Superficial BBC reporting of Tlaib and Omar story

On August 15th the BBC News website published a report headlined “Israel bars Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib from visiting” on its ‘Middle East’ page. The opening paragraph similarly told readers that:

“Israel is blocking two US Democratic lawmakers, who are prominent critics of the Israeli government, from visiting.”

The following lines however indicated that the BBC is well aware of the fact that the two Congresswomen had no interest in visiting Israel as a whole.

“Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib were due to visit the occupied West Bank and East Jerusalem next week.”

Readers were told that:

“Both have supported the boycott movement against Israel, but Israeli law allows supporters of the campaign to be banned from visiting.”

And:

“Israeli law blocks entrance visas to any foreigner who calls for any type of boycott that targets Israel – either economic, cultural or academic.

The law attempts to suppress the “boycott, divest, sanction” movement, which has drawn growing support across Europe and the US.” [emphasis added]

Not only is that representation of the 2017 amendment to the ‘Entry to Israel’ law inaccurate (the amendment gives the interior minister leeway to make exceptions) but as usual the BBC did not clarify to its audiences that the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions campaign (BDS) promotes the so-called ‘right of return’ for millions of descendants of Palestinian refugees which would lead to the elimination of the Jewish state and thereby deny the Jewish people their right to self-determination.  

The report also told readers that:

“Ms Omar and Ms Tlaib have both been criticised for their stance on Israel – but have denied charges of being anti-Semitic.”

No effort was made to explain to readers why such charges have been leveled or to inform them of the problematic nature of statements made by the two representatives.

The BBC chose to uncritically amplify a statement from Omar while failing to inform readers of similar actions taken by democratic countries – including the UK.  

“Ms Omar described Israel’s move as “an insult to democratic values and a chilling response to a visit by government officials from an allied nation”.”

Regarding the Congresswomen’s proposed itinerary, readers were told that:

“According to US media, their trip was meant to begin on Sunday, and would include a stop at one of the most sensitive sites in the region – a hilltop plateau in Jerusalem known to Jews as the Temple Mount and Muslims as Haram al-Sharif.

They also planned to visit Israeli and Palestinian peace activists and travel to Jerusalem and the West Bank cities of Bethlehem, Ramallah and Hebron.” [emphasis added]

According to that itinerary, what the BBC presents as “peace activists” are in fact political NGOs such as ‘Mercy Corps’, Amnesty International, Al Haq, B’tselem, DCI-Palestine and ‘Breaking the Silence’.

Readers were told that:

“The trip to the West Bank was planned by Miftah, an organisation headed by Palestinian peace negotiator Hanan Ashrawi.”

No background was provided concerning Miftah and its record of advocating the BDS campaign and glorifying terrorists

The following day – August 16th – that article was replaced by another headlined “Rashida Tlaib rejects Israel’s offer of ‘humanitarian’ visit” which included much of the same content but also informed readers that:

“…in a series of tweets on Friday, Ms Omar hit back at claims that she and Ms Tlaib hadn’t asked to meet with Israel’s government or opposition officials.

The Minnesota congresswoman said that, during their visit, they had planned to meet Jewish and Arab members of Israel’s parliament, along with Israeli security officials.

Among other plans, they had also intended to tour the West Bank city of Hebron with Israeli military veterans, she said.”

Readers were not told that those “Israeli military veterans” were in fact members of the foreign funded political NGO ‘Breaking the Silence’ or that the itinerary shows no evidence of planned meetings with Israeli Knesset members or officials.

Readers also found another euphemistic portrayal of the anti-Israel BDS campaign.

“Ms Tlaib and Ms Omar have voiced support for the Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions (BDS) campaign – which aims to put economic pressure on the Israeli government – because of their opposition to Israel’s policies towards Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza Strip.”

Obviously if – in line with the BBC’s public purposes obligations – audiences were to understand Israel’s decision not to permit this visit by two members of the US Congress, they needed to be accurately informed what the campaign supported by the women is really about.

However rather than provide that essential information, in these two reports the BBC once again chose to continue its long-standing policy of avoiding telling its audiences that what that campaign ultimately seeks to achieve is the end of Israel as the Jewish state.

