The World Media Blaming Israel is Scary

 

World Media Blames Israel for US Striking Iran

Full article at https://tinyurl.com/2txttyvj

Taking 66 Americans hostage at the U.S. embassy in Tehran in 1979. Killing 258 Americans in three separate Beirut bombings in 1983. Killing 19 U.S. Air Force servicemen in Saudi Arabia in 1996. Killing 603 U.S. service members in Iraq between 2003 and 2011. Killing three Americans in Jordan in January 2024. Attempting to assassinate U.S. President Donald Trump last year. Damaging the U.S. embassy branch in Tel Aviv last week.

This is just a partial list of what the Islamic Republic of Iran has done to the United States since the regime came to power 46 years ago.

Nevertheless, since Trump ordered strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities Saturday night, leading media outlets in the U.S. and around the world have reported that the U.S. had no reason to get involved, other than to help Israel.

That’s factually false–not only because of the long history of Iranian aggression listed above, but because a nuclear Iran would pose a direct future threat not just to the so-called “Little Satan” in Israel, but also to “the Middle Satan” (Europe) and “the Big Satan,” the United States.

This narrative is dangerous. When Iran retaliates against the U.S., any American casualties will likely be blamed on Israel by those misled by a media that is reporting inaccurately and irresponsibly.

·        The New York Times headline reads, “With Decision to Bomb Iran, Trump Injects US Into Middle East Conflict.” The truth is the Iranian regime injected the U.S. into the conflict immediately when it took power, and it had nothing to do with Israel. The sub-head is even worse, with its claim that “the US has joined Israel’s war against the country.” Why does The New York Times get to decide that only Israel can be involved in stopping a maniacal regime from getting nukes?

·        The Associated Press headline is no better: “US Inserts Itself Into War Between Israel and Iran.” Foundation for Defense of Democracies CEO Mark Dubowitz said: “Most people don’t get this: Khamenei gave his nuclear weapons scientists permission — for the first time — to creep toward a warhead DURING talks with Trump & Witkoff. That was the tripwire. Crossed. Detected. Understood. The reason Israeli strikes began.”

·        Reuters described “Trump’s decision to join Israel’s military campaign against its major rival Iran [as] a major escalation of the conflict [that also] risks opening a new era of instability in the Middle East.” Keep in mind, this was in a news article, not an analysis–this is the view of journalists Phil Stewart and Steve Holland who think the move will cause instability in the same Middle East that has been through 625 days of war on seven fronts. Perhaps stopping a nuclear-armed regime whose proxies have destabilized the region for decades might actually increase stability, Phil and Steve?

·        MSNBC columnist Nayyera Haq described “the volatile leaders of Iran or Israel” in speculating what might come next. But the democratically elected leaders of Israel are not morally or politically equivalent to the oppressive clerics and unelected strongmen of Iran. As Trump himself has noted, Iran had plenty of chances to avoid war.

·        BBC’s Middle East bureau chief Jo Floto wrote: “If Netanyahu’s tone was triumphant, and the smile barely suppressed, it is hardly surprising. He has spent most of his political career obsessed with the threat he believes Iran poses to Israel.” But it isn’t just Netanyahu. Stopping Iran’s pursuit of a nuclear weapon is a consensus issue in Israel, not a personal “obsession.” Calling it that implies irrationality when the threat is existential. Floto also credited Netanyahu with “changing the mind of a U.S. president who campaigned against overseas military adventures,” ignoring Trump’s repeated public declarations that he would take any necessary action to stop Iran’s nuclearization.

These examples reflect a broader pattern of dishonest reporting on the U.S. strike on Fordow. If this trend continues, there’s a serious risk that antisemites and anti-Israel extremists in the U.S. will respond with violence, targeting American Jews for what was a legitimate decision by the president to defend his own country.

It’s not too late for the international press to course-correct–to report accurately, and place the attacks in their proper historical context–before false narratives ignite a wave of anti-Israel or antisemitic backlash at home.

