 |
|
|
Sunday, June 8 2008BBC Reporter: Genuine Eyewitness or Palestinian Propagandist?Whose version of events does a BBC journalist stand by? Find out at HonestReporting's latest communique: BBC Reporter: Genuine Eyewitness or Palestinian Propagandist?
TrackBackTrackBack URL for this entry: Listed below are links to weblogs that reference BBC Reporter: Genuine Eyewitness or Palestinian Propagandist?: Comments"Why does the BBC fail to make clear the chronological order of events?" Why the naive' question ? Don't we yet know the BBC's attitude towards Israel and we Jews. Why the passive response? Lets accuse them of what they really are, an anti-Zionist bunch of Anti-Semites who wouldn't print the truth if it hit them in the face ! It seems that you may not have received an email from me that seems to have disappeared from the box. My email message to you concerns another attempt by British media to create another "Israeli atrocity" myth. There is a very obvious discrepancy between the number of victims first alleged in this alleged incident about 2 months ago and the number of victims alleged in a revival of the story, curiously timed to a day or so after the verdict in the Al-Durah case in Paris. See link to a post on my blog, please read it, and see how you can make use of my research. http://ziontruth.blogspot.com/2008/06/british-agitprop-agencies-assault.html Could it be that the "Israeli soldiers" were actually Palestinians dressed in IDF uniforms to make it look like it was the Israeli army? Then it could be passed off as further proof of Israeli aggression. What this story is about is an atempted apprehension of a recognized terrorist. Israel will not allow it's citizens to be terrorized. The authorities in Gaza aren't doing their job so the Israelis have to do it for them. What would we do in the USA if rockets were fired on us from Canada and the Canadians took no action? Bob Poplar The BBC always does this. I think they always go for the later event for the headline. The other factor is that Jeremy Bowen, Middle East editor, always talks about the conflict as if it is a tit-for-tat battle between two sides over disputed territory - he colours this with criticism of Israel's methods while always implying that the Palestinian methods are justified. i began to comment to the bbc per your : "Please write to BBC Complaints - http://www.bbc.co.uk/complaints - and ask if Aleem Maqbool can clarify his version of events that day in Ramallah. (Please remember to include the program "From Our Own Correspondent", the story hyperlink and the appropriate date, 3 June 2008.)." The BBC should be banned in its entirety from Israel. There has never been any objectivity of any kind from the BBC in their reporting about Israel. As far as I'm concerned, let them report only from the Arab territories that are in dispute and place them in the same category as Al Jazeera; I believe that Al Jazeera's reporting may be even more objective that the BBC. I regret the need to question the BBC's versions of specific events in Gaza, because the BBC used to be trustworthy and regarded as unbiased. It's more diffcult to think of BBC as unbiased given its current tendency simply to blame Israel and regard the Palestinians as innocent victims. One would think that Israel had vowed to destroy Hamas, rather than vice versa.One would think that Israel daily sent missiles, unaimed, against civilian settlements, rather than vice versa. I'm saddened by these distortions, but I shall continue to question, seek further information, and publicize the need for this process. Why does the bbc continue to grossly distort the news regarding any conflict jnvolving israel and the palestinians???Is this bias the result of the fact that the bbc is a goverment agency and taxpayer funded??? I am not surprised at the false report. The BBC has no shame and no scruples. I am surprised people still read it, unlsee they want a fictional story.Israelis don't kill first and ask questions later. they know the difference between right and wrong and will only kill as a necesity to protect civilians.I did not need to be told that. Right from the start I knew the report was false. this is a serious thing because it is a matter of life and eath and can cause a great deal of harm. Journalists are supposed to report the truth. The BEEB journalists are not reporting news. They are in the business of making the news to align with their leftist, politically correct, hard multiculturalist totalitarianistic stance; which is all about being anti-israel, pro-arab. When a BBC journalist reports anything, there is not a scintilla of truth, there is no good faith, there is no journalistic rigour applied. The only hope the western world has is for another British Royal Commission review of the BBC -- they held one after the british nuclear scientist, investigating iraq's nuclear weapons of mass destruction, was found dead in the woods outside his home. When the next one will be is not predictable. What the BBC journalist reports is filtered through the cognitive sieve the BBC journalist calls a brain, filled with leftist propaganda spouted by members of the Social Workers party. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if the BBC journalist isn't required to take out membership in the Social Workers party before they get to the field. I wouldn't believe a word any BBC journalist wrote and/or spoke. And NEVER would I believe an arab BBC journalist. Thanks for exposing this, HR. I also had a look at the excellent work done by Camera on the reporting of the incident. I have complained to the BBC via that old dinosaur of a "complaints" site of theirs that looks like it hasn't been updated in ten years and is difficult to navigate around. There has also been quite a lot of discussion on the blogosphere, e.g. the Biased BBC site, which dealt specifically with the vile article by Maqbool: http://biased-bbc.blogspot.com/2008/06/bbc-is-not-biased.html Here's how I ended the complaint: "Frankly I regard this as a new low for the BBC. Where was the Middle East Editor while vile and unsubstantiated allegations against Israel were published by one of his staff? I expect the BBC to make a formal apology for publishing an article that is more suited to third world propaganda than an impartial first world news service and to point out to the public that Maqbool's version of events is unconfirmed and exists purely in his warped imagination. I also expect this apology to be prominently displayed on your website and inserted at the top of Maqbool's article. Anything less will damage your credibility since it will indicate that the BBC has no interest in the truth of this matter but is content to simply go along with lies and anti-Israel propaganda. I would also appreciate a reply rather than your usual tactic of ignoring complaints." Has there EVER been a time when the BBC has shown one shred of understanding for what the Israelis endure on a daily basis? I believe the BBC "reporting" is a combination of endemic British anti-Semitism and a perceived need to appease the rapidly-growing Muslim population of Great Britain.
