NAUGHTIE'S SPEECH ON GAZA

*
David Preiser on the B-BBC blogsite draws our attention to more bias from James Naughtie - this time over Israel. Naughtie's opinions are rarely far from the surface so his explicitness here is just one step further. He should keep his opinions to himself.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/today/newsid_8600000/8600503.stm

There's a real problem here for people looking in on it. Leave to one side for a moment the plight of people living in Gaza, which is a very disturbing one to people in the outside world because they're being kept there effectively in prison for a very long time, but it is said in some quarters...that of course there are different groups operating in Gaza, as you say planning attacks against Israeli citizens, not all connected directly with Hamas, and some people say there is evidence that Hamas, which runs Gaza of course, is trying to get control of some of these groups and these people, and the argument goes that retaliation on this scale might actually make that more difficult. In other words the outcome may well be that Israeli citizens are put n more danger not in less.

David's comment is worth quoting in full:

James Naughtie spells out the BBC Narrative on Israel very clearly. Gazans are "kept there, effectively in prison, for a very long time", and Israel should not retaliate on the scale that they do. In fact, Naughtie suggests, many of these missiles and terror attacks on Israel aren't done by Hamas, and retaliation just makes peace more difficult.

Any chance Naughtie sees to discredit Israel, he takes. Gaza is a prison, Hamas is
trying to control these other factions so that they don't interfere with the peace process (I can't stop laughing at that one), and Israel is just making it worse by saying that they'll retaliate if soldiers are killed. In other words, Hamas is really trying to work for peace and Israelis need to roll over and die in greater numbers before they should retaliate.

Now that George Bush is out of office, no other government in the world is challenged so aggressively by the BBC.

http://biased-bbc.blogspot.com/2010/04/open-thread.html

*

(If you scroll down you'll also see David's fine dissection of Matt Frei's latest bit of propaganda and Hippiepooter's reply. Typical Frei, typical (unlabelled) use of a liberal talking head).

ONE-PART-OF-THE-WORLD-IN-PARTICULAR TONIGHT

*
After discussing Mark Easton's 'they're all as bad as each other, so Labour's not the worst of the lot by a long way as you might think' story, The World Tonight moved swiftly on to discuss its favourite subject, Israel (the subject is its favourite of course, not Israel!)
*
It was discussed, inevitably, with a liberal American academic, Michele Dunne, senior research associate at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace (the programme's favourite US think tank) before yet another report on this plight of the Palestinians - this time from Paul Wood on how "unarmed" Palestinians, "just coming home from college", were being shot with real (rather than rubber) bullets by the wicked Israelis. A Palestinian medic said, yes, he was sure they were shot with real bullets. The Palestinian case was made at considerable length, the Israeli denial considerably more concisely.
*
The BBC are just obsessed about this. I am deeply, deeply bored by their obsession. I want to hear about Cambodia, or Gambia, or Canada, or Tunisia, or Fiji...there's a whole world out there BBC! Let's hear about it!
*
(The World Tonight at least does spread its wings a bit wider than its companion programmes.)

*

ENOUGH ALREADY!

*

Though finding myself again a bit overwhelmed by the sheer amount of BBC bias at the moment I think I must make time just to put on record a few more examples of the BBC's brain-defying obsession with Israel and the Palestinians (zzzzzzzzzzzz!). (For more on which always see Sue on the Biased BBC website).

*

Tuesday's The World Tonight had a report on how the 'age-old' ways of Palestinian fishermen in Gaza are being destroyed by wicked Israeli restrictions. The reporter spoke to some of those fishermen and to a Palestinian economist, who denounced Israel.

*

Yesterday (before 7.00am) the BBC's Lucy Williamson (pictured) reported from the West Bank on a British charity's donation of olive trees to Palestinians in Nablus. The Palestinians were angry because Israeli restrictions (specifically an electric fence erected by settlers) made it hard for them to plant the olive trees.

*

I've said it before and I'll say it again, zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz!!!

*

'GUARDIAN' BOY IS BACK! WATCH OUT ISRAEL!

