BBC News website silent on Labour PPC suspension over anti-Israel Tweets

The Sunday Times, the Independent, the Mirror, the Express and the Jewish Chronicle have all reported over the last couple of days that a prospective Parliamentary candidate for the British Labour Party has been suspended following a series of offensive anti-Israel Tweets. Even Ha’aretz, the Jerusalem Post and Press TV are carrying the story.

And the BBC? Well, nothing on the topic currently appears on the BBC News website page devoted to the county in which Vicki Kirby’s prospective constituency is located.

Website Surrey

Neither does a report on the matter appear on the website’s England page or UK page.

Website England

Website UK

There is plenty of coverage of the ongoing Labour Party conference in Manchester (to which Kirby was apparently en route when she was informed of her suspension) on the website’s dedicated UK Politics page, but no mention of a PPC selected by a mainstream British political party who obviously felt that it was acceptable to publicly use a Nazi analogy and to declare that she would ensure that her grandchildren learned “how evil Israel is”.

Website UK politics

Interesting…. 

Source of the BBC’s three 2013 Iron Dome reports gets cosy with a Holocaust denier

h/t Adam Holland Twitter

On July 10th 2014 – soon after the commencement of Operation Protective Edge – the BBC News website’s Middle East page included an article by diplomatic correspondent Jonathan Marcus in its ‘Features & Analysis’ section which was titled “What weapons are being used in the Israel-Gaza conflict“. In that article, Marcus wrote:Marcus 10 7

“As important in determining Israel’s strategic outlook as its offensive operations is the reliance that it places on missile defence – the Iron Dome system – to defend its civilian population. Indeed, as long as it is successful it is a powerful factor in crisis limitation. […]

Israel rigorously guards detailed data on Iron Dome’s performance. Its earlier use has prompted some debate among experts on its seemingly extraordinary success rate. But whatever the basic data, the evidence from its use suggests that it is having a significant effect in preventing Israeli casualties.”

The link inserted by Marcus leads to an earlier article he wrote in March 2013 promoting the claims of MIT professor Theodore (Ted) Postol which was discussed on these pages at the time. Jonathan Marcus did not like our post concerning his report and chose to respond in the comments section, informing us that:

“The report on Ted Postol’s work (with two other scientists cited) first ran in Ha’aretz. I saw this but waited until I had a chance to speak to Postol – who despite your rather nasty insinuations, is a highly respected scientist with a distinguished track record in this field. You will remember that he correctly questioned the performance of the initial Patriot system in the war to liberate Kuwait. His concerns about Iron Dome certainly merits an airing rather than criticism.”

Six weeks after the appearance of Marcus’ report – in April 2013 – the BBC Jerusalem Bureau’s Kevin Connolly produced two additional reports on the same topic promoting the same claims advanced by Postol.

Well now it appears that Jonathan Marcus’ “highly respected scientist” has found a new outlet via which to promote his theories.Iron Dome

Towards the end of August 2014 Ted Postol gave two interviews to a person named Ryan Dawson who uploaded them to his Youtube channel which is titled ANC Report – “Anti-neocon Report”. In the first of those interviews Postol again promotes his claims regarding the Iron Dome (as well as his opinions on Israel in general and American domestic politics) and in the second he takes issue (as he has before) with the fact that the Syrian regime used chemical weapons against civilians in Damascus in August 2013. Both interviews provide very revealing insight into Postol’s political views – and his motivations.

So who is the person with whom this “highly respected scientist” agreed to chat in such a chummy manner for an hour and a half? Adam Holland has more details on Ryan – or Ry – Dawson.

“The man behind the podcast promoting those videos, Ryan Dawson, has for over a decade used the internet to spread some pretty horrid ideas: ideas about Jews making up or exaggerating crimes committed by Nazi Germany, ideas about Israel carrying out the 9/11 attacks, even claims that the Jewish religion sanctions pedophilia, rape and ritual murder. Dawson has made clever use of the free publicity-generating possibilities provided by social media to promote some of the worst forms bigotry and conspiracy theories. On Facebook, he does this under the name “antizionist”. He’s “Anti-neocon,” “Super anti-neocon” or just “ANC” for his blog, web-forum and his podcast, the “ANC Report”.”

