Toning down Islamic Jihad terror BBC style

Among the headlines appearing on the BBC News website’s Middle East page on July 12th and 13th was one reading “Palestinian hunger striker freed”. That link led to an article similarly headlined “Israel frees Palestinian hunger striker Khader Adnan“.Adnan art

Uninformed readers may of course by now have concluded that the most important thing they need to know about Adnan is that he was a “hunger striker” but of course that is only a sideline to the story.

In the body of the article Adnan is described as follows:

“Khader Adnan, 37, an Islamic Jihad activist, had been held for more than a year without charge under the Israeli “administrative detention” policy.” [emphasis added]

Readers are not informed anywhere in this report that the Palestinian Islamic Jihad is an Iranian funded terrorist organization which is designated by the United States, the European Union, the United Kingdom, Japan, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and Israel. Neither are they told that the PIJ is dedicated to the violent destruction of Israel and the establishment of an Islamic Palestinian state in its place – despite the fact that the BBC has been aware of that agenda at least since 2001 and documented PIJ terrorism during the second Intifada.

Likewise, no information is provided to inform BBC audiences what the description “activist” actually means. Does Khader Adnan organize coffee mornings or petitions on behalf of the PIJ? Does he paint placards, fold flyers or write letters to the editor? Here is just one example of Khader Adnan’s ‘activism’:

All that, is of course very relevant context which, had it not been omitted, would have aided BBC audiences’ understanding of why Khader Adnan has – as the article states – “been arrested a number of times by Israel”.

The article also tells readers that:

“The hunger strike had left him [Adnan] in critical condition. He ended it on 28 June following a deal with Israel securing his release.

Gaza-based Islamic Jihad had threatened violence if he died.”

Readers are not told that the intended targets of that vague sounding “violence” were – as reported by the NYT – Israeli civilians.

“It [PIJ] threatened to fire rockets at Israel from Gaza, in violation of a truce that ended the war last summer, if Mr. Adnan was not released.”

However, as was the case in the BBC’s previous article on the same topic from June 29th, readers were informed that:

“Under “administrative detention” Israel can hold suspects indefinitely for renewable six-month periods. The controversial measure has been criticised by human rights groups.”

Those “human rights groups” are not identified and their possible political agenda is not revealed, meaning that the BBC deprives readers of the ability to judge for themselves whether or not the description of administrative detention as “controversial” is indeed warranted. Apparently the intention is for audiences to take that description of a procedure used by other Western countries (including the UK) at face value.

Another notable aspect of this article is that it links to a previous BBC report from June 30th 2014 concerning the discovery of the bodies of the three Israeli teenagers kidnapped and murdered by members of a Hamas cell in Hebron. Readers following that link are informed that:

“Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Hamas was responsible, a claim the Palestinian militant group has denied. […]

Israel’s Shin Bet security service earlier said the main suspects in the case were two men named Marwan Qawasmeh and Amer Abu Aisheh and that they were “Hamas operatives”.”

At the time that article was written Hamas had not yet admitted its role in that terror attack but that information has long been available and hence there is no reason nearly a year later for the BBC to link to an outdated and inaccurate article which has not been amended to clarify the facts.

Related Articles:

What the BBC classified as ‘riots’ in London become ‘protests’ in Beitounya

BBC reveals the ‘secret’ detention which wasn’t

BBC describes known terror finance man as ‘activist’

Politicised BBC report on hunger strikers omits crucial information

2 comments on “Toning down Islamic Jihad terror BBC style

  1. Meanwhile, yesterday’s Telegraph newspaper carries the following headline:

    “…BBC director-general vows to fight cuts
    Lord Hall is highly critical of the Conservatives and their plans for the BBC saying ‘the British public do not share their views’…”

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/bbc/11734611/BBC-director-general-vows-to-fight-cuts.html

    Duvidl suggests that an annual 10% of magistrates criminal court prosecutions being for non-payment of the BBC TV licence fee TV tax with the risk of imprisonment means the British public do indeed share and endorse their views.

    Here is an extract from The Telegraph’s article.

    “…The BBC’s website, which has been described as “imperialist” by George Osborne, the Chancellor, could also be dramatically scaled back amid fears it is destroying local and regional newspapers.
    Mr Whittingdale has appointed a board of eight advisers – many of whom are strident critics of the BBC – to conduct “root-and-branch” reform of the Corporation as part of the charter renewal.
    However, in an article for a Sunday newspaper, Lord Hall was highly critical of the Conservatives and their plans for the BBC.
    It comes days after Mr Osborne ordered the BBC to take on the cost of providing free TV licences to the over-75s.
    “What is most important is that the voice of the audience and the voice of people who care about the BBC are heard in the debate,” Lord Hall said. “The public are our shareholders. Their view will always be the most important.
    “We should be under no illusion that this is a period of high risk for the BBC. While no one wants to abolish the BBC, there will be some who want to diminish us for their own narrow interests. We must remind them that the British public do not share their views.”
    A BBC source warned that the green paper risks destroying the Corporation’s global reputation within a decade.
    The public will not want to see popular programmes like Sherlock face the axe, the source said.
    “Let’s see what the Green Paper says, but the BBC doesn’t nakedly chase viewers, but we do seek to make the good popular, and the popular good,” the source said. “Research has shown that an element of competition drives up quality across the industry.
    “The voice of the public will be key and they will have their own view about the merits of BBC programmes like Strictly and Sherlock.”
    The source added: “In a world where broadcasting is increasingly global, it is important for Britain that we have a strong, vibrant and successful creative sector and the BBC has been a key driver of delivering that. A key test for the green paper is whether it enhances or diminishes that status. The BBC is a British global success story.
    “If we get this wrong, in ten years time it will no longer be.”…”

  2. The BBC and it’s use of language:

    Video ‘shows Israeli officer shoot fleeing Palestinian’

    It shows a person believed to be Kasbeh running at the Israeli army vehicle as it passes by and throwing a stone. He then runs away as the car then brakes suddenly and at least two soldiers get out, brandishing weapons.

    http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/brandish

    brandish
    Tweet
    verb bran·dish \ˈbran-dish\

    : to wave or swing (something, such as a weapon) in a threatening or excited manner

    Full Definition of BRANDISH
    transitive verb
    1: to shake or wave (as a weapon) menacingly
    2: to exhibit in an ostentatious or aggressive manner

    Of course to say the soldiers were carrying, or holding weapons would be too neutral – we all know that Israeli soldiers are menacing, aggressive, threatening and exited!

Comments are closed.