There is NOTHING like Israel daring to defend itself against Hamastan terror to show visceral BBC bias. Take THIS report on the murder of three people killed as rockets were randomly fired from Gaza struck into in the Israeli town of Kiryat Malachi was hit.
It marks the first Israeli fatalities since Israel killed Hamas’ (sic) military chief in Gaza on Wednesday. Eleven Palestinians – mainly militants (sic) but also children (hint)- have been killed in the ensuing Israeli operation. Since then, more than 130 rockets have been fired into Israel, police say. (Not believe that stat BBC?)
Note the nauseating failure to call Hamas what they are – Jihad terrorists. Note the implication that the Jews want to kill children. No mention of the fact that Hamas use women and children as cover. No explanation of WHY Hamas have brought this upon themselves. The BBC equate the legitimate and forensic defensive actions of the IDF with the wicked random terrorism of Hamas.
Melanie Phillips:-
“Israel defends itself against hundreds of rocket attacks. Tut-tut!”
Note her comments on BBC’s reporting of this-
http://www.melaniephillips.com/israel-defends-itself-against-hundreds-of-rocket-attacks.-tut-tut
the bbc is a constant drip drip of “supposed” reports from gaza, while i m out this morning, – hamas finally , and quite rightly blamed for the escalation, but still the bbc can t help itself, so we have this “Israelli aggressors” etc etc etc mantra from the debatable line up who keep appearing on 5live,(where do they get them from?),
even after bbc fave william vague, comes out roundly condemning hamas … but still the “pallywood” appreciation society guest appearances keep coming. ;-D
i note M Regev hasn t been given a chance to roundly slap down this crap … but there s time
yet, like a breath of fresh air on Ch4 last night he wasted no time on the “genocidal terrorist organisation” hamas
Mr. Regev was just on SKY who, in the form of its brain dead female anchor* and emoting ‘people are telling me’ in Gaza City (probably the safest place to be as the Israelis seem a bit better at hitting military targets than if they were based as usual in their comfy hotel in Israel) chick-in-the-stix (also hired more for TV screens than brains).
The whole sorry farce of Western MSM ‘reporting’ illustrated by the set up as between an Israeli Government spokesperson and a Gazan activist. How do you negotiate when they have no structure to be held to account save a bunch of shifty geezers with beards who know whatever they say will not be challenged if they wheel out a dead baby.
These… are the lowlifes ensuring such kids are next to a Grad launch site, and then smugly in the next breath claim Gaza is the most crowed place on earth (Is it? Not a peep from airhead).
So… it’s OK to hide behind (doubtless willing) PallyMum’s (like NetMums only with older Volvos and a direct line to senior Graun management via phone as opposed to across the bed) skirts to fire inaccurate rockets (160 according to brain dead) at Israel because of dodgy house prices?
At least this morning’s bozo (Sam Kiley doing his SEAL impression – where’s Tim Marshall when you need him?) was more balanced this time.
Seems the Israelis are not playing fair on the proportionate attrition stakes by their Iron Dome missile interception working too well.
The whole region will soon be a smoking wasteland, and ‘reporters’ like this and from the BBC will be fully culpable.
*She actually, during a slot on Mr. McAlpine taking a chunk out of the BBC (donate it to a fund helping licence fee rebels mate!) seriously said ‘the general public and bloggers are not well schooled in media legalities like we are’. Er, run that one by me again? Mr. Schofield & his slap wrist ITV employers? George Monbiot and the Graun selective editorial (hacking, tax) bunnies or… Newsnight & the BBC’s secret squirrel meetings? That kind of professional media competence and adherence?
Are they all really so inbred they have no clue on irony along with actual reality?
When it comes to Hamas or Palis, and their eternal war against Jews, a far better and fairer news is provided by al Jazeera.
The BBC is even worse then Pallywood, as BBC trades on the reputation that it is fair and unbiased.
Counter to INBBC :-
“Robert Spencer and Michael Coren on Israel’s self-defense and more”
(Video clip)
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2012/11/robert-spencer-and-michael-coren-on-israels-self-defense-and-more.html
incisive and succinct … of course not from the bbc but by its guest 😀
why do i get the feeling that it will be a while before he gets invited back on the bbc?
I look forward to seeing him debating with Paxo on newsnight (if paxo ever rises from his lay-down in a darkened room!) to return to newsnight.