Perhaps Jonathan Marcus would be kind enough to tell us in the comments below whether he thinks it appropriate for the BBC to still be promoting on its website the bizarre claims of someone who collaborates with a known antisemitic Holocaust denier?  

 

 

BBC’s WHYS promotes Gaza interviewee with a penchant for antisemitic imagery

The BBC – its funding public is told – “aspires to remain the standard-setter for international journalism” and to ensure that its audiences “remain informed about world events”.WHYS main

Recently it has become apparent that BBC editors are of the opinion that those aspirations are served by providing audiences with commentary on current affairs from a teenager qualified with nothing more than a Twitter account.

Whilst it may be difficult to imagine that the BBC would deem commentary from such a source likely make any serious contribution to meeting its public purpose remit of informing audiences about British defence policy, in a certain part of the Middle East anything goes.

The August 26th edition of the BBC World Service radio programme ‘World Have Your Say’ purported to discuss what it described as the “Gaza Truce” as though nothing at all has happened in neighbouring Israel during the past 50 days and more. Presenter Ben James hosted a number of interviewees during the programme (available here) including the BBC Jerusalem Bureau’s Kevin Connolly, the Jerusalem Post’s Lahav Harkov, Shoshanna JaskollDr Bassel Abu Warda of Shifa hospital and Xavier Abu Eid of the PLO’s Negotiations Affairs Department.WHYS stand alone item

But James’ star guest – and the one to which the programmes editors elected to devote a stand-alone item on their website – was Farah Baker; a sixteen year-old girl from Gaza City who has during the last seven weeks been extensively courted and promoted by the international media (including BBC Radio One’s ‘Newsbeat’ programme aimed at younger audiences) due to her activity on Twitter.

One might assume that before a potential interviewee whose only qualification for talking about international affairs is that she Tweets personal views was put on air, producers would take a look at the relevant Twitter account in order to check out what they were actually amplifying and promoting. Farah Baker Tweets under the handle @Farah_Gazan and in her profile uses an offensive comparison of herself to Anne Frank.

Farah Baker profile

 That is not a one-off theme.

Farah Baker AF comp

But Farah Baker’s Holocaust analogies do not end there. Perusal of her timeline shows that she uses the hashtag #shujaia_holocaust and her Tweets and Retweets indicate that the teenager feted and promoted by the Western media is rather fond of antisemitic imagery.

Farah Baker 2

Farah Baker 3

Farah Baker rt 1

Farah Baker rt 2

That obviously was not the cause of any concern to Ben James or his producers and unfortunately, past experience shows that should not come as much of a surprise to the rest of us. We have previously documented here the appearance of Nazi analogies and defamation on the ‘World Have Your Say’ Facebook wall despite the supposed existence of a moderation policy set out in ‘House Rules’.

The August 26th programme also invited listeners to comment on the WHYS Facebook account and below are some of the comments which still appear there at the time of writing.

WHYS FB 1

 

WHYS FB 2

WHYS FB 3

WHYS FB 4

This, licence fee payers may be dismayed to learn, is apparently what the BBC believes is ‘standard-setting’ journalism.

BBC News website promotes the anti-Israel defamation of a fringe racist group

Here’s an item with absolutely no news value which the BBC News website’s editors obviously wanted to make very sure that audiences did not miss.

An article titled “Holocaust survivors condemn Israel’s Gaza ‘genocide’” from the evening of August 23rd is basically nothing more than a collection of selected quotes from a statement put out by the small, extremist fringe group IJAN and reproduced (presumably in return for payment) in several newspapers.  Not only was that ‘article’ promoted in two separate locations on the website’s Middle East page, but a link to the statement was also placed in the day’s main article titled “Gaza conflict: Mahmoud Abbas urges fresh talks in Egypt“.