 

BBC’s Bowen Claims “Israel Trying to Control the Media”

Video - HOSPITAL turned Into A Military TERROR Operation Center  http://tinyurl.com/24ct5ws6 

For the full article go to - http://tinyurl.com/63m2d4rs

BBC’s Jeremy Bowen complains that “Israel continues to prevent independent journalistic access to Gaza – it will do so until there is a ceasefire and even then, if Israel remains in control of the territory, I am not sure we will be allowed in.

I don't think the Israeli forces are worried about whether we are safe in there or not – I think there are things they don't want us to see and that they want to master the media battlefield. So they are fighting on all fronts and controlling the media is one of them.

If you look at Israeli TV, it is focused 24/7 on Gaza of course. But what you don’t see is Palestinian suffering. You see troops, the home front, constant reminders of what happened on 7 October. You see the pain of the hostage families.

What you do not see are stories of individual Palestinians, nor the colossal scale of the damage going on in Gaza.”

So this is his point of biased view, but let’s break this down.

1. Israel’s borders with Gaza are shut. Period.
2. Foreign journalists were previously able to enter the Gaza Strip through the Erez Crossing, which has been closed since October 7 after Hamas destroyed it.. There is no “business as usual” for passage between Israel and Gaza for anyone, including journalists.
3. The international media do, however, have the ability to attempt to enter Gaza through the Rafah Crossing on the Egyptian side.
4. But Bowen believes that Israel is preventing foreign media from entering because “there are things they don’t want us to see and that they want to master the media battlefield.

”It is arguably not to Israel’s benefit that foreign journalists are not in Gaza. Because Palestinian stringers and agenda-driven Arab outlets such as Al Jazeera are currently the only ones supplying all of the coverage from inside the Strip.

5. Despite a steady flow of damaging footage from Gaza showing injured women and children while suspiciously never showing Hamas terrorists, Bowen still believes Israel is “controlling the media.”

But is Israel also controlling its domestic media in the cause of ensuring its people don’t see any Palestinian suffering? Israel’s government may wish it had some semblance of control over the country’s newspapers and TV stations but the reality is that Israeli media is fiercely independent.

Israel is a country still traumatized by those events and for Bowen to expect Israeli media to be broadcasting the same sympathetic content on Gaza as his own BBC or other foreign media is both unrealistic and meant to portray Israelis as somehow immune to the suffering of ordinary Palestinians.

How dare Bowen make such a judgment. Israelis are still processing and trying to come to terms with October 7 and the resulting impact on the country. Israeli TV news is now broadcasting footage of the funerals of Israeli soldiers, many of whom were reservists who left their families and day jobs to defend their country. Many may have lost their lives because the IDF has used ground troops rather than airstrikes precisely to avoid causing Palestinian civilian casualties.

Jeremy Bowen is correct: there is a media battlefield. Israel has every right to fight on that battlefield especially when foreign journalists like himself weaponize their news reports to assault the Jewish state.

VIEW OUR WEBSITE WWW.BRITISHISRAELGROUP.WEEBLY.COM

"BBC" Laps Up Amnesty’s Latest Anti-Israel Hit Job

Video Of The Week - PA. Does NOT Control Jenin https://tinyurl.com/3r2yc25h

 Carrying on its long tradition of unfairly attacking Israel, Amnesty International has published another hatchet job masquerading as a serious investigation this week.

 The report, “Israel/OPT: Civilian deaths and extensive destruction in latest Gaza offensive highlight human toll of apartheid,” accuses Israel of committing a war crime in its pursuit of Islamic Jihad terrorists in the Gaza Strip last month.

 As is the usual fashion when it comes to Amnesty, the 1,300-word denunciation of Israel exercising its legally-sanctioned right to defend itself is replete with hyperbole, distortions and outright lies — the latter demonstrated in Amnesty repeating its well-worn libel that Israel is an apartheid state.

 Given that Amnesty so clearly has an anti-Israel axe to grind, one would think that reputable news organizations, like the BBC, which prides itself on its commitment to impartiality, would take anything published on the Amnesty website with a pinch of salt.