Look at 2:11 and 2:43, “badly hurt man” makes miraculous recovery!
2:39 “hurt woman and child” have no visible injuries.
Talk about a deliberate stage managed piece for the cameras.
the pallywood oscar for quickest recovery from an almost fatal wound goes to Faisal al Jewhater for his role in “those jewish murderers violate international law…..again part 4579”
At this rate the bbc will be using this footage to show the terrible cost of Israeli air strikes to innocent Palestinians.
Sod it… cant get the link to work… it was achmed the dead terrorist, by Jeff’fa’fa Dunham…dot..com as peanut would say 🙂
It must be time for the BBC to host a Pallympics:
The grinning Fireman(?) Ham at 2.24 is a surefire gold medalist for the 20 yard dash to the back of the ambulance.
LoL who then puts his mate down, who is rather unhurt, lol.
Yep, same guy. Typical Paliwood. Just after that, there was also a shot of one man with an orange vest carrying another guy with an orange vest, who was set down and seemed to be perfectly fine just as the camera conveniently cut away.
All this makes me wonder: are there no BBC cameras available in Israel today? No footage of Israeli children huddling in bomb shelter? Or is that too pro-Israel and will provoke complaints from both sides?
oh no
but they do have plenty of beeboids in hamastan
all their (massively publicly funded)resources are clearly tied up in hamastan
‘of course not from the bbc’
First word out of the earpiece-jockey’s mouth after the guest offers his first thoughts…
‘Of course, our correspondents in the region are reporting a lot of anger on the streets..”
Unleash…. The Mason!
How faked are those pictures of the “Victims” on the 2nd section?
No blood, no injuries, beardy bloke with bib carrying other beardy bloke with bib on his back….un-injured of course.
Hijabbed women running away….no blood, no injuries….please!….come on, can you not see propaganda when you see it “Auntie”?
I saw an article where they were in a hospital earlier, talking to “victims”, no injuries, no blood….STAGED…even had a little girl in a hospital bed, claiming to have been at a wedding…..that old chestnut, eh?….again, no injuries.
Sick to death of all this crap, I really am.
There’s a tomato ketchup shortage because they wrecked all the greenhouses.
Interesting that the Beeboid suggested that perhaps the Hamas leader’s life was de-valued by Israel when he said that, “to them” he was just a “terrorist, a military leader fighting a cause.” Well, what the hell does the BBC think the Hamas guy though he was himself? An innocent bureaucrat? Santa Claus?
Rather unfair way to put it, making Israel seem like the side which places no value on human life.
Civilian areas of Israel have been under constant rocket attack from Gaza for the last month. Sky News reported that many Israeli civilians were spending a good percentage of their days in air raid shelters over the last month. As many as 60 rockets a day were pounding their suburbs. That report came last week.
Israel issued a warning last week to Hamas that unless these missile attacks against civilians ceased that they would eliminate Hamas leaders. Again reported on Sky News.
This has now come to pass.
In terms of International Law, administered by the UN it is unlawful to deliberately target and kill civilians. If the UN accepts Hamas as the legal administration of Gaza then there should be proceedings to identify and bring to justice any and all elected leaders for prosecution.
UN very quiet, Willie Hague very quiet but sure to squeak up any time soon on the subject of unjustified escalation of violence by Israel. Hague no doubt also calling for emergency meeting of UN Sec Council to condemn Israel.
“Note the implication that the Jews want to kill children.”
Couldn’t see that. Could you be more specific?
JD
you mentioned on another thread that there are areas where the bbc was….can’t remember the word exactly,but the implication was “not up to scratch in the impartiality stakes”
I then saked if you cared to list them-you didn’t
but would you now care to state that their reporting of all things Israel falls short of those “world class standards” we’ve all come to know and love?
*asked
just before stephen or is that dez jumps in with a gramattical riposte 🙂
*grammatical-I can almost type!!
Here goes;
* Royal coverage- I’m broadly pro, but their coverage is simpering
* business coverage- too much free PR time for companies on the early morning radio shows
* religion- too much religious coverage and too much respect ( including I agree pussy footing around islam’s worst excesses). TFTD a disgrace. Coverage of the CofE way beyond its importance
* Israel – occasionally too even handed, but I think their coverage of the recent conflict is good so far. I agree Bowen seems a little captured by the Arab narrative
Other than that, I think bbc radio 4’s news coverage is the best I’ve heard. Truly superlative, favourites being Webb, Davis, Mair. Don’t like Humphreys. Jury out on Peston, but he is very sharp.