“In a separate development, more than 300 Jewish survivors of the Holocaust and descendants of survivors have issued a public statement condemning Israel’s action in Gaza.”

Holocaust survivors story on ME pge

IJAN’s raison d’être is its opposition to the existence of the world’s one and only Jewish state.  Its methodology includes the adoption of the halo of Holocaust survival as a means of conscripting supposed authority and moral superiority to its claims and statements. At the same time, it uses Holocaust inversion such as the example in this latest statement which – as reflected and promoted in the BBC’s headline – seeks to equate Israel with Nazi Germany by falsely claiming that it is carrying out “genocide”.

The BBC’s dismal record on recognizing and reporting antisemitism means that it comes as no surprise to find that two points which should be perfectly obvious to BBC editors unfortunately require clarification.

The denial of the Jewish people’s right to self-determination – as promoted by IJAN – is antisemitism even if it comes from people with some connection to Holocaust survival.

“Examples of the ways in which antisemitism manifests itself with regard to the State of Israel taking into account the overall context could include:

Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, e.g., by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor.”

The use of Nazi analogies is also antisemitism.Holocaust survivors story header

“Examples of the ways in which antisemitism manifests itself with regard to the State of Israel taking into account the overall context could include:

Drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis.”

The BBC knows full well that no “genocide” of the Palestinian people is taking place in Gaza or anywhere else and yet it promotes that defamatory falsehood both in its headline and in the body of its article (and no: the use of punctuation does not mitigate that editorial decision) without bothering to inform readers that the allegation has no basis.

“More than 300 Jewish survivors of the Holocaust and descendants of survivors have issued a public statement condemning Israel’s “genocide” of the Palestinian people in Gaza.”

Had a small, fringe racist organisation from, say, the far-Right of the British political map put an equivalent advert in a paper falsely accusing a certain ethnic or religious group of non-existent crimes against humanity we would (one trusts) be unlikely to see the BBC promoting and amplifying such defamatory incitement without comment or clarification of the inaccurate nature of the allegation.

“If we broadcast anything that harms the reputation of an individual, a group, or an organisation we may be sued for defamation. The risk exists whether the defamatory statements are scripted or spoken off the cuff. Subject to the defence of innocent dissemination (the “live defence”), the BBC can be liable, as broadcaster, regardless of who makes the defamatory comments.”

But when what is probably perceived as a far-Left racist organisation makes defamatory anti-Israel statements, the BBC News website promotes them with gusto. Whoever made that miserable editorial decision must be brought to account. 

BBC Breakfast’s Jenny Hill enables PSC antisemitism washing

Has the Western media’s chosen focus and style of coverage of the hostilities in Israel and the Gaza Strip contributed to the spike in recent antisemitic incidents in Europe in general and the UK in particular? That question could probably keep several doctoral students busy for quite some time, along with the equally relevant question of whether or not events in the Middle East actually foster antisemitism or if in fact racist reactions to those events are really the product of pre-existing antisemitic attitudes.

Here is a report produced by Jenny Hill of BBC Breakfast News on August 7th – “Gaza conflict: UK police record rise in anti-Semitism” – which edges audiences towards the view that it is the events themselves which cause antisemitism. Hill opens:Jenny Hill 7 8

“So many deaths. So much misery. A conflict whose consequences are felt worldwide.”

The item then cuts to an interview with the CST’s Mark Gardner, followed by other interviews with members of the Jewish community and then footage from a London demonstration with a speaker almost screaming:

“The death toll is increasing. It’s over sixteen hundred now. Most of them are young children.”

That latter claim is obviously not true but nevertheless, whoever edited this report elected to include it anyway and Hill follows that section of footage by saying:

“Of course there is tension.”