 Alas, not so.

 Instead, the BBC has regurgitated almost word-for-word Amnesty’s most damaging allegations surrounding Israel’s role in the May conflagration, including Amnesty’s claim that the IDF mounted “disproportionate air strikes which killed Palestinian civilians.”

 Of course, and this should go without saying, there is nothing disproportionate about killing terrorists who are planning to launch attacks on Israeli civilians.

 In the piece, ‘Amnesty: Possible war crimes in recent Israel-Gaza fighting,’ the BBC’s Middle East desk correspondent David Gritten quotes at length Amnesty’s repeated claim that Israeli strikes to take out Islamic Jihad commanders were excessive, as well as the NGO’s malicious assertion that the risk to civilians in Gaza was “likely disregarded” by those in Israel who “planned and authorised the attacks.”

 While Amnesty may have convinced most journalists that it is an unimpeachable source of information, the BBC should really have examined the organization’s sad and sorry history of getting things wrong or letting its ideologically-driven leanings interfere in conflicts that it apparently knows very little about.

 For example, Amnesty was widely criticized last year when it released a report that accused the Ukrainian military of endangering civilians by “establishing bases and operating weapons systems in populated residential areas, including in schools and hospitals” — apparently forgetting that Ukraine was forced to position soldiers in urban areas to avoid being completely overrun by invading Russian troops and to protect those very Ukrainian civilians in the path of Russia’s military.

 Unsurprisingly, when Islamist terrorists plant rockets inside and underneath civilian centers in Gaza, Amnesty has very little to say in the way of condemnation.

 However, the most worrying aspect of the article is Gritten’s abject failure to probe the veracity of Amnesty’s allegations, as any serious journalist should.

 If he had, he would have noted that Amnesty’s claim that Israel started the five days of fighting, is complete and utter fiction. As HonestReporting has repeatedly pointed out, Operation Shield and Arrow was launched in response to a barrage of rocket fire from the Strip after Islamic Jihad terrorist Khader Adnan eventually died in an Israeli prison following a protracted hunger strike in a bid to secure his release.

 Gritten also appears to go to great lengths to clean up Islamic Jihad’s image, particularly by not bothering to mention that the group is an internationally-recognized terrorist organization that has been proscribed by pretty much the entire Western world, including the United Kingdom where the BBC is based.

 Indeed, Gritten even prominently features the group’s “spokesman” Tariq Salmi saying Islamic Jihad welcomed Amnesty’s report, which “proves that the occupation [Israel] was the one that began the aggression by committing grave crimes.” This, while not mentioning the fact that the group’s sworn goal is the annihilation of the Jewish state using “the Jihad solution and the martyrdom style as the only choice for liberation.”

 As an independent organization, Amnesty International is free to publish as many unfair screeds about Israel as it likes.

 As a state-funded broadcaster tasked with delivering non-partisan news coverage to millions, the BBC should robustly challenge Amnesty’s biased bilge. 

VIEW OUR WEBSITE WWW.BRITISHISRAELGROUP.WEEBLY.COM

Shameful Silence on West Bank Massacre

Video Of The Week -Manipulated Media Attacks on Israel- https://tinyurl.com/mr2dtd4f         

For the full article by Brendan O'neill go to - https://tinyurl.com/mnrknere

So that’s it, is it? A British mother and her two young daughters are murdered by a terrorist in the most awful fashion imaginable, and we’re just going to move on? Three British citizens are shot to death at point-blank range on account of their identity, their beliefs, and it’s fading from our collective memory already? The Foreign Office did express ‘sadness’ over this massacre of half a family, which is something, I suppose. Though if you and your mother were murdered overseas for being the ‘wrong’ kind of people, wouldn’t you hope for something more than sadness from the government? Anger, perhaps?

