I’m hugely entertained by the faux media storm that the BBC is bravely resisting efforts by Government and others to broadcast a charity appeal for schools in Hamastan! International Development Secretary Wee Dougie Alexander has moaned that it was not too late for a reversal to recognise the “immense human suffering”. (Forget about that suffering including that of Israelis, they don’t even count as humans in wee Dougie’s world-view) A protest is to be held outside Broadcasting House in London after the BBC declined to broadcast appeals by the Disasters Emergency Committee. (aka Save Hamas Now) Now then, given that the BBC has spent three weeks faithfully propagating every blood libel possible against Israel, the notion that it is somehow defiantly holding out to maintain it’s impartiality is a joke. The BBC has no right to be carrying any ads for Hamastan and this is making a virtue out of not doing something it should not be doing anyway! That said, I wonder will it be able to resist the cries of all the Jew-haters out there?
BBC IMPARTIALITY UNDER THREAT?
Bookmark the permalink.
Still didn’t stop them getting Tony Benn in knowing full well he would churn out the address of where to send donations to…which he did…twice. The interviewer actually starting sniggering.
I have a feeling that there will be an awful lot of BBC employees outside protesting along with the usual unwashed, anti-semitic rabble that these sorts of demonstrations attract.
Why doesn’t anyone point out to gits like Benn and co. that there is well documented evidence that aid convoys to Gaza are being hijacked by Hamas fighters for their own ends?
I hope people understand that donating to this ‘appeal’ just supplies provisions and medicines to the Hamas terrorists so they can continue their war against Jews in Israel and beyond. Though I guess to some (i.e Grauniad and Indescribablyboring subscribers) that’s the main reason to donate!
I don’t suppose the BBC are at all non-plussed by the (as you say) “faux” media storm they are whipping up around themselves.
It is laughable though that one of the few times the BBC gets it right (especially to do with Gaza) the liberal left are foaming at the mouth that their trusted vehicle has suddenly developed a misfire.
Well if people need help I would rather it be given by an auditable charity with peoples donations rather than by the £20million of our money been donated by our government or the billions given by the EU most of which has probably made its way into al Fatah and Hamas bank accounts.
As for the recent treads about Gaza here they have been overly pro Isreal.
I don’t disagree with the IDF cleaning up the back yard and hopefully it will keep Hamas subdued but dont forget the terroism from the jews before Isreal existed including the murder of British soldiers!
David
Like you I can see right this.
It’s little more than a cynical ploy to maintain a laughable pretense that the BBC somehow still upholds impartiality. They abandoned impartiality ten years ago.
The likes of Jeremy Bowen blaming Israel and making excuses for terrorist scumbags cannot be described as impartial by any stretch of the imagination.
I say let them do it, let them be as biased as they fucking well like, everybody seeing more clearly that they are rotten to the core and hence hastening their demise..
“the liberal left are foaming at the mouth that their trusted vehicle has suddenly developed a misfire.”
Exactly what I was thinking. The protests just prove that the lefties regard the BBC as their mouthpiece.
The BBC was criticised today for broadcasting an appeal to raise emergency funds on behalf of an a known anti-Israeli organisation.
The appeal by TV Licensing, an umbrella group for various money collecting agencies, demanded that owners of television sets pay £139.50 towards the running costs of the BBC, an international media group notorious for disseminating Hamas propaganda. The request for funds also warned that those refusing to pay could face a fine or even imprisonment.
A BBC spokesperson said: “The BBC’s decision to broadcast the appeal on behalf of the BBC was the correct one. It is vital that the BBC has the resources to continue its mission to demonise Israel.”
The BBC’s decision was welcomed by UNRWA spokesman Chris Gunness: “It is essential that funds continue to flow to the BBC’s Middle East journalists so they can blindly report whatever rubbish UNRWA and Hamas tell them. I am particularly pleased for my friend Jeremy Bowen, who really knows how to spin things to the satisfaction of the terrorists in charge here in Gaza.”
Veteran politician Tony Benn said, “Is it time for my pills yet? I’m 83, you know?”
First line should read “on behalf of a well-known anti-Israeli organisation”.
