Monthly Archives: December 2019

Dec 25 2019

Revisiting the BBC’s promotion of Amnesty International

The recent publication of a report concerning Amnesty International by David Collier provides an opportunity to revisit the issue of the BBC’s promotion of that NGO.

Throughout 2018 Amnesty International was the second most quoted and promoted foreign NGO in BBC reporting on Israel and the Palestinians. Coverage of the arrest and trial of Ahed Tamimi included quotes from Amnesty International and even promoted a link to the NGO’s related campaign webpage. A BBC News website live webpage covering the ‘Great Return March’ featured quotes from Amnesty International and the organisation was quoted in a BBC Sport report about a cycle race and later the same month in another report.

That editorial policy was also evident in earlier years – for example:

BBC’s Connolly ‘contextualises’ Hamas torture and execution (spoiler – it’s Israel’s fault)

BBC amplification of Amnesty’s lawfare agenda again compromises impartiality

BBC WS ‘Newshour’ amplifies Israel delegitimising lawfare campaign

BBC’s Middle East editor promotes Amnesty International’s Gaza report

BBC lends its shoulder to Amnesty’s cart of politically motivated defamation – part one

BBC lends its shoulder to Amnesty’s cart of politically motivated defamation – part two

BBC website now promoting flawed Amnesty report as a ‘related story’

BBC uses photo of exploited child to promote anti-Israel propaganda

Although BBC editorial guidelines on impartiality have long stipulated that audiences should be provided with information concerning the “affiliations, funding and particular viewpoints” of contributors – including charities – in over seven years of monitoring we have never been able to document the BBC’s provision of such information in relation to Amnesty International.

Related Articles:

No BBC coverage of Amnesty International’s antisemitism vote

Dec 24 2019

BBC Radio 4 religious show airs anodyne report on Palestinian Christians

h/t MD

The December 22nd edition of the BBC Radio 4 religious affairs programme ‘Sunday’ included a report from the BBC world affairs correspondent Emily Buchanan whose highly problematic video purporting to explain Judaism to BBC journalists still remains on the BBC Academy website.

Presenter Edward Stourton opened the item (from 14:34 here) with a reference to the Banksy agitprop unveiled hours earlier. [emphasis in italics in the original]

Stourton: “Well Christian Christmas has been marked in Bethlehem by a new Banksy installation framing the manger scene with Israel’s separation wall. This time last year Israel allowed some 700 Palestinians living in Gaza to travel to Bethlehem, Nazareth and Jerusalem over the Christmas period. Earlier this month the Israeli authorities announced they won’t be doing the same this year. They say many Gazans who are allowed to visit the West Bank outstay their permits. The episode illustrates the kind of pressures faced by the Christian minority in Gaza and the West Bank. My colleague Emily Buchanan was in Bethlehem not long before the recent announcement.”

That initial announcement was actually amended on the same day as this programme was aired but that fact is not reflected on its web page.

If listeners thought that they were about to hear some in-depth reporting on why Christians from the Gaza Strip “outstay their permits” (none of whom have been interviewed by the BBC in the past year) and what exactly the “pressures faced by the Christian minority in Gaza and the West Bank” are, they would have been disappointed. Emily Buchanan began by describing the scene at the Church of the Nativity in Bethlehem and then spoke to a priest.

Buchanan: “And how is it now? How difficult is it? I mean you’re in charge of the Church of the Nativity which is the big church, the church over the site where Jesus Christ was born. What are the changes that you’re seeing in the Christian community here?”

Priest: “Actually we are having the big problems that the people emigrated from Bethlehem to go around over around the world and the problem is lack of money, the problem lack of freedom. That’s why we are losing people, not gaining more people, getting more.”

The priest went on to state that the Christian Orthodox community in Bethlehem amounts to about three thousand people and commented “but day by day I see less people”.

Buchanan then went to visit a souvenir shop.

Buchanan: “Outside the church is bustling Manger Square with its shops selling olive wood nativity scenes, mother of pearl crosses and colourful ceramics. Tourism is vital to these Christian businesses and a major part of Bethlehem’s economy. One business is run by a couple called, appropriately, Joseph and Mary. Joseph Jacaman is a carpenter and I went to visit him in his workshop.”

