Why do so many Palestinians (and others) think they should kill Jews?

Why do so many Palestinians (and others) think they should kill Jews?

'Palestinian Media Watch has found that the PA teaches an ideology of virulent hatred of Jews
and Israel that mandates the killing of Jews solely because they are Jews. The murder of Jews
is presented not only as beneficial to Muslims and Arabs, but as necessary for all humankind.
These findings are based on a thorough study and analysis of eight years of official PA
television and PA-controlled daily newspapers. This report documents how this hate ideology
has been taught for years, well before the war started in September 2000, and continues even
after the death of Yasser Arafat:'

That's an extract from this Palestinian Media Watch paper do go and read the whole piece.

Here's some examples, there are dozens more in the PAL Watch document:

“Kill them all... we won’t leave a single Jew here.” Young Girl [PA TV (Fatah), Oct. 22, 2000]

Dr. Mahmoud Mustafa Najem: “The Jews are Jews, and we are forbidden to forget their character traits even for a moment, even for a blink of an eye.” [PA TV (Fatah), Dec. 6, 2002

This presentation of Jews as having inherently negative character traits was taught for years in the PA curriculum: “One must beware of the Jews, for they are treacherous and disloyal.” [Islamic Education for Ninth Grade, page 79] “Treachery and disloyalty are character traits of the Jews and therefore one should beware of them.” [Islamic Education for Ninth Grade, page 87] These books were based on Jordanian schoolbooks. Though the PA was notified of this content in 1999, it refused an American offer to fund the reprinting of these books without this and other anti-Jewish content.

Crossword Puzzle Clue: “Jewish character trait spelled backwards” Solution: “Treachery” [Al-Quds, Dec. 20, 2000]

“We are waging this cruel war with the brothers of the monkeys and pigs, the Jews and the sons of Zion.” [PA TV (Fatah), Sept. 12, 2004]

Sheikh Ibrahim Mudayris: “The Muslim remembers how the Jews corrupted the land... Oh Muslims! The Jews are Jews. Their character and custom are the corruption and destruction of this land. We keep warning you: the Jews are a cancer that spreads inside the body of the Islamic and Arab nation.... They invest in the East Asian countries, which were destroyed [by the Tsunami] because of the Jewish and American corruption and destruction.” [PA TV (Fatah), Jan. 7, 2005]

Senior historian Issam Sissalem used a “parasitic worm” simile in referring to the Jews who came to Israel: “[Jews-Israelis] are like a parasitic worm that eats a snail and lives in its shell. We will not let anyone live in our shell.” [PA TV (Fatah), Dec. 21, 2004]

“If we presented this before a judge [now]...he would renew this condition ... the solution is that no Jew should live there... The prosperity of this city [Jerusalem] and of this land necessitates that no Jew should ever live there.” [PA TV (Fatah), Dec. 14, 2004]

Dr. Muhammad Ibrahim Maadi: "All weapons must be aimed at the Jews, Allah’s enemies, the cursed nation in the Koran, whom Allah describes as monkeys and pigs: [The] Koran says clearly that the worst enemies of the Moslem Nation are the Jews, may Allah fight them...” [PA TV (Fatah), Aug. 3, 2001]

Dr. Ahmad Abu Halabiyah, Sharia (Islamic Law) Rulings Council, Rector of Advanced Studies, Islamic University: “The Jews are the Jews. Whether Labor or Likud the Jews are Jews. They do not have any moderates or any advocates of peace. They are all liars. They must be butchered and must be killed... The Jews are like a spring as long as you step on it with your foot it doesn’t move. But if you lift your foot from the spring, it hurts you and punishes you: “It is forbidden to have mercy in your hearts for the Jews in any place and in any land. Make war on them any place that you find yourself. Any place that you meet them, kill them.” [PA TV (Fatah), Oct. 13, 2000]

Soon after this call to kill Jews, a teenager on PA TV expressed this desire to kill all Jews: “Kill them all... we won’t leave a single Jew here.” [Young Girl, PA TV (Fatah), Oct. 22, 2000]