Her closing words clarify the message further:

“For now, difficult questions: how to stop what’s been described as an endless cycle of suffering. How to calm the hatred it engenders.”

Remarkable too is the fact that the report includes an interview with Hugh Lanning of the Palestine Solidarity Campaign – one of the organisers of several demonstrations in the UK during the last few weeks. Lanning says:

“We’re very clear that…err… antisemitism or any form of racism isn’t tolerated on any of our protests and actually be a distraction from the main purpose. Our opposition is to what the Israeli government with the support of the US and the UK government is doing and that’s where we want the focus to be.”

Leaving aside the issue that the PSC’s logo itself eradicates the one and only Jewish state from the map, the fact that the BBC provides Lanning with an unchallenged platform from which to airbrush the antisemitism which has been seen (not for the first time by any stretch of the imagination) at three London demonstrations it helped organise which took place prior to this interview is obviously a problem.

The picture below was taken by Richard Millett at the July 11th demonstration organized, inter alia, by the PSC.

London demo 11 7

These photographs were taken at the demonstration organized by the PSC and others on July 19th in London by Michael Ezra – see more on his Twitter feed here.

London demo 19 7

London demo 19 7 b

London demo 19 7 c

The PSC and fellow travellers also organized another demonstration in London on July 26th and these pictures were taken by Michael Ezra at that event.

London demo 26 7 a

London demo 26 7 b

London demo 26 7 c

And yet, Jenny Hill – who of course works for an organization committed to editorial standards of accuracy – saw no reason to challenge the obvious falsehoods promoted by Lanning and even provided them with backwind and the BBC’s stamp of reliability.

Two BBC programmes claim criticism of Israel brings accusations of antisemitism

h/t: DL, Amie

One annoying aspect of being an Israeli, or a person with family in Israel, at a time like this is having to listen to pundits (who it is quite safe to assume have never had to grab their children and rush to a bomb-shelter within seconds because of missile fire from terrorists) sitting safely in a studio thousands of miles away and pontificating about the rights and wrongs of a conflict upon which they apparently believe they are qualified to comment because they have read about it in the papers or watched it on television.Any Questions

This last weekend the BBC Radio 4 programme ‘Any Questions?’ had on its panel the former (2000 – 2004) BBC director general Greg Dyke, former LibDem MP Susan Kramer, Harper’s Bazaar editor Justine Picardie and MEP Dan Hannan. In the section of the programme which related to the current hostilities (available here from around 33:13 or here on iPlayer), listeners heard the editor of a fashion magazine opine that life in Gaza “is like living in a big prison”. They also heard a British MEP describe the Gaza Strip as a “sealed concentration camp almost” and then add “I should say sealed refugee camp”. Most interestingly though, they got to hear the following remarks from the man who headed the BBC during most of the second Intifada before resigning his position in the wake of the Hutton Report.

Greg Dyke: “I have to say, I do find the Israeli response massively over the top. [applause] I look at…and I look at what’s been happening this week with horror. I also….the problem is, if you criticize Israel you are – by certain sections of the Jewish community around the world – immediately accused of being antisemitic – which I am not in any way. And we have got to overcome…and you have to look at why is the American response always so limited; why do the Americans actually….because they’re scared of the Jewish community and the Jewish vote in America. We somehow have got to separate the concept of antisemitism…and supporting an Israeli government that I think is not supportable or doing things that are not justifiable. [applause]“

Presenter Jonathan Dimbleby then says:

“Greg, as you will know, historically the BBC has come under great external pressure from the interest groups in this – very severe. At the moment the criticism seems to be coming principally not from the Israelis for the BBC coverage but from those who think that the Palestinians and those who live in Palestine are not being fairly, adequately represented with enough background information to form a clear judgement. Yet…is the BBC eternally locked in that or does the BBC have something to answer for?”