Question Time I loathe and the 9/11 coverage was a disgrace on a par with anything they’ve done.
I’m sure there’s more, but that’s the gist of it.
* Royal coverage- I’m broadly pro, but their coverage is simpering NEUTRAL ON THIS
* business coverage- too much free PR time for companies on the early morning radio shows BROADLY AGREE
* religion- too much religious coverage and too much respect ( including I agree pussy footing around islam’s worst excesses). TFTD a disgrace. Coverage of the CofE way beyond its importance PARTIALLY AGREE-ESPECIALLY ABOUT THE RELIGION OF PEACE-C OF E HAS TO A LARGE EXTENT CEASED TO BE A CHURCH AND HAS BECOME A SOCIAL CONSTRUCT
* Israel – occasionally too even handed, but I think their coverage of the recent conflict is good so far. I agree Bowen seems a little captured by the Arab narrative NEVER GONNA AGREE ON THIS!!
Other than that, I think bbc radio 4′s news coverage is the best I’ve heard. Truly superlative, favourites being Webb, Davis, Mair. Don’t like Humphreys. Jury out on Peston, but he is very sharp. NEVER LISTEN TO THEM
Question Time I loathe and the 9/11 coverage was a disgrace on a par with anything they’ve done. AGREE 100%
seems you have more in common with biased-bbc than you might think!!
Indeed.
I think I just had an out of body experience.
Agreed, I don’t see anything implying the Israelis want to kill children this time. But it would be nice if the BBC spent more time focusing on the use of children as human shields and trump cards. It would lessen the stigma against Israel, and cause the BBC to receive complaints, but it’s still a valid issue to discuss. If, that is, children’s lives are more important than the cause.
When I tuned into PM tonight it was straight into BBC reporter interviews with parents of child victims – Palestinian, that is.
SKY was as bad, and even the wife & kids over breakfast were swaying my way on pulling the DD and, to stay legal, the SKY sub too.
As far as they seemed concerned, ‘the bloodshed started’ with the targeted obliteration of a hostile, enemy military commander, as if the roman candles being set off in the vague direction the other way did not draw the same human, or infant fluid if they actually manage to arrive anywhere near anything. And Hamas ‘responded’ to air strikes. Er… what was going on before? Was it ‘another time’ in media bubble world again?
The moral relativism of MSM ‘proportionality’ is beyond a joke now. It’s like that Star Trek episode where equal numbers of two warring factions are required to walk into a vapouriser equally based on a computer analysis of how many on each side died.
To keep it nice and ‘clean’.
No BBC….NO SKY… war is a dirty, horrible business; not an episode of the X Factor where if those you like falter you rig the phone-in.
Hamas is a bunch of nutters.
Supported by a bunch of crooks and nutters in Iran, Syria, Egypt, Libya and all the way up to half of if not more of the UN with axes to grind.
You can’t negotiate, and if they can’t behave, to survive, you remove the threat. As with the Falklands. Not so well being carried out via Blair’s War still.
So showing scum supporting scum behind podia means zippy.
Hilariously, they even got all excited that Hamas was rushing around saying… ‘now you’ve gone too far, and you’re really for it!’.
I rather suspect that the Israelis have sussed that turning the cheek in the style of the BBC, Hague, Cameron, The Graun, Labour, the TUC the Coop and most points West means allowing these unchecked psychos start at the bared neck (or buttock end if proffered in submission vs. Braveheart styly) and work their way up until they reach something that does real damage… in the BBC’s case certainly not the brain.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Taste_of_Armageddon
News International’s ownership is embedded in Arab/Muslim world.
Sky/News International’s second largest shareholder is Saudi:
Al-Waleed bin Talal.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Waleed_bin_Talal
This year Sky launched ‘Sky News Arabia’:
“BSkyB launches Sky News Arabia”
By Martin Chulov.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2012/may/06/bskyb-launches-sky-news-arabia
Also:
“Sky News Arabia”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sky_News_Arabia
The real scandal is both sides not talking to resolve this after 60 odd years. As a lifelong supporter of the right of an Israeli state to exist, I despair that the right wing agenda now makes any serious debate impossible. So Hamas are terrorists. So were the Stern gang.
