. We all know just how oppressed those poor Palestinians that inhabit Gaza are. Why the BBC’s Aleem Maqbool bemoans that “Peace talks fail to hearten Gazans.” Funny how the BBC seems to have missed reporting what DOES hearten Gazans. Can you guess what it is? Yes, that’s right – suicide bombing missions against those pesky Jews. It seems the majority of Gazans both support and relish that – but Aleem has nothing to say about that. Who’s surprised?


The BBC likes to refer to Mahmoud Abbas, leader of Fatah, as a moderate. He is frequently positioned to us as the “good guy” on the Palestinian side compared to Hamas who are the more “militant” bad guys. What I found interesting from BBC coverage of this region is the complete absence of the news that holocaust-denying Abbas has decided is to award “The Al Kuds Mark of Honor”, the PLO’s highest medal, to two female terrorists who helped kill Israelis.

Ahlam Tamimi is a Hamas affiliate serving a life sentence for driving the suicide bomber who exploded himself in the Sbarro restaurant in Jerusalem, killing at least half a dozen people, including a whole family. Amra Muna, seduced Ophir Rahum over the Internet and then lured him to Ramallah where he was murdered. Both terrorists will be given this great honour by the moderate Abbas.

Any thoughts on why the BBC seems unable to report this? Maybe because it’s just too busy providing space for Jeremy Al-Bowen to urge direct talks with Hamas?


Even Islamic killers are clear that they engage in premeditated acts of terrorism. “This was a martyrdom-seeking [suicide] operation aimed at kidnapping Zionist soldiers,” the Islamic Jihad spokesman said. But to the BBC it was an “attack” by “militants.” I am sick of the witless BBC equivocation on this subject. These Palestinians are JIHADISTS, they even call themselves this. They enjoy taking the life of innocent Israelis. They are, by any standard, engaging in act of terrorism, so why will the BBC not call it like it is?

I also hate the way in which the BBC buries away another little lie in this same report. It innocuously states ” Fighting had subsided since early March, when the Israeli army launched an offensive that killed around 120 Palestinians. ” It conveniently leaves out the fact that a/ This Israeli strike followed the terror attack on Israel that resulted in the death of young teenage Jewish students in Jerusalem and b/ The 120 figure quoted includes a significant number of Hamas terrorists with others dying because they either voluntarily or involuntarily provided sanctuary to Hamas terrorists. What justification have the BBC for calling Islamic killers “militants” when even the Islamic killers boast of their terrorist ambitions?


I was listening to the BBC “Today” programme early this morning cover the news that the worlds “highest moral authority” – the United Nations – has appointed a law professor in the shape of Richard A. Falk – who has compared Israel to the Nazis – as special investigator on Israeli actions for a six-year term. Nothing odd so far – after all comparing Israel to the Nazis is a favoured rhetorical device for the morally bankrupt. But I then noticed that the BBC interviewer referred to the “Occupied Territories” as the location for these imagined genocidal crimes that the UN will investigate and I wondered WHY it is that the BBC gets away with this routine parroting of Palestinian propaganda? The territories concerned are “disputed”, they are not occupied. In fact last time I checked the only people “occupying” Gaza were the Jew-hating barbarians Hamas. The use of language is of fundamental importance in all news reporting and the BBC should not parrot terms which can clearly be seen to favour one side and not another. The neutral term to use in this situation is to define the given territories as “disputed.” Why won’t the BBC use it?


Good to see the BBC’s Midde-East disinformation service exposed and watching the Beeboids forced into issuing apologies for the poor standard of reporting.

You recall all that hysteria the BBC spouted on March 7, following the Mercaz Harav Yeshiva massacre? The BBC showed a bulldozer demolishing a house, while correspondent Nick Miles told viewers: “Hours after the attack, Israeli bulldozers destroyed his family home” Just one problem. That’s right – the house was not demolished. Other broadcasters showed the east Jerusalem home intact and the family commemorating their son’s actions.

Just over a week later in a news item entitled “Israel jets strike northern Gaza” the BBC reported that Israel was deliberately targeting civilians in an operation targeting Qassam rocket launch sites in Gaza, and claiming that the United Nations secretary-general had described it as an attack on civilians. Following a complaint the BBC squirmed “We accept we should have made reference to what [Ban] said about Palestinian rocket attacks as well as to the ‘excessive use of force’ by Israel. We have amended the report, also removing the reference to Israeli ‘attacks on civilians.”

Just what is it that makes BBC reporters see the imaginary demolition of houses? Just what is it that makes the BBC fail to report condemnation of Palestinian terrorists? The answer appears to be an endemic desire to want to believe the worst about Israel and simultaneously portray the Palestinians as doe-eyed innocents. This is BIAS incarnate and in these two instances, the BBC has been forced into providing the balance and accuracy that was lamentably lacking.


We all know that BBC journalists are the very model of professional impartiality, right? So, have a look at the attached image. Dozens of Palestinian journalists demonstrated on Wednesday morning at Bethlehem’s Church of Nativity in protest of the Israeli arrest of journalist Hassan Abdel Jawad. They called not only for the release of the journalist, but for “political prisoners”. (Terrorists to you and me!) Head of the Palestinian Journalists Union, Naim Toubassi, said that the arrest of Abdel Jawad is the latest proof of the Israeli “policy of repression and harassment, not only against political activists, but also against journalists who transmit the truth and exercise their right to freedom of opinion and expression.” Can you guess which State broadcaster was part of the fun? Mmmm..maybe they just provided the taxi service, what do you think? The bias is endemic folks, and only the voluntarily blind can’t see it.