Related Articles:

BBC News claims BDS is solely about ‘a cultural boycott’

BBC R4 report on antisemitism in the US uses the Livingstone Formulation

BBC R4 presenter floats ranking racism

BBC WS ‘Newshour’ messaging reflects that of anti-Israel group

Advertisements

Weekend long read

1) Writing at the Jerusalem Post, Maurice Hirsch examines “The UK-PA partnership to reward terrorists”.

“Despite having positive knowledge that the PA used a considerable amount of its financial resources to implement its terrorism-rewarding policy, the DFID, via the World Bank, provided the PA, over a seven-year period, with over £430 million to be used as the PA saw fit. While DFID has adamantly claimed no UK funds were used to fund “pay for slay”, it did so relying on narrow audit reports that cannot and do not support its assertion.

Created in 2008, the World Bank’s Palestinian Recovery and Development Program – Multi-Donor Trust Fund (PRDP-MDTF) pooled the funds of multiple donor countries, including the UK, and provided steady and reliable quarterly cash flow to the PA. As the PRDP-MDTF clearly states, the donor funds were provided to the PA “untied and unearmarked.””

For more information on that topic see this post from UKLFI.

2) At the JCPA Nadav Shragai explains “The Unique Status of the Jerusalem Suburb
of Wadi Hummus
” – information which was lacking in BBC reporting on that story last month.

“In the area of Sur Baher, the state planned to locate the security fence on the route of the jurisdictional boundary. But vigorous lobbying activity, including an appeal to the Supreme Court by residents who opposed detaching Wadi Hummus from Sur Baher, brought about a change in the decision. The result was that Wadi Hummus was included within the route of the fence even though it is not part of Jerusalem.

Some of the Wadi Hummus residents are originally from Sur Baher and hold Israeli residency cards. Others are from the West Bank and are not Israeli residents. The result is a legal and bureaucratic imbroglio in which Wadi Hummus, a tract of only a few hundred dunams, is surrounded by the Israeli fence, is not an official part of Jerusalem, and includes areas of three kinds: A, B, and C. In Area A, security and civilian control belong to the Palestinian Authority; in Area B, security control belongs to Israel and civilian control to the Palestinian Authority; in Area C, official security and civilian control belong to Israel.”

3) At the Tablet Liel Leibovitz takes a look at “The Long History of Politically Motivated Travel Bans”.

“American law […] goes on at length regarding the various categories of people who may be barred from entering the United States, including those with communicable diseases, those convicted of certain crimes, and—drumroll, please—anyone who “seeks to enter the United States to engage solely, principally, or incidentally in… any activity a purpose of which is the opposition to, or the control or overthrow of, the government of the United States by force, violence, or other unlawful means.”

Israel has similar laws. Its argument that avid supporters of a movement, BDS, whose overtly stated goal is the destruction of Israel as a Jewish state represent a threat to the country may not be politically savvy, but nor is it unprecedented or indefensible.”

4) As the BBC continues to promote the notion that the Palestinian Authority aspires to a two-state solution to the conflict, at the Washington Institute David Pollock analyses a recent Palestinian public opinion poll.  

“…when asked about ending the conflict with Israel permanently, only a minority would approve a two-state solution: 30 percent of West Bankers, and 42 percent of Gazans. Instead, the narrow majority in both territories–56 percent in the West Bank, and 54 percent in Gaza, say “the conflict should not end, and resistance should continue until all of historic Palestine is liberated.” This marks a hardening of West Bank views compared to previous polls. And under half of the Palestinian public say “we should recognize that we will never defeat Israel, and that fighting just makes things worse”: 40 percent of West Bankers, and 49 percent of Gazans.”

 

 

BBC approach to gender-segregated events differs with location

On August 12th a report titled “The Kenyan dance parties where men are banned” appeared on the BBC News website’s ‘Africa’ page.

Readers of that sympathetic report were told that:

“The team behind a new event in Nairobi argues all-women’s dance parties can create safe nightlife spaces for women. […]

“You have to be so strict in a place with men. You just want to go out with your friends and men interfere,” says Jane, 26, who’s come to the party with her best friend Shani.

