Pounce originally came up with these figures in the comments and I was reminded of them by Is the BBC biased?:
Analysis Of Gazans Killed So Far In Operation Protective Edge
From their figures, and I haven’t looked at the source myself, it looks like the Palestinian casualties are 14% male under fighting age (up to 17), 18% women, 6% male over age (over 60) and the bulk being 61% of male fighting age…up to 60 years old.
So when the BBC reports ‘X’ number of Palestinians have been killed…just how many are in fact Hamas fighters or commanders?
The figures of course are changing as time goes on and more operations take place but the BBC’s blanket use of the simplistic and misleading description ‘Palestinians’ for casualties feeds into the Hamas narrative and is a highly emotive way of wording their reports…note how in contrast the BBC is very careful to emphasise how many Israeli casualties are ‘military’…
Twenty Israelis – 18 of them soldiers – have died, Israel says, as it seeks to end rocket fire on the country.
Over 500 Palestinians, mainly civilians, have been killed since the Israeli offensive began two weeks ago, Gaza’s health ministry says.
The BBC has absolutely no proof of a casualty’s status…it is relying, as it says, on the Palestinians own figures. Are they likely to be truthful? ‘Mainly civilians’.…at present that is pure propaganda but the BBC doesn’t seem to be too bothered about the truth at the moment.
Any civilian casualty is a terrible thing but the BBC’s pretence that nearly all casualties are civilian when they fail to differentiate between the status of the various victims makes the BBC part of Hamas’ ‘human shield’ ploy….a cynical charade that the BBC turns a blind eye to.
I don’t think there can be any doubt whose side the BBC takes in this war.
Hamas guide for social activists.
The guide, titled Be Aware – Social Media Activist Awareness Campaign, gives a wide range of tips on how to push the Hamas viewpoint. Tips include comparing Israel to the Nazis and ensuring that all casualties are viewed as “innocent civilians” who are victims of Israeli aggression.
The guide also encourages different messages to the Arab world and to the West:
The narrative of life vs. the narrative of blood: [When speaking] to an Arab friend, start with the number of martyrs. [But when speaking] to a Western friend, start with the number of wounded and dead. Be sure to humanize the Palestinian suffering. Try to paint a picture of the suffering of the civilians in Gaza and the West Bank during the occupation’s operations and its bombings of cities and villages.
I keep asking myself is the BBC knowingly reporting using the Hamas play-book; is it instinctual and they would do it anyway or is it a coincidence?
I don’t think it’s an accident. It wouldn’t even suprise me if some of their ’embeds’ helped write it!
The BBC gleefully report that the UN…and no doubt, the USA, the EU, the Arab League and all the usual reflex oafs in the Coalition of the Stupid are telling Israel to take more care in protecting Gazas “citizens”.
They never ask the same of Hamas though-why ever not?
Why aren`t Hamas ever brought to book about their role in allowing their citizens to be sacrificed as telegenically-enhanced corpses for the worlds liberal media?
The BBCs deadlines seem to require it…
I think you’re being VERY generous saying 17 is the ‘fighting’ age: think of the many pictures, produced with pride by Hamas etc themselves and I think you’ll realise that 14-15 is the probable real ‘fighting age(and even that is generous – we know elsewhere in the world especially Africa children as young as 10 etc are armed and dangerous. )
Of course it goes without saying that anyone under 18 is ‘a child’ to the BBC. Unless they’re white UK ‘thugs’, IDF soldiers or similar.
Given the multicultural world view of the Beeb, isn’t there a cognitive dissonance in this?
Why do they avoid Hamas’ own definition of a fighting age, 14/15 upwards, and instead impose their own Western definition of 18 unpwards?
Yes, simplifying it myself…but I didn’t have a breakdown for 15-17 year olds who are, as you say, just as likely to be taking up arms….but it still illustrates the probability that the majority of males, and indeed casualties, could be fighters and not ‘innocent’ civilians.
Israel regrets killing civilians and tries to avoid it. Whether that’s pragmatism, morality, both or neither is irrelevant. Hamas is different.
Hamas’ anger and frustration is understandable, but they could stop this. As in Northern Ireland it only needs one side to stop fighting and then peace happens.
israel not only regrets killing civilians, they go out of there damm way to inform the civilian population to vacate areas where hamas are firing there scud missiles and grad rockets at schools,hospitals and childrens playgrounds in israel.lets get real here,over the border in iraq isis have took over iraq and we all know what horrors are going on there now,what israel are doing is sending a clear message to isis in iraq we are an army does not run away and if you mess with us you will get the same treatment with interest that the hamas terrorists are getting at the moment,we should be commending israel and the idf for taking on there hamas terrorists enemy and destroying them in a fight to the end,simple as that.
Regards that shelling on that Gaza Hospital. which the bBC is bigging up here is a picture from Al Jazeera of where and what was hit:
and here is the actual Tweet:
Not quite the Hospital dorm is it?
Seems unlikely that triage or bed-blocking counting was being carried out from the highest vantage point in the building. One has to wonder what may have attracted such (evidently very targeted) fire?
Every newspaper needs a daily chart showing Casualties Caused by Muslim Intolerance. It would need a logarithmic scale in comparison of course, and the Beeb would never dare show it.