That some would seek to use the BBC to appeal for cash for Gaza (why not the Tamil Tigers or The BNP for that matter) is illustration enough that many people simply view the BBC as their plaything.
Tony Benn was on News 24 this morning reading out the phone number for the appeal and he was not stopped.
Close down the BBC now. If people want to raise money for their pet causes let them do it in the normal (difficult) way.
In this context, the Telegraph’s report on the story is kind of amusing.
In their new joint role as NuLabour’s best friends, and Hamas-cheerleaders-in-Chief, the paper just can’t understand the Beeb’s seeming reluctance to go with the flow.
BBC refusal to show Gaza appeal ‘inexplicable’:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/4329701/BBC-attacked-by-Ben-Bradshaw-for-refusal-to-broadcast-emergency-fund-appeal-for-Gaza.html
What with the Plett affair and the contents of the Balen report the BBC knows it is too dodgy to run the Gaza charity appeal.
What’s in the Balen report? I had to help pay for the report so I can watch football on Sky TV without getting a fine and a criminal record so why shouldn’t I be able to read it?
By banning this appeal the BBC is taking sides.
How dare you (David) categorise everyone who takes an opposing view as ‘Jew-haters’. Some may be, but some may be Jews, and most are probably neither.
I trust the charity organisations, people are suffering and if you want to help why not.
My own personal views don’t matter. I wont be giving to this appeal, that’s irrelevant. But you don’t refuse to help people because you don’t like their government.
The BBC is showing bias by choosing which humanitarian appeals it deigns to allow. That’s cruel, immoral, unwise, and I suspect ultimately futile.
I will be writing ie using pen and paper to complain – remembering the criticisms from beeboids when complaints flooded in about Ross – that it was too easy to complain on line – asking who authorised the broadcast of the story on all news reports – bearing in mind that the BBC is the story – we can only assume that it was agreed somewhere high up.
Having acknowledged that there was a ‘bias’ issue to report it as they have done on all news reports reinforces the bias.
Tony Benn on Toady quoted numbers of deaths – probably UNWRA figures – ie from an organisation that employs 99% palestinians some of whom are HAMAS.
John,
By banning an appeal from an organisation which includes the Hamas linked Islamic Relief, the BBC is merely doing what is required.
As for the Jew-haters line I used, I looked at the list of DEC AND I stand by my comment. I also reflect on media coverage of the three week offensive on Hamas, and I stand by my comment.
It’s a wonderful piece of reverse psychology from the BBC and shows how much they have learnt from the suicide bombers of the ME. Make out you are a victim and get sympathy. Get those pro-Palestinian cabinet ministers vocalising their disdain, report on all those groups protesting about your decision and voila! Pretend you come to your “senses” and ignore the impartiality rule next time round because the “people have spoken.”
I guess they thought that if Ross/Brand can get so many complaints then their “unfair decision on the Gaza appeal” will do so too.
Cunning lil buggers, ain’t they?
In the Telegraph it was reported it was due to ‘Israeli objections’, although I dont record reading in the report what objections those were.
This is a fake issue to discredit people who complaining about BBC anti-Israel bias. Noone would object to humanitarian relief for Gaza. It is though interesting that DEC has formed. Surely there is untold relief money in place already?
John | 24.01.09 – 3:45 pm |
The BBC is showing bias by choosing which humanitarian appeals it deigns to allow. That’s cruel, immoral, unwise, and I suspect ultimately futile.
Doesn’t it occur to you that, by running this appeal in the context of a “humanitarian crisis”, the BBC is not only denying that this is really happening because the Palestinians chose to let Hamas run the show, but informing the public that Hamas isn’t responsible?
Doesn’t it occur to you that if Hamas (and Arafat before them) hadn’t been trousering all those billions of dollars in international aid and using it for weapons, there would be no humanitarian crisis in Gaza? Don’t you see that by running this charity appeal in the current context of “this is caused by Israel”, the BBC would be denying the truth about Hamas and further demonizing Israel?
And finally, doesn’t it occur to you that the BBC will not speak out about violence against British citizens of Jewish extraction, yet we’re supposed to believe that this isn’t anti-Israel, anti-Jew, and pro-Hamas and pro-Palestinain?