“So having a space where it’s all women immediately feels safe and you feel you are with people who understand you.””

And:

“Munira, 22 and Khadija, 25 are best friends. As practising Muslims, they often find themselves with minimal options when it comes to night life.

They say that, although women from all faiths attend the all-women parties, they particularly suit Muslims.

“Some of us have to remove our hijabs to blend in when we are out dancing. When they see you with a hijab, people are surprised and wonder what you are doing there.

“A space like this is also better because we are forbidden from freely mingling with men,” Khadija says.”

Apparently short of UK domestic news, on the following day – August 13th – BBC Radio 4’s ‘Six O’Clock News’ aired an item (from 27:16 here) introduced by presenter Corrie Corfield as follows: [emphasis in italics in the original, emphasis in bold added]

Corfield: “Israeli women’s rights groups are urging the mayor of Haifa to cancel a planned concert for a men-only audience by two popular ultra-orthodox Jewish singers. The controversy comes after one of the artists cancelled another event when a court ruled that organisers couldn’t force men and women in the audience to sit separately. Under a strict interpretation of Jewish laws, men and women are not supposed to mingle at social events. Our correspondent Yolande Knell sent this report from Jerusalem.”

Yolande Knell began her report with a claim which – coincidently or not – is also found in the opening lines of the singer’s Wikipedia page. Listeners discovered that Corfield’s reference to “groups” in the plural is inaccurate.

Knell: [Music] “Mordechai Ben David is often called the king of Jewish music. He’s due to perform in Haifa later this month with a younger star of Hassidic pop, Motty Steinmetz. Their concert, which is getting city funding and support, is meant to be for men only and that’s the problem. A rights group – Israel Women’s Network [Shdulat Ha Nashim B’Israel] – says it amounts to illegal discrimination.”

She went on:

Knell: “Its objections have infuriated members of the ultra-orthodox community. They came just days after legal action by the same organisation led to Motty Steinmetz pulling out of a concert in a public park in the city of Afula because men and women might not be separated. A judge ruled that while Haredi audience members were free to seat themselves as they wanted, keeping to their religious customs, the event organisers couldn’t force gender segregation on others.”

The judge’s ruling to which Knell refers was made two days before her report was aired, on August 11th. However the next day the political party Shas petitioned against that ruling and on August 14th a different judge at the same court gave a different ruling.

“The Nazareth District Court ruled to allow the Afula municipality to hold a gender-segregated concert Wednesday evening, accepting an appeal against a controversial decision it made just days earlier barring the northern city from putting on such an event. […]

As part of his Wednesday ruling, Judge Atef Eilabouni recommended that the municipality agree to a compromise in which the amphitheater be split in three for the concert, with a woman’s section above a men’s section as well as a mixed-gender area.”

The Motty Steinmetz concert in Afula – which both Corfield and Knell told listeners was cancelled – in fact took place on August 14th.

Knell continued, referencing a story from 2017 which was described by the local media at the time as “unusual” to support her claim of “not uncommon”:

Knell: “The decision sparked a heated political debate. One ultra-orthodox politician described it as evil while the head of a secular party praised it, saying Israel was not Iran. It’s not uncommon for musical events in Israel to lay bare the religious-secular divide. Two years ago another conservative singer stirred up controversy by blindfolding himself with duct tape on stage to avoid seeing women dancing to his song. But with the ultra-orthodox population here growing fast, it’s not just its pop stars becoming more influential. Its religious leaders are too and that’s having a cultural and political impact.”

While everyone is entitled to their opinion on gender-segregated events, the understanding of this story by the BBC’s British audiences would obviously have been enhanced had Knell bothered to inform them that in Afula that concert was:

“…the only one of over 300 events put on by the city over the summer to have segregated seating as it was aimed at the local ultra-Orthodox population.”

Had they been provided with that information, listeners may have been able to make up their own minds about the validity of Knell’s closing claims concerning “cultural and political impact” and reach their own conclusions about why two BBC reports on gender-segregated events on consecutive days were so different in tone.