After a discussion with the carpenter about his carvings, Buchanan told listeners that:

Buchanan: “Business fluctuates with every outbreak of violence in the region and many Christians have opted to emigrate.”

Listeners were not of course told who is responsible for those ‘outbreaks’ of violence before Buchanan went on to speak with the shop owner’s son.

Buchanan: “I asked him what pressures they’re facing.”

Jacaman: “Palestinian are suffering always in the holy land. Either Christians or Muslims, they are suffering the same way. I mean political situation is not good. Don’t have long-term plans. The war would start in this region any time. Intifada will start any minute. Business goes up and down. Things keep changing and it’s the holy land. You want to live in the holy land? You have to get used to this. It was never peace here. Go with the history, hundred years ago, it’s the same always.”

Buchanan: “How do you live day to day here when it’s so hard to plan ahead and to know what’s going to happen?”

Jacaman: “You have two options. Option one is to do like many people; just keep saying situation are not good, situation is not good, we can’t invest, we can’t do anything and you stay where you are. At the end you will just leave this country and go live abroad and I don’t know what kind of life you can have. I’m sure 10% of the people who went outside they lived good life. But 90% are still poor because they couldn’t do anything in their country they can do it outside.”

Buchanan: “What sort of message would you like to send to the audience who might be listening to this programme in England?”

Jacaman: “What we have been asking for years and years: just pray for peace. Pray for peace in the holy land, even now in the Middle East.”

The item ended there and while one cannot blame either of Buchanan’s interviewees for skirting the real issues or promoting the notion that both “Christians or Muslims, they are suffering in the same way”, it is abundantly clear that Emily Buchanan – like so many BBC journalists before her – had no interest in producing a report which provided BBC audiences with the full range of information which would genuinely enhance their understanding of the “pressures” faced by Palestinian Christians.

Related Articles:

What does the BBC Academy teach the corporation’s journalists about Judaism?

BBC News again self-conscripts to Banksy’s Israel delegitimisation

BBC WS radio airs anti-terrorist fence falsehoods

BBC Radio 4’s selective framing of the “hardships” of Gaza Christians

Revisiting a BBC Radio 4 Christmas report from the Gaza Strip

BBC report skirts issues facing Palestinian Christians

 

Dec 24 2019

The BBC returns to an old obsession

Long-time readers may recall that back in early 2013 the BBC exhibited something of an obsession with one Israeli football club.

The BBC, football racism and Israel

Obsession: four BBC ‘Beitar’ articles in under a week

As was noted here at the time:

“Yes – there is a serious problem with a group of racist fans of one football club out of dozens – most of which (as even acknowledged in the BBC article on the subject) have players from many different religious and ethnic backgrounds – in a country which includes players from minority ethnic and religious groups on its national teams. 

Deplorable as the racism among some fans at Beitar Jerusalem is, its existence makes Israel no different and no worse than most countries on the planet which have also failed to eliminate racism from football. It certainly does not justify the over-generalised headline “Football racism fears in Israel” or the placing of two separate reports on two home pages of the BBC News website for a relatively prolonged period of time. 

Unless, that is, this incident is being exploited to try to advance a specific narrative about an entire country.” 

In 2016 the BBC’s Middle East editor promoted an irrelevant comparison – and false equivalence – between incitement and glorification of terrorism sanctioned and organised by the Palestinian Authority and its main party Fatah with the behaviour of a specific group of Israeli football hooligans.  

“Hate-filled Palestinian rhetoric against Israel is not hard to find. It cuts the other way too.

Fans of one of Jerusalem’s professional football clubs, which has roots in a right-wing Zionist youth movement, are notorious for chanting “Death to Arabs” during games.”

On December 20th the BBC returned to the topic of the Beitar Jerusalem football club in a flurry of reports by BBC Sport’s Alex Capstick.

A written report headlined “Beitar Jerusalem: How do you change ‘the most racist’ club in Israel?” was published on the BBC Sport website and on the BBC News website’s ‘Middle East’ page.

A filmed report titled “How Beitar Jerusalem’s football club owner took on racism and won” was also posted on the BBC News website’s ‘Middle East’ page and in its ‘Crossing Divides’ section. That film promotes the following bizarre claim:

“In Israel pulling people together in a common cause is difficult.”

