The BBC Response to My Complaint of Bias & Genocide Denial was that it was ‘Abusive in Nature’& ‘Goes against our values’
Under Fire: Israel's War On Medics
A week ago I made a Complaint to the BBC about their decision to withdraw Gaza – How To Survive a Warzone from BBC iPlayer. I also made some observations about their Zionist gatekeeper Raffi Berg and their ex-soap powder cum Pepsi salesman Tim Davie.
A few days ago I was sent an M.Phil dissertation on the BBC’s
record during the first 6 years of the Nazi period. It doesn’t make pretty
reading. Who would have thought that the BBC, which today appeases the Zionists
on the grounds of ‘anti-Semitism’, was so sympathetic to the concerns of the
Hitler regime?
When anti-Semitism was a genuine problem rather than a pretext
for defending genocide, the BBC bent over backwards to placate the Nazi regime.
It ignored their anti-Semitism. Indeed it justified it, branding Germany’s Jews
a political threat rather than a religious group, which was what the Nazis were
saying.
So when the BBC and the British Establishment parade their
‘anti-Semitism’ credentials today just bear in mind that when anti-Semitism was
alive and kicking the BBC had no problem with it.
According to the BBC my complaint went against their ‘values’ and was abusive. Not only that
but the ‘tone and language’ was ‘offensive’. Who would have guessed what
snowflakes the BBC are.
This is
my response.
BBC Complaints - Case
number CAS-8047026-N0S3Z9
Dear BBC,
It seems
that you have lost your judgement in the wake of the PR disaster that is Gaza – How To Survive a Warzone. Accusations of enabling genocide
have touched a raw nerve. I only hope that you can see and smell the blood of the
thousands of Palestinian children who your propaganda has helped to kill.
In your
response (14 March) to my complaint about your persistent pro-Zionist bias you informed
me that it was ‘abusive in nature’ and
that ‘the tone and language used is
offensive’ and that ‘the underlying
message goes against our values’.
Perhaps you
can explain for your viewers what your values are? Do they include balancing
Israeli lies with their actions such as bombing tent encampments and the
burning alive of Palestinian children?
Do your
values include support for the torturing to death of doctors such as Dr Adnan al Bursh?
A good example
of your bias is the headline ‘Palestinian doctor
dies in Israeli prison’. What did he died of? COVID? Over eating?
How is it
that a healthy man of 50 when he was arrested died soon after? Why has his body
not been returned to his family? Has the BBC asked any of these questions? Or
is the death in custody of Palestinian prisoners taken for granted by the BBC?
We are told that ‘No details were
given on the cause of death, and the prison service said the incident was being
investigated.’ The same prison service that had previously denied it even Dr
Al-Bursh. Have you followed up on this so-called ‘investigation’?
The BBC refers
to ‘Gaza's Hamas-run health ministry’
as if to pour doubt on their claim that 496 health workers have been killed by
Israel. Do you preface Israeli claims with ‘the Likud-run government’. Hamas
happens to have been elected to govern Gaza.
Sky News however did investigate and they reported that:
"In mid-April 2024, Dr Adnan Al-Bursh arrived
at Section 23 in Ofer Prison. The prison guards brought Dr Adnan Al-Bursh into
the section in a deplorable state. He had clearly been assaulted with injuries
around his body. He was naked in the lower part of his body.
"The prison guards threw him in the middle of
the yard and left him there. Dr Adnan Al-Bursh was unable to stand up. One of
the prisoners helped him and accompanied him to one of the rooms.
He died soon
after. The death of Dr Bursh was a prima
facie case of murder yet the BBC displayed no interest in the circumstances
or causes of the death of a famous orthopaedic surgeon. Instead it quoted the
meaningless warblings of a Biden Administration spokesperson.
Did Netanyahu’s fan and ex-CIA man at BBC News, Raffi Berg, deem that the story did not fit with your image of Israel as ‘the only democracy in the Middle East?’
Sky
News - The Murder of 5 year old Hind al Rajab and the Paramedics Sent to Rescue
Her
Let us take
another example of BBC Censorship by omission, the murder of 5 year old Hind al
Rajab, the little girl who was blown up by an Israeli tank along with the
ambulance crew that was sent to rescue her. Again Sky News covered her death in detail and again Raffi Berg decided to ignore it.
Informing the Public with Stickers
The reality
is that BBC News coverage is dictated by a Zionist zealot, Raffi Berg and you
call this ‘balance’. It is not surprising that you decided that my complaint ‘will not be circulated to our colleagues for
consideration or further reply.’ What point is there in disturbing their
consciences when it is clear that they have none?
