israeli government statement said:
He also admitted that he worked in Jordan and cooperated with local Hamas operatives. . . . Incriminating files were found on Ali’s computer, including documents that attested to [Islamic Relief’s] ties with illegal HAMAS funds abroad–in the UK and in Saudi Arabia–and in Nablus.
The IRW’s activities in Judea, Samaria and the Gaza Strip are carried out by social welfare organizations controlled and staffed by Hamas operatives. The intensive activities of these associations are designed to further Hamas’ ideology among the Palestinian population.
These associations’ educational and religious institutions incite against the State of Israel and advocate terrorist actions against it and its citizens.
In 1999, IRW’s British headquarters received $50,000 from a Canadian group that the Treasury Department says is a Bin Laden front, according to the Los Angeles Times. ”
read it all here –
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID=18F78A54-653F-474A-9C47-C11ECAAA8D9A
i have to say that this time round, even though i’m a news junkie, i am specifically AVOIDING all bbc coverage of this war. my blood pressure might not be able to take it.
using twitter, blogs and other internet sources instead.
i’m bit saner and vastly more informed because of it.
but i have to make ONE point that has not been made in the acres of coverage by the BBC – ever notice just how QUIET the west bank is?
there’s your hint. if your intelligent enough, you’ll be able to join the dots. something that Al-Beeb cannot do.
It’s almost certain that the BBC, in its role as the craven lickspittle of Islam, is deliberately leaving this story fuzzy and rather puzzling:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/glasgow_and_west/7804613.stm
The precise nature of the sedition the couple would appear to have preached and the criticisms of the government, they don’t even try and guess.
What may well have been the real reason for this couple’s persecution is hinted at in this para from the Telegraph’s report on the incident:
“Peter McMinn, Mrs Fulton’s father, said that before the couple’s arrests, his son-in-law had been attacked three times in the street by locals who did not like the couple’s Christian beliefs. He said: “They threw stones at him and attacked him with bits of wood. He was very shaken.””
Gambia is a predominantly Muslim country and in such countries, around the world, Christians are usually subjected to discrimination, legal disabilities and sometimes lead lives in which their physical safety can come under threat. This is, to all intents and purposes, never reported upon by the BBC, which even describes local jihads against Christian communities as ‘religious/sectarian friction.’
This seems to be yet another incident in which alBeeb is not even going ‘to go there’.
Hatem Shurrab voted for Hamas:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4651384.stm#hatem
He was a student at the university that contains Hamas weaponary:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/5012572.stm
That the BBC itself says is a “cultural symbol of Hamas”:
http://www.webcitation.org/5dPrKOjVe
(note: this has now been expunged from the minitrue story)
Other choice quotes:
“The Israeli army is still killing us every day here in Gaza”
“The NGOs are still here but they’ve stopped advertising jobs. ”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/talking_point/5240050.stm
So, a Hamas supporter who attended the university associated with Hamas and who gets a job with a Hamas linked NGO. Hmm, sounds like the average Gazan.
The idiot Bowen’s pieces are all opinion not reporting. I learnt tonight on the late TV news that if the US Secretary of State was to land in Israel and demand a ceasefire then it would happen. Bowen said this so it must be true. This is pure spinning nothing to do with news. The man is an idiot. Israel should kick them all out as undesirables. Think how much the BBC accountants would save on fares and expenses
Dave S: Calling Bowen an idiot is an insult to idiots. The man is a tosspot.
Can anyone understand this?
“Managers also questioned the use of the word “terrorism” as defined in the independent report, chaired by British Board of Film Classification president Sir Quentin Thomas.
In the report, “terrorism” was described as “the most accurate expression for actions which involve violence against randomly selected civilians with the intention of causing terror”.
Such a definition, executives argued, “would exclude attacks on soldiers” and oblige journalists to make “the very value judgements” they are asked to avoid making under the BBC’s editorial guidelines.”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/5096050.stm
This is (apparently) why the BBC do not use the word “terrorist” Where’s the “judgment” Either a civilian is attacked or a soldier – seems pretty easy to me.
Now look at this picture on the BBC –
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/in_pictures/7804396.stm
No 6 – Notice how empty the hospital is – and how many doctors are there treating one patient.
Note on the above – it does say its in Egypt – but it still seems strange that they only have one patient.
hmmm I linked to an objectionable site on one of the threads below, in case no ones reading replies there anymore.
http://www.haloscan.com/comments/patrickcrozier/4810530699082881579/
I wonder why the bBC isn’t showing these clips (Now on You-Tube) of so called innocent pals getting a free pass to Heaven in which to meet a few virgins.
Hit on a Grad rocket launcher/mobile store?