Related Articles:

BBC WS ‘World Have Your Say’ misleads on Israeli buses

BBC Arabic breaches style guide on Temple Mount

Earlier this week we documented descriptions in BBC World Service radio news bulletins of a premeditated demonstration of intolerance at a site holy to three religions as “clashes at the al Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem”. We noted that:

“…the BBC has returned to its past habit of complying with PLO instructions by naming the place its style guide says should be termed “Temple Mount, known to Muslims as the Haram al-Sharif” as “the al Aqsa Mosque”.”

While no coverage of those August 11th incidents appeared on the BBC’s English language website, the BBC Arabic website published a report on that day headlined “Al-Aqsa Mosque: Clashes between Israeli police and Palestinians after Eid al-Adha prayers”.

Readers were told that: [translation CAMERA Arabic, emphasis added]

Extremist Jewish groups were trying to congregate near Moors’ [Mugrabi] Gate in order to enter the Mosque and commemorate the anniversary of what is referred to as ‘the destruction of the temple, which coincided this year with Eid al-Adha…”

And:

“At a later time, the police allowed dozens of Jewish extremists to enter the plaza of the Jerusalem sanctuary for a few minutes…”

In exactly the same way that BBC World Service radio’s failure to comply with the BBC’s own style guide confused audiences, this report’s employment of the deliberately politicised term “al Aqsa Mosque” to describe the entire Temple Mount plaza and the ensuing claim that Jews were trying to “enter the mosque” is inaccurate and materially misleading.

The headline further misleads readers by suggesting that “clashes between Israeli police and Palestinians” took place in the al Aqsa Mosque rather than – as was actually the case – outside the building.

Also inaccurate is the blanket description of unarmed, non-violent visitors to the holiest site of their faith as “extremists”. While Muslim visitors to the site on that day (some of whom participated in the violent rioting) were described by BBC Arabic merely as “Palestinians”, the description of Jewish visitors as “extremists” demonstrates bias on the part of that BBC department.   

CAMERA Arabic has submitted a complaint to the BBC concerning that report.

Related Articles:

BBC WS radio news confuses audiences with politicised terminology

Mapping changes in the terminology used by the BBC to describe Temple Mount

PLO recommended terminology continues to appear in BBC content

PLO terminology returns in BBC Jerusalem Day report

 

Catching up with a story the BBC reported in 2015

Back in March 2015 the BBC News website published a report relating to the issue of arrest warrants for three men suspected of having been among those responsible for the 1982 terror attack on the Jo Goldenberg restaurant in Paris in which six people were killed and 22 wounded.

BBC News recycles three year old factual failures in Abu Nidal report

Three months later the BBC reported that one of the suspects had been arrested in Jordan. We have however not been able to find any follow-up BBC reporting on Jordan’s refusal to extradite that suspect and another one.

“The suspects in the Chez Jo Goldenberg attack were not formally identified until 2014, when two anonymous informants associated with Abu Nidal’s group supplied the French authorities with the missing information.

The following year, France’s top magistrate tasked with combating terrorism, Marc Trévidic, issued arrest warrants for several suspects, including Hamada and fellow Jordanian citizen Souhair Mouhamed Hassan Khalid al-Abassi — aka Amjad Atta — reputedly the mastermind behind the attack.

A French request to the Jordanian courts for al-Abassi’s extradition was similarly rejected in Oct. 2015 — just three months after the Hashemite Kingdom signed an extradition treaty with the French government.”

Neither have we been able to find any BBC coverage of a story which emerged around the 37th anniversary of that terror attack, for which no-one has stood trial. Several French, British and Israeli media outlets – including the BBC’s preferred paper, the Guardian – have reported that:

“Families of the victims of a 1982 terrorist attack in Paris are demanding a parliamentary inquiry after reports that the former chief of French intelligence made a secret pact with the perpetrators. […]

On Friday, Le Parisien newspaper reported that the former head of France’s intelligence service Yves Bonnet had admitted negotiating a “secret deal” with the [Abu Nidal Organisation] terrorist group. Now 83, Bonnet is said to have told investigators that he agreed the group’s members could continue travelling to France if they carried out no more attacks on French soil.

