FactsOfIsrael.com News, Comments and Links

<- Back to Main page

July 24, 2002
 Send to Printer    Link to this page
The leftist BBC is anti-Israeli and anti-Semitic

The Jewish World Review (www.jewishworldreview.com) has posted an article that describes how the BBC has become one of the most anti-Israeli and anti-Semitic stations, surpassing even NPR.

Did the BBC, which reaches into virtually every British living room, take a conscious policy decision to allow this arrant nonsense to become an established fact on its air waves? I doubt it. Rather, I believe, that the profound anti-Israel bias -- and now I am convinced that it does exist -- has, over the years, become ingrained in the BBC's corporate culture. Combine that with a massive dose of anti-Americanism and you have a combustible cocktail.[...]

In my judgement, the volume and intensity of this unchallenged diatribe has now transcended mere criticism of Israel. Hatred is in the air. Wittingly or not, I the BBC has become the principal agent for re-infecting British society with the virus of anti-Semitism. [...]

But it was not just the lamentable standards of journalism: I parted company with the BBC over its systematic, hysterical advocacy of the most extreme Palestinian positions; an advocacy that has now transmogrified into a distorting hatred of a criminal Israel and, by extension, into a burgeoning hatred of Jews closer to home.

It is astonishing that little more than half a century after the Holocaust, the BBC, guardian of liberalism and political correctness, should provide the fertile seedbed for the return of "respectable" anti-Semitism which finds expression not only in the smart salons of London but, according to the experts who monitor such phenomena, across the entire political spectrum, uniting the far-left with the centre and far-right.

I copy the full article below.

The BBC is quickly becoming one of the world's 'kosher' purveyors of hate
By Douglas Davis, July 24 2002
http://jewishworldreview.com/0702/davis_bbc.html

Would I, asked the BBC researcher who called, be available to appear again on the Nicky Campbell programme -- Britain's equivalent of Larry King Live -- the following morning?

"It should be very interesting," she said, warming to her sales pitch. "We want to discuss whether Israel is a morally repugnant society."

"Thanks, but no thanks."

"You sure?" she asked, disbelief mingled with impatience.

"Absolutely positive. Absolutely," I replied, to avoid any possible confusion.

A moment's silence, then icily: "Okay," and the line went dead.

The BBC, in my experience, has always been critical of Israel. At times I have felt somewhat queasy by its coverage; on occasion, I have thought it downright unfair. But as an Israeli and a journalist I have defended its right to take a critical view of Israel, even an extremely critical view. After all, no one could accuse the Israeli media themselves of being tame. And besides, I subscribed to the cock-up rather than the conspiracy theory when it came to BBC coverage of the Middle East.

I argued that the Arab-Israel conflict, anchored in a heady mix of religious, territorial, political, social, economic and historic issues, presented an eye-crossing challenge to even the reasonably well-informed observer, let alone the neophyte from London intent on establishing a reputation in one of the world's media hot spots.

September 11 changed all that. Even as the Twin Towers came crashing down, the BBC was rushing in the first of a stream of studio analysts to solemnly intone, one after another, that it was racist to assume that Arabs or even Muslims were responsible. More likely, they chorused, it was the Mossad because such an event "played into Israeli hands."

But even if Arabs and Muslims had flown those planes, they said, was it not obvious that America itself was the real culprit? After all, it was America that was pursuing a pro- Israel foreign policy, dictated by the Jewish lobby; it was America that was ignoring the occupation and turning a blind eye to the settlements; it was America that was contemptuous of Arab sensibilities. Could anyone blame the Arabs for wanting to vent their humiliation, frustration and rage at this one-sided American foreign policy?

Apparently not. At least not at the BBC, which could not get enough of it. As I followed the events, I felt increasingly as though the rest of the world -- or at least that part of it which was inhabited by the BBC -- had gone stark, staring mad. Disbelief, it seemed, was suspended at Television Centre as logic was turned on its heads and victim became perpetrator. But far more shocking than the repeated ventilation of these bizarre views was the fact that they went virtually unchallenged by the BBC's usually robust interviewers.

Forget the apparently inconsequential fact that Israel had only a few months earlier offered to disgorge 97 per cent of the West Bank, grant the Palestinians a share in Jerusalem, permit a limited return of the refugees and recognise an independent Palestinian state (which no previous ruler in the area had ever done). Forget all that. In the Newspeak of the BBC, there was a direct, causal link between the attack on America and the occupation of the West Bank.