This is the grim story of the murder of Lucy Dee and her daughters Maia and Rina in the West Bank. The Dees are originally from the UK. The father of the family – Leo Dee – was a rabbi in Hendon in north London and later Radlett in Hertfordshire, parts of Britain with large Jewish populations. The family made aliyah to Israel in 2014 and were living in Efrat, a settlement in the West Bank. On Friday, as they drove to Tiberias in northern Israel for Passover, mum Lucy’s car was ambushed by a Palestinian gunman. He shot at the vehicle, causing it to crash. Then he walked to the wreckage with his Kalashnikov and sprayed bullets inside. Maia and Rina were hit by 20 bullets. They were 20 and 15 years old. Lucy survived, in a comatose state. ‘How will I explain to Lucy what has happened to our two precious gifts?’, Rabbi Dee wept at the funeral of his daughters. The next day, Lucy died.

Where is Britain’s anger over this slaughter of three women who were British citizens? Actually, two women and a minor. A British-born child – 15-year-old Rina – was shot, executioner-style, for the crime of being a Jewish person in the West Bank and there is only deathly silence from Britain’s moral clerisy. Our opinion-forming elites expressed more sympathy for Shamima Begum, 15 when she fled Britain to join the Islamist death cult of ISIS, than they have for Rina Dee, 15, when she was cut down for her family’s offence of migrating from the UK to a peaceful Jewish community in the West Bank.

Officialdom’s initial comments on the murders were extraordinarily passive. ‘We are saddened to hear about the deaths of two British-Israeli citizens and the serious injuries sustained by a third individual’, said the Foreign Office. Deaths? The women did not just expire, of natural causes or something. These weren’t deaths, they were killings. Michael Oren, the former Israeli ambassador to the US, said the lack of ‘outrage’ in the FO’s statement was strange and disturbing. According to the UK government, ‘The sisters merely “died” and a third person was somehow injured’, he said. The murders were decontextualised, de-moralised in fact – turned from wickedness consciously inflicted on three civilians into a mere regretful demise.

The passive voice could be heard in the media, too. ‘Daughters of British rabbi die in West Bank drive-by shooting’, was The Sunday Times headline. This elevation of the act of dying over the act of killing, of the passing away of the victims over the murderous intent of the killer, speaks to an urge to drain the incident of its true horror. To render it sorrowful rather than political; a tragedy rather than terrorism. The BBC’s first report on the attack swiftly stated that ‘the shooting took place hours after Israeli warplanes carried out airstrikes in southern Lebanon and the Gaza Strip’. As if these things are morally linked. As if the fact that Israel and Palestinian elements remain in a state of low-level war explains the massacre of three unarmed women. I trust the BBC still believes in the Geneva Conventions? They stipulate that in times of war no violence may be visited on individuals who are ‘taking no active part in the hostilities’.

Such moral depravity has been widespread. Under the BBC’s tweet about Maia and Rina’s funeral, one respondent said they ‘shouldn’t be there in the first place’. ‘Not a smart idea to go settle [in] occupied land’, laughed another. ‘Occupiers dead’, said one. The cruelty of it all is unsettling. Then we had the response of Cage, the advocacy group that works with communities affected by the ‘war on terror’. Its Twitter thread branded Rabbi Dee a ‘coloniser’ and said he and his family enjoyed ‘an apartheid lifestyle’. “

The British silence on the massacre of these three British citizens is a new nadir in moral cowardice. The problem is that the faces of the murdered mother and her young, aspirational daughters pose too much of a threat to the self-aggrandising moral narrative of the anti-Israel set. These women dangerously call into question the hyper-racial depiction of Zionists as a wicked, abnormal people, and reveal that, in truth, some of them look and sound a lot like us. This must not stand. Too much moral capital has been invested in othering these people. And so Britain’s chattering class looks the other way – anywhere but into the eyes of the three women murdered for being Jews.

VIEW OUR WEBSITE WWW.BRITISHISRAELGROUP.WEEBLY.COM

BBC is Practising an Anti-Israel Bias

Video Of The Week - BBC's Non-Stop Anti-Israel Bias! https://tinyurl.com/mr3mxzmn

Simon Wiesenthal Center’s head says ‘months of intense debate and discussion’ preceded ranking; cites alleged biased reporting, antisemitic staff.