Dyke: “It’s incredibly difficult. I mean I was director general of the BBC for four years in a period of conflict. There was no doubt there was more pressure on me from the Israelis than any other state anywhere in the world. To the extent that in the end I stood up and said look I’m sorry – you cannot be the judge of impartiality. You are so one-sided in this you have got to leave it to us to be the judge of impartiality but we have got to be impartial and we have got to try to be impartial. I do find – I have to say – this week I have found every time the BB…eh…BBC news talks about Israel and then militant Palestinians, I find that a difficult…if I’d been director general this time, I’d be saying hang on – this is…is this not judgemental? We call one bunch a government and the other bunch we call militant Palestinians and the word militant implies somehow illegitimate.”

So, apparently the man who was at the helm whilst the BBC spread the lethal narratives of the ‘Jenin massacre’ that never was and the Al Dura story is more concerned about the risk of implying via terminology that a person who indiscriminately fires military grade missiles at civilians is “illegitimate” than he is with those acts themselves. One can only wonder if that ‘gem’ crops up in the Balen Report of 2004 which the BBC has spent ten years and hundreds of thousands of pounds of public money avoiding publishing.

Another programme broadcast by the BBC this last weekend was the July 27th edition of BBC World Service radio’s ‘Weekend’ – available here for a limited period of time. It is worth listening to the programme in full in order to hear the context-free descriptions of the Gaza Strip from Chris Morris and Ian Pannell, including further promotion of Hamas’ pre-ceasefire demand to “lift the economic blockade” – described as a “smart demand” by Morris.WS Weekend

That programme also has two guests: one a woman in Paris called Vaiju Naravane – a novelist and former European bureau chief for the India’s Hindu newspaper, which apparently qualifies her to discuss the issue of this conflict although the fact that she describes Israeli towns and villages in Judea & Samaria as “colonies” is probably sufficient clue as to her political orientations. Right at the end of the programme she is given a platform to promote the following notions.

“Oh I think it’s a huge challenge [covering the story in the Gaza Strip]. I mean this is bigger than anything we faced in the Balkans in the 1990s for instance. […] and we’re not talking also about the essentials of the problem. I mean when France was occupied during the Second World War there were people who were planting bombs and there were people who were undertaking terrorist acts in order to get rid of the Germans from here and they were hailed as heroes. Now the same thing is not being applied to Hamas. I have no sympathies for Hamas because I think they’re extremists and all that. But at the same time you cannot in any moral sense have the kind of occupation – the way in which these people – this 1.4 million population is living in 140 square meters [sic] of territory without any kind of access and this is going on year after year after year and Israel’s demand seems to me to be submit, don’t do anything, don’t hit back and we’ll be OK with you but we will not remove the blockades, we will not remove the restrictions we place on your life. Now what sort of an argument is that?”

The other guest on that programme was Robert Fox – formerly a BBC defence correspondent and currently an occasional BBC contributor. Notably, Fox came up with the same claim promoted by Greg Dyke the day before.

“One of the difficulties that I’m having is that every time you criticize Israel… somebody of my position who’s been at the game for 47 years….ah, but you’re being antisemitic. That is a confusion of language. It’s a monstrosity… [..] This is a debate. There is an argument on all sides because what the criticism of Israel…what Israel is doing – and it’s a fundamental of international law – it is disproportion.”

So there we go: two ‘cultured’ BBC radio programmes in one weekend – both of which include promotion of the notion that it is not possible to criticize Israel without being accused of antisemitism – with one of the speakers making his own none-too-veiled insinuations based on the ‘Jewish power’ trope and another who – through her claim that Hamas is like the French Resistance and her comparison of Israel’s non-existent occupation of Gaza with that of Germany in France in WWII  – using a Nazi analogy.

Could it get more surreal than that?  