*
Reading the BBC News website's various stories on the assassination in Dubai of Hamas leader Mahmoud al Mabhouh - and watching Gavin Esler and Peter Marshall on Newsnight last night - you would be hard pressed to know why al Mabhouh is such a controversial figure, beyond what seems to be his involvement in arms deals with Iran (apparently why he was in Dubai) and his high-up position in Hamas. Sky News, however, tells us in its report on the story, "Last month Hamas admitted al Mabhouh, a founder member of Hamas' military wing, was involved in the kidnapping and killing of two Israeli soldiers in 1989." That's an important detail, isn't it? It surely throws some light on what might have happened and why. So why is the BBC being so coy about it?
*
Newsnight featured a discussion on the story between Clinton-era official and former US ambassador to Israel Martin Indyk and the ubiquitous Sir Ming Campbell. Esler was far from even-handed and showed his hand throughout (as ever). He and Sir Ming were naturally on good terms, but Abdul Bari Atwan's pal Esler was downright rude to the pro-Israeli Mr Indyk, asking him bitterly sarcastic questions and regularly interrupting him. (Will Gav and 'Bari' be together again on this week's Dateline, slagging off Israel? 'Bari' was on last week, so this shouldn't be the case - but we'll see if Esler and his producer can resist temptation!).
*
Talking of biased Esler, as I showed recently each of his three appearances on last week's Newsnight saw him kick off the newspaper headlines at the end with The Guardian. Last night was his first appearance this week and, with all the inevitability of a wink from Anne Robinson, he kicked off last night's newspaper headlines with, yes you guessed it, The Guardian (followed by The Independent of course). Gavin Esler is the Naughtie of Newsnight.
*

EYELESS IN GAZA, AT THE MILL WITH BABES

*
Today's The World This Weekend with James Robbins spent much of its time navel-gazing, discussing the BBC's disgraceful sidelining of female presenters of a certain age (and above) in favour of young beauties (like Joanna Gosling, Martine Croxall, Karin Gianonne, Anita McVeigh and Ellie Crissell). BBC News 24 is going to get an influx of older females in the coming months, so my only reason for watching this irritating channel will vanish along with its bevy of young lovelies! (Only joking. Or am I?)
*
Then The World This Weekend turned to Israel and the Palestinians. (What a surprise! Again, again, again with Israel and the Palestinians! Will the BBC's obsession with this subject ever end?) Whatever your view on this most controversial and exhausting of international conflicts (yawn!), you surely must agree (yeah right!) that the BBC is biased on the subject. Even if you don't, here's some evidence for this point of view. I hesitate to present it only because I have so little interest in the subject, but feel I must present it because there's no escaping the BBC's incredibly one-sided obsession with it.
**
James Robbins mentioned that it was a year since the Gaza War. Because international journalist were excluded from Gaza, he said, "the BBC relied on its resident Gaza producers for eye witness accounts of what was going on. A year on one of them, Hamada Abuqammar, recalls what it was like reporting on a conflict that put his own family in danger." Mr Abuqammar's report featured the complaints of a personal friend who said "I used to have a good life, like people in the West, but the Israelis reduced it to dust." Hamada himself worried about the future: "Life for me and my family remains a challenge. Prices have gone up for fruit, flower, vegetables and clothes for my children. The continued blockade means that they won't change soon." Mr Abuqammar's report made no mention of Hamas. Everything was Israel's fault. Hamada is, let me remind you, employed by the BBC. The report lasted for 2 minutes 42 seconds.
*
For the sake of balance, an Israeli perspective was then sought - but Robbins framed the lsraeli lady's comments in a way laden with caveats: "But the Israeli government insists it acted in self defence. The number of its citizens killed or maimed by rockets fired from Gaza was far smaller than the number of Palestinians killed in Gaza and rocket attacks have dropped sharply, but still Inab Silverman (as I'm transcribing, sorry if I've spelled her name incorrectly), one of those Israelis living in Sderot, told me of the dangers in her everyday life". The lady was heard from for a mere 25 seconds!!! Is that what passes for balance at the BBC? *
*
James Robbins then chaired a double-interview that, at least, offered a Palestinian and an Israeli perspective, on equal terms: "So is there any chance of advancing the peace process in the Middle East in 2010? Well to discuss that earlier today I spoke to Dr Sabri Saidam, a former advisor to the Palestinian president Mahmoud Abbas, or Abu Mazin, and first to the left-of-centre Israeli politician, former justice minister Yossi Beilin." It wouldn't be this blog if I didn't point out that the BBC went naturally towards a left-of-centre Israeli politician. Of course it did. Robbins himself said, "Yossi Beilin, neither you nor Sabri Saidam, is particularly sympathetic towards the Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu...". Which raises the obvious question, why wasn't someone who is sympathetic towards Mr Netanyahu invited on?
*