It seems that
you took offence at my language. Who would have guessed that the BBC’s genocide
supporters have hurt feelings? I suspect that Eichmann and Hitler too felt hard
done by. However the death of thousands of Palestinian children does not seem
to move you.
Since
October 7 the Government has supported Genocide in Gaza whilst denying it was
taking place. Naturally the BBC has fallen in line. Instead of admitting you
are a state propaganda organisation you pretend that you are independent and your
coverage ‘balanced’.
I plead
guilty to being insensitive to your feelings. Faced with Israel’s starvation of
Gaza, its bombing of hospitals (because they are all Hamas), its torture camps
and rapes, it is not a difficult decision given your heroic efforts at news
management.
In nearly
all cases of genocide, the killers claim they are acting in self-defence. Ratko
Mladic, the Bosnian Serb commander based his case against genocide on the claim that
his forces were acting in self-defence. Mladic was convicted of genocide and war crimes by the
International Criminal Tribunal. Similarly with the Armenian genocide. The
Turkish Foreign Affairs Ministry claimed that
Ottoman policy of removing the Armenians from
militarily sensitive zones to the inner parts of the country must be seen as a
justified measure of self-defense not genocidal action
The BBC not
unnaturally has adopted the Zionist narrative.
You ignored a
petition from 700+ Jewish anti-racists and a thousand media commentators such as Gary Lineker. Who are they compared to the voice
of 45 Racist Jews?
Jews who are
anti-racist and anti-Zionist are invisible to the BBC because in your eyes we
aren’t Jewish. To be Jewish in the eyes of the Establishment you have to be a
supporter of Zionism. I do not recall a single BBC programme on Jewish
anti-Zionism or which has acknowledged that one-third of British Jews refuse to define themselves as
Zionists.
Jews in
Britain are the moral alibi for the crimes of imperialism. It is far better to
pretend to be defending a ‘Jewish’ state than admitting it’s about oil,
resources and strategic interests. At least Trump is honest when he declares that
he wants to plunder other countries.
Unlike you
most British people are not desiccated pen pushers. You reach for your ‘guidelines’
much like a drunk leans on a lamppost, for support rather than illumination.
Even the BBC’s own journalists protest
at the censorship
There are of
course genuine journalists at the BBC who are outraged at your coverage. Owen
Jones quotes from numerous journalists at the BBC
but I suspect that those handling complaints are selected for their slow-witted
viciousness to say nothing of their stupidity.
Censorship applies
not only to what you publish but also what you don’t publish. In the case of
Ukraine the BBC doesn’t face such dilemmas. It carries only Zelensky’s version
of events.
Israel is
different because it is a western settler-colonial occupation. Indigenous
people are, by definition, sub-human terrorists. When the BBC reports from
Palestine it takes care not to use the word Occupied and prefers euphemisms such
as Disputed Territories.
Israel’s
defence of its land theft is akin to a burglar claiming title to the goods he’s
just stolen, though on a much grander scale.
Former BBC journalist Karishma Patel has called the BBC out for refusing to reach “reasonable,
evidence-based conclusions” over Israel’s genocide in Gaza. She suggested that
you have become “a vehicle in informational warfare”. That’s why she resigned in 2024.
Impartiality has failed if
its key method is to constantly balance “both sides” of a story as equally
true. A news outlet that refuses to come to conclusions becomes a vehicle in
informational warfare
We have passed the point at
which Israel’s war crimes and crimes against humanity are debatable. There’s
more than enough evidence – from Palestinians on the ground, aid organisations;
legal bodies – to come to coverage-shaping conclusions around what Israel has
done.
In the case
of Ukraine there is no balance. The BBC reached its conclusions that Russia was
in the wrong on day one of the invasion but in the case of Israel you prefer to
wait for eternity as you pretend that it is about Hamas rather than ethnic
cleansing.
Russia’s
version of events, that the promises made to Gorbachev in 1991 about NATO
expansion were broken are never put even though they are documented in the US’s own National Security
Archives.
Imagine if
Russia had destroyed or bombed every Ukrainian hospital in order to eradicate
terrorists. Would that explanation be treated with respect by the BBC? BBC
balance is a dishonest attempt to treat right and wrong, good and evil,
genocide and peace as equals.