 

 

 

Unhindered promotion of PSC speaker’s propaganda by BBC News

The next time the opaquely funded, Hamas supporting, Palestine Solidarity Campaign complains about supposed BBC bias in favour of Israel (and let’s face it – that won’t take long), it may be worth reminding them of an item which appeared on BBC television news on July 26th and was also promoted on the BBC News website’s Middle East page under the title “London rally will ‘boost morale of Palestinians in Gaza’“.PSC demo London al Helou

In that report on a rally held on the same date in London (at which antisemitic imagery and messaging were in open use, although there is no reporting on that in this item), presenter Keith Doyle interviewed Yousef al Helou – currently a Reuters Journalist Fellow at Oxford University. Doyle made no effort whatsoever to counter the inaccuracies, falsehoods and propaganda spouted by al Helou, who claims not to be a Hamas supporter but all the same seems to have no qualms about doing a speaking tour for the PSC which does support and enable that terrorist organisation.

Doyle: “This is one of a number of protests and rallies taking place throughout the UK. Organisers estimate around 15 thousand people are taking part in this protest outside the Israeli Embassy. It’s just moving off now but one of those people who is here at this protest is Yousef al Helou. You’re a journalist from Gaza; your family are there – have you been in touch with them?”

Al Helou: “Yes I am. I was born in Gaza. I grew up in Gaza which is known to be the world’s largest open-air prison. I’m in touch with my family and of course I’m very worried about them. I’m stressed out. I’m exhausted. I couldn’t sleep for the past three weeks trying just to stay awake. I didn’t want to hear bad news about my family. My house has sustained damage as a result of an Israeli airstrike. I’ve lost 12 members of my extended family. I live in the eastern part of Gaza where a Shuja’iya quarter was entirely flattened. The situation is miserable, very dangerous. There are no red lines. Hospitals were attacked, paramedics, journalists, mosques, churches, cemeteries. The ICRC is trying its best to work. People are outraged from the silence of the international community and they want to see of course an [unintelligible] court.”

Doyle; “Can a rally like this – can this do anything to help?”

Al Helou: “At least it will boost the morale of the Palestinians inside Gaza. They know now that they are not alone. ‘Cos the Palestinian cause is a just cause; it’s a universal issue.”

Doyle: “But it does take two sides to make peace and rockets are still going into Israeli territory.”

Al Helou: “Israel decided to wage this war on Gaza without any evidence that Hamas has killed the three Jewish settlers. And the people of Gaza have suffered enough. Three wars in less than six years. My seven years old daughter now she’s experiencing the third war in her age. People of course on both sides want peace but who has started the aggression? It was Israel.”

Doyle: “Well certainly the people here – feelings are running very high at this rally here this afternoon. As you can see behind me it’s just moving on now. By the time those talks get underway in Paris this rally will be passing Downing Street.”

That barrage of uncorrected falsehoods and context-free distortions was brought to millions in the UK  – at a time when antisemitic attacks are on the rise in the UK – by the media organization which claims to adhere to standards of accuracy and impartiality. 

 

 

 

BBC News website whitewashes attack on Israeli footballers

An article titled “Pro-Palestinian protest halts Maccabi Haifa match” appeared on the Europe and Middle East pages of the BBC News website on July 24th.Maccabi Haifa art

The BBC’s version of events is as follows:

“Pro-Palestinian protesters have disrupted a football match in Austria between the Israeli club Maccabi Haifa and French team Lille.

The pre-season friendly in Bischofshofen was stopped close to the final whistle when protesters waving Palestinian flags stormed the pitch.

It seems that no-one was seriously hurt in the incident.”

Readers might wonder why the BBC found it necessary to point out that no-one was seriously hurt if the disruption only involved “protesters waving Palestinian flags”. The answer to that conundrum is that rather more than just flag waving went on. The Daily Telegraph reported:

“Pro-Palestinian protesters invaded the pitch and physically attacked Maccabi Haifa players towards the end of a preseason match against French side Lille in Austria on Wednesday”

Ynet reported:

“Anti-Israel protesters invaded the pitch late Wednesday in Bischofshofen, near Salzburg, in a pre-season friendly late Wednesday between Maccabi Haifa and French side Lille, and physically confronted Israeli players towards the end of a the training match.