“We made a kind of verbal deal in which I said I don’t want any more attacks on French soil and in return I’ll let you come to France and I guarantee nothing will happen to you,” Bonnet reportedly said in an interview with investigating magistrates in January. […]

To date no reporting on that story appears on the BBC News website’s ‘France’ page.

 

 

BBC WS radio news confuses audiences with politicised terminology

h/t AB

Ahead of the fast of Tisha B’Av on August 10th/11th various Israeli media outlets reported that:

“The Muslim religious body that manages the Al-Aqsa Mosque on the Temple Mount in Jerusalem’s Old City has called for all other mosques in the area to shut Sunday to boost attendance at the flash point holy site in order to block Jewish visitors from going there on Tisha B’Av. […]

This year, the start of Eid al-Adha coincides with the Jewish fast day of Tisha B’Av, when Jews mourn the destruction of the temples and other disasters in Jewish history.

In a statement, Grand Mufti of Jerusalem Mohammed Hussein, former grand mufti of Jerusalem Ekrima Sabri and senior Waqf official Abdel Azeem Sahlab announced that “all mosques in Jerusalem will be closed and that blessed Eid al-Adha prayers will take place in the blessed Al-Aqsa Mosque.”

They said the move comes in response to the Israel Police’s decision to “evaluate” whether to allow Jews on the Temple Mount on Sunday. “The people of Jerusalem and its surroundings will stand together in the face of the ambitions of the settlers,” they added.”

On the morning of August 11th:

“Following a security assessment, police said non-Muslims would be barred from entering the Temple Mount, where tens of thousands of Muslim worshipers had arrived during the morning.

“In light of the amount of worshipers and the high potential for friction, it was decided not to allow visits to the Temple Mount at this stage,” a police statement said.”

Later in the day that decision was reversed but not before rioting began on Temple Mount.

“Israel on Sunday morning reversed its decision to bar Jews from the Temple Mount in Jerusalem on Tisha B’Av, the Jewish day of mourning for the destruction of the biblical temples that once stood at the site. […]

A short time earlier, major clashes erupted between Muslim worshippers and Israeli security forces at the Temple Mount, where large numbers had gathered to mark Eid. […]

“At one point, thousands of worshippers who were at the Temple Mount crowded into the area of the Mugrabi Gate [the entrance to Temple Mount for non-Muslims] and began rioting, shouting for nationalist slogans and throwing stones, chairs and other objects at the officers,” the police said.

“In light of this, the district commander issued an order to disperse the rioters up using the crowd dispersal methods and restore public order.”

The Times of Israel reported that:

“At least 61 Muslim worshipers were injured in the clashes, according to the Red Crescent. At least four Israeli officers were also lightly to moderately wounded, police said.

The Palestinians had gathered near the Mughrabi Gate in “a peaceful manner” to protest the possibility of Israel allowing Jews to visit the Temple Mount during Eid al-Adha, a Waqf official, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said.

“It’s unacceptable that they be allowed to enter during our holiday,” the official said.”

No reporting of that premeditated demonstration of intolerance at a site holy to three religions appeared on the BBC News website. However the following day – August 12th – listeners to early morning BBC World Service radio news bulletins were informed that: [emphasis in bold added]

“Dozens of Palestinians and four Israeli police officers have been injured in clashes at the al Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem. The Palestinians, who were celebrating the start of Eid al Adha, objected to the entry of worshippers marking a Jewish holiday at the same site.” (from 01:14 here)

And:

“Dozens of Palestinians and four Israeli police officers have been injured in clashes at the al Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem. The Palestinians, who were celebrating the start of the Muslim Eid al Adha holiday, objected to the entry of Jewish worshippers who were marking the Tisha B’Av holiday.” (from 03:20 here)

Leaving aside that description of the most solemn day in the Jewish calendar as a “holiday”, we see that the BBC has returned to its past habit of complying with PLO instructions by naming the place its style guide says should be termed “Temple Mount, known to Muslims as the Haram al-Sharif” as “the al Aqsa Mosque”.