As
Archbishop Desmond Tutu said, “If you are neutral in situations of injustice, you have chosen the side of the oppressor.”
Martin Luther King made the same point when he said that “The hottest place in Hell is reserved for those who remain neutral in times of great moral
conflict.”
There is no
such thing as neutrality. You either support genocide or you oppose it. The
fact that the BBC refuses even to mention the word is proof enough as to where
you stand.
I realise
that the scribe who wrote to me may take offence if called a liar so I’ll
suggest that you are being economical with the truth. The BBC coverage of Gaza is
an extension of the Foreign Office’s policy objectives.
That
brilliant film on Gaza’s children, with Abdullah being a natural presenter, was
scrapped because the foul Danny Cohen, Baroness Deech’s trollope of a daughter,
Sarah, Oberman and all the other political dwarfs were considered more
important than the thousands of people, Jews included, who bombarded you with
complaints.
How the BBC
Appeased Hitler and either Ignored or Justified Nazi Anti-Semitism
I’ve just read a fascinating M. Phil Dissertation by Guy Raz of Cambridge University.
It’s titled ‘The
BBC and Appeasement: Broadcast Coverage of Nazi Persecution of the Jews,
1933-1938’. In his Introduction
Raz writes:
‘Between 1933 and 1938, Nazi Germany engaged
in the systematic persecution of its Jewish community with acts of increasing
intensity. One would, therefore, expect the BBC to have reported extensively on
these developments considering its association with hard-nosed journalism and
critical news broadcasting. That this was not the case is in part explicable
through the extent to which Broadcasting House, in direct and independent
compliance with the diplomatic aims of the Foreign Office, was party to and a partner
in the application of the policy of appeasement. There was a major discrepancy
between the BBC's knowledge of what was happening in Nazi Germany and the
Corporation's effort to disseminate that knowledge to any great extent. 'Negative'
news about Nazi Germany was carefully controlled by the BBC during this period
in order to ensure that 'sensitive' information was not widely distributed for
public consumption.’
This could
have been written, word for word, about your coverage of Israel today. When anti-Semitism was a matter of life and death, when
Jews were being beaten, impoverished and put in Nazi concentration camps the
BBC did not want to know.
John Pilger doesn't hold back: "The BBC is and has long been the most refined propaganda service in the world." pic.twitter.com/6mViFKnG4Z
— Rachael Swindon #WeAreCollective (@Rachael_Swindon) December 9, 2017
But
when ‘anti-Semitism’ is a propaganda tool weaponised to justify apartheid and
genocide the BBC is suddenly opposed to it. You have even installed an Israeli
spy, Raffi Berg, as a Zionist gatekeeper in charge of the news. As John Pilger said, the BBC is the world’s
most sophisticated propaganda machine.
There were 3 major anti-Semitic mileposts between 1933 and 1939
in Germany. The first was the Boycott of Jewish Shops on 1 April 1933. The second was the
passage in September 1935 of the Nuremberg Laws which stripped German Jews of
citizenship (something the Zionists welcomed) and the third was Kristallnacht, the Nazi pogrom of 10-11 November 1938 when most
synagaogues were burnt to the ground, over 100 Jews killed and 30,000 thrown
into concentration camps. How did the BBC cover this? Guy Raz writes:
the April boycott was discussed in two
non-news bulletins but the tone of the discussion preferred to minimize the
extent of the boycott. The Nuremberg decrees were mentioned in one, brief news bulletin
lasting no more than twenty seconds and devoted primarily to the Memel dispute.
Kristallnacht was also mentioned in a
news bulletin, without commentary and with few details.
The
Nuremberg Laws were described by Gerard Reitlinger as ‘‘the
most murderous legislative instrument known to European history’ yet the
BBC gave them 20 seconds in a news bulletin. Kristallnacht, the pogrom that signalled
Nazi intentions towards the Jews was mentioned without comment.
When
anti-Semitism was a reality the BBC stood with the racists and anti-Semites? Why?
Because the BBC was born in the womb of the British Establishment and shares
their values. Raz tells
us that
News deemed 'negative', defined as such by
the Foreign Office ... was to be avoided after 1936. What is astonishing,
however, was just how little information about anti-Jewish persecution was
dispensed for broadcast before this time - three years after the introduction
of anti-Semitism as official policy in Germany. Even fewer reports about
anti-Jewish persecution would be broadcast after 1936.
When
Hitler was preparing the ground for the expulsion and eventual extermination of
Europe’s Jews, the BBC was silent. But today when ‘anti-Semitism’ is a mere prejudice
the BBC is all over it like a rash.