Some lessons from history don’t need to be learnt the hard way.
Also its normal in any news report to say were the source of the information comes from. Hence the constant addition to Syria footage that it is unverified.
Hardly bias but proper objective reporting.
Can you tell us, prole, old chap, when the next elections in Gaza are scheduled to occur?
‘…both sides not talking to resolve this after 60 odd years‘.
Camp David?
I tend to keep off the subject of Israel as I always feel I don’t know enough to make informed comment. But I do seem to remember Israel giving some land over to the Palestinians, and it was less than 60 years ago unless my counting skills have deserted me. That must have involved talks, or were they attaching messages to their rockets? Could someone remind me how that worked out?
Well in 2005 Israel withdrew its troops from Gaza and the U.S. had to give the Gaza Arabs a second chance, providing them with new greenhouses to replace the Gush Katif originals they demolished.
In 2005, as Israel withdrew its troops from Gaza and forcibly removed the Jewish residents of the area, a group of Jewish American donors came together to ensure that the famed Israeli greenhouses that produced $200 million of produce per year would not go to waste. The greenhouses were purchased for $14 million – much of it provided by the Gates Foundation – and turned over to Gaza Arabs.
But within hours of the withdrawal, many of the buildings had been damaged beyond repair. Terrorists and looters stripped them of their piping and electronic equipment and tore down their walls. Some greenhouses remained, several of which were destroyed in a second round of looting in 2006.
Now Gaza Arabs are going to get a second chance to try to recreate the thriving greenhouses of Gush Katif. The United States Agency for International Development is to sponsor a project termed Family Agricultural Greenhouses, which will construct three new greenhouses.
USAID hopes the three greenhouses will support 900 families in the Hamas-run Gaza region.
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/139012#.UKT9huS6dc0
Curiously, the BBC forgot to mention that last week when they did that story on starving Gazans having to grow food on their rooftops. Can’t imagine why. Probably down to sclerotic management structure.
The arabs do not ‘do’ farming, they are nomads, goat herders. They turned a green and productive N Africa into a desert again post BC 636, and the Med became full of slave ships instead of trade ships. They are a complete waste of space, and with their death cult called Islam, look set to lay waste to Europe, with the help of the Left, and our very own fifth columnists, the BBC……….
Silly me, wine effects, should be AD 636, god forbid we have had an extra 636 years of that nonsense!
It’s actually pretty simple. If Hamas stopped firing rockets , or other groups launching mortars, or tourists getting blown up on buses, then Israel would have no need to strike back! They really do not want to live in conflict.
I was in Israel a few weeks ago. I spoke to Arab-Israelis as well as Jewish-Israelis. They’re all immensely proud of their country and what they’ve achieved. It was striking how well they seemed to live among each other. The Muslims were happy as Larry being able to make a good living.
Crossing the wall into Palestinian-controlled areas is a bit like crossing to the Wild West. There is a definite unease. I wonder whether they’re jealous of their fellow Muslims making a go of it in Israel. It’s also interesting to see the murals on the Palestinian side of the wall, all in English and definitely designed to appeal to the camas rather than the locals.
Sure, but the BBC will tell you that Hamas is justified in firing those rockets so long as the Israeli siege in place. That’s the beginning and the end of it. Also, Hamas has no control whatsoever of all those other naughty people. If only Israel wasn’t such a bully and would, as people like prole suggest, sit down and for once talk it through….
To exist where? In the Med? Plus you know very well that Hagganah were by far the biggest resistance organisation, not the tiny Stern gang – and if you tried to find out a bit about the Deir Yassin “atrocity”, you’d discover it had been infiltrated by Arab terrorists. Doesn’t quite fit the nazi in denial mindset, does it? You’ll be saying Christians are safer in the West Bank than their counterparts in Israel next.
BBC News 24 12:10 reporter Ben repeatedly refering to the 200 Hamas rockets which had been fired since the Israeli assasination of the Hamas military leader, repeatedly giving the FALSE impression that no rockets had been fired before, and the rockets were therefore a justified response to Israeli aggression. Just incompetent? Or disingenuous?
economical with the truth
in this case a 50% Saving
Just containing enough of the truth to plant a lying innuendo on the trusting public?
Gosh, where have I seen that media method used recently?