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=wQPiTZIrLVY
How about this so called underground missile site
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=cd8kv3Xg4Rw
A mish mash of IDF hits on so called civy targets.
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=yxKwfXVK5IA
(The last strike says a lot about how innocent these targets are)
Netanyahu All decent people everywhere should back Israel
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=QeTKGQirA5c&feature=channel
Melanie Phillips admits she was wrong about E. HUSSAIN, the pen name of Mohammed Mahbub Hussain, ex-Hizb ut-Tahrir supporter.
It seems that Melanie thought that Hussain was a truly ex-Islamic jihadist supporter, but his current propaganda for the Islamic jihad organisation, which is Hamas, coupled with his denounciation of all things Israel has made Melanie see Hussain in his true political colours. Welcome to the club, Melanie.
Unfortunately, Hussain is still lionised by the likes of the BBC and the Labour government who have allowed Hussain to do their thinking for them on Islamic jihad.
“On the other side from civilisation”
(by Melanie Phillips)
[Extract]:
“The British government has invested huge hopes in Ed Husain as an attractive and plausible antidote to Islamist extremism in Britain. But how can anyone now believe anything he has ever said when he promulgates such a gross libel as the canard of Israel’s ‘massacre’ of hundreds of ‘innocent’ Gazans? How can the government believe that Ed Husain will de-radicalise British Muslims when through articles such as this one he is inciting them to yet more hatred of Israel, the west’s forward salient against Islamist aggression?
“Of course, his arguments are — tragically, appallingly — replicated in large measure amongst the British intelligentsia, media and indeed members of the government itself and the broad political class. Indeed, this is a far, far wider problem than one not-so-reformed-after-all Islamic extremist. It is a profound moral corruption that has infected the British body politic. The fact that so many among Britain’s educated class think like this means that they too are on the wrong side in the great battle to defend civilisation. And it’s not just Israel that in their moral confusion they are thus preparing to throw to the Islamist wolves. It is their own society too.”
http://www.spectator.co.uk/melaniephillips/3197296/on-the-other-side-from-civilisation.thtml
thanks for those pounce.
the israeli PR machine have clearly taken over youtube. MSM such as the BBC can now be bypassed so israel can get the message across without having to go through the islamist filter.
Here is something else Bowen doesn’t report
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=6DCuRzzsKnk&feature=channel
Thanks, Pounce…
You Tube (unless they’re starting to filter content again) is among our best weapons to defeating Al Beeb and their leftie media brothers.
I hope the Israelis are going to utilise internet videos a lot more.
Jon | 31.12.08 – 1:19 am |
We need more collateral damage if you ask me.
Has anyone read most of the Irish media? They make the BBC look moderate and balanced.
jimbob | 31.12.08 – 1:12 am |
the israeli PR machine have clearly taken over youtube. MSM such as the BBC can now be bypassed so israel can get the message across without having to go through the islamist filter.
False. YouTube has often censored pro-Israel or anti-Islam/Palestinian videos whenever a lone viewer flags them as objectionable. Only rarely are they restored. Meanwhile, all manner of anti-Semitic, anti-Israel, pro-jihad stuff stays up indefinitely.
There is no special relationship between Israel and YouTube. Only in the last month have they agreed to allow the ADL and the IDF to have their own channels, which are heavily censored by YouTube anyway. Unlike certain other videos. We’re only now seeing stuff because enough of it is put up there that they can’t censor all of it fast enough.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/7804001.stm
Now here is some classic bias.
“It is an attitude that is very similar to the one adopted by the Bush administration during the 2006 war between Israel and Hezbollah in Lebanon – calling for a sustainable cease-fire and a lasting peace rather than pressuring Israel to immediately halt a military operation that was killing civilians.”
And how about pressuring Hamas to halt a military operation that was killing civilians?
“Bush failure”
These days, what isn’t? I’m glad that the BBC has discovered the root problem
“The flare-up also highlights the failure of Mr Bush to bring about a peace agreement between Palestinians and Israelis.””
How about that cure for cancer and hemorrhoids that has long been promised? Another failure of Mr Bush.
Re Israel and YouTube, see this:
IDF’s YouTube Channel Under Attack
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/article/32317_IDFs_YouTube_Channel_Under_Attack
.
Now that’s interesting; the current HYS on the subject previously had an anti-Israel comment furiously racing in the recommendations count against the one presently at the top. The anti-Israel one has now disappeared. Has anybody saved it? Is any Beeboid on board to explain what happened?
http://newsforums.bbc.co.uk/nol/thread.jspa?sortBy=2&forumID=5857&start=0&tstart=0&edition=2&ttl=20081231054322#paginator
.
