The BBC Continues To Lie About History And Censor Calls For Ethnic Cleansing

Apologies for the lengthy title, but there are two issues here which need to be covered, and I’m combining them into one post. First, the BBC’s continued attempts to lie and rewrite history.

Q&A: Palestinian statehood bid at the UN

Most people here will know exactly what’s coming, and I know this has been covered here many times before, but it’s even more important to call the BBC out on it now because of the looming UN fight over creating a State of Palestine. For the benefit of those who don’t know the BBC’s bias about the “West Bank”, here’s the map they use to explain history to the public:

Notice on the left, the BBC is claiming that there was such a thing as the West Bank (i.e. Palestinian) Territory before the 1967 war. They’ve just erased a chunk of Jordan from history. As we all know, that was part of Jordan at the time, a country at war with Israel. Why else would Israel have invaded? This map indoctrinates the public with PLO propaganda, that Israel invaded sovereign Palestinian territory. Your license fee is being used to promote false history and anti-Israel propaganda.

Reality, on the other hand, is not Israeli propaganda. This map of Jordan – from a non-partisan source – and environs showing the borders during part of the 1967 war in question is fact, not fiction:

Notice the clear border lines of Jordan encompass the area about which the BBC is lying. Yes, I am accusing BBC News Online of telling a lie. I don’t care what some Beeboids personally believe about nasty old Israel’s land grab or the plight of the poor Palestinians or anything else. This is historical fact, and the BBC is lying about it. How can there be an honest Q&A about the topic when one of the answers is a lie? Until they remove that first map and replace it with an honest one, my accusation will stand.

Needless to say, this propaganda demonizes Israel in the minds of the public. Most people are seriously uninformed about the facts of Israel and 1967 and the “Palestinian Territories”. When one tries to explain the facts to get past the emotions, one is then accused of spouting Israeli propaganda. This is how the BBC’s editorial policy and style guide is blatantly biased, causing them to demonize Israel at every opportunity, although the BBC disputes this.

It’s impossible to have a civil discussion, national or otherwise, about the situation when the national broadcaster promotes propaganda for one side and demonizes the other. This then promotes anti-Jewish sentiment, but that’s a topic for another time.

Now for the BBC Censorship angle. Last week, Maen Rashid Areikat, the Palestinian ambassador to the US, said that there should be no Jews in a State of Palestine:

“Well, I personally still believe that as a first step we need to be totally separated, and we can contemplate these issues in the future,” he said when asked by The Daily Caller if he could imagine a Jew being elected mayor of the Palestinian city of Ramallah in a future independent Palestinian state. “But after the experience of 44 years of military occupation and all the conflict and friction, I think it will be in the best interests of the two peoples to be separated first.”

Actually, this isn’t the first time we’ve heard about their desire for a Judenfrei Palestine. He said the same thing a year ago. Not only that, PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas said the same thing last year, and went further:

Almost no notice was taken of another pre talks decision that the PA chairman revealed, as he announced clearly that if a Palestinian Authority state is created in Judea and Samaria, no Israeli citizen will be allowed to set foot inside.The PA chairman also stated that he would block any Jewish soldiers from serving with an international force stationed on PA-controlled land.

“I will never allow a single Israeli to live among us on Palestinian land,” Abbas declared.

Judenfrei, Judenrein. And the BBC has steadfastly censored all of this. Justin Webb didn’t bring it up to the feckless Lord Levy on Today, it doesn’t feature in any BBC News Online report about Israel or the Palestinians, and it hasn’t been mentioned anywhere else on the BBC. If someone can show me one single example of it, I’ll post it here, shocked but grateful.

Without the truth and all the facts, it’s impossible to have a rational debate and reasonable understanding of the situation. Yet the BBC actively prevents that, promoting propaganda for one side, rewrites history, and censors the Palestinians’ desire for ethnic cleansing.

ADDENDUM: Here’s Katty Kay interviewing US Ambassador to the UN, Susan Rice, in which Katty states uncategorically that only Bibi Netanyahu is the problem, and Amb. Rice corrects here. No surprise that this is Katty’s belief as she recently tweeted to her followers that this New York Magazine article – which blames Netanyahu and uncritical, “steadfast” support for Israel in the US Congress as the only obstacles to peace – is All you need to know about the frosty relationship between Barack and Bibi.”