For the full article by Toi staff go to:  https://tinyurl.com/bdcvcwa8

The BBC has been branded antisemitic by the Simon Wiesenthal Center, and placed third on its annual “Global Antisemitism Top Ten” list, according to a Sunday report.

First and second place went to Iran and the Gaza-based Hamas terror group, respectively.

The head of the organization, Marvin Hier, told the Daily Mail that “people might be surprised to see the BBC on our list, but the decision to place the BBC at No. 3 came after months of intense debate and discussion.”

“We believe the BBC has been guilty of several incidences of antisemitism during the past year,” he said.

“People might assume we would put neo-Nazi groups on our list,” Hier told the paper, “but the BBC is there because when a globally recognized organization allows antisemitism to creep into its reporting, it makes it all the more insidious and dangerous.”

Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs 

The BBC Ignores 99 Percent of Attacks on Israelis. - Jan Shure (Jewish Chronicle-UK)

There were 189 terror incidents against Israelis in June - more than six per day. These included 117 attacks with petrol bombs, 42 with pipe bombs, 16 arson attacks, 11 shootings and two stabbings. There was also a rocket attack directed at the city of Ashkelon.

 The BBC failed to report almost any of these, though it was very quick to record injuries or fatalities which result from Israel's counter-measures.

 BBC News reported just 1% of the terror attacks against Israelis, but it reported 89% of the resulting actions by Israel.  

 Few aspects of the BBC's editorial stance better illustrate its role in fanning the flames of anti-Israel feeling - and thus, indirectly, fanning the flames of anti-Semitism.

This cavernous imbalance in reporting damages Israel and harms Jews, because of the blowback on Jewish communities.

That Israelis experienced more than six terror incidents per day in June is the kind of context that is vital to enable BBC viewers to make a fair judgement on Israeli actions.

 Its omission massively manipulates reality in favour of Israel's enemies. That is immoral.

VIEW OUR WEBSITE WWW.BRITISHISRAELGROUP.WEEBLY.COM

BBC ‘Inexcusable’ Anti-Semitism

Video Of The Week - Peace Brings Benefits- https://tinyurl.com/ytb46ahc

“I simply don’t see how I or in fact any Jew who has any pride in that name can be associated with the Corporation anymore.”

For the full Article from “United With Israel”  by Pesach Benson, https://tinyurl.com/58d3yjhp

After 30 years of contributing to BBC programming, Rabbi YY Rubinstein resigned over what he called “inexcusable” anti-Semitism. The rabbi posted his resignation letter on Facebook on Tuesday.,

Rabbi Rubinstein, a sought-after writer and international lecturer, was a regular on BBC shows such as “Thought for the Day,” “Sunrise, Sunset,” other TV and radio programs. On some occasions, he even appeared on the BBC’s World Service.

In a letter addressed to a BBC staffer identified only as Gabby, the rabbi wrote, “The current crisis over anti-Semitism at the Corporation and its attempts to turn the victims of the recent anti-Semitic attack on Jewish children in London and claim that the victims were actually the perpetrators, was and is inexcusable. The obfuscation, denial that followed, was and is utterly damning.”

Rabbi Rubinstein noted that the BBC was ranked number three on the Simon Wiesenthal Center’s list of top anti-Semites of 2021, but stressed that this wasn’t a reflection of Gabby or the production people that he worked with during his 30 years with the broadcaster.

But the rabbi concluded, “I simply don’t see how I or in fact any Jew who has any pride in that name can be associated with the Corporation anymore.”

Jews have long been frustrated by the BBC’s coverage of Israel, but anger absolutely boiled over during Chanukah.

Jewish children traveling on a bus in London, on their way to a holiday celebration, were viciously harassed by a group of Muslim anti-Semites in downtown London. The young men shouted “Free Palestine,” made Nazi salutes and other profane gestures, and spat and banged on windows. The attack was caught on video, but police have not found the suspects.