Moreover, although under post-1967 agreements non-Muslims are allowed to visit the site during limited hours but are prohibited from praying there or displaying any religious symbols, the BBC nevertheless erroneously referred to “the entry of Jewish worshippers” – i.e. people participating in a religious ceremony – to the site.

That choice of terminology is even more bizarre given the BBC’s claim that those “Jewish worshippers” were “marking a Jewish holiday at the same site” – which according to the BBC is a mosque. 

As we see yet again, the BBC’s employment of politicised terminology rather than correct place names serves only to confuse its audiences.

Related Articles:

Mapping changes in the terminology used by the BBC to describe Temple Mount

PLO recommended terminology continues to appear in BBC content

PLO terminology returns in BBC Jerusalem Day report

 

 

 

 

BBC News website fails to update report on Gush Etzion terror attack

Four days after the BBC News website published its August 8th report on the murder of a seminary student in Gush Etzion, the article remains on the website’s ‘Middle East’ page with the headline “Israel hunts killer of off-duty soldier in West Bank”.

Middle East page August 12th

In fact, some 48 hours after the victim had been discovered, two suspects were arrested.

“The Shin Bet security service announced Saturday that it had arrested two Palestinian cousins suspected of stabbing to death 18-year-old Israeli Dvir Sorek in a terror attack late on Wednesday near the West Bank settlement of Migdal Oz.

Security forces identified the two suspects as Nasir Asafra, 24, and Qassem Asafra, 30, from the village of Beit Kahil in the southern West Bank. While the Israel Defense Forces said that the former suspect is a Hamas member, neither of them had any prior arrests.

The two were sleeping in their home when forces arrived at around 3 a.m. Saturday, apparently not anticipating being tracked and captured so quickly.”

In other words, even though the suspects were apprehended on August 10th, on August 12th the BBC News website is still telling visitors that “Israeli forces are hunting for the killer” because nobody has bothered to either update the original report or produce a new one to inform BBC audiences of the two day-old developments in that story.

Related Articles:

BBC reporting on Gush Etzion terror attack

 

BBC interest in Israeli politicians’ legal cases has its limits

As we know from our monthly overviews of reporting on Israel and the Palestinians, the BBC News website is rather fond of stories about criminal/legal cases in Israel – especially if they involve Israeli politicians or public figures.

February 28

Gonen Segev: Israel ex-minister admits spying for Iran

Israel police investigate ‘sex-for-judgeships’ allegations

Netanyahu and the allegations of corruption (discussed here)

Benjamin Netanyahu: Israel PM faces corruption charges (discussed here)

Benjamin Netanyahu: What are the corruption allegations? (discussed here)

Benjamin Netanyahu: Israel PM faces corruption charges (discussed here)

Netanyahu charges: Is Israel PM in more trouble now than ever before? (discussed here)

Sara Netanyahu: Israeli PM’s wife ‘agrees plea bargain’

Benjamin Netanyahu’s wife Sara admits misusing public funds (discussed here)

By contrast, since the beginning of the year visitors to the BBC News website have seen just one report about a possible criminal/legal case in the Gaza Strip (not involving politicians) and just one report about Palestinian Authority politicians (not involving a legal case).

Interestingly, the BBC is apparently rather less interested in potential indictments when they involve an Arab Israeli political party, even though it has in the past repeatedly given a platform to one of the people involved.

“Former lawmaker Haneen Zoabi and the Arab party Balad will be indicted pending a hearing for forgery and fraud relating to their reports on campaign funding filed to the state comptroller, the attorney general and state prosecutor announced Thursday. 

Balad is suspected of having received from abroad some three million shekels ($862,650) and using the funds while pretending that the money had come in as donations. The party rejected the accusations, claiming they were part of “political persecution.” […]

Zoabi and the others are suspected of aggravated fraud, attempted fraud, money laundering, aggravated forgery, using a forged document and forging corporate records.  […]

Party officials deposited around 2.4 million shekels ($690,000) in the party bank account before the 2013 general election.  In a financial report provided to the state comptroller in February 2016, the funds were described as donations. The report was accompanied by 1,300 receipts, found by police investigation to be forged, and a list of donors, also found to be forged, according to the prosecution.”