Dr. Muhammad Ibrahim Maadi: “All the weapons must be aimed at the Jews, Allah’s enemies, the cursed nation in the Koran, whom Allah describes as monkeys and pigs, worshippers of the calf and idol worshippers: Nothing will deter them except the color of blood in their filthy nation : unless we blow ourselves up, willingly and as our duty, in their midst: We will blow them up in Hadera, we will blow them up in Tel-Aviv and in Netanya so that Allah will make us masters over this riff-raff. We will fight against them and rule over them until the Jew will hide behind the tree and rock and the tree and rock will say: ‘Muslim! Servant of Allah, there is a Jew behind me, kill him.’” [PA TV (Fatah), Aug. 3, 2001]

This official PA line that God demands the killing of Jews was expressed in graphic form on the Hamas website promising entry to Heaven to those who follow God’s command. The words read: “We shall knock on heaven’s doors with the skulls of Jews.” Dr. Mahmoud Mustafa Najem: “Servants of Allah, be you the ones by whom Allah tortures the Jews with harsh torment.” [PA TV (Fatah), Nov. 1, 2002]

Muhammad Abd Al Hadi La’afi, Responsible for Religious Teaching and Instruction in the Office of the Waqf: “The battle with the Jews will surely come: The decisive Muslim victory is coming without a doubt, and the prophet spoke about in more than one Hadith, and the Day of Resurrection will not come without the victory of the believers [the Muslims] over the descendants of the monkeys and pigs [the Jews] and with their annihilation.” [Al-Hayat Al-Jadida (Fatah), May 18, 2001]

It doesn't matter whether it is Hamas or Fatah, the aim is the same destroy Israel utterly, ensure there is no Jewish state in the Middle East and kill as many Jews as possible. Yet these are the people Israel are told to negotiate with as 'partners in peace'?

The BBC just won't report these regular statements from Hamas or Fatah that call for death for all Jews etc. but will report when one Israeli extremist makes threats against Arabs. I have complained about this to the BBC but their Middle East supremo, Tarik Kafala, seems uninterested in taking my complaints seriously.

 

This is a repost of a piece from last year that I think bears repeating.

The BBC still spreading anti-Israel lies

The BBC still have several reports on the Jenin 'massacre' on their news website. One is here and is titled 'Jenin 'massacre evidence growing'
The report contains some prime examples of Palestinian/BBC lies and distortion, including:

'A British forensic expert who has gained access to the West Bank city of Jenin says evidence points to a massacre by Israeli forces. Prof Derrick Pounder, who is part of an Amnesty International team granted access to Jenin, said he has seen bodies lying in the streets and received eyewitness accounts of civilian deaths. The Dundee University expert said the Amnesty investigation has only just begun but Palestinian claims of a massacre were gaining foundation as the team continued its analysis. He said: "The truth will come out, as it has come out in Bosnia and Kosovo, as it has in other places where we've had these kinds of allegations. "I must say that the evidence before us at the moment doesn't lead us to believe that the allegations are anything other than truthful and that therefore there are large numbers of civilian dead underneath these bulldozed and bombed ruins that we see." The professor said recovering the bodies would be difficult because many buildings collapsed during bombardment. He said: "We know there are families who were there and killed and buried. "We were on the ruins yesterday and two elderly men came forward, each of them pointed to where their houses had been and one of them told us that 10 members of his family were buried under the rubble." ... A United Nations special envoy described the the devastation as "horrific beyond belief". ... Palestinians claim hundreds of bodies are buried beneath the rubble, but Mr Shoval said only about 65 bodies had been recovered, of which five were civilians.'

In 2002 it might have been understandable how a news organisation, especially one opposed to Israel's right to exist, might allow such distortions onto their news website. But 10 years later after a UN report was issued that indicated that in fact 52 Palestinians had been killed and that more than half of those were combatants and not civilians, should the report not have a correction added to it?

The UN report criticised the Palestinians and not just the Israelis for having exposed civilians to danger. Should the BBC report not contain that extra information?

At Jenin, as Daniel Taub (a senior Israeli Foreign Ministry official), said:

"There was no massacre, and statements by the Palestinian leadership talking about hundreds of civilians that were killed were nothing more than atrocity propaganda".