No
doubt the BBC’s famous ‘balance’ was in operation then too. It balanced between
the British government and Hitler. Jews were out of the equation altogether
just like the Palestinians are today.
‘the Corporation
saw anti-Jewish persecution as secondary to other forms of Nazi repression,
most notably, anti-Church persecution’.
Christians
were not discriminated against as Christians.
‘When information about anti-Jewish repression
reached the airwaves, the tone of the broadcast almost always implied that
Jews, along with Marxists and Social Democrats, constituted a political opposition.’
The
idea that religion is a political ideology or movement is not new. Geert
Wilders, the fascist leader of Netherland’s Party for Freedom (PVV) says exactly the same about Islam today:
Islam is an ideology aiming for world
domination rather than a religion. It demands that the state be regulated
according to Islamic law.
If
Wilders weren’t so ignorant, he would know that the same is true of all
religions. The Israeli Right, which controls Israel’s government, also wants to see Israeli civil law
replaced by Halacha, Jewish law.
Some
of the worst genocidal states during the Holocaust were the Christian ethno
states, Romania, Slovakia and Croatia. Every religion has those who believe
that their religion is supreme. Guy Raz said:
what is surprising was the extent to which
the Corporation 'spiritually surrendered' to Nazi conceptions of race by adopting
some of the language of German racialism.
This is
no surprise. Racism is as English as buttered toast and the BBC is nothing if
not a reflection of ruling class Englishness.
Broadcasts also often implied that Jews were
partially responsible for the increase in anti-Semitic persecution.
This was
particularly evident during the Holocaust. Hungary was the last country in
Europe with a large Jewish population when the Nazis invaded on 19 March 1944. Robert Philpot wrote about how the
BBC had consistently avoided the topic of its Jews in its wartime broadcasts to
Hungary, failing to warn that a Nazi invasion would mean deportations and
death.
Prof. Carlile
Macartney was a wartime adviser to the BBC and the Foreign Office. He proposed that
the BBC needed to take into account the anti-Semitism of the Hungarian populace
and avoid mentioning Jews altogether.
His advice was a reaction to ‘continuing concerns that the Hungarian Service was, in
fact, too associated with Jews.’ A December 1939 internal BBC memo, spoke of the
criticism the corporation had received that the service’s announcers had “Jewish-sounding voices” and that its six
Hungarian staff were “purely or
preponderantly Jewish.”
A further memo 18 months later spoke of how “One of the main criticisms of our broadcasts has been on the ground of
Jewish accents.” It was necessary to bring in “a nucleus of Aryan voices.”
Jean Seaton, in her article ‘The
BBC and the Holocaust’ states that
'The BBC displayed both before and during the
war, views and decisions that were quite simply anti-Semitic.'
On the eve of the Anschluss, the annexation of Austria, its
founder and General Manager Lord Reith
assured the German foreign minister that the
'BBC was not anti-Nazi' after von Ribbentrop suggested otherwise.
Today the
BBC has exchanged its respect for Nazism for adulation of Zionism. Raz observed
that the BBC went out of its way to portray Hitler in a positive light. For
example the destruction of Jewish and ‘degenerate’ art found fulsome support in
the BBC.
When his policies seemed to defy rationality,
like the destruction of 'degenerate artwork', reports often came to his
defense. ‘At least he [Hitler] honours
art to the extent of believing that its misuse can encompass the cultural
destruction of a people; and equally that... it can be the greatest agent in
national regeneration,' said one art review.
The BBC’s most
disgraceful decision was over who should represent them at the 1936 Berlin
Olympics. Harold Abrahams, a gold medalist in the 1924 Olympics, ‘was also the Corporation's most popular and
widely respected sports commentator.’’
There
was just one problem. Abrahams was Jewish and for 3 months ‘executives
debated on the prudence of sending Abrahams to Berlin as the BBC's representative..’ the
Director of Broadcasting wrote to the Director of Programming that
You will remember that at a
Programme Board meeting in the late autumn we discussed the advisability of
using Mr. Harold Abrahams as our commentator at the Olympic Games. It was then felt that while we
were not prejudiced against him for racial reasons, it might be advisable to
postpone a final decision as to his employment
by us until nearer the time, when we should be able to see the state of
feeling in Germany...