Anat (Israel) | 31.12.08 – 5:59 am | #
Yes I noticed that Anat. However I am extremely suspicious of the leading recommended comment. If you look at the next few most popular comments they are mostly supportive of Israel’s action. I suspect that someone at the BBC has been ‘playing’ with the ‘recommended by’ figures and has deliberatley manipulated that comment to be at the top. Wouldn’t get too uptight about it. The BBC is just a total disgrace when it comes to reporting fairly regarding Israel.
Over at BBC Radio Solent, the evening news/drive time show has an in-depth analysis of the Gaza situation. What they’ve done is find a lecturer at Southampton University who has family in Gaza. There is then an interview in the classic soft’n’gentle ‘How does it feel’ mould. Unfortunately, the interviewee starts sobbing unconrollably (some might say ‘theatrically’) within moments. He continues so sob, wracked with emotion, for some time. The DJ eventually brings the interview to a drama filled finish.
I waited for the highly paid DJ/journo to ask him if his family were anywhere near Hamas launch sites, or if he thought that the firing of 8,000 rockets might have something to do with Israel’s action, but, no, there was no time for any balanced debate. Hear it (box of Kleenexes at the ready) at 1 hr 6 minutes in:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/p001v3bp/Steve_Harris_30_12_2008/
Answering the bBC (and its masters) claims;
1) “Israel’s response in Gaza is disproportionate”
Since when is war a mathematical equation? The basic objective of any warring party is to inflict maximal damage on the enemy while minimizing its own casualties. Was there anything proportional about the US war in Iraq? Or about Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait for that matter? Or about Russia’s recent war against Georgia? Israel is doing exactly what any other country has done in the past. This is how war works.
Would abu bowen complain that “too few” British soldiers are being killed in Iraq? Probably would actually.
And on a more elementary note: Palestinian military inferiority is not an indication of moral superiority. Palestinian insistence on resorting to violence despite this military weakness is an indication of poor judgment perhaps – yet it is by no means an indication of moral virtue. Being militarily weak does not make the Palestinians right.
2) “But Qassams don’t kill”
Actually, Qassams do kill. Not too often, perhaps, but dozens of Israelis were killed and wounded by rocket fire in recent years. Moreover, at this time the Palestinians are firing long-range Grad rockets with even greater explosive power. Such rockets killed 2 Israelis Monday.
Yet beyond the casualty figures, the psychological damage caused as result of living under an ongoing rocket threat is immeasurable. Would anyone in the West agree to have their family live under constant rocket attacks and be regularly woken up by sirens in the middle of the night? Would anyone living under such conditions appreciate being told that “these rockets don’t kill?” Probably not.
3) “It’s all because of Israel’s siege. Israel should allow aid into Gaza.”
Israel has allowed goods into Gaza regularly throughout the “siege”. Palestinians have been able to complement these deliveries with supplies smuggled through hundreds of tunnels (of course, they would likely be able to bring in even more food had they not used the tunnels to smuggle in missiles.).
The day before operation “Cast Lead” got underway, Israel allowed dozens of trucks carrying aid to enter the Strip. On Tuesday, another 100 trucks – double the normal number –are expected to enter Gaza after Defense Minister Barak approved the move.
In short, Israel is allowing aid into the Strip (but guess who has kept Gaza crossings mostly closed thus far? That’s right, Egypt.)
4) “Why didn’t Israel just agree to renew the Gaza truce?”
First, what truce? Terror groups continued to fire rockets throughout the lull, even if somewhat infrequently, and even if the world didn’t seem to care too much. Nonetheless, Israel clearly declared that it is interested in extending the truce. Our top officials made it clear time and again.
Yet Hamas leaders clearly declared that the truce has ended on December 19th, and proceeded to bombard southern Israeli communities with dozens of rockets daily. In short, it is no wonder that even the Egyptians are blaming Hamas this time.
5) “But Hamas was elected democratically – why can’t Israel accept it?”
Although Hamas won the Palestinian elections, it took Gaza by force, in the process hurling rival Fatah members down to their death from high-rises and shooting others in the knees with the declared aim of maiming them. Some democracy.
In any case, Israel in fact “recognizes,” de facto, Hamas’ rule in Gaza, which is precisely why it is justified in attacking the Hamas-ruled Strip, recognizing that it is indeed being governed by a terror entity. Israel did not launch the operation because Hamas is in power there – rather, it did so because Hamas is a terrorist organization that has deliberately targeted civilians with thousands of rockets over the past 8 years.
6) “Israel is targeting civilians”
You mean to say that “one of the most powerful armies in the world” has been bombing Gaza for days, deploying massive air power, dropping hundreds of bombs, and ultimately killing a grand total of 50 civilians or so in the “most crowded place on earth?”