800 rockets so far this year.
I meant they only tell half the story-ie just what happens after those nasty jooz brutally attack gaza
Yes, but they were only tiny little ones.
Standard Fireworks have a lot to answer for.
If you are expecting (or hoping) to find bias in a report about the Gaza strip, you will find it. This strikes me as a totally even-handed bit of reporting.
The current main headline on the site is ‘Gaza Rocket Fire Kills Israelis’. The report details the suffering of Israelis, including the death of several children. William Hague’s comments placing the blame at the door of Hamas are prominently featured and quoted at length.
If Sky was ‘as bad’, I would suggest that a more accurate representation of the situation is that those of you who think that it was skewed have a particular agenda and are incapable of understanding that balance entails trying to present a picture of events that does not favour either side unduly.
On this specific issue (as opposed to UK politics) it is worth noting that there are as many websites complaining that BBC coverage is too pro-Israeli as there are complaining the opposite.
yeah
dear forbid that anybody would ever deem to say that Israel has a right to exist
that alone qualifies them in some eyes to be too pro Israel
See my comment above on the BBC TV news report at 12:10 today that repeatedly tried to give the impression that the Hamas rockets were only fired in retaliation for the Jabari strike ( Instead of the truth which is the exact inverse : Jabari was assasinated in retaliation for hundreds of rockets fired EARLIER this week – BEFORE any Israeli action )
what really pishes me off is the way anti Israel protestors are allowed to denegrate that country as aggressors,imperialists,terrorists…….but they’re not “anti jewish”
contrast this with some like mardell for example
his beloved obamessiah gets a thick end of a bit of criticism and the detractors are “obviously racist”
hypocrites
‘On this specific issue (as opposed to UK politics) it is worth noting that there are as many websites complaining that BBC coverage is too pro-Israeli as there are complaining the opposite.
Publication of Balen imminent, in that case.
We know the BBC gets complaints from both sides on this (and all other issues). It’s a standard defense for them. But without being allowed to see what they are, we all have to take their word that one side or the other isn’t mostly unfairly extreme charges.
For example, if the vast majority of complaints that the BBC is anti-Israel were just people saying that any reporting on Israel which includes a criticism of the country is evidence of the Corporation being a pawn of Islamic Jihad, and that even the tiniest negative report is evidence of deliberate anti-Semitism because it doesn’t declare that the Palestinians are 100% genocidal maniacs who would put Hitler to shame, while the other side is mostly thoughtful, nuanced analyses of how the BBC sometimes fails to present the Palestinian side fairly, then it would be pretty obvious which side had a valid claim.
My first question would be which side has more complaints claiming that the BBC is controlled by some paranormal faction.
Without knowing the quality of the complaints, it’s impossible to tell. Because the BBC is protected from revealing this stuff, we’ll never know, and they can continue to use that defense with impunity.
I just despair at the ignorance of people like prole who post “Why won’t they talk?”. Israel talks but gets no response except violence.
There could have been a Palestinian stae in 1937, 1948, 2000 and again with the Olmert peace plan in 2009. In 2009 Palestinians would have got almost everything they wanted. But they still walked away.
As Abba Eban once said “The Palestinians never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity”.
nothing to “talk” about … pallywood has made its decision … it will have to live with the consequences.
just like if dozens of bombs landed in london …
the talking is over!
one thing that should happen, abbas s snide duplicitous B/S, should be kicked into touch at the UN, and have his arsed kicked all the way back to Mecca
Camp David negotiations, 2000:
‘The Israeli and American negotiators put forth ideas regarding borders, Jerusalem, and land transfers. One of those was a Palestinian state comprised of four cantons. Arafat rejected these suggestions, but did not raise a single idea himself. Ben-Ami, who kept meticulous diaries of the proceedings, said that Clinton exploded at the Palestinians over their refusal to make a counteroffer. “‘A summit’s purpose,’ Clinton said, ‘is to have discussions that are based on sincere intentions and you, the Palestinians, did not come to this summit with sincere intentions.’ Then he got up and left the room.” According to Ben-Ami, Israel tried to find a solution for Jerusalem that would be “a division in practice…that didn’t look like a division;” that is, Israel was willing to compromise on the issue, but needed a face-saving formula. The Palestinians, however, had no interest in helping the Israelis; to the contrary, they wanted to humiliate them.” Nevertheless, Ben-Ami said Israel dropped its refusal to divide Jerusalem and accepted “full Palestinian sovereignty” on the Temple Mount and asked the Palestinians only to recognize the site was also sacred to Jews.[1a]
Arafat’s only contribution was the assertion that, in reality, no Jewish Temple ever existed on the Temple Mount, only an obelisk; the real Temple existed in Nablus, he said. Not only did he not make any accommodation to Israel, Ross said, “he denied the core of the Jewish faith.” [2] This stunning remark illustrated how Arafat had become caught up in the mythology he had created and indicated to the Americans that he was incapable of the psychological leap necessary — the one Anwar Sadat had made — to achieve peace. As a result, President Clinton’s press conference following the summit laid most of the blame for the outcome on Arafat.’