Police said Thursday the disturbance was the work of locals, most of them of Turkish origin, whose identities were known.

The Austria Press Agency cited Maccabi as saying team members Idan Vered und Dekel Keinan were physically accosted before police broke up the melee. […]

The rioting fans tried to attack Yossi Benayoun, the national team captain, as well as other members of the squad. One player was spat on, while the coach entered the pitch to protect his players.

None of the players were injured. They walked to the dressing rooms as security forces cleared the protesters. One player, defender Samuel Scheimann, claimed at least one of the rioters was armed with a pocket knife.”

That is a rather different picture to the one presented by the BBC article – and particularly interesting because the image later added to this BBC report clearly shows one of the ‘protesters’ kicking an Israeli player, but that part of the story is not reflected in the text. The Daily Mail has similar images, as well as a picture suggesting that the BBC’s euphemistically termed “Pro-Palestinian protesters” would be more accurately described as anti-Israel.

photo credit: Daily Mail

photo credit: Daily Mail

photo credit: Daily Mail

photo credit: Daily Mail

The article goes on:

“Israel launched a military offensive on 8 July, with the declared objective of stopping rocket fire from Gaza.

At least 649 Palestinians and 32 Israeli soldiers, plus three Israeli civilians, have been killed in the past 15 days of fighting, officials say.”

Once again, the BBC fails to inform readers of the sources of its Palestinian casualty figures and of the fact that they have not been independently verified by the BBC.

 

 

 

 

 

BBC’s Paul Adams amplifies Nazi analogy in coverage of Gaza ground op

One of several BBC journalists ‘parachuted in’ to the region recently in order to cover Operation Protective Shield is Paul Adams – usually based in London as a World Affairs correspondent.OP PE Adams vers 1

On July 18th the BBC News website published an article by Adams initially titled “Gaza casualties mount amid Israeli ground campaign” but later renamed “Hospital on Gaza conflict’s front line”. In his fourth paragraph Adams adheres to what has been standard BBC practice since the beginning of its reporting on this operation: the quotation and promotion of figures supplied by the Hamas-run health ministry in Gaza without any qualifying statement regarding the fact that they have not been independently verified by the BBC and with no attempt made to distinguish between civilian and combatant casualty figures.

“But a new phase of operations inevitably brought a new wave of casualties – more than 20 dead, according to Gaza’s ministry of health. Among them at least three more children.”

Depending on the time at which Adams wrote those words, he should of course have pointed out to BBC audiences that at least fourteen terrorists were among the casualties on the first day of Israel’s ground operation.

A considerable proportion of Adams’ report relates to the Wafa rehabilitation hospital in the Shuja’iyeh neighbourhood of Gaza City which, incidentally, also accommodated members of the International Solidarity Movement with the staff’s knowledge and consent, although Adams refrains from mentioning that fact. 

“I found the patients and staff from the Wafa rehabilitation hospital sheltering in a Gaza City clinic.

The Wafa has been hit repeatedly in the past week. It’s close to the border and very close to some of the latest Israeli military activity.

Basman al-Ashi, the hospital’s executive director, said everything seemed quiet on Thursday night, until shelling intensified in the hours before troops entered the Gaza Strip.

With artillery rounds hitting the hospital once more, Basman decided to evacuate everyone.”

Leaflet distributed in Gaza Strip 16/7/14

Leaflet distributed in Gaza Strip 16/7/14

In fact, the hospital’s staff were directly alerted to the need to evacuate the premises by the IDF on the evening of July 15th –47 hours before the ground operation commenced – even according to B’Tselem.  General warnings were also issued to residents of that neighbourhood and others on the morning of July 16th. Contrary to the impression which readers receive from Adams’ report, the actual reason for the evacuation warning was the presence of terrorist infrastructure located near to the hospital.