The BBC World Service radio programme ‘Newshour’ included an item on the same story (from 14:05 here) with presenter Tim Franks telling listeners that:

“One of the more unpleasant football matches I’ve ever attend was fifteen years ago in Jerusalem where the top club, Beitar, had a truly terrible reputation for a hardcore of racist fans and so they proved to be, screaming ‘death to Arabs’, waving blood-curdling banners – you get the ugly picture. But when the high-tech business mogul Moshe Hogeg became the new owner, he decided to take the numbskulls on and his at-time confrontational style seems to be working.”

The filmed report tells viewers that Beitar Jerusalem is “the only one [team] in the top division never to have selected as Arab player”. However none of Capstick’s reports inform BBC audiences just how prevalent Muslim players actually are in Israeli football teams – including the national squad which is currently captained by Circassian footballer Bibras Natkho.

Obviously the BBC continues to find it more ‘newsworthy’ to promote the exception to the rule by continuing to focus audience attentions on one particular Israeli football club.

Dec 23 2019

BBC WS radio airs anti-terrorist fence falsehoods

In addition to the BBC News website’s written puff piece relating to the latest agitprop in Bethlehem from Banksy, the corporation also promoted the same story on television and radio.

Listeners to the BBC World Service radio programme ‘Newshour’ on December 22nd heard an item (from 33:52 here) which not only gave uncritical amplification to what is clearly no more than an exercise in delegitimisation of Israel but also gravely misled BBC audiences.

Presenter James Menendez introduced the item.

[emphasis in italics in the original, emphasis in bold added]

Menendez: “The British street artist Banksy has made a big name for himself with his witty, provocative and usually political graffiti. His most famous images have been widely reproduced. Perhaps less well-known is his campaigning against Israel’s separation barrier: the high wall dividing Israel and the West Bank and in places cutting deeper into Palestinian territory. The UN’s highest court has advised that it contravenes international law.”

Menendez made no effort to inform listeners either at that point or any other in the four and a quarter minute item that – despite his description of a “high wall” – over 95% of the anti-terrorist fence is made of wire mesh.

His claim that in places the fence cuts ‘deeper into Palestinian territory’ fits in with the BBC narrative according to which areas that the Palestinians agreed under the terms of the Oslo Accords would have their final status determined through negotiations with Israel (in this case locations in Area C) are described using the pre-emptive phrase “Palestinian territory”, which is of course unhelpful and even misleading to audiences.

Predictably Menendez made no effort to inform listeners that the cited ICJ advisory opinion was marred by politicisation before continuing with a coy description of ownership as “an interest”:

Menendez: “Well it turns out Banksy has an interest in a small hotel in Bethlehem called the Walled Off Hotel – that’s walled off, not Waldorf – and has just produced a new work to sit inside the lobby. It is a Christmas manger scene called ‘the scar of Bethlehem’ and it shows the manger by Israel’s separation barrier which appears to have been pierced by a blast, creating the shape of a star. Well the hotel manager Wissam Salsaa has been telling me more.”

Salsaa: “The holy family is just a classical holy family but the background of the holy family is a replica of the separation wall that Israel built round the Palestinian cities and of course there’s a big part of it around the town of Bethlehem. And on the middle there is a kind of shell hole carved the wall as a scar. So this nativity scene…I mean it looks like the star of Bethlehem but Banksy called it the scar of Bethlehem.”

Menendez refrained from telling listeners that Israel did not build a “wall” – or a fence – “round the Palestinian cities” at all – including Bethlehem. Indeed, the BBC presenter proceeded with the false claim that “the wall runs through Bethlehem”:

Menendez: “And the background that people should understand as well is that – as you say – that the separation barrier, the wall, runs through Bethlehem but specifically runs right round the back of your hotel. I mean I think all the rooms overlook the barrier; is that right?”

As the B’tselem map below shows, the anti-terrorist fence (marked in red, with planned construction in purple) does not ‘run through’ Bethlehem at all – that claim is a complete falsehood.