BBC coverage falsely claimed that Islamophobic slurs could be heard from inside the bus, though none were heard in the video. A linguist and forensic audio experts commissioned by the Board of Jewish Deputies concluded that the words in question were somebody saying in Hebrew, “tikra lemishehu, ze dachuf,” which in English means, “Call someone, it’s urgent.”

Former BBC chairman Michael Grade called on the news service to provide the evidence to support their defense or rethink and issue an urgent correction and apology.”

British Jews and lawmakers are demanding the BBC adopt a working definition of anti-Semitism developed by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance and pledge to keep to fair standards of coverage of Israel and the Jews.

In a statement to the Jewish Chronicle, a BBC spokesman said, “We are sorry to hear of Rabbi YY Rubinstein’s decision as he has always provided thoughtful and compassionate contributions to our programmes, which have been deeply appreciated by our listeners. Anti-Semitism is abhorrent and we strive to serve the Jewish community, and all communities across the UK, fairly.”

NEW ,VIEW OUR WEBSITE WWW.BRITISHISRAELGROUP.WEEBLY.COM

BBC only just behind Hamas in SWC "List Of Shame"

 Video Of The Week - Dershowitz on Tutu: "A Special Place in Hell" https://tinyurl.com/ujupk4ph

For the full article go to DailyMail https://tinyurl.com/2rernn5y

The head of The Simon Wiesenthal Center said the BBC had repeatedly been guilty of anti-Semitism

Rabbi Marvin Hier highlighted reporting of an anti-Semitic attack in London

By CAROLINE GRAHAM IN LOS ANGELES and JONATHAN BUCKS FOR THE MAIL ON SUNDAY

The BBC has been branded anti-Semitic by one of the world’s most respected Jewish organisations. 

The Simon Wiesenthal Center –named after the famed Nazi-hunter – has placed the BBC at No 3 on its annual ‘Global Antisemitism Top Ten’ list.

Last night, Rabbi Marvin Hier, head of the centre, told The Mail On Sunday: ‘People might be surprised to see the BBC on our list but the decision to place the BBC at No 3 came after months of intense debate and discussion.

‘We believe the BBC has been guilty of several incidences of anti-Semitism during the past year.

‘People might assume we would put neo-Nazi groups on our list but the BBC is there because when a globally recognised organisation allows antisemitism to creep into its reporting, it makes it all the more insidious and dangerous. 

The Simon Wiesenthal Center –named after the famed Nazi-hunter – has placed the BBC at No 3 on its annual ‘Global Antisemitism Top Ten’ list

‘People around the world trust the BBC and rely on it for truthful reporting of world events.’

The Rabbi singled out the Corporation’s reporting of an attack on a busload of Jewish teenagers by a group of men who chanted anti-Israel slogans.

The incident took place in London’s Oxford Street last month as the teens celebrated the Jewish holiday of Hanukkah.

‘The BBC falsely reported that a victim on the bus used an anti-Muslim slur. But what was heard on tape was a distressed Jewish man speaking in Hebrew appealing for help,’ Rabbi Hier said.

The Mail on Sunday understands the BBC has investigated the reporting and maintains the alleged slur was included to ensure the fullest account of the incident.

The BBC issued a statement earlier this month saying the story was a ‘factual report’ that ‘overwhelmingly focused on the individuals the police want to identify; those who directed abuse at the bus’.

The Wiesenthal Center report, which will be released on Tuesday, lists Iran – whose leaders deny the Holocaust and have pledged to ‘annihilate Israel’ – at No 1 on the list and the Palestinian terror group Hamas at No 2.

The report condemned former BBC reporter Tala Halawa who posted a series of tweets including ‘Hitler was right’ and ‘Zionists can’t get enough of our blood’ in 2014. Ms Halawa no longer works for the BBC.

Rabbi Marvin Hier highlighted BBC News reporting of an anti-Semitic attack in London in his defense of the list.

It also criticised the Corporation for ‘often’ referring to Israelis as ‘settlers’ and cited a video tweeted by senior BBC producer Alaa Daraghme captioned: ‘An Israeli settler ramming a Palestinian man near the Lions’ Gate.’