The BBC would be blaming Israel entirely for the situation, and lying about what Hamas really gets up to with their own people. Further, it will encourage more violence against Jews and their property in the UK. But you don’t see that as bias, or something the BBC should avoid?
If the BBC was honest about Hamas, and what they and previous Palestinian leadership have really done to their own people, then I could support a charity appeal. Unfortunately, they are not only suppressing the truth, but actually lying about it all.
Until honesty happens at the BBC, this is not acceptable.
hahaha
yous are all whingers
BBC are appeasing yous blaggers
both David’s,
thank you for your comments.
According to it’s website, “The DEC consists of: Action Aid, British Red Cross, CAFOD, CARE International UK, Christian Aid, Concern Worldwide, Help the Aged, Islamic Relief, Merlin, Oxfam, Save the Children, Tearfund, World Vision.” That’s not a list of “Jew haters”. The list includes the best known British relief charities.
News coverage of the fighting in Gaza is a different issue. We’re talking here about allowing a relief appeal. It’s got nothing to do with who’s to blame for the fighting.
How does the fact that Arafat and cronies made off with millions, translate into punishing Palestinians now by denying an appeal? The fact is that there is a crisis, whoever is to blame, and people are caught up in it.
The appeal is an appeal, not a polemic against Israel or Jews.
If the BBC really wants to seem impartial it could air an appeal for Jewish victims of Palestinian terrorism.
If you’re concerned about anti-semitism, I can understand your concerns about BBC news coverage, and British foreign policy, but wanting to stop British charities using the British public service broadcaster to appeal to the British public is a stupid act.
You don’t have to support Hamas, or oppose Israel, to want the BBC to show the appeal.
John,
Palestinians have the means to help themselves. What they dont have is the will to do so.
Instead of diverting all that money to weapons and hatred against Israel, they should spend it on bettering their own lives.
There really is no need for an appeal, Palestinians already have the means to look after themselves.
Mailman
Hmm, I’d say this is a difficult one. On the one hand, the people voted for Hamas in the last election, so one could argue that they have reaped what they have sown. Even so, that shouldn’t stop people who wish to donate their money to help these people doing so. They didn’t all vote for Hamas.
But in making such an appeal, shouldn’t it be made absolutely clear to those who donate what has happened to previous donations? How much actually reached the people, and how much was siphoned off by terrorists, er, militants.
John | 24.01.09 – 5:02 pm |
The appeal is an appeal, not a polemic against Israel or Jews.
On its own, in a vacuum, yes. But the BBC isn’t a vacuum. In the context in which the BBC has portrayed – not reported, but portrayed – the situation, the appeal has more than face value.
If the BBC really wants to seem impartial it could air an appeal for Jewish victims of Palestinian terrorism.
I’m sorry, but that’s a joke. 13 Israeli dead compared to Pallywood figures of 1300 eliminates such an idea entirely. There would be rioting in the streets if the BBC even hinted at such a thing. The BBC thinks the Israeli deaths are chickens coming home to roost.
As I’ve already said, if the BBC really wants to seem impartial they could report the truth about who is really responsible for the lives of Gazans, and what they’ve done. Jeremy Bowen weeping over tunnels used only to supply lambs and milk for babies, but never, ever anything bad (even though the BBC itself has video footage of weapons smuggling, while Bowen still says that’s only what Israel thinks) is not the full truth, and only serves to make things worse.
Benn is a disgusting, lying, cowardly fascist who has never met a mass-murderer he didn’t like. Of course they knew what he’d do.
There is no apostrophe in “its impartiality”.
.
“Oxfam … That’s not a list of “Jew haters”.
Oxfam is.
.
“How much actually reached the people, and how much was siphoned off by terrorists, er, militants.”
Answers on a postcard.
.
“dont forget the terroism from the jews before Isreal existed including the murder of British soldiers!”
Bingo, the ignorant Jew-haters have arrived.
.
This one is shaping up to be a ‘mother of all extremes’, with the BBC finding itself on a mammoth ‘lose-lose’ whatever they do. Ah well, stuff happens.