What’s’ ignorant about wanting a peaceful solution? As a Christian that is always the default position. Blowing up kids by either side and thinking it resolves anything is true ignorance
I think the point, Prole, is you should look beyond the BBC’s version of history. It’s amazing you thought there had been no discussions between the two sides for 60 years, and I wonder if you are similarly oblivious of the 3 Arab-Israeli wars since the state of Israel was established (including the Arab states’ intention of wiping them off the face of the earth within 24 hours of that establishment).
The BBC’s lack of historical context to the conflict and to Israel’s relationships with other states in the region is a constant reminder of their bias.
Jeremy Bowen has been on BBC News at One giving what passes in his mind for “analysis”. He also made the partisan-loaded statement that Egyptians don’t like “what Israelis do to Palestinians, especially in Gaza” – had he said “Egyptians are highly sympathetic to Palestinians ” or something of that sort it would have been a neutral statement.
Bowen really should try to bone up on the facts:
http://daphneanson.blogspot.co.uk/2012/11/the-bbcs-jeremy-bowen-wrongly-claims.html
the first for letter of that word are right
“anal”
that’s what he talks out of
Bowen is partially correct about Egypt, even if he’s typically dishonest about the rockets. Of course he’s going to play it as Israel being the villain in all cases, rather than anyone else sharing blame, as he has a personal bias against them (hard to believe any other major news organization would allow someone with such a personal trauma to continue as their top man commenting on the cause of it).
The Muslim Brotherhood knows all about the visceral Jew-hatred that has been growing among Egyptian youth over the last few years. Indeed, they exploited it last year when Mubarak was sent out the door. We heard lots of vox pops about how a major reason they hated Mubarak was that he kept the peace with Israel. All understood with a wink and a nudge.
The MB will exploit this hatred to their advantage. They know Hamas is a pain in the ass, and that there are even worse actors running around in Gaza. But the MB bosses also hate the existence of Israel, and will be happy to help destabilize if they see an opportunity. They know the UN, Russia, China, and most of Europe will not particularly side with Israel if Egypt and Syria go to war with them. Not sure yet how the Egyptian generals feel about it, though.
Israel will not be found wanting in terms of defence. As happened before, their response can be awesome in its effectiveness.
Excellent find, Daphne.
Shoddy Newsnight-style journalism by Bowen?
RedWhiteandBlue will enlighten us, hopefully.
“RedWhiteandBlue will enlighten us, hopefully.”
I seriously doubt it
I haven’t seen the offending report so can’t comment, but if it as Daphne says, I don’t demur. But the article David criticises above is strikingly impartial as far as I’m concerned.
Israel will only take so much when they decide to hurt Hamas then it will be put up or shut up for weak countries to give Israel a hand or not.
HuffPost UK @HuffPostUK
Omar Misharawi, 11-Month-Old Baby Of BBC Worker Jihad Is Buried After He Was Killed Gaza City Strike http://huff.to/T3nqkI
With all due condolences to the family whose innocent child seems to have been near a place of armed conflict, I do confess to first managing a double take as to what a ‘BBC Worker Jihad’ might be.
‘BBC Foreign Editor Jon Williams this morning tweeted an image of the tragedy’
Classy.
That would, of course, have been my first thought if a colleague had suffered a tragic loss… no propaganda thoughts at all.
One for the family album later, though?
I remember during the 2006 war against Hezbullah,I got the impression Lyse Doucet deliberately slurred the name of the Lebanese finance minister, when thanking him, after an interview, presumably because she was a bit embarrassed that his name was Jihad – and she thought, somehow, it might give viewers an impression or cultural clue as to the real name of the game that is going on in the Middle East. They don’t seem to care any more.