THE CRUEL BARBARITY OF CAROLYN QUINN

*
Tonight's PM with Carolyn Quinn began by exploring the story of Akmal Shaikh, the British drug smuggler facing execution in Communist China. The issue was discussed with someone who's "an expert in human rights", Saul Lehrfreund of The Death Penalty Project. This is not an organisation that campaigns for the death penalty, you won't be surprised to hear. Mr Lehrfreund and Carolyn got on like a house on fire.
*
If you'd expect Carolyn to share Mr Lehhfreund's opposition to the death penalty, you'd also surely expect her not to be in favour of further 'profiling' of terrorist suspects - after all that might risk offending the Muslims (who, for some unfathomable reason, people suspect of being ever so slightly more likely to want to blow up aeroplanes, with people on them). Her line of questioning to Philip Baum, an airline security expert with Green Light Ltd showed that to be a very reasonable expectation.
*
The ever-entertaining Eric Pickles was up next, love-bombing an unwooable Danny Alexander of the Liberal Democrats. Carolyn interrupted Eric to ask about...guess what?....inheritance tax, then, when the interview ended read out one e-mail from 'a listener' who said he'd never vote Tory because of the "the cruel barbarity of fox, deer and hare hunting".
*
We then had yet another report about Gaza. Gaza, Gaza, Gaza, day in day out on the BBC. I couldn't care less about Gaza. I'd like to hear about Japan, or Mongolia, or New Zealand, or Tunisia, or Congo, or Canada, or Mexico...anywhere except Gaza. The BBC are obsessed about Israel and the Palestinians.
*
Eddie Mair (my favourite BBC interviewer, unlike Carolyn Quinn) then continued his series of full-length interviews with retiring MPs. These have all been interesting, with Eddie extracting a fine confession from John Hutton last Tuesday. (Good man John Hutton. He characterised Gordon Brown's prospects as prime minister perfectly, and in the circumstances his swearing was understandable!!). So far though, he's talked to Labour's John Hutton (last Tuesday), Labour's Bob Marshall-Andrews (last Thursday) and Independent Labour MP Clare Short (today). Hopefully, PM's producers will set Eddie up with a few retiring Conservative MPs later. (If not, why not?)

PRE-BUDGET BIAS

*
Wednesday's The World Tonight was the worst by far. Hosted by Ritula Shah, it focused mostly on the day's big story - Labour's shameless Pre-Budget Report. It was unquestionably biased towards Labour.
*
First came a chat between Ritsy and BBC economics correspondent (and unabashed leftie) Jonty Bloom, during which Jonty gave the government a glowing review. The scary news that Labour will need to borrow an extra £178 billion this year alone "could have been a lot worse", according to Bloom. Mr Darling was "very generous to pensioners", and "the economy is not doing quite as badly". Bloom is openly hostile to raising the threshold on Inheritance tax (please see http://beebbiascraig.blogspot.com/2009/10/more-bloomin-bias.html for the details on this) and said of the freeze on Inheritance Tax announced in the P.B.R. "that'll effect people with big estates, the rich basically" . People with a house worth just over £300,000? Are such people all 'the rich'? This was a party political broadcast on behalf of the Labour Party. Another was to follow.
*
The next commentator was Richard Murphy of the Tax Justice Network which, Ritula said, "lobbies for a more progressive taxation system". He was another leftie, who approved of the Inheritance tax freeze and thought the anti-banker legislation was a step in the right direction ("an attack on the disparity of wealth in our country"), though he wanted much more action against the rich. He got 1 minute 33 seconds.
*
Next up was Dave Prentice of UNISON, who condemned proposed public sector pay cuts. He got 41 seconds.
*
We did then get a banker - George Mathewson, formerly of R.B.S. - though he only got 12 seconds!
*
Finally a bit of balance was restored with a debate between Labour-supporting pollster Peter Kellner and Anne McElvoy of the London Evening Standard.
*
Jonty Bloom returned later with a second Labour Party political broadcast, advocating the need for more government spending on the UK's infrastructure. All of his four 'talking heads' agreed on the need for this.
*
Ritula Shah's introduction to Bloom's report pretty much says it all: "Our economics correspondent Jonty Bloom now reports on the importance of government investment to the British economy". First up was Cross-Rail: "So it's just as well that the government is spending a small fortune on Cross-Rail", Bloom opined after talking to a chap who says "What's keeping us going is public sector spending." He then went to a school in Nottingham "transformed" thanks to the generosity of this glorious people's government (all hail the prime minister). "It's a huge undertaking, but better schools are only one of the things Britain will need in the coming years - new and faster rail links, better roads, broadband internet access, new power stations and massive amounts of money for green projects like wind farms are also needed." (As they used to say at school: "Discuss.") Again, Jonty Bloom strays from reporting into open advocacy.
*
He ended by sounding a warning to the country against electing a Conservative government: "Our economic rivals around the world, but especially in Asia, are using this recession to increase intervention in their infrastructure, providing a tonic to their economies during the recession and making them better placed to compete with us when growth returns. What many in business fear is that in the rush to cut government spending and reduce borrowing we here will be doing the exact opposite."
*
Alistair's cheque's in the post, Jonty.
*
The programme also featured a report on the Palestinians. Of course it did.