Personally, I have no problem the the principle of any appeal for aid to innocents suffering… so long as it is run a totally apolitical basis, and the money generated is guaranteed to get where it is billed as going.
So far I have heard a few emotive appeals on behalf of the appeal that are anything but apolitical (with the DEC charities possibly wincing at such ‘support’), and am a tad unsure at the moment if anyone has the slightest clue who will end up with the money. It’s not like the guys on the ground at the sharp end of the doling out seem to be up for full disclosure. However, that is no reason not to try, I guess.
Any innocent life is one too many, so I open myself to critiques on the very ‘two wrongs’ basis I often hold others to, but considering the actual human toll, the rush to tsunami levels of excitement on this aid mission are hard to equate to a few other civilian catastrophes even in the recent past. So one does have to wonder to what extent there is already a mighty political component at play already, complemented by some pretty cynical media ‘support’ as this one is a lot ‘sexier’ ratings-wise.
I actually feel sorry for the BBC in some ways. At least they seem to have tried to weigh various issues, which is more than some bandwagon jumpers I’ve seen out and about today.
As one on the fence, being sympathetic but unlikely to contribute, I must say how this one plays out currently rates as ‘interesting’.
At the moment few in the media, or the political arena, are coming out of this well… IMHO. And yet again I do wonder if the kids they all claim to be most worried about are really being well served by all those jockeying for the high grounds.
“I actually feel sorry for the BBC”
Why??? When antisemitic shits get their comeuppance, I crack open a bottle.
.
“According to it’s website, “The DEC consists of: Action Aid, British Red Cross, CAFOD, CARE International UK, Christian Aid, Concern Worldwide, Help the Aged, Islamic Relief, Merlin, Oxfam, Save the Children, Tearfund, World Vision.” That’s not a list of “Jew haters”. The list includes the best known British relief charities.”
John | 24.01.09 – 5:02 pm |
John – frankly that is a list of charities that I am sick of. You can give them your money and watch them naively piss it up the wall on undeserving causes if you like – but not me. I used to regularly support the British Red Cross, Oxfam, CAFOD and Help the Aged – but no longer. Their high profile support and proselytising for trendy left wing causes just pisses me off!
Well done david Vance. A laughable attempt to squeeze this issue into the b-bbc narrative. But at least you didn’t ignore it and took up my challenge. vm To your credit.
I see all the other terrestrials will broadcast. but the BBC is holding out.
pro hamas my @rse.
Oh yes, and the Red Cross – a thoroughly antisemitic organisation.
I give Oxfam and RC a wide berth. All my stufff goes to a local hospice.
One of the reasons I won’t donate to Gaza – regardless of what channel airs it.
http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/our-neighbor-and-why-we-have-to-kill-him/?print=1#comments_controls
There was a protest outside the BBC. I could not help noticing that the had immediate banners all well printed o n sticks. it must be a speciaised industry ready for all occasions
Of course. It’s called Rent-a-mob.
MWL,
Sorry but you rate yourself rather too highly. I did not take up your “challenge” -I covered a story that appealed to me. As to whether an umbrella group that includes Islamic Relief may be pro-Hamas – d’oh.
Wow! Call off the hounds! I’m a dedicated B-Bias contributor but let’s give them some credit when they get it right.
The reason why the BBC refused to support the DEC is solely because of the inclusion of Islamic Relief…who, um…let’s say have dodgy connections and the Beebobalooloos were not convinced the money would go to the right channels.
I think we should bombard the BBC with messages of support. The Mr Benn fraternity are sending in vast numbers of orchestrated email complaints. So, this time we should show support when they do the right thing. Conspiracy theories apart. The BBC spokesman was in fact very brave to enter the C4 News lions den and stick to her guns.
I doubt the “impartiality” of some of these “charities” especially Oxfam, War on Want & Christian Aid.