Apparently Jihad is the picture editor for the BBC’s Gaza bureau (I wouldn’t be surprised if he was a dab hand at photoshopping). Jon Donnison, our man on the spot, on PM is anxious to tell us that Jihad’s son was a killed in a civilian neighbourhood and there were no ‘militants’ near by. Of course not – everyone knows it’s been Israeli practice to despatch missiles at complete random into any civilian area within range, for years.
The clear intention of the piece was to make out Israel indiscriminately shell civilian areas.
The BBC had to swallow a big lump of gristle today….Hague blamed Hamas for starting this latest outbreak of violence.
However when Jeremy Bowen rolled into town you just knew he wouldn’t disappoint as he never fails to meet my lowest expectations of his reporting…..he managed to get this phrase into his brief statement:
‘Israel is doing very, very bad things to Palestinians.’
Bowen…a national treasure….might be a Palestinian national treasure….but a national treasure for sure.
he’s an utter lowlife scumbag
and that,dear friends, are his better points
Hmmm……well overdue for a stray bullet…….
Oh dear-do I need a reset?
I ask because I had my best anti-BBC antennae ready for Newsnight last night.
Gavin Esler was talking to Tim Whewell about the “situation” in the Middle East following the Hamas nutjobs despatch to the land of 70 grapes…blow me, if it turned out to be fair and reasonable.
Tim seemed to be that rare bird-a proper journalist at Newsnight.
Tell me it ain`t so friends…I went to bed thanking Savile and MacAlpine for dealing with the BBCs bias for a few days….was I wrong?
Could it be…..possibly…..sounds too far-fetched….but just maybe…
Biased BBC is working.
Indeed. I wrote about this yesterday morning. Only interview was with an Israeli minister, so slanted the Israeli way if anything.
Sunny Hundal @sunny_hundal
I see Israel’s learned from last time, when invading Gaza brought about peace… http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-20336811 … #sarcasm
High on the [sarc] there Sunny; low on the historical precedents. What’s a few Doodlebugs amongst BFF’s?
‘I have in my hands a BBC report form Gaza, that says… peace in our time (sources say). Now, here’s a quick video presentation’
BBC headline at the moment is ‘Gaza missiles fired at Tel Aviv’. While I admire the fact they seem to be reporting on rocket attacks for a change, there is no evidence (unless the BBC were actually firing the missiles which isn’t completely impossible) that they were aimed at Tel Aviv. The IDF denies this and no rockets have landed anywhere near Tel Aviv. So what is the point of this headline? It’s just a lie! Are they trying to strike terror into the hearts of Israelis in the north of the country as well as the south?
Hm, evidence is mounting that rockets are landing close to Tel Aviv. Forgive my previous post.
if any do land on tel aviv,expect major repercussions and ever bigger bbc lies
“I have just been reading the latest bulletin from the Hamas Propaganda Bureau – sorry, I mean of course the BBC – who inform us that……”
so writes Peter Mullen, opening his blog article in today’s Telegraph:
‘Israel has every right to take action against the relentless terror meted out to its civilian population’
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/petermullen/100189845/israell-has-every-right-to-take-action-against-the-relentless-terror-meted-out-to-its-civilian-population/
Bearing in mind this piece today from Honest Reporting
Exposed: Pallywood Returns to Gaza
The BBC is also reporting that the 11 month old son of one of their BBC Arabic picture editors based in Gaza was killed in an Israeli air strike. The man brings his child wrapped in a shroud out on to the street where he is surrounded by a crowd, and conveniently, a reporter with cameras and microphone to get his story. His response is dramatically ‘What did my son do to die like this?’ Which the BBC use as the emotive headline.
The interview can be seen here
Is this what a father does just after his child has been killed?
Where’s the mother?
Since Israel drops warning leaflets before airstrikes on civilian areas where rocket bases are located, why was he and his son still there?
Could he be ‘editing pictures’ for the effect he wants to produce?
A man who takes his job to heart. He must have heard about Entwistle getting the boot for not doing his job well and he decided he’d better pull up his socks.
Quote from Marcus Tullius Cicero
“A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murderer is less to fear. The traitor is the plague
Superb. Cicero he da man as they say.
Excellent, Earls.