ROBIN LEFTIG (2)

*
Now back to Thursday's The World Tonight, again presented by Robin Lustig. This began by discussing the meeting of minds between President Sarkozy and Gordon Brown (because Gordon is now following Sarko's line on regulation). Who did Robin invite on to discuss the issue. "I asked the French MEP Sylvie Goulard should we now believe them when they say they agree?" Sylvie had a bit of a dig at Sarko and praised the EU. I've complained about this before (http://beebbiascraig.blogspot.com/2009/11/world-tonight.html). Again Lustig neglected to tell us where she stands politically. Like last time (4/11), he did not tell us that she is a French Liberal MEP. (She's also president of the ultra-Europhile French European Movement). This is 'bias by (not) labeling'. The other guest was centrist Financial Times foreign editor Gideon Rachman.
*
An initiative by three U.S. senators on 'climate change' (ie. man-made global warming) was discussed with Rob Bradley of The World Resources Institute, "an environmental think-tank in Washington" and the BBC's environment(alist) correspondent Richard Black.
*
The World Tonight is particularly obsessed about Israel and the Palestinians. The Egyptian government's moves against tunnels into Gaza, which Lustig helpfully reminded us is thought of by every single one of its 11/2 million inhabitants as "the world's biggest open-air prison", were discussed with one man, Chris Gunness of the UN agency UNRWA. You may recognise the name, as Chris was a former BBC correspondent. He regards Israel as an "occupying power."
*

FOOLS RUSH IN

*
Given the flak that poor Sue over on the Biased BBC website gets from all-sorted loons over her posts on the Israeli-Palestinian issue, I tread a little gingerly here in pursuing this point. (I always have, oh cowardly me!) Oh well, what the heck!!

Today's The World This Weekend featured a glowing report from Brian Hanrahan on Marwan Barghouti.

"One of the sticking points appears to be the release of Marwan Barghouti, seen as a leader with the potential to unify the feuding Palestinian factions. He's an important figure in Palestinian politics, but he's serving a life sentence for murdering five Israelis. His trial made him a contentious figure in Israel but a hero to the Palestinians".

I had to use the Internet to find out what those murders involved. You might wish to do the same.
*
Those who know him, said Hanrahan, describe him as "a man of great political skill and considerable charm" but "shy away" from the "frequently-made" comparisons to Nelson Mandela. *
*
The 'talking heads' in Hanrahan's report seem to me to show bias. What do you think?

They were:

Ghada Karmi, University of Exeter (who knows Barghouti's wife apparently). She spoke warmly about him.

Devorah Chen, chief prosecutor in Barghouti's trial. She was the 'sop to impartiality', though not quite the sop she seemed, as Hanrahan used her words to end his report. The words were "I will accept it" if Barghouti is released.

Alistair Crooke, head of the European Secuity Team, who has kept in touch with Barghouti in prison & speaks of his potential as a leader.

Richard Burden, Labour MP, head of the Britain Palestinian All-Party Group, who also spoke well of Barghouti.

So that's 3 against 1.

Counting up the times each spoke for in the report seems to confirm the bias:

Ghada Karmi (pro-Barghouti): 2 minutes 9 seconds
Devorah Chan (anti-Barghouti): 42 seconds
Alistair Crooke (pro-Barghouti): 17 seconds
Richard Burden (pro-Barghouti): 1 minutes 3 seconds

Or to put it another way:

Pro-Barghouti: 3 minutes 29 seconds
Anti-Barghouti: 42 seconds

Methinks the BBC is taking sides. How unusual!!
****