Did the BBC, which reaches into virtually every British living room, take a conscious policy decision to allow this arrant nonsense to become an established fact on its air waves? I doubt it. Rather, I believe, that the profound anti-Israel bias -- and now I am convinced that it does exist -- has, over the years, become ingrained in the BBC's corporate culture. Combine that with a massive dose of anti-Americanism and you have a combustible cocktail.

It is outside the range of my expertise to explain the behaviour of the BBC in this matter. On the face of it one might have expected a respected British institution to feel a sense of affinity with Israel, a Western, democratic state that shares common values, ideals and aspirations in a region where anti- democratic, despotic and corrupt regimes are the norm.

Perhaps a clinical psychiatrist could offer a cogent explanation of the causes and consequences of the BBC's extraordinary conduct. Or perhaps the answer is far simpler: a reflex reaction of the grown-up, new-left radicals from the Sixties who now occupy executive positions in the great offices of state.

Could such a collective mind-set, permeated with post- colonial guilt, have animated the Director-General, Greg Dyke, to declare that the BBC was "hideously white"? Could it have animated the Foreign Office Minister, Peter Hain, in a previous incarnation, to advocate the violent destruction of Israel and label Israelis "greedy oppressors"?

If there is a disparity between the time given to Arab and Israeli commentators on the BBC, I must take some of the blame. Over the past five years or so, I have been a frequent commentator on Middle East affairs. Since September 11, however, I have refused all invitations to appear on BBC radio or television. The reason is not that I wish to avoid a debate, but rather that I believe the BBC has crossed a dangerous threshold.

In my judgement, the volume and intensity of this unchallenged diatribe has now transcended mere criticism of Israel. Hatred is in the air. Wittingly or not, I the BBC has become the principal agent for re-infecting British society with the virus of anti-Semitism. And that is a game I am not willing to play, even if, as one BBC researcher recently assured me, my interview fee far exceeded that of my Arab protagonists (an outrageously racist point that I, a third-generation refugee and an exile from apartheid South Africa, found difficult to applaud).

I am neither an apologist for the Israeli government nor a defender of its policies. I have been perfectly capable of taking a critical view of Israel when appearing on the BBC, whether it was the Israel of Yitzhak Rabin, Shimon Peres, Binyamin Netanyahu, Ehud Barak or Ariel Sharon. And I am not afraid of informed criticism from others. On the contrary, I believe criticism is essential to the health of the democratic process (although I was always perplexed that Arab guests were treated with a kind of paternalism that never permitted hard questions).

I have a problem with the BBC's propensity to select and spin the news in order to reduce a highly complex conflict to a monochromatic, single-dimensional comic cut-out, whose well-worn script features a relentlessly brutal, demonically evil Ariel Sharon and a plucky, bumbling, misunderstood Yasser Arafat, the benign Father of Palestine in need of a little TLC (plus $50 million a month) from the West.

But it was not just the lamentable standards of journalism: I parted company with the BBC over its systematic, hysterical advocacy of the most extreme Palestinian positions; an advocacy that has now transmogrified into a distorting hatred of a criminal Israel and, by extension, into a burgeoning hatred of Jews closer to home.

It is astonishing that little more than half a century after the Holocaust, the BBC, guardian of liberalism and political correctness, should provide the fertile seedbed for the return of "respectable" anti-Semitism which finds expression not only in the smart salons of London but, according to the experts who monitor such phenomena, across the entire political spectrum, uniting the far-left with the centre and far-right.

It is astonishing, too, though perhaps no longer so surprising, that the Oxford University English professor and poet Tom Paulin should continue to star on BBC Television's weekly culture panel, despite his clarion call, published in the Cairo- based al-Ahram last month, to kill Jewish settlers. One can only guess at the BBC's reaction if his remarks had been directed at British Asians rather than Israeli Jews.

I still receive a couple of calls a week from producers and researchers at the BBC - there is obviously a serious disconnect there somewhere - but they should know by now that I am no longer a candidate to make up the numbers in order to allow them to justify the injection of yet more poison into the national bloodstream.

Nor, as Nicky Campbell's researcher so sweetly asked, am I prepared to defend the legitimacy of Israel's existence - and, effectively, the legitimacy of my own existence as an Israeli and as a Jew. To that I say: "Get stuffed."

Posted by David Melle at July 24, 2002 09:00 AM
Comments

I was blazingly annoyed after watching the BBC cover of Israel defending herself yet again.

I am not a man of words, articulate or would what you call educated, i am a worker, the thick lower class, and most of my infomation comes from the main media, but i just wanted to tell you that i know in my heart what is going on, and so do many common people.

