The BBC opposed military intervention in Libya and when Cameron and Sarkozy actually committed to the air campaign (with Obama “leading from behind, as ever) there was a lot of BBC huffing and puffing. We all know how things worked out and it is clear the BBC called it wrong. So when the organisation Human Rights Watch produces a report that alleges NATO air strikes killed 72 civilians and that it needs “to bear responsibility where appropriate” the BBC was quick to follow up. There was a quite disgraceful interview on Today this morning @ 7.33am with David Mepham, UK Director of Human Rights Watch, and Oana Lungescu, Nato Spokesperson for the Public Diplomacy Division. Lungescu was harangued throughout and it was perfectly obvious that in the BBC world view, wars must be fought without ANY collateral damage. Further, in the BBC world view if HRW says something then it must be true. Finally, the BBC seems to think that it knows better than the Libyan government. This is both unreasonable and unbalanced but what one expects from this organisation.

Bookmark the permalink.


  1. The Highland Rebel says:

    I wonder if they’ll call for the Muslim community to offer compensation for the hundreds of thousands who are murdered every year in the name of Islam?


  2. John Anderson says:

    I could not see any reason whatsoever for this “story” to be given such prominence by the BBC. 1 It sounds like pure cherry-picking and self promotion by Human Rights Watch. 2 No sign that Libyans themselves are angry about what NATO did. 3 The military action is long since finished, Brits are simply not interested in this over-blown nonsense.

    Civilians get killed in war. Bears and woods ?