Salsaa: “Yes, the Walled Off hotel – a hotel that was created by Banksy in 2017 – located about 4 meters away from the separation wall. It is known as the hotel with the worst view in the world. Usually our room sells according to the view: the worse the view is, the more expensive the room becomes.”

Menendez made no effort to clarify that the location of the propaganda exercise that is the hotel was selected precisely because of its proximity to the small section of the anti-terrorist fence made of concrete at that location.

Menendez: “But how has this work gone down in Bethlehem? What’s been the response to it?”

Salsaa: “Yeah I mean I heard some of the responses. I think people so appreciative to this contribution by Banksy to Bethlehem because Christmas started in Bethlehem but unfortunately we in Bethlehem we don’t live normal Christmas because of our situation. So it’s putting the spotlight on our pain.”

Menendez then came up with the falsehood that no terror attacks have taken place “for…three years now”. Since the beginning of this year alone 218 attacks have taken place in Jerusalem and on the Israeli side of the ‘green line’ – some of which were perpetrated by residents of PA controlled areas in Judea & Samaria.  

Menendez: “Israel of course says the barrier is necessary to prevent terror attacks and there hasn’t been one for, what, three years now. I mean have they got a point do you think?”

Salsaa: “Building the wall?”

Menendez: “Yeah, building the wall, yeah.”

Salsaa: “Actually I mean if you come over here and you could see in your eyes that there are thousands of Palestinians – Palestinian labourers – sneak into Israel every day to go and work. They use ladders and grappling hooks to climb the wall. So I don’t think that the wall could prevent terrorism or violence. I completely disagree with that.”

The Palestinians who illegally enter Israeli territory do so – according to Israel’s former Chief of Staff – in places where the anti-terrorist fence has yet to be constructed rather than in locations where a ‘wall’ has to be climbed. Salsaa went on – unchallenged by Menendez – to promote more baseless propaganda.

Salsaa: “Beside that, the wall is not built on a border. So like if you look at the map of the wall you would see that the wall is strangling for example Bethlehem; is converting Bethlehem into an open-air prison. So the wall is not the border. You cannot talk about the border between two countries. You are talking about a different set-up, OK, and this is the problem. Of course I mean security is important for everyone. We talk about peace; peace should be for everyone. So walls cannot be an answer for the circumstances of the conflict that we are living in.”

Menendez: “And given the way things have been going, do you have any optimism that the wall will come down any time soon?”

Salsaa: “Well honestly I mean…yeah I mean the political situation are not so much encouraging but of course as human beings we should have some hope and the hope that I have is a big support by Banksy and through art we try to speak out and raise our voice. The set up of the Walled Off Hotel and the activities have been mainly led by Banksy in our part of the world are so essential in promoting creativity and positive way of resistance instead of violence. So today we Palestinians can raise our voice in a very positive way.”

Menendez closed the item at that point, with BBC audiences having been exposed to over four minutes of totally unchallenged and entirely one-sided propaganda concerning the anti-terrorist fence, without even one mention of the hundreds of Israeli civilians murdered in the attacks which were the reason for its construction.

Related Articles:

BBC News again self-conscripts to Banksy’s Israel delegitimisation

Media turn Banksy’s small Anti-Israel installation into major news (CAMERA)

BBC’s ME editor says “there haven’t been all that many” terror attacks in Israel

Dec 23 2019

BBC Radio 4 reporting on the ICC prosecutor’s statement

Listeners to the December 20th edition of the BBC Radio 4 programme ‘The World Tonight’ heard the following (from 06:01 here) in the opening news bulletin read by Luke Tuddenham. [emphasis in italics in the original]

Tuddenham: “The International Criminal Court’s chief prosecutor says she will launch a full investigation into alleged war crimes in the Israeli-occupied Palestinian territories at the earliest opportunity. Fatou Bensouda says she believes serious offences have been committed but Israel has questioned whether she has the jurisdiction to open an inquiry. Our Middle East analyst Alan Johnston reports.”

Johnston: “The ICC prosecutor has conducted a preliminary investigation of Palestinian complaints regarding the situation in the West Bank, East Jerusalem and Gaza. Now she says she’s satisfied that war crimes have indeed been committed there. But she’s asked the court to confirm that it has jurisdiction over these areas before she launches a full investigation. Israel has vigorously denied that the ICC has any legal authority in the Palestinian territories and says the case should have been thrown out. If Ms Bensouda does proceed with her investigation charges might be filed against Israelis and Palestinians.”