Propaganda that 10 years on the BBC are still happily spreading.

The author of that BBC report was Tarik Kafala, now happily ensconced as the BBC's Middle East Editor. Does that help to explain the BBC's anti-Israel agenda?

Dear William Hague - some historical facts re Jerusalem

'
Dear Mr Hague:

I write in support of a petition I have recently signed, asking the British Foreign Office to alter its position on what has become an unnecessarily vexed question concerning the capital of Israel. As you know, Israelis are unanimous in regarding Jerusalem as their capital, not Tel Aviv (where the British embassy is currently located), nor Haifa nor Jaffa nor Petah Tikva nor anywhere else in the country. 

It is not hard to understand why the first Israeli parliament chose Jerusalem as its seat, even before it had built an edifice suitable to the needs of the men and women who sat in its chamber.  For many centuries, Jews in the Diaspora had clung to a hope, not only of a return to the Holy Land, but to Jerusalem in particular, the erstwhile home of its holiest Temple and the scene of so many primary events in Jewish and Christian history. This might be dismissed on the grounds that religious belief should not determine a city’s status, but many cities derive their significance from their role as religious centres, from Mecca and Medina (the latter having been the first capital of Islam), to Karbala’ and Mashhad, to Varanasi (Benares) and the Vatican City. This original attachment, intensified by daily prayers while facing Jerusalem and repeated wishes to return there, was later supplanted by the governmental, educational, trading, defensive, legal and bureaucratic concerns of the capital of a secular state.

As a people who have been deeply wronged in the past, Jews have tried to build their own state along lines of equal citizenship, a single legal system, human rights, and the protection of all holy places. But when Jordan occupied East Jerusalem from 1949 to 1967, Muslim holy places were renovated while 58 synagogues were destroyed and 38,000 Jewish graves were demolished. In addition, Jews were not allowed to set foot in their own holy places, notably on the Temple Mount. By contrast, when Israel retook Jerusalem in 1967, the Temple Mount was handed to a Muslim authority on account of two Islamic structures built on top of it, the al-Aqsa mosque and the Qubbat al-Sakhra or Dome of the Rock.

Such depredations and a lack of reciprocity have made Israelis wary of a Muslim takeover of East Jerusalem, where the holiest sites are located: the Temple Mount, the Western Wall (the Kotel), the Church of the Holy Sepulchre, the Mount of Olives, and the famous Jewish graveyards, still vandalized horribly by Arab criminals.

But the Palestinians have made it their business to turn Jerusalem into a bastion of Islamic holiness, not just because the al-Aqsa mosque and the Dome of the Rock are there, but because they now claim that there has never been any Jewish connection to the city or to the land of Israel. There was, they boast, no Jewish Temple there. All Biblical references to the Temple and to Jerusalem as a city built by King David are summarily and ahistorically dismissed. 

Given that Muslims have demolished the holy places of more than one religion, the Jews are rightly concerned lest Jerusalem fall under Islamic control. In Saudi Arabia for decades now, the government has been engaged in the destruction of Islamic holy places in Mecca and Medina. Lest you think me in the grip of some obscure fantasy, I should explain that the Wahhabi form of Islam, which governs Saudi Arabia, is utterly ruthless in its condemnation of anything that may be worshipped instead of God. They have demolished over 200 historical sites to prevent pilgrims praying at them. In Mali, a similar form of Islam – Salafism – has recently demolished dozens of shrines belonging to the Sufi form of Islam. And in Iran, the government has demolished all the holy places and cemeteries of the persecuted Baha’i religion. Israel, by way of contrast, protects and nourishes the large international headquarters and two holiest shrines of the Baha’is, places now recognized as UNESCO World Heritage Sites.