See NGO articles like this one re Oxfam:
THE NGO FRONT IN THE GAZA WAR: OXFAM
“From the beginning of Israel’s “Operation Cast Lead” in Gaza on December 27, 2008 to January 8, 2009, 35 NGOs claiming to promote human rights and humanitarian agendas have issued more than 132 statements on the fighting, and the number increases continuously. These statements exhibit severe bias and double standards, focus overwhelmingly on condemning Israel, and ignore or pay little attention to Israeli human rights and casualties. Under the façade of morality and universality, they exploit international legal terminology and erase Hamas violations of international humanitarian law, such as the extensive use of human shields. These reports are a central part of the “soft power” war being waged against Israel, in parallel to the “hard power” rocket and terror attacks, and reflect an ideological bias which also gives excessive attention to this conflict. In contrast many international NGOs have remained silent on extensive human rights abuses occurring around the world during this period. For example, on December 27 (the start of the operation), 189 villagers were massacred by Ugandan rebels in the Congo. Yet, none of the major NGOs reported on this incident.
NGO Monitor is tracking these statements to provide continual updates on the NGO public relations effort on Gaza. In order to highlight the activities of particular NGOs, NGO Monitor´s series entitled, “The NGO Front,” will focus daily on different organizations, beginning with an analysis of Oxfam’s role.
Oxfam : “Disproportionate” Attacks on Israel
• Oxfam is funded by the British government ; Oxfam American received $9 million from the Ford Foundation in 2007.
• Following Hamas’ takeover of Gaza and increased rocket attacks on Israeli civilians in 2007, Oxfam played an integral role in the NGO campaign against Israel’s Gaza policy, accusing Israel of an “illegal siege”, “collective punishment” and continued “occupation”. This campaign contributed to the conflict and gave Hamas leaders the expectation of international support for its terror activities.
• Oxfam has issued eight statements since December 27, and has created a special page regarding the conflict on its website.
• These statements include false international legal claims, such as the accusation that Israel is guilty of “disproportionate force” or “illegal collective punishment”.
• Presents an immoral equivalence between Hamas’ deliberate rocket attacks on Israeli civilians and Israel’s response in self defense – a right guaranteed under Article 51 of the UN Charter.
• Repeats the standard Palestinian accusation that Israel has created a humanitarian crisis, despite the detailed evidence from the World Food Bank and other sources to the contrary.
• Oxfam uses these claims to promote a clear anti-Israel political agenda, including calls for increased diplomatic pressure and demands that the EU and other international bodies suspend agreements with Israel. No similar demands are presented with respect to Hamas, the Palestinian Authority, Egypt, or Iran.”
You’re right ricky.
This site should spread its remit to C4. Anyone see snow’s “nightmare” comment on Bush the other day? Now that’s bias.
John:
By banning this appeal the BBC is taking sides
[…]
But you don’t refuse to help people because you don’t like their government.
John | 24.01.09 – 3:45 pm | #
No, the Disasters Emergency Committee has already taken sides – one of the bodies making up the Disasters Emergency Committee is Islamic Relief, an international organisation that is alleged to have supplied millions to Chechen jihadis and to have links with Hamas.
Disasters Emergency Committee Members
Allegations against Islamic Relief
How about that as a reason for not airing this appeal?
Excellent, La Cumparsita.
And you can say much the same thing about Amnesty Int’l. But I suppose Oxfam is in a league of its own where lying antisemitic propaganda is concerned.
Sky news showed the demonstrators outside Bush House – one was carry in a placard that read “The BBC – Israel’s Lord Haw-Haw”
I kid you not!
If the BBC really wants to seem impartial it could air an appeal for Jewish victims of Palestinian terrorism.
John | 24.01.09 – 5:02 pm
That’ll happen when pigs sprout wings.
I’m going to send another load of pizzas to the IDF.
Another good cause, if anybody wants to contribute, is this:
http://www.warmtheneedy.org/
Santiago:
Yes: ‘Islamic charities’ an oxymoron.
‘Jihadwatch’ has pages of references to abuses of such organisations:
http://www.google.com/custom?hl=en&client=google-coop-np&cof=AH:left%3BCX:JihadWatch%2520Website%3BL:http://www.google.com/coop/intl/en/images/custom_search_sm.gif%3BLH:65%3BLP:1%3BVLC:%23551a8b%3BGFNT:%23666666%3BDIV:%23cccccc%3B&cx=013255222075609514560:yu16amghxpi&adkw=AELymgUP1QN67ho5wmFGjaSoVLLIx98L5SO0-nh0o2jJ4XaEPIyoyRDo6pRFZGd_C-DEtP_c5wUl1fqz2ELYlfKYfk_QwgSoc3iRrpgTvpJ64fQDj91dC-c&q=islamic+charities+2008&start=0&sa=N
Noone would object to humanitarian relief for Gaza.
hippiepooter | 24.01.09 – 4:08 pm | #
I don’t claim to be in any way neutral but I object.