A couple of hours later those listening to BBC Radio 4’s ‘Midnight News’ heard this portrayal of the same story (from 19:57 here).

Newsreader: “The International Criminal Court’s chief prosecutor says she will launch a full investigation into alleged war crimes in the Israeli-occupied Palestinian territories at the earliest opportunity. Fatou Bensouda believes serious offences have been committed and has asked the court to confirm that it has jurisdiction over the areas in which she wants to conduct an investigation: the West Bank, East Jerusalem and Gaza. Israel’s prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu said the ICC had no authority in these areas.”

Obviously neither of those items provided the BBC’s domestic audience with even the minimum of background information needed to properly understand the story. The BBC’s blanket portrayal of “the West Bank, East Jerusalem and Gaza” as “Israeli-occupied Palestinian territories” – despite the fact that Israel withdrew from the Gaza Strip over 14 years ago and agreements signed by the Palestinians place parts of Judea & Samaria under Israeli control and define the final status of those areas as well as parts of Jerusalem as being subject to negotiation – obviously muddied the picture.

Listeners heard no explanation as to why “Israel has vigorously denied that the ICC has any legal authority” in the said areas or what sort of ‘war crimes’ the prosecutor claims have been committed. Neither was it clarified why charges “might be filed against Israelis and Palestinians” and the relevant issue of the “principle of complementarity” was not mentioned at all. 

What these two superficial reports do promote to domestic BBC audiences, however, is the take away messaging that an international legal body is “satisfied that war crimes have indeed been committed” by Israelis.

Related Articles:

Superficial and one-sided BBC reporting on ICC statement

Dec 22 2019

BBC News again self-conscripts to Banksy’s Israel delegitimisation

For years the BBC has uncritically promoted the recurrent anti-Israel propaganda produced by the anonymous English political activist known as Banksy.

It hence came as no surprise to see that the lead report on the BBC News website’s ‘Middle East’ page on the morning of December 22nd did not concern the tens of thousands of people forced to flee Idlib province in Syria after over 400 airstrikes by Syrian and Russian forces but instead promoted yet another piece of the graffiti artist’s agitprop.

In addition to the report headlined “Banksy ‘nativity scene’ appears in Bethlehem hotel” audiences were offered links both on the ‘Middle East’ page and in the body of the article to two previous examples from the same BBC genre:

Multiplatform BBC amplification for anti-Israel ‘political statement’ PR campaign

More Balfour Declaration agitprop promotion on the BBC News website

The report recycles messaging which has previously appeared in related BBC content.

“A manger scene by British artist Banksy has appeared at a hotel in Bethlehem in the West Bank.

Dubbed the “Scar of Bethlehem”, the work shows Jesus’s manger by Israel’s separation barrier, which appears to have been pierced by a blast, creating the shape of a star.

On Instagram, the artist said the work was a “modified Nativity”.

Israel says the barrier is needed to prevent terror attacks. Palestinians say it is a device to grab land.

The International Court of Justice has called it illegal.”

As is inevitably the case in BBC content relating to the anti-terrorist fence, audiences are not informed that 95% of the structure is made of wire mesh or that the paraphrased ICJ advisory opinion was marred by politicisation.  While the article  includes the standard employment of the qualifying ‘Israel says’ formula to portray the structure’s purpose, the view presented to BBC audiences excludes any mention of the murders of hundreds of Israeli men, women and children by Palestinian terrorists that preceded the fence’s construction.

Readers are later informed that:

“All the rooms in the Walled Off hotel overlook a concrete section of the controversial West Bank barrier.”

Apparently the BBC is quite happy to employ the word “controversial” in relation to the anti-terrorist fence which has dramatically reduced Palestinian acts of violence but does not find it necessary to use the same terminology to describe the hundreds of terror attacks against civilians which brought about its construction.

Readers also find the following:

“Hotel manager Wissam Salsaa said Banksy had used the Christmas story to show how Palestinians in the West Bank were living.