Is it surprising that the Israelis, backed by Jews and others like myself round the world, are desperate to maintain the integrity of the city, knowing as they do that Muslim Arab rule would carry a greatly heightened risk to the Old City and its environs? Israel has been generous towards Muslims and their holy places, but they fear that if increased pressure were to come from Saudi Arabia or Iran or, nearer to hand from Hamas, everything Jewish might be eliminated. Palestinians have taken control of the Jewish Tomb of Rachel, the third holiest site for Jews. They have commandeered most of the Ma’arat Ha-Machpelah, the Tomb of the Patriarchs in Hebron and made access for Jews to a tiny space very difficult, as I can personally attest. This is the second holiest site for Jews, containing as it does the tombs of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Sarah, Rebecca, and Leah.

In the earliest days of Islam, the Prophet Muhammad adopted from his Jewish neighbours the practice of turning towards Jerusalem during the five daily prayers. But in the year 622, a few months after his arrival in Medina, he did an about turn during one prayer session and from then on directed his followers to pray towards his home city of Medina. He severed all direct ties with Jerusalem, and in the centuries that followed Jerusalem was never a provincial capital, nor the heart of a Muslim country or empire. Medina in the first years, then Damascus, Baghdad, Istanbul and other cities became the capitals of Islam. Cairo was the major city in North Africa, Fez and Rabat capitals of the west, Esfahan, Tabriz, Tehran and others the royal cities of Iranian dynasties. And so on. But Jerusalem was never given such signal importance. This is significant. Palestinian wishes to make Jerusalem defy centuries of insignificance would lock us into a dispute that could last one thousand years.

For this reason, Jews everywhere will refuse to relinquish a city that was theirs from the beginning, and they will not reward people who have tried to take what was never theirs, who have tried to deny the historical record concerning the Jewish presence in a city that has been Jewish for 3000 years. To confirm the place of Jerusalem at the heart of Jewish life and prayers and as the eternal capital of their only homeland, Jews and Israelis appeal to honest governments to do the right thing and recognize that Jerusalem is the city where all the key aspects of Israeli life converge. No Israeli regards Tel Aviv as his or her capital. It is demeaning to treat Israelis as children by telling them this or that foreign government knows better than they and their government when it comes to designating Jerusalem their capital. I do not think you treat any other capital city in this way. You do not call Cork the capital of Ireland, nor Glasgow the capital of Scotland, nor the cathedral city of St. David’s the capital of Wales, nor Marseilles the capital of France. I do not believe the Foreign Office means to be insulting in this matter; but if foreigners called Birmingham the capital of England and the UK, would you not feel aggrieved?

Israel’s enemies call in all seriousness for the destruction of the country. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has called on all Islamic nations to ‘exterminate Israel’ (my translation). The Arabs, faced by their repeated failure to achieve this by military means or terrorism, have turned to secondary means, saying that there never any Jews in Israel, that they themselves were there first, an impossible 9000 years ago, and that Jerusalem was always an Arab city (a claim that directly contradicts the accounts of Arab historians like al-Tabari). It is a cheap and dishonest attempt to rewrite history itself and to introduce confusion into a simple narrative. Denying the historicity and modern reality of Israel, of Jerusalem, and of Israelis by refusing to liberate the city from the string of fictions that has tied so many in knots, allows falsehood and deceit to rule in international affairs. Britain is still a great country that is admired the world round for its probity. I do not doubt that you, like myself, wish to see that image remain untarnished. But I have to say that it is in some measure tarnished when you try to steal the Israeli capital from the Israelis themselves.

Yours sincerely,

Dr. Denis MacEoin'

This letter has been sent by Denis MacEoin to William Hague and others at the Foreign and Commonwealth Office. Please spread the word... I wonder if Tarik Kafala, the BBC's Middle East Editor, could usefully learn something from this letter?

Why do so many Palestinians (and others) think they should kill Jews?

'Palestinian Media Watch has found that the PA teaches an ideology of virulent hatred of Jews
and Israel that mandates the killing of Jews solely because they are Jews. The murder of Jews
is presented not only as beneficial to Muslims and Arabs, but as necessary for all humankind.
These findings are based on a thorough study and analysis of eight years of official PA
television and PA-controlled daily newspapers. This report documents how this hate ideology
has been taught for years, well before the war started in September 2000, and continues even
after the death of Yasser Arafat:'

That's an extract from this Palestinian Media Watch paper do go and read the whole piece.