nan at Jun 8, 2008 10:46:08 PM, You raise a good point. The BBC "Complaints" site is one of the most user-unfriendly I have seen on the internet. For example, going back to edit your text or details will wipe out the details so that you have to re-enter all of them. I'm sure it is an elementary process to fix this flaw but they couldn't be bothered. More seriously, I haven't even received the courtesy of a response from them for 90% of the complaints I have sent and when I do get a response it is inadequate, to say the least. There seems to be an unwritten rule at the BBC that nobody who receives a complaint should acknowledge its validity or apologise for wrongdoing. You always have to take it to the next level and they make that process as cumbersome and as difficult as they can. But I guess we have to keep on trying, especially for something as vile as Aleem Maqbool's 'report'. I suppose the most important things are to paste the URL, if available, in the box above the comment box and check the box next to "Do you want a reply to your complaint." Good thinking on HR guiding people through the BBC complaints process. How about it HR? You could get feedback from us re our treatment at the hands of the BBC when lodging a complaint. I'd be happy to share my experiences.
The BCC used to have a reputation for factual, honest, unbiased reporting. What has happened to those most admirable qualities. I also found it interesting that in the second story the little Palestinian girl was named where as the Israeli man wasn't. The BBC can't help themselves..!!!Thank goodness that there a many who can see through this biased reporting...Pray for the Peace of Jerusalem!!! .. as an aside, if I may, it is interesting to note that even Sir Alex Ferguson the manager of Manchester United will not, under any circumstances, allow or grant interviews to the BBC. They are literally 'persona non grata' at the club and have been for a long time. I was censored on this panel before, curiously, when I sent a comment; mind you, a very pro-Israeli comment. Regards, Let's face it, the BBC is pathologically biased against Israel and the Jewish people. It sends its Palestinian reporters to dig up any dirt on the Israelis to make them look bad. Remember Jenin? Did the BBC ever apologize for its error? Does the BBC ever, ever tell the story of the 850,000 Jews ethnically cleansed from the Arab world? Of course not. Anti Semitism is the root of all this bias. The BBC do not know what honest reporting means. I beleive that they are in the pay of the Arab countries. Orla Garon was married to a Palestinian, her Mother was an IRA terrolist wanted by the British in the 70's, this is who they used for honest reporting. Last week they gave a Vidio recorder to the Arabs on the so called West Bank, to film Settlers, that means play acting, as in your report. I asked them why they did not give one to the people in Southern Israel, to film the Rocket fire from Gaza, they had no answer. I understand that a Solicitor is suing the BBC because of their dishonest reporting from the Middle East. I wish him the best of luck, sos should we all. Last week on BBC (televised in Israel) I witnessed 2 distortions--one--Palestinian women beaten complaining that Israelis had beaten them and taken their land. Films of masked men wielding weapons followed. They were assumed to be Israeli "terrorist-radicals." Then an Israeli "Human Rights" group, supposedly in order to collect"impartial" evidence armed Palestinians with cameras, and the footage will be shown on BBS with no attempt to verify or objectify their film clips. How can they call themselves a professional station when they resort to such slanted and dubious means of obtaining information? Pamela, in fairness it was the Jewish "human rights" organisation, Betselem, who gave the videocameras to the Palestinians. But your point remains valid. The video is an obvious fake, but the BBC happily showed it and it can still be accessed from a link on its Middle East page. Who is this solicitor suing them? They deserve to be sued.
Next
»
Post a comment[Comments are held for approval before appearing.]
|