“It is a great way to bring up the story of Bethlehem, the Christmas story, in a different way – to make people think more,” he said. […]

“Banksy is trying to be a voice for those that cannot speak,” Mr Salsaa added.”

There is of course nothing at all “different” about this latest exploitation of the nativity story for political ends – as the BBC obviously knows full well seeing as two years ago it collaborated with precisely such an initiative. And clearly the notion that the Palestinian people “cannot speak” is ridiculous given the amount of airtime and column space devoted to their views by the Western media- including the BBC.

This latest Christmas exploiting self-conscription to a long-running PR campaign promoting anonymous agitprop intended solely to delegitimise Israel continues to further erode the BBC’s claim of ‘impartiality’.

 

Dec 22 2019

Superficial and one-sided BBC reporting on ICC statement

A report headlined “ICC wants to open ‘war crimes’ investigation in West Bank and Gaza” was published on the BBC News website’s ‘Middle East’ page on the afternoon of December 20th.

Readers were told that:

“The International Criminal Court’s chief prosecutor says she wants to open an investigation into alleged war crimes in the Palestinian Territories.

Fatou Bensouda said “war crimes” had been or were being committed in the Israeli-occupied West Bank, East Jerusalem and Gaza Strip, and asked for a ruling on the court’s territorial jurisdiction.”

And – linking to the statement put out on the same day by the ICC:

“In her ruling, Ms Bensouda said a preliminary examination had gathered enough information to meet all criteria to open an investigation, and that she was “satisfied that there [was] a reasonable basis to proceed” with an inquiry.

“[T]here are no substantial reasons to believe that an investigation would not serve the interests of justice,” she said, adding that she had filed a request with judges to rule on what territory a future inquiry would cover because of the contested legal and factual issues of the territories.”

No further explanation was provided concerning those “contested legal and factual issues” which are the background to that request for “a jurisdictional ruling” and so readers would be ill equipped to understand the context to the Israeli reactions quoted in the report.

“Israel said the ICC move was baseless.

In a statement, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said the ICC, of which Israel is not a member, had “no jurisdiction in this case”, and that the decision had turned the Hague-based court into a “political tool to delegitimize the State of Israel”. Israel occupied the West Bank, Gaza and East Jerusalem in the 1967 Middle East war. […]

Mr Netanyahu described the announcement as an “outrageous decision”, saying: “The ICC only has jurisdiction over petitions submitted by sovereign states. But there has never been a Palestinian state.”

Earlier, Israel’s attorney general said the ICC had no jurisdiction in the West Bank or Gaza. Israel also considers East Jerusalem, which it regards as its sovereign territory, as outside the court’s mandate.”

The BBC did not bother to provide readers with a link to the statement issued on the same day by the Attorney General’s office which concludes:

“…the necessary precondition to the Court’s jurisdiction under Article 12(2) of the Rome Statute, which requires there to be a sovereign State that has delegated to the Court criminal jurisdiction over its territory and nationals, cannot be met by virtue of the simple fact that no sovereign Palestinian State is in existence. The events surrounding the purely technical act of the purported accession of “Palestine” to the Rome Statute, or the Palestinian purported Article 12(3) declaration, neither alter this conclusion nor substitute for the substantive inquiry required for the establishment of the Court’s jurisdiction. Moreover, even if a conclusion is erroneously reached that a sovereign Palestinian State exists, the scope of the territory concerned is indeterminate and is clearly not for an international criminal court to define; and if the Rome Statute is misinterpreted to allow for non-sovereign entities to confer jurisdiction upon the Court, the latter would still lack jurisdiction over Area C and Jerusalem as well as Israeli nationals.”

Readers of the original version of the BBC’s report were told that:

“Ms Bensouda did not specify the perpetrators of the alleged crimes but it is understood that in her preliminary inquiries she has been focused on issues like Israel’s building of settlements and its military operations in Gaza, BBC Middle East analyst Alan Johnston reports.”

That section was later amended to read: [emphasis added]

“Ms Bensouda did not specify the perpetrators of the alleged crimes but, if she proceeds with her investigation, charges might be filed against Israelis and Palestinians, BBC Middle East analyst Alan Johnston reports.