Humanitarian Aid (much promised; some arrives; little reaches) seems to me to do nothing more than try to minimise the world’s failure to do anything during the crisis. Rather than investigate why no-one (West, East, ‘moderate’ Arab or ‘militant’ Arab) considered Cast Lead justified risking the life of even one soldier.
I object for several reasons:
*This reflex action only encourages the Palestinians to believe that no matter what they do someone will bail them out.
*It comes at the expense of far larger humanitarian tragedy (both manmade and natural).
*Money given in the past was pissed away and none of the DEC demand any accountability now.
BTW does this sudden burst of BBC ‘neutrality’ mean the BBC won’t broadcast LiveAid this year?
Anyone see snow’s “nightmare” comment on Bush the other day? Now that’s bias.
mikewineliberal | 24.01.09 – 7:12 pm | #
FFS Mike, is it not getting through yet? I don’t have to pay for John Snow’s opinions under pain of imprisonment, and I don’t watch C4 anyway.
Mark Thompson answers:
BBC and the Gaza appeal
alan – in effect, you do pay for C4, although not through a licence. It’s given free spectrum. so try again.
Mark Thompson answers:
BBC and the Gaza appeal
Roody | 24.01.09 – 8:20 pm
Has that man ever listened to the BBC?
The usual chunks of the ‘UMMAH’,(whose first loyalty is to Islam, not to ‘infidel’ Britain), and SWP, are demonstrating their approval of Al Jazeera Islamic TV, and demand that the BBC emulates it even more.
The Labour government can see Muslim votes in supporting the demonstrators.
The Islamisation of Britain speeds up.
Is the BBC’s ‘ring of steel’ in time? And the question the BBC should be working out the answer to: who are were defending ourselves against?:
‘Telegraph’-
“BBC plans ‘ring of steel’ to improve Broadcasting House security”
“The BBC is planning to increase security at Broadcasting House in London amid fears the landmark building could become a terrorist target.”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/culturenews/4240767/BBC-plans-ring-of-steel-to-improve-Broadcasting-House-security.html
Look at us!We, the bbc piss off palestinians and the government!
Roll up,roll up and see the scrupulously impartial bbc!
Utterly contrived bollocks,they`re ensuring that every time accusations of pro palestinian bias are made they can cut to a shot of angry supporters waving anti-bbc banners, a cynical ploy or an incredibly convenient happenstance to be taken full advantage of,either way no-one i`ve spoken to believes a word of it.
The whole thing stinks.
Wasn`t it the bbc on trying to get alan johnston back off his holidays that said,we have always been a friend to the palestinians?
deegee | 24.01.09 – 7:32 pm
Hear hear to all of that!
:+:
I have to ask: is this blog anti-BBC bias, or pro-Israeli? If the latter, then fair enough rail about how the BBC is being cynical and expedient. But if the former, then surely this one case is an example when you guys should be pausing for reflection about quite how extreme the BBC’s bias is (or isn’t).
And while we’re on the subject of gross impartiality, let’s address what David wrote in this post: “a charity appeal for schools in Hamastan … ads for Hamastan”. That’s a really sickening misrepresentation, David. As you know full well, the Disasters Emergency Committee is a network of charitable organisations of various persuasions who are raising money for GAZA AID RELIEF AND RECONSTRUCTION. It included Christian Aid (that’s *Christian*, not Muslim, Aid), Oxfam, Save the Children, Help the Aged and the British Red Cross.
This is not about raising funds for Hamas at all. It’s about rebuilding the lives of innocent Palestinian children, who’s only crime was to be born in a bit of shite country.
And no, that doesn’t make me a Jew Hater. This was a despicable post.