Perhaps unwittingly, Adams provides evidence of the practice of locating weapons stores and missile launchers in the vicinity of medical facilities and other civilian structures when he goes on to write:

“As he recalled the scene, surrounded by his evacuated patients, two deafening salvoes of rockets took off from somewhere very close by – rockets fired by fighters from Hamas or one of the other armed factions.” [emphasis added]

No attempt is of course made by Adams to clarify to BBC audiences the legal significance of the practice he witnessed and he later goes on to deliberately mislead audiences by writing:

“Israel says rockets have been fired from Basman al-Ashi’s hospital, a charge his staff deny completely.”

Significantly, he does not ask the hospital’s director about the actual situation – i.e. that areas near the hospital have been used for the purposes of terrorism.

Adams does, however, take the opportunity to promote and amplify the hospital director’s use of a Nazi analogy.Op pe Adams vers 2

“Basman’s eyes closed for a moment in weary resignation, but opened wide in defiance when I suggested the actions of Hamas might simply make matters worse.

“It’s a very natural response for the Palestinians to respond, to defend themselves,” he insisted.

Israel, he said, had made “a concentration camp of 1.8 million people”.

“No air. No land. No sea. You’re trying to tell the people what? I’m putting you in prison and I want you to obey, eat, sleep and that’s it. We’re human.” ” [emphasis added]

One of the definitions of antisemitism according to the EUMC working definition is:

“Drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis.”

Even if that is what an executive director of a Gaza hospital with close links to the ISM actually said, there is no justification and no excuse for the BBC’s amplification and propagation of Nazi analogies.

It would have been helpful to BBC audiences’ understanding of the reality of the situation had Adams bothered to explain to readers that – contrary to al Ashi’s inaccurate claim – Israeli policy concerning the Gaza Strip is the result of the terrorism perpetrated by Hamas and other groups rather than the other way round. However, it is perfectly clear that Paul Adams did not set out in this article to provide BBC audiences with accurate and impartial information which really would enhance their “understanding of international issues“.   

Paris synagogue attacks ignored by BBC

This is a screenshot of the BBC News website’s Europe page on the morning of July 14th 2014: Europe page 14 7 This is what happened in Paris the evening before:

“Media reports said that hundreds of Jews were trapped inside a synagogue in the area and police units were sent to rescue them.

A person in the synagogue told Israel’s Channel 2 news that protesters hurled stones and bricks at the building, “like it was an intifada.”

Riot police dispersed the group, with two members of the Jewish community and six officers slightly injured in the ensuing scuffle, the source said. […]

A second synagogue was also attacked.[…]

Prime Minister Manuel Valls condemned the attempted synagogue stormings “in the strongest possible terms”.

“Such acts targeting places of worship are unacceptable,” he said in a statement.

“I am profoundly shocked and revolted. This aggression towards the Jewish community has taken an absolutely unacceptable turn,” Joel Mergei, president of the Israelite Central Consistory of France, told AFP.”

In contrast, the BBC did elect to report on what it bizarrely termed a protest “against the BBC’s coverage of the conflict in the Middle East – and the conflict itself” in Manchester on July 12th. Obviously the BBC has not yet come to terms with the fact that the current upsurge of violence in the Gaza Strip and Israel is not the conflict in the Middle East.  That may perhaps be explained by the fact that BBC journalists apparently read (and saw fit to link to) the website of a pro-Assad supposed ‘anti-war’ organization which could not be bothered to rally itself on behalf of the 170,000 dead, 680,000 injured and five million refugees in Syria.

“A second rally was organised by the Stop the War Coalition in Manchester’s Piccadilly Gardens, in protest at what the group says is “the brutal intensification of violence” at hands of the Israelis. […]

More than 20 anti-war protests were planned around the country over the weekend, according to Stop the War Coalition’s website.” 

Surreal.  Related Articles: BBC again dithering (impartially, of course) over antisemitism