Rabbi Hier said: ‘In fact, the car drove on to the pavement after an attempt by Palestinians to lynch the Jewish driver who lost control of the vehicle.’

A BBC source said the original tweet had been posted when there was ‘some confusion’ over the incident. Mr Daraghme later published another tweet clarifying what had happened. 

The US-based Simon Wiesenthal Center’s top ten also includes ‘social media giants’ (for allowing hate to spread online) and the Unilever corporation, which owns Ben & Jerry’s ice-cream. Ben & Jerry’s board boycotted East Jerusalem and the West Bank.

A BBC spokesman said last night: ‘Anti-Semitism is abhorrent. The BBC strives to serve the Jewish community, and all communities across our country, fairly with accurate and impartial reporting.’

NEW ,VIEW OUR WEBSITE WWW.BRITISHISRAELGROUP.WEEBLY.COM

BBC: Leading the World Against Israel

 Video Of The Week -One Year Into the Abraham Accords - https://tinyurl.com/ypx2apxj

For the full Article by Richard Kemp go to https://tinyurl.com/tnuprh4e 15,8,2021

• in 2004 the BBC was pressured to open an inquiry into its coverage, by Malcolm Balen, former BBC News editor. For 17 years Balen's findings have been kept under lock and key by the BBC, which admitted spending $500,000 of public funds in a series of legal battles to prevent its release.
• "What is it are they hiding and what are they afraid of?", Conservative peer Lord Polack asked.
• The BBC's reporting on the Gaza conflict this year typifies its long-term bias against Israel. It constantly drew moral equivalence between Israel, a Western liberal democracy, and Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad, both proscribed terrorist organizations.... There was no acknowledgement that the conflict had been initiated by these groups that openly seek the destruction of Israel or that without their violent actions, no Palestinians in Gaza or civilians in Israel would have died. Instead the BBC maintained the fiction — pushed by the Palestinian side — that Israel's actions in Jerusalem were the cause. Nor did they mention that Hamas misappropriated millions of dollars of international aid to construct tunnels, rockets and other engines of war to attack Israeli civilians
• This biased journalism was crowned by commentary direct from Jeremy Bowen, whose report from Gaza at the end of the conflict looked more like pro-Hamas propaganda than objective reporting.....
• Why so much emphasis on Bowen's role? Because all BBC reporting on the Israel-Palestinian conflict for more than 15 years has been driven, above all, by his editorial influence.
• I do not blame Bowen for the influence he wields, I blame the BBC executives that allow him, with his history, to hold a position that dominates the coverage of the world's largest broadcast media corporation. Israel. During the 2021 Gaza conflict... the BBC had to issue corrections eight times in their Arabic news coverage alone.
• Senior BBC producer Alaa Daraghme recently shared a video on Twitter which he wrote was "An Israeli settler ramming a Palestinian man near the Lions Gate." In fact the video showed a car being driven onto the sidewalk after an attempt by Palestinians to lynch the driver, who then lost control. There are many other such cases of bias and distortion among BBC staff.
• Like many others, the BBC rejects or ignores historical reality in order to portray Israel as an illegal occupier of Arab lands. To underpin its false narrative, for many years it has repeated Palestinian propaganda, ignored violence against their own people, and whitewashed their Jew-hate.... Israel's contributions to disaster relief and other humanitarian actions around the world are almost always ignored.
• There is little likelihood, without firm intervention by the British government, that the BBC will relinquish its leadership of the global anti-Israel movement that has contributed to so much suffering, misery and bloodshed.

NEW ,VIEW OUR WEBSITE WWW.BRITISHISRAELGROUP.WEEBLY.COM

Rattling Israel's BBC Tormentors

 Video Of The Week - BBC'S "Blood Libel" https://tinyurl.com/9urahnes   

 Melanie Phillips April 21st 2021

 For the full Article go to - https://tinyurl.com/ed9vrvfw

 A reliable sign that someone has managed to puncture one of the BBC’s doctrinal falsehoods is when an interviewer is sufficiently rattled to keep interrupting.