I just saw this story and like most others, I am shocked at this wicked act of murder that has taken place at a Jewish seminary in west Jerusalem. However from this poorly written (or is it?) BBC story you would struggle to even see this as an act of premeditated murder. Consider the language – the culprits were “gunmen” apparently. No they weren’t – they were dedicated Palestinian terrorists who used guns to kill the young Jewish students. You have to read down quite a bit to you get to the “Hamas praise” heading. Indeed Hamas do praise those who have brought death to these religious seminary, but the BBC helpfully adds that those who study here identify with the leadership of the Jewish settlement movement – who believe the West Bank should be in Jewish and not Palestinian hands. Mmm, and the BBC also remind us that Israeli forces launched a raid into northern Gaza in which more than 120 Palestinians – including many civilians – were killed. No insight provided into where this 120 deaths figure comes from, or how many were Hamas terrorists. I’m sorry to have to keep banging on this Middle East theme (will change tomorrow!) but I think this report is almost written from the viewpoint that the Jews were just asking for this kind of act of reprisal. I also notice that at the very bottom of the page this act of mass murder is described as an “incident”. Pure bloody bias.


Tuning into Radio 4 “Today” programme, I thought I had accidentally come across the Gaza Broadcasting Corporation. Around 7.45am, the BBC ran an item on a doctor working in Gaza, who also runs a blog, highlighting just how awful it all is for Palestinians living under Israeli “occupation.” She was give free rein to undermine Israel and the best that the BBC interviewer could come up with was the suggestion that perhaps Israel and Hamas were equally to blame for the alleged deprivation! At NO point did she choose to ask where the $$$billions of aid poured into this wretched place over the years has gone, an obvious question one w0uld have thought. Nor did she question how it is that medical supplies just cannot be gotten whereas Qassam rockets overflow in this territory. This interview was but a trailer for the main news item at 8 o’clock which was a sustained attack on Israel, care of the Shamnesty International, Save the Children etc cabal. In true form, these left-wing charities blame Israel, exonerate Hamas from any responsibility, and the BBC laps it all up. If you can force yourself to read this page from the BBC this morning, I think we must settle on the fact that when it comes to the Israel/Palestinian issue, the BBC is not just biased, but an active participant in the Palestinian propaganda campaign.

The war on the Jews.

Gotta love the BBC – it remains consistent in its pro-Palestinian reporting at all times! Take the news that “Israeli forces have carried out further attacks on the Gaza Strip, killing at least 26 Palestinians.” Three points here;
1. Who says that 26 people have been killed? Oh yes, Hamas. And they would never lie, right?
2. Why did the Israelis launch these counter-attacks on Gaza? Oh yes, because of the HUNDREDS of rockets Hamas terrorists have been firing into Israel. To the BBC however the scale of the Palestinian rocket onslaught remains unmentioned – it gives no figures to help us contextualise the issue.
3. Who are these Hamas “militants” to whom the BBC obliquely refers? Can’t they say the word “terrorist” since that is clearly the word which best sums up those who shelter amongst Gaza civilians whilst targeting innocent Israeli civilians with indiscriminate rocket fire?
Oh, and one final observation. The BBC refers to the fact that the launch of Israeli missiles into the Gaza area is causing the poor oppressed Gaza citizens to lose sleep. I am curious as to why the noise coming from the launch of hundreds of Qassam missiles from Gaza into Israel does not also disturb their sleep? Maybe that is a comforting sound to them and helps send them to sleep? Obviously the thought would never enter a BBC mind.
This BBC report is riddled with bias on this issue – check out the last two sentences of the report if you want further proof of how the BBC always gives the last words to the psycho Palis!.


I was struck by this BBC headline “Rare suicide bombing hits Israel” prominently displayed on its Middle-Eastern news page. Consider the details and then ask yourself if “Rare” is the word you would choose to describe what has happened.

“A suicide bomber has killed a woman in the southern Israeli town of Dimona, the first such attack in over a year. Police said a second suicide attacker was shot dead before he was able to detonate his explosives belt. “We heard a large explosion and people started to run. I saw pieces of flesh flying in the air,” a witness told army radio.

Several point here. Despite what the BBC alleges, the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigade terror group is an integral part of the Fatah organisation, led by Mahmoud Abbas. So why does the BBC try to distance it from their favourite “man of peace”, the holocaust denier Abbas, by claiming it is some sort of “violent off-shoot”? Next, this is a SAVAGE terrorist attack. The frequency of it is neither here nor there. By suggesting this is a rare event (which it isn’t since Palestinians have carried out many homicide bomber attacks over the years) it is in danger of being seen to try and somehow ameliorate the barbarism and naked hatred that lay behind this outrage. Finally, I note that both Hamas and Fatah get to comment on this, both of them predictably explaining that the bad Jews brought it upon themselves. Curiously, comment from the Israeli government is missing. Fair and balanced????

p.s I also note that the BBC initial report makes no mention of those other people who were injured and traumatised by this vicious act of terrorism. More amelioration?

Update by Natalie:The word “rare” has now been stealth-edited out.