God Bless Israel ! and i say with out fear if i were younger or just fitter i would sign up for the IDF tomorrow if they would have me. I write a lot to the newspapers and the BBC bastards, demanding just the truth not favourtisem. I know that one day the truth will choke em all, but i care not about them, I DO CARE about YOU, our thoughts and prayers are with you.

I live in RHYL North Wales

Posted by: Steve Woodruff on August 8, 2006 11:51 PM

The snobby, stuck up BBC with its mawkish 'journalism' shows that it still cannot take the idea that ordinary people are richer than them, as in the USA - hence the BBC cant handle it. The blatantly anti-Jewish BBC is not surprising,as after WW2 many Officers cliqued to find nice jobs in the BBC, while others struggled in a bare and poverty stricken UK of the 1950's. Bare in mind Britain's war with Germany was purely military, UK didn't go to war to fight for a principle or cause. At Belsen death camp, the Brits took their time and were quite indifferent to the mass sufferings there, even the German guards were left fully armed. UK government was terrified the Americans would easily move into British oil interests, so it betrayed Israel badly, including the Jewish Brigade that aided UK so much in WW2 - keeping Rommel out of the mideast. Sir Anthony Eden persecuted Jews in and out of Israel (then called Palestine), the British Royal Navy sank a passenger liner, taking 1,000's of jews to the bottom of the Med', sick & sorry survivors of death camps. Britain even deported captive Jews IN Israel and sent them back to prison camps IN Germany ! - Yes your Britain. ONLY THE AMERICANS showed any sympathy and understanding of the plight of Jews in Europe AND BRITAIN too! Before the war Neville Chamberlain trapped Jews into Europe - so millions could not flee from Hitler. Britain is not clean of fascism I'm afraid. On yet another occasion Britain deserted the Israeli's - but paid the price! the lost the Suez canal, but Israel General Moshe Dayan recovered it ! Result:- Britain lost her Empire there and eventually eveywhere. Now Britain is reduced to a cheap, imature, selfish bunch of homosexual, lesbian, money grubbers, with a morbid fetish for blacks and odd women. What a sorry land Britain is today.

Posted by: gordon on August 3, 2009 12:17 AM

I have read the above article with great interest as I have a very dear friend who is a non-practicing Jew, but who is adamant that the BBC is antisemitic. I have often argued with her that I don't think it is any more anti-Semitic than it is anti-Christian. It is certainly pro-Muslim, but since it is fiercely pro-homosexuality it cannot be said to actually BE Muslim. The BBC is also anti-White, because Muslim "comedians" (and at least one "comedienne") can say make as many anti-White jokes as they like, but just let a White person make an even slightly anti-Muslim joke and we'd have the representative of the Muslim Counsil of something or other making a statement to say that such comments were "dangerous", in that slightly threatening way that seems to be so ingrained in their culture.

However, whether it is pro-Muslim or not is not the question. Is it anti-Semitic? I just don't know. That is it Islam-apologist, there is NO doubt at all, so much that it is sickening. I am sick to death of the continual heart string tugging stories, plays, always painting the blacks and Muslims as the most honourable injured parties, with Christians (and yes maybe Jews too, but I don't notice that so much) the ones always to be vilified. I can see exactly why you think what you think though. I must confess that not being Jewish, I took no noticed of what you take to be anti-Semitism and took it simply to be the usual Islamic excuses with Israel the easiest target to pick on. I am quite sure that had Christianity been easier to blame in the context of Sep 11, then Christianity would have also been blamed. Anything rather than blame the real offenders!

Gordon, some of your comments are extremely offensive. Frankly, for you to confuse anyone of anti-anythingism is wholly hypocritical, since you seem to be as bigotted about the Brits as you are claiming the Brits themselves are. You are making the mistake of confusing the BBC with the whole of Britain! I can assure you the majority of us are not of the types you describe, although why are you so concerned about people's skin colour anyway? There are quite a few Jews who aren't exactly what you'd call "White"! I'm White and it makes no difference to me if you are or call yourself Black, Jewish, Asian, Chinese, Hispanic, etc., etc., as long as you adhere to a decent set of moral standards. Gordon, I don't care if you're White, Black or any other colour, you're being out of order and bigotted. Disgusting, in fact.

I value my Jewish friends greatly. Without exception I have found them to be courteous and well brought up. Without our Jewish poplation, Britain would be very much worse off as a culture.

Pam

Posted by: Pam Ingram on January 13, 2011 06:43 AM
Post a comment 
Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:


Remember info?



Email this entry
Email this entry to (please enter email address):


Your email address:


Message (optional):


Referrers to this Page

FAIR USE NOTICE

This site contains some copyrighted materials the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.




(According to digits.com)