The Controller of Public
Relations wrote:
Abrahams is a Jew. He is our
best commentator on athletics. The question arises as to whether or not we
should do this [label Abrahams as a commentator]. We all regard the German
action against the Jews as quite irrational and intolerable and on that score
we ought not to hesitate, but should we, as between one broadcaster and
another, put aside all views of this kind and take the line that however
irrational we regard another country's attitude to be it would be discourteous
to send a Jew commentator to a country where Jews are taboo?
Just
savour that for a moment – it would be discourteous to send a Jewish
commentator to a country where Jews are taboo. Can anything better sum up the
BBC’s historic attitude to racism?
From
Nazi Germany and the Holocaust in the 40s to Genocide in the 2020s the BBC has
never let principle stand in the way of what is in the best interests of the
British ruling class.
The
committee's decided against sending Abrahams ('it would be definitely impolitic for us to send Abrahams as our
official commentator') illustrates the cowardly nature of the BBC. It is in this light
that the decision to pull the film on Gaza
should be seen. It has nothing to do with ‘terrorism’ or ‘anti-Semitism’.
It is simply a continuation of the BBC’s loyalty to British Foreign Policy.
This
and this alone explains the abysmal, biased coverage of Genocide in Gaza. Indeed
the BBC refuses to even use the word ‘Genocide’ thus taking the position of the
very genocide deniers that it decried in Srebenica where 8,000 not half a million have died.
Israel developed its own atrocity propaganda
surrounding October 7 which mirrored British atrocity propaganda in WW1 when
German troops were accused of bayoneting Belgian babies. The BBC has carried it
without once questioning it.
Defense minister confirms
army orders to kill Israelis on 7 October
On October 7 Israel put into operation the Hannibal Directive which decrees that it's better to kill a captured Israeli rather than allow them to be exchanged later for Palestinian hostages. The Zionist love of killing Palestinians outweighed their concern for their own citizens.
On 7 July 2024 Ha'aretz reported that the IDF used the Hannibal Directive to prevent Hamas taking Israeli soldiers captive. It later turned out that the Directive was also used to prevent the capture of civilians. There were many such similar stories in the Israeli press.
The Australian Broadcasting
Corporation ran a story ‘Israeli forces accused of killing their own citizens under the 'Hannibal
Directive' but
not the BBC. There isn’t one mention of the Hannibal Directive on the BBC’s
website. The BBC is STILL propagating Israeli lies that Hamas operatives
slaughtered Israelis on October 7 when the truth is that the majority of
Israeli civilians were killed by the IDF.
Take another
story, which is connected with the BBC pulling Gaza – How To Survive a Warzone. The killing of Palestinian children. There is every reason to believe that the
high number of Palestinian children killed is a consequence of their being deliberately targeted.
Rabbi
Eliyahu Mali, who runs the Bnei Moshe Yeshivah in Jaffa has, like other rabbis,
openly advocated for the murder of Palestinian children because they
represent the future generation of Palestinian fighters. It is an argument that
Himmler made about Jewish
children:
“For I did not consider myself
justified in exterminating the men—in other words, killing them or having them
killed—and then allowing their children to grow up to wreak vengeance on our
children and grandchildren.
When complaints were made to the
Israeli Police, who are happy to raid Palestinian bookshops on a whim, they recommended
that Mali not be prosecuted. Has the BBC covered this story or related it to
what is happening in Gaza? Of course not.
The BBC was happy to carry the allegations of
Netanyahu that the Bibas children were killed by Hamas with their bare hands rather
than that they were killed by Israeli bombing. The BBC gives full unchallenged coverage
to any Israeli lie.
There is no evidence to support
Israel’s allegations and there is no medical evidence either. Hamas was not given
the chance of rebutting Netanyahu’s lies.
When it comes to documented proof of
Israel’s murder of Palestinian children the BBC goes silent and withdraws the
only film that allowed Palestinian children to express themselves. When
Zionists make demands the BBC rushes to demonstrate their fealty to the
genocidaires.
The UN has just released a Report that Israel’s systemic attacks on women’s
healthcare in Gaza amount to “genocidal acts”, and that the Israeli military
have used sexual violence as a weapon of war to “dominate and destroy the Palestinian people”.
Has the BBC
reported on this or investigated? Well it did lead with Israel’s denials on BBC
Radio 4 News. When a Russian atrocity is announced does the BBC lead with
Russia’s denials? To call the BBC genocide enablers would be an understatement.