Why, it’s almost as if there’s a groupthink on this issue extending across the spectrum of the BBC.


In ancient Rome, augurs were a special class of priest who foretold the future by examining the flight patterns and sounds of birds. I quote from wiki:

Only some species of birds (aves augurales) could yield valid signs whose meaning would vary according to the species. Among them were ravens, woodpeckers, owls, oxifragae, eagles. Signs from birds were divided into alites, from the flight, and oscines, from the voice. The alites included region of the sky, height and type of flight, behaviour of the bird and place where it would rest. The oscines included the pitch and direction of the sound. Since the observation was complex conflict among signs was not uncommon.

The BBC now has its own very augur in Richard Black, whose brief is a bit wider and adapted to the religion of climate change. His technique is to scour selectively special journals (rather than the sky), and find stories from “researchers” about creatures that are doing strange or different things. He then grandiloquently pronounces what will happen in future: a message from on high.

His topic today is crustaceans in the Palmer basin off the west Antarctic penninsula. Already, Mr Black has augured that this ice is disastrously melting. Now, it seems, “researchers” have found that the area has been invaded by 1.5m king crabs. Woe! Doom! He solemnly intones they are doing what king crabs do – voraciously scoffing other marine creatures – but this, he warns, is a very bad sign. It will cause “profound damage” to the ecosystem because verily, they are nasty invaders that can only survive because of the catastrophic warming.

The snag with augury, of course, was that it was a whole belief system based on a few snippets of truth. Some birds do gather before a storm – but their behaviour is much more complex than that. In exactly the same way, Mr Black – in his haste to spread alarm – ignores the key facts. The Antarctic is not getting significantly warmer.


Another depth plumbed by BBC science reporting. A warmist fanatic – in this case Alun Hubbard, a glaciologist whose self-declared mission is to confirm his fanaticism – has now only to say that he’s “gob-smacked” about the extent of ice loss for it to make a website lead story. Never mind that there is huge controversy about the causes of glacier melt in Greenland, and never mind that many experts suggest it is triggered by nothing more sinister than natural variability. I am not sure under which category of scientific measurement you will find the gob-smacking technique, but clearly for the BBC, any form of panic-mongering will now do. Especially if it’s from one of its regular warmist pimps, as Dr Hubbard clearly is.


This latest exercise in naked partisanship by Richard Black has already been noted by B-BBC readers, but I was away yesterday and could not let it go without further comment. What it shows is that Mr Black is now such a fanatical propagandist that he is avidly snapping up any chance he can to rubbish the views of those who dare to disagree with him. The reality of the “story” – puffed up to be lead item on the warmist section of the BBC website – is that the editor of an alarmist science journal resigned after readers ganged up on him and told him that he had published a report that gave too much credence to evidence from dreaded sceptics which suggests more heat escapes from the earth into space than warmists say.

The guts of the situation – as is explained here – is that the editor appears himself to be a spineless propagandanist who has caved in, despite the powerful evidence contained in the paper. But as pounce_uk has already astutely noted, the key part of Mr Black’s predictably haughty, patronising put down of the offending research is the caption of Dr Roy Spencer, one of the joint authors:

Dr Spencer is a committed Christian as well as a professional scientist.

That, of course, to the BBC is the ultimate insult. He might as well have called him by the n* word. In the BBC lexicon, utter contempt is meant by such a description. To me, this marks a new low – the descent into a vicious, Inquisition-style vendetta against all who dare to challenge the alarmist orthodoxy. The gloves are off.


I caught this item earlier today but only have the chance to comment on it now. In essence, yet again, the BBC is spouting more pro-environmental extremism clap-trap and using it to have a go at President Bush. It uses the tag that US “environmentalists” have accused President George W Bush of trying to rush through changes to the Endangered Species Act in his last days in office. These moonbats say the changes could take away protection for animals and plants facing possible extinction. The Bush administration says it wants to make it easier for drilling, mining and major construction projects to go ahead without a full scientific assessment.The BBC says that Bush has already been criticised by environmentalists for adding fewer than 10 species of plant and animals a year to the endangered list. That contrasts with former President Bill Clinton, who added an average of 65 species a year. Aw, how they must miss the degenerate Clinton