It is understood that she focused her preliminary inquiries, in a case the Palestinians brought under the State of Palestine, on issues like Israel’s building of settlements and its military operations in Gaza, our correspondent adds.”

The BBC did not clarify to readers that the relevant document published by the ICC also states (section 94) that:

“…there is a reasonable basis to believe that members of Hamas and Palestinian armed groups (“PAGs”) committed the war crimes of: intentionally directing attacks against civilians and civilian objects (articles 8(2)(b)(i)-(ii), or 8(2)(e)(i)); using protected persons as shields (article 8(2)(b)(xxiii)); wilfully depriving protected persons of the rights of fair and regular trial (articles 8(2)(a)(vi) or 8(2)(c)(iv)) and wilful killing (articles 8(2)(a)(i), or 8(2)(c)(i)); and torture or inhuman treatment (article 8(2)(a)(ii), or 8(2)(c)(i)) and/or outrages upon personal dignity (articles 8(2)(b)(xxi), or 8(2)(c)(ii)).”

Quoting casualty figures that the BBC has never bothered to independently verify, the report informed readers that:

“The ICC has been examining what they say are war crimes committed by Israel since June 2014, one month before a war between Israel and Palestinian militants in Gaza. In the fighting, 2,251 Palestinians, including 1,462 civilians, were killed while 67 soldiers and six civilians were killed on the Israeli side.”

Despite having previously acknowledged in 2015 that “the date chosen by the Palestinians as the starting point for the ICC to investigate requires explanation as it is clearly not arbitrary”, this report makes no effort to inform audiences why the ‘start date’ of June 13th 2014 – which deliberately excludes the abductions and murders of three Israeli civilians by members of a Hamas terror cell – was selected by the Palestinians.

The BBC’s report promotes reactions from the Palestinian Authority and a political NGO also engaged in lawfare against Israel.

“In a statement, the Palestinian Authority said: “Palestine welcomes this step as a long overdue step to move the process forward towards an investigation, after nearly five long and difficult years of preliminary examination.”

Reacting to the ICC decision, B’Tselem, an Israeli human rights group, said: “Israel’s legal acrobatics in an attempt to whitewash its crimes must not be allowed to stop international legal efforts to, at long last, hold it to account.””

It closes with promotion of the BBC’s standard but partial mantra concerning ‘international law’.

“There are some 140 Israeli settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem, which most of the international community consider illegal under international law. Israel disputes this, and last month the US reversed its position and declared it no longer considered the settlements invalid.”

At the bottom of the article readers are told that they “may also find interesting” an embedded video dating from August 2019 which features as one of its main interviewees the director of another political NGO – Addameer – which is linked to a Palestinian terrorist organisation.

Although the BBC acknowledged years ago that the Palestinian decision to join the ICC and pursue this suit is part of what it has described as “a new strategy to put pressure on Israel“, that information is completely absent from this latest report. 

Related Articles:

Why isn’t the BBC telling its audiences all about the PA’s ‘lawfare’ strategy?

Superficial BBC News report on PA application to join ICC

BBC WS ‘Newsday’ flouts corporation’s guidance on use of term Palestine

BBC World Service or Palestinian Authority radio station?

On the BBC News ICC Q&A

The part of the ICC preliminary investigation story the BBC decided not to tell

BBC amends ICC Q&A following reader complaint

 

 

Dec 20 2019

Weekend long read

1) At the INSS Gallia Lindenstrauss, Sarah J. Feuer and Ofir Winter analyse ‘The Perils of the Turkey-Libya Maritime Delimitation Deal’.

“The November 27, 2019 signing of the maritime delimitation agreement between Turkey and the internationally recognized Government of National Accord (GNA) in Tripoli, led by Prime Minister Fayez al-Sarraj, has heightened concerns among many countries in the Eastern Mediterranean. The deal will negatively affect Turkey’s relations with Greece, Cyprus, Egypt, and Israel; pose further challenges to the already questionable plans for the EastMed pipeline; and raise the stakes for outside actors involved in the Libyan civil war, likely prolonging the conflict there. It may, however, have a boomerang effect from Ankara’s perspective in that it strengthens Egypt’s determination to become an energy hub for the region.”