The BBC’s silence and refusal to
accurately report
the multiple accounts of Israeli torture of Palestinian health care workers and
their murder makes it complicit in that murder. Because if the BBC and other
western media were calling out these war crimes Israel would not feel that it
had impunity to do whatever it wants.
The BBC has repeatedly carried Israel’s atrocity
propaganda about Hamas rapes on October 7, despite there being no forensic
evidence and despite Israeli prosecutor Moran Gaz saying that she has no cases or victims.
In an interview with Ynet, Moran
said that the prosecutors are not filing a case on sexual assault or rape by
Hamas militants as her department has failed to find any evidence despite
having over fourteen months to investigate the claims.
"In the end, we don’t have
any complainants. What was presented in the media compared to what will
eventually come together will be entirely different…" Moran said.
However the
BBC has been reluctant to publicise the well documented examples of Israeli soldiers raping
Palestinian women. Rape of indigenous people is a well established colonial
tradition.
An Israeli soldier who raped a Palestinian prisoner alongside other soldiers appeared on Israeli channel 14 to defend his unit that committed the rape. The incident sparked outrage as it was filmed on CCTV cameras and spread to the media.
— red. (@redstreamnet) August 8, 2024
The incident happened in the Sde Teiman… pic.twitter.com/jL7qME3mDn
The verified Israeli rape of Palestinian men, with the perpetrators appearing on Israel’s Channel 14 boasting of their deeds, hasn’t merited coverage on BBC News or any investigative programme. Raffi Berg instead commissioned ‘We will dance again’ since the focus must always be on the settlers never the colonised.
There is also Israel’s routine torture of prisoners. Nearly all those released have
been in a shocking physical condition and showing signs of torture compared
to Hamas’s Israeli prisoners.
The deliberate starving of Palestinian
prisoners began under Israel’s neo-Nazi Minister of Police, the Kahanist Ben
Gvir who openly proclaimed the policy. The
BBC has never provided any context to Israel’s policy of torturing Palestinian
prisoners.
Whereas Israeli hostages kiss their
captors Palestinian hostages show no affection for their guards. One Zionist
suggested to me that Israeli hostages were suffering from Stockholm Syndrome. I
asked why it was that Palestinian prisoners don’t suffer from this malady!
Israeli Hostage’s Hamas
Kiss-Fest Leaves IDF Red-Faced
I refer particularly to the torture of the Director of Gaza’s Kamal Adwan
Hospital, Dr. Hussam Abu Safiya, who told a legal representative of “the torture and abuse” he was subjected
to since being detained by Israeli occupation forces 47 days ago.
The BBC
refrained from publicising what has happened to Dr Safiya. One wonders what its
response would be if it had been Hamas that had been torturing an Israeli
doctor?
"A pure soldier showcases the quality football that was made with hard work after prolonged fighting in the Whores' Strip."
— Quds News Network (@QudsNen) February 24, 2025
This is the caption written for an image shared on a prominent Israeli settlers' Telegram channel. The image shows an Israeli soldier stepping on the… pic.twitter.com/m9bVKLAvLe
Berlin's Jewish Hospital
The
destruction of this and other hospitals was a war crime. To capture and torture
doctors is a practice that even the Nazis refrained from. The only Jewish
communal building that survived untouched in Berlin till 1945 was
the Jewish Hospital. Israel has outdone the Nazis as no hospital in Gaza has
escaped unscathed.
The BBC refuses to use the term ‘genocide’ despite
the overwhelming evidence. For example Israeli ministers like Nissim Vaturi,
the Deputy Speaker of the Knesset, have called for all adult men in Gaza to be
killed. That sounds a bit like genocide but if you don’t report it then you
don’t have to decide.
There is also the small matter of the mass graves which are
being uncovered in Gaza but I wouldn’t want to disturb your conscience any
further. You have a lot weighing it down as it is.
I wouldn’t expect the BBC to cover the case of an
Israeli soldier playing football with the skull of a Palestinian man. After all this is simply good old
colonial fun and games.
I might expect the BBC to carry prominently the
story of Israel’s denial of food and fuel aid to Gaza and how babies have frozen to death. However the silence of the BBC on this as on so much else is
deafening. There are only some voices that the BBC can hear. See
A Dagger To The Heart’: BBC Credibility
Nosedives Even Further
Thank you Tony for your pure heart and dedication to pursuit of truth.
ReplyDeleteYour ability to show this juxtaposition is a credit to you, puts the current state of reporting into context. The irony is tragic as is. If I was a bbc license payer I would be mad a hell!
ReplyDelete