 These theatrics occurred last evening on BBC TV’s Newsnight, when anchor Emily Maitlis grilled Tzipi Hotovely, Israel’s new ambassador to the UK.Hotovely,  is highly controversial because of her profile as an Israeli religious nationalist.

 The Newsnight item was ostensibly about what Britain might learn from Israel’s “green” vaccination passport.Maitlis noted concerns that the introduction of a British vaccination passport might widen social divisions. Then she said : But in Israel, where the Palestinian population has not been inoculated at anywhere near the rate of the Israeli population, there’s plenty of concern about the passport’s ability to widen the gulf.

 Subsequently noting Israel’s impressive achievement in getting nearly 60 per cent of its population fully vaccinated, she nevertheless added:

…but the roll-out to Palestinian citizens has been much slower at 0.5 per cent.

 Woa! Stop right there! She appeared to be suggesting that Israel was discriminating against its own Arab citizens by vaccinating them at a slower rate. This is totally untrue. Israeli Arabs have been offered the vaccination in exactly the same way as every other Israeli citizen.   Maitlis seemed to be conflating Israeli Arabs, who are Israeli citizens, with Palestinian Arabs who are not Israeli citizens but inhabit those disputed territories beyond Israel. Under the Oslo Accords, their health needs are delivered by the Palestinian Authority.

 Hotovely proceeded to hole other falsehoods below the waterline. She pointed out that the Palestinian Authority hadn’t wanted Israel to provide the Palestinian Arabs with a vaccination programme. The PA had instead wanted to provide it for them itself, and had done just that by purchasing doses of the Russian Sputnik vaccine.

 This unanswerable fact so wrong-footed Maitlis that she pulled out what she presumably believed was her killer point — that six Israeli ultra-leftist NGOs had said Israel had a “legal, moral and ethical” obligation to deliver Covid vaccinations to the Palestinians.

Hotovely kept her cool and responded with the first of her two zingers of the evening. “Let me ask you, Emily,” she said, “would you actually impose getting vaccines [on] the leaders of the Palestinians? Would you actually say [they had to] accept Israeli access and Israeli help? When they’re not interested?”

 Maitlis started to talk over her by robotically intoning “legal, moral and ethical obligation”. Hotoveley,proceeded to drive her point home:

But you’re not answering my question. My question is very simple. Can you impose receiving the vaccine on populations [whose] leadership wants to be in charge of the programme? You’re patronising the Palestinians.

 Maitlis asked:

You’re telling me that the Palestinians didn’t want to take up the vaccinations? Replied Hotovely:

No no, they had their own programme, they bought the Russian vaccine, they had a agreement with the WHO and they wanted to run their own programme and I think we need to respect that. And when they asked for Israel’s help, we were there to help.

With the collapse of that line of attack, Maitlis switched to the presumed awfulness of both Hotovely herself and the State of Israel that she represents.

 So it was that an item on the issue of vaccination passports found it necessary to accuse Israel of having proposed last year to annex up to one-third of the “West Bank”; and to accuse Hotovely, a former “settlements minister”, of being such a right-wing religious extremist that her appointment as ambassador had provoked 2000 liberal British Jews to petition against it. Did she or did she not, demanded Maitlis, support the “two-state solution”? To which Hotovely said how gratified she had been by the warm response to her arrival from the Jewish community, and calmly delivered her second zinger of the evening.

 You cannot speak about a formula when the Palestinians aren’t willing to sit and negotiate with Israel. They’re not interested in any two-state solution.

 From all of which we might make two observations. The first is that this was an impressive debut appearance by Tzipi Hotovely. She remained calm, factual and pleasant while delivering facts that punctured the lies (and which many Brits will not have heard before).The second is that,  the BBC seems to be taking its talking points not just from the Guardian, but also now from extreme-leftist NGOs.

 NEW ,VIEW OUR WEBSITE WWW.BRITISHISRAELGROUP.WEEBLY.COM