2) Writing at Commentary magazine, Jonathan Schanzer discusses ‘The new rocket threat to Israel’.

“If Israel doesn’t find a way to halt Iran’s PGM project, the very character of its wars will change. Despite a steady stream of attacks perpetrated by their enemies in recent years, the Israelis have not needed to fight long or particularly bloody wars. Instead, they have been conducting limited operations. Israel has, in fact, often been able to determine the beginning and end of these flare-ups. Iron Dome’s ability to neutralize rudimentary rockets has made that possible. But now, with PGMs in play, Israel may no longer be able to dictate the terms of conflict when its enemies want one.

And let there be no doubt: They want one.”

3) Jonathan Spyer takes a look at ‘The Riddle of Baghdad’.

“Last week, five rockets were fired at the Ayn al-Asad base in Iraq’s Anbar Province.  The base is a facility housing US troops.  Ayn al-Asad is something of a symbol for the 5,000 strong US presence in Iraq.  […]

Two days  later, Katyusha rockets were fired at the Balad airbase, 70 kilometers north of Baghdad.  Again, this is a base where US forces and contractors are stationed.

There were no casualties in either attack. They were the latest in a string of similar incidents which have taken place on US facilities in Iraq since the beginning of the year. These attacks have a number of things in common, other than that they are directed at US personnel and facilities: they appear to be intended for now to send a message rather than to cause injuries or fatalities among US troops.

They are also notable in that no force or organization has taken responsibility for them.”

4) David Hirsh argues that ‘Corbyn’s legacy is that political antisemitism has re-entered the British mainstream’ at the Fathom Journal.

“Corbyn’s movement has left behind many thousands of people who have been educated to believe that between ‘us’ and ‘socialism’ sits the formidable obstacle of Jewish power. The rage and shame that they are feeling after their humiliating defeat should not be under-estimated. For many it will be a key formative experience. Political antisemitism has re-entered the British mainstream, and it is not going to just disappear. There is reason to believe that on the populist left people who have been learning to understand the world through antisemitism will find ways to actualise that in the development of antisemitic social movements.”

 

Dec 20 2019

BBC report skirts issues facing Palestinian Christians

On December 17th a filmed report by Barbara Plett Usher titled “Saint Barbara: A celebration for Arab Christians” appeared on the BBC News website’s ‘Middle East’ page.

“Eastern Orthodox Christians celebrate the feast of St Barbara.

It may not be as familiar as some other religious holidays, but it’s a big day for Arab Christians, and especially for those in the Palestinian village of Aboud in the West Bank.

The BBC’s Barbara Plett Usher went to find out more.”

Referring to a resident of the village who expressed concerns about emigration and low birth rates, Plett Usher told viewers that:

“She worries about the future of Christians here.”

Nevertheless, BBC audiences heard nothing substantial about the issues facing Palestinian Christians.

The same was the case in an audio version of the report which was aired on the BBC World Service radio programme ‘Newshour’ on December 17th (from 37:45 here).

“But she worries about the future of Christians here.”

In both reports Plett Usher did however tell a certain story about the shrine she visited.

Filmed: “It’s interesting to me that Barbara is the patron saint of gunpowder or people who handle explosives because this cave was blown up by the Israeli Army during the second intifada. They said they thought it was a place where militants were hiding out and they didn’t realise how significant it was religiously.”

Audio: “The Israelis blew up the shrine by mistake during the second Palestinian intifada because they thought militants were using it as a hide-out. Interesting that Barbara is the patron saint of those who handle explosives.”

By “militants” Plett Usher of course means terrorists apparently hiding in a church. Whether or not that account is accurate or complete is unclear: it is highly unlikely that a structure would be attacked on the basis of a “thought”. Although a similar story appears on the English language ‘Wikipedia’ page for Aboud, it is sourced from a report prepared by the anti-Israel NGO ‘ARIJ’ and BBC Watch was unable to find confirmation from any reliable source, including news reports from the time.

Nevertheless, it is interesting to see that Barbara Plett Usher chose to highlight that vague and context-free story from over seventeen years ago in what was billed as a report about a Christian feast day while ignoring the fact that a church in the same village was vandalised just months ago.