Despite its usually lively interest in legal cases and criminal investigations involving Israeli politicians and public figures and although this story about Balad broke last week, the BBC News website (once again) has to date not found it at all newsworthy.

Related Articles:

The prison story from Israel the BBC chose to report – and one it didn’t

Summary of BBC News website portrayal of Israel and the Palestinians – July 2019

BBC continues to yawn at Gaza border incidents

One theme repeatedly promoted in cross-platform BBC reporting is that the situation in the Gaza Strip is essentially the result of the “blockade” imposed by Israel and Egypt. Often no attempt is made at all to explain why the counter-terrorism measures had to be put in place. On other occasions the BBC uses the “Israel says” formula to tick the impartiality box but without any substantial explanation of what Israel’s “security concerns” or “security reasons” actually entail. Some more recent examples include:

“A blockade, which Israel says it’s imposed because of security concerns, has severely restricted imports and exports and the movement of people.” BBC World Service radio 1/8/19

“But peace didn’t last long and Israel still controls who and what goes in and out of Gaza. It says the blockade is for security reasons.” BBC Radio 1 & BBC Radio 1 XTRA 14/5/19

“And really the context to all of it is that the Palestinians in Gaza say they want an easing of the blockade that Israel says it carries out for security reasons.” BBC Radio 1 & BBC Radio 1 XTRA 13/5/19

“…Israel tightened its blockade on the region citing security concerns and strictly controlling all movement of goods and people in and out of the Gaza Strip.” BBC Two 13/5/19

“One of the demonstrators, Bahaa Abu Shamala, said Palestinians were highlighting their historical dispossession and calling for an end to the blockade which Israel says it imposes for security reasons.” BBC Radio 4 30/3/19

“Hospitals have been badly affected by the economic blockade maintained by Israel and on the other side by Egypt – they say for security reasons.” BBC Radio 4 18/1/19

“Gaza’s economy has also been badly hit by a blockade by Israel and Egypt – needed, they say – for security reasons.” BBC News website 30/12/18

“However, given the blockade maintained by Israel – it says of course that’s for security reasons – travelling to the West Bank requires special permission which many do not get.” BBC Radio 4 24/12/18

“The economy’s been impacted by a blockade maintained by Israel and Egypt – they say for their security…” BBC World Service radio 17/12/18 

“Gaza is a place that the UN said six years ago could be unlivable by 2020. Today they’re warning that two million people who live here are slipping deeper into poverty because of what they’re calling deplorable living conditions. The blockade maintained by Israel and Egypt – they say for security reasons – is a major factor.” BBC Radio 4 17/12/18

Early on the morning of August 10th a serious incident took place in the southern section of the border between Israel and the Gaza Strip.

“The Israeli military said on Saturday that a “large-scale terror attack” was thwarted as troops killed four Palestinians who attempted to infiltrate into Israel from the Gaza Strip, armed with AK-47 rifles, rocket-propelled grenades, hand grenades, hunting knives and bolt cutters. The Israel Defense Forces released a number of photos of the seized weapons.

The army said in a statement that the incident began at 4:00 a.m. Saturday as lookout troops spotted four figures heading toward the border fence “in military formation” from the direction of Khan Younis in southern Gaza. […]

The four Gazans were killed by Israeli soldiers who “opened fire once one of the terrorists scaled the fence,” the military said in an initial statement, adding that a hand grenade was thrown at the troops during the clash but none of the soldiers were injured.”

On the morning of August 11th another incident took place in the northern sector of the same border.

“Israeli forces shot dead a Palestinian gunman who opened fire at them while attempting to sneak into Israel from Gaza early Sunday, the military said, as fresh fighting broke out on the tense border. […]

“IDF lookouts spotted an armed terrorist approaching the security fence in the northern Gaza Strip. The terrorist shot at IDF troops. The troops, who were prepared for the event because of the lookout, opened fire at the terrorist,” the army said in a statement.”

