FactsOfIsrael.com News, Comments and Links
BBC reporters continue to support Palestinian terrorism
The Jerusalem Post (www.jpost.com) has posted more examples on how the English BBC reporters "are full-throated partisans in covering the Israeli-Palestinian crisis, acting as outright advocates of the Palestinian cause instead of neutral purveyers of information".
One striking gauge of the bias is the discrepancy in treatment of Palestinian versus Israeli spokesmen by BBC interviewers. Deep indulgence is routinely afforded Palestinian officials, while Israelis who defend the actions of their government are often verbally pounded in hostile, aggressive interviews. [...]
I think the fact that reporters that work for the BBC tend to be European leftists makes them full supporters of the Palestinian cause. They ignore the historical context, the refusal of peace by Arafat and his thugs, the thousands of terrorist attacks and dozens of suicide bombers that have deliberately killed hundreds of unarmed Israeli civilians and continue in their blind hate of Israel. It also makes sense that such a message would be carried by the leftist NPR in the US (see "The deliberate killing of unarmed civilians is terrorism").
Thank God Europe is not a super power anymore and is irrelevant in the outcome of the Israeli/Arab wars.
I copy the full article below.
ANDREA LEVIN'S EYE ON THE MEDIA: BBC World Disservice
BBC reporters, as millions of listeners and viewers have come to know, are full-throated partisans in covering the Israeli-Palestinian crisis, acting as outright advocates of the Palestinian cause instead of neutral purveyers of information.
One striking gauge of the bias is the discrepancy in treatment of Palestinian versus Israeli spokesmen by BBC interviewers. Deep indulgence is routinely afforded Palestinian officials, while Israelis who defend the actions of their government are often verbally pounded in hostile, aggressive interviews.
On consecutive days (August 7 and 8, 2002) on the World Service's News Hour, BBC's Alex Brodie interviewed Nabil Shaath, the PA's Minister for Planning and International Cooperation. Although Shaath is a man of questionable credibility, given his prior statements and entanglements, not a hint of skepticism was conveyed by BBC.
In particular, no reference was made to Shaath's recent baseless and incendiary charges that Israel had massacred 500 Palestinians in Jenin and had engaged in summary executions and the removal of corpses in refrigerated trucks. Coincidentally, only days before the BBC broadcast, the United Nations had issued a report definitively refuting Palestinian allegations that Israel committed a "massacre" in its April incursion into Jenin to uproot terror bases.
But Brodie ignored this apparently minor blemish on Shaath's veracity, as Shaath, of course, knew he would. Indeed, the reporter evinced not the slightest reservation when the Palestinian spokesman began anew to recite charges against Israel: "Assassinations, siege and further incursions. I mean, what they have done in... the north of Gaza and in Rafah in the south of Gaza, and in Tulkarem and Nablus in the last two, three days is unbelievable."
Nor was there any lurking uneasiness about Shaath's credibility based on other aspects of his resume, including threats of violence against Israel. In March 1996, the Arafat aide had announced, "if and when Israel will say, 'That's it, we won't talk about Jerusalem, we won't return refugees, we won't dismantle settlements, and we won't retreat from borders,' then all acts of violence will return. Except that this time we'll have 30,000 armed Palestinian soldiers who will operate in areas in which we have unprecedented elements of freedom."
The minister's involvement in rampant Palestinian financial abuse was equally immaterial to the BBC. A Palestinian Legislative Council committee had actually urged that Shaath be put on trial for corruption in the wake of massive budgetary scandals involving the disappearance and misuse of 40% of the Palestinians' 1996 budget, or $326 million. That fleeting effort by Palestinians to bring accountability and transparency to their governing clique was crushed by Arafat and cronies like Shaath.
Brodie's questioning in the August 7 segment contained almost comical sycophancy. In one query, the reporter tossed this tough challenge: "[T]he Israelis are going to want you and your forces to take Hamas and Islamic Jihad and the others head-on. That's politically impossible for you, isn't it?"
Shaath agreed; "This is impossible."
Only one Israeli voice was heard in the two segments, that of Ha'aretz journalist Danny Ben-Simon. A favored BBC guest, Ben-Simon often espouses views consistent with BBC perspectives. In this instance, he appeared torn between deploring the epidemic of terrorist slaughter engulfing his country and satisfying Brodie's insistence that he offer some "optimism here" on avenues of negotiation.
In the end, the Israeli reporter deferred to the BBC, saying he didn't "know which comes first" the targeted killings by Israel or the suicide bombers. He concluded: "So it's, I mean, both of them must be right..."
Not to worry. Ben-Simon will be invited back.
When Mr. Shaath returned to the News Hour on August 8 to blast Israel for not withdrawing from areas re-occupied by the military, he was echoed by Hanan Ashrawi, who berated Israel for violating "its own commitments," and acting in "bad faith." No Israelis at all were heard in this segment. Instead, Brodie and his colleague Caroline Hawley lamented that real progress in achieving a "cease-fire" had been wrecked by Israel's strike against Hamas leader Salah Shehada.
Some days the BBC does invite Israeli officials. A memorable segment with Foreign Ministry spokesman Gideon Meir in February included Alex Brodie goading the Israeli. In reply to Meir's statement that Israel treats "human life in a different way than the Palestinians are doing," an indignant Brodie demanded: "I'm sorry, what did you say? You say that you treat human life in a different way to the Palestinians?" Meir stood his ground answering: "Absolutely, absolutely. We don't send suicide bombers to put nails in the heads of teenagers This is what the Palestinians are doing." Unmoved, Brodie then assailed Israeli military efforts as counterproductive, declaring "there is no military solution." When Meir concurred, urging Palestinians to come to "the negotiating table," Brodie oozed sarcasm.
"This is interesting. You are saying [you are] open to negotiations?"
Meir responded: "We were always open to negotiations."
"No, that's not the case, Mr. Meir," Brodie shot back, insisting the current Israeli government was opposed to peace efforts.
Repeatedly, as is characteristic on BBC, the interviewer interrupted the Israeli speaker, badgering him and disparaging the government of Ariel Sharon.
Elsewhere around the globe, BBC may have free rein to proffer such repugnant coverage. But in America where the World Service News Hour is carried on hundreds of public radio outlets, listeners can protest the use of tax-supported media to disseminate biased and defamatory reports.
Andrea Levin is Executive Director of CAMERA, Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America
Link to this page | Email this entry | digg this
The BBC is the only major impartial news network in the world. While reporters of the BBC have no disposition to be biased (as this website clearly does), they draw the obvious conclusion that Isarel is committing daily warcrimes against palestinians - the vast majority of whom are innocent civilians. While the palestinian terrorists are of course completely unjustified in their actions, they are the tiny minority in Palestinian areas, wheras the Israeli military is the official state military of Israel and is killing civilians, reflecting on the whole Israeli population.
Posted by: Daniel at November 7, 2002 11:52 AM
FAIR USE NOTICE
This site contains some copyrighted materials the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.