There are two options here: A) The Israeli army is not targeting civilians, or B) Israeli pilots suck. We tend to go with option A.
Indeed, Israel goes to great lengths to avoid civilian casualties, by deploying precise ammunition and specialized techniques. In fact, nobody in the world does this better than the Jewish State.
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3647296,00.html
The BBC uncritically has reported violent examples of the ummah supporting the ummah against Israel and the USA and Britain, e.g.:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/7803569.stm
But the BBC could add IRAN to the list. Perhaps inspired by Channel 4 giving a Christmas public broadcasting platform to Ahmadinejad, and the BBC’s routinely dhimmi reporting on Iran, there is this sort of thing going on in Tehran:
‘Jihadwatch’:
“Iran: Students (i.e. “Muslim youth”) raid British Embassy”
http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/024151.php
So far, the BBC site has not reported this, although the BBC still prominently reports the Iranian shoe-throwing ‘journalist’.
And any BBC report on Tehran demos against Britain would miss out any worthwhile critical analysis such as this:
‘Jihadwatch’:
[Extract, from above]:
“Surely Khomeini would be proud. Even though ‘Britain has called for an urgent ceasefire,’ that’s not good enough. Nothing will ever be good enough — not allowing sharia courts to operate in Britain, nor financially supporting Hamas. The more you concede, the more will be demanded of you — till you live in complete submission in accordance to Koran 9:29: ‘Fight those who do not believe in Allah, nor in the latter day, nor do they prohibit what Allah and His Messenger have prohibited, nor follow the religion of truth, out of those who have been given the Book, until they pay the tax in acknowledgment of superiority and they are in a state of subjection’.”
Surely the big question on the Israel/Gaza fiasco is what Obama is/will be doing about it.
As Bush is now a “lame duck” as well as a moron and has been for years according to the Beeb, surely Bazza should be stepping messianically into the breach to demand that the idiots stop killing each other and spread peace and love throughout the world.
Instead he seems to be playing golf which seems a bit half hearted.
The Beeb reports that of course he can’t do anything yet as he’s not prezzo until January, but a) surely he should be pitching a few suitably intellectual ideas at this point and b) he apparently single handedly solved the US financial crisis despite his purely elect status???
As someone who supported Obama (notwithstanding scary economic policies) on the basis that the massive “he’s not Bush/republican” global goodwill generated by his triumph might give him leverage to progress some of these conflicts, saving me as a British taxpayer a few quid and the need to listen to endless tedious whining from Muslim/Jewish work colleagues, I’m a bit pissed off about this. If he can’t be arsed saving the world we might’ve well have had Palin and a good laugh.
That’s very interesting.
Cockney, if you believe that Obama has answers, Palin is for laughs, and Bush is a moron, reality is bound to piss you off.
IRONY (except the Palin is for laughs bit)
Yes, irony. So is mine.
.
Irony and sarcasm don’t work on t’internet.
Is it the case that muslims only give aid to other muslims?
We need an irony button on all keyboards! A smirk key instead of the ‘insert’ key that I’ve never used in all my computing life
It seems to me that a ‘proportionate’ response from Israel might be to randomly lob 2-300 missiles a week into Gaza. It might (would) lead to many more civilian deaths but the BBC would be placated since it would be ‘proportionate’. It would wouldn’t it?
Arthur Dent:
It seems to me that a ‘proportionate’ response from Israel might be to randomly lob 2-300 missiles a week into Gaza. It might (would) lead to many more civilian deaths but the BBC would be placated since it would be ‘proportionate’. It would wouldn’t it?
Even using only the UN’s* estimates of civilian/civilian casualties the proportion of palestinian victims seems to be of the same order as the proportions regularly threatened by German occupying forces in their retaliations against resistance organisations in occupied countries.
In what it is doing in Gaza Israel is being as bad as Germany was in its treatment of occupied countries – but whats a few dozen civilian deaths if it gets their shabby government re-elected!
These are listed today in the New English review website as ‘mysterious thresholds’
1. Middle age for a Palestinian. Palestinians are “children” for a long time, and then they suddenly become “elderly”.
2. The line between poverty, which fuels Muslim extremism, and affluence, which fuels Muslim extremism.
The “*” in “UN’S*” in my last post? I meant to add:
*Oh – I forgot that the UN, like everyone who dissents from the strident clamour in the comments on this topic, is an anti-semitic tool of Islamic world domination!
“In what it is doing in Gaza Israel is being as bad as Germany was in its treatment of occupied countries ”
J-O-O-S are the new Nazis!