Earlier this month a similar incident took place in the southern sector when a Hamas operative infiltrated Israeli territory, injuring three Israeli soldiers.

A media outlet truly committed to providing “impartial news and information to help people understand and engage with the world around them” would of course report such incidents in order to provide its audience with context to the phrase “the blockade which Israel says it imposes for security reasons”.

The BBC, however, has to date ignored all three of those serious recent incidents in its English language reporting. The two latest attacks have however been briefly mentioned on the BBC Arabic website.

Related Articles:

No BBC reporting on serious Gaza border incident

 

 

BBC reporting on Gush Etzion terror attack

On the morning of August 8th the BBC News website published a report titled “Israel hunts killer of off-duty soldier in West Bank” on its ‘Middle East’ page. The report has since undergone various amendments but the headline and opening paragraph describing Dvir Sorek as an “off-duty soldier” even though he had yet to undergo any military training remain unchanged.

Unsurprisingly, the only use of the word ‘terrorist’ throughout the report came in direct quotes from the Israeli prime minister and an IDF spokesman.

One hundred and five of the report’s 414 words were given over to uncritical amplification of statements from a terrorist organisation.

“There has been no claim of responsibility for the killing, though a spokesman for Hamas, the Palestinian militant group which rules the Gaza Strip, justified the attack.

“The Etzion [Jewish settlement bloc] Operation was as much as a response to the crimes of Occupation, the latest of which was the one committed at Wadi Hummus; it is also a response to the continued occupation of the Palestinian territory,” Hazem Qasim said.

He was referring to the recent demolition by Israel of Palestinian homes in the area of Wadi Hummus which Israel said were built illegally too close to the separation barrier in the West Bank.”

Towards the end of the report readers were told that:

“Cpl Sorek’s killing has echoes of the abduction and murder of three Israeli teenagers in the same area of the West Bank in 2014.

The murders of Naftali Fraenkel, 16, Gilad Shaer, 16, and Eyal Yifrah, 19, triggered a massive search in the West Bank, and eventually escalated into a conflict between Israel and Palestinian militants in Gaza.

The killers of the teenagers came from Hamas.”

As has been noted here on numerous other occasions in the past five years when the BBC has presented a similarly misleading portrayal of the background to Operation Protective Edge:

“…the BBC has completely airbrushed from audience view the hundreds of missiles launched at civilian targets in Israel between the date of the kidnappings – June 12th – and the commencement of Operation Protective Edge on July 8th. It was of course that surge in missile fire which was the reason for Israel’s military action, with the later discovery of dozens of cross-border tunnels prompting the subsequent ground operation. The military operation could have been avoided had Hamas elected to take advantage of the ample opportunities it was given to stop the missile fire before July 8th, but the terrorist organisation chose not to do so – for reasons not by any means exclusively connected to Israel.”

A filmed report embedded into that article and also posted separately on the BBC News website described the victim as a soldier, without the term “off-duty”. While that portrayal is technically correct, it is also irrelevant seeing as the attacker would not have been aware of the fact that he had recently been recruited.

Listeners to BBC Radio 4’s ‘Today’ programme on the morning of August 8th were told in a news bulletin (from 2:07:04 here) that:

“An Israeli soldier has been found stabbed to death near a Jewish settlement in the occupied West Bank. The 18-year-old is thought to have been off-duty at the time of the attack near Hebron. The Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, said he was killed by a Palestinian.”

Once again the victim was described as a soldier even though the IDF spokesman had clarified that:

“The slain youth is a resident of Binyamin [in Samaria] and a yeshivah student in Migdal Oz. He had begun his recruitment into the IDF but had not yet served. He was still in the studying stage at the yeshivah.”

As for the BBC’s claim that the Israeli prime minister had, by 10 a.m. local time on August 8th, said that the victim was “killed by a Palestinian” – we have been unable to find anything on the prime minister’s social media accounts or in reports by the local media such as Ha’aretz, Ynet, the Jerusalem Post or the Times of Israel to support that BBC claim.  

Related Articles:

BBC News report omits significant information