Here's some examples, there are dozens more in the PAL Watch document:

“Kill them all... we won’t leave a single Jew here.” Young Girl [PA TV (Fatah), Oct. 22, 2000]

Dr. Mahmoud Mustafa Najem: “The Jews are Jews, and we are forbidden to forget their character traits even for a moment, even for a blink of an eye.” [PA TV (Fatah), Dec. 6, 2002

This presentation of Jews as having inherently negative character traits was taught for years in the PA curriculum: “One must beware of the Jews, for they are treacherous and disloyal.” [Islamic Education for Ninth Grade, page 79] “Treachery and disloyalty are character traits of the Jews and therefore one should beware of them.” [Islamic Education for Ninth Grade, page 87] These books were based on Jordanian schoolbooks. Though the PA was notified of this content in 1999, it refused an American offer to fund the reprinting of these books without this and other anti-Jewish content.

Crossword Puzzle Clue: “Jewish character trait spelled backwards” Solution: “Treachery” [Al-Quds, Dec. 20, 2000]

“We are waging this cruel war with the brothers of the monkeys and pigs, the Jews and the sons of Zion.” [PA TV (Fatah), Sept. 12, 2004]

Sheikh Ibrahim Mudayris: “The Muslim remembers how the Jews corrupted the land... Oh Muslims! The Jews are Jews. Their character and custom are the corruption and destruction of this land. We keep warning you: the Jews are a cancer that spreads inside the body of the Islamic and Arab nation.... They invest in the East Asian countries, which were destroyed [by the Tsunami] because of the Jewish and American corruption and destruction.” [PA TV (Fatah), Jan. 7, 2005]

Senior historian Issam Sissalem used a “parasitic worm” simile in referring to the Jews who came to Israel: “[Jews-Israelis] are like a parasitic worm that eats a snail and lives in its shell. We will not let anyone live in our shell.” [PA TV (Fatah), Dec. 21, 2004]

“If we presented this before a judge [now]...he would renew this condition ... the solution is that no Jew should live there... The prosperity of this city [Jerusalem] and of this land necessitates that no Jew should ever live there.” [PA TV (Fatah), Dec. 14, 2004]

Dr. Muhammad Ibrahim Maadi: "All weapons must be aimed at the Jews, Allah’s enemies, the cursed nation in the Koran, whom Allah describes as monkeys and pigs: [The] Koran says clearly that the worst enemies of the Moslem Nation are the Jews, may Allah fight them...” [PA TV (Fatah), Aug. 3, 2001]

Dr. Ahmad Abu Halabiyah, Sharia (Islamic Law) Rulings Council, Rector of Advanced Studies, Islamic University: “The Jews are the Jews. Whether Labor or Likud the Jews are Jews. They do not have any moderates or any advocates of peace. They are all liars. They must be butchered and must be killed... The Jews are like a spring as long as you step on it with your foot it doesn’t move. But if you lift your foot from the spring, it hurts you and punishes you: “It is forbidden to have mercy in your hearts for the Jews in any place and in any land. Make war on them any place that you find yourself. Any place that you meet them, kill them.” [PA TV (Fatah), Oct. 13, 2000]

Soon after this call to kill Jews, a teenager on PA TV expressed this desire to kill all Jews: “Kill them all... we won’t leave a single Jew here.” [Young Girl, PA TV (Fatah), Oct. 22, 2000]

Dr. Muhammad Ibrahim Maadi: “All the weapons must be aimed at the Jews, Allah’s enemies, the cursed nation in the Koran, whom Allah describes as monkeys and pigs, worshippers of the calf and idol worshippers: Nothing will deter them except the color of blood in their filthy nation : unless we blow ourselves up, willingly and as our duty, in their midst: We will blow them up in Hadera, we will blow them up in Tel-Aviv and in Netanya so that Allah will make us masters over this riff-raff. We will fight against them and rule over them until the Jew will hide behind the tree and rock and the tree and rock will say: ‘Muslim! Servant of Allah, there is a Jew behind me, kill him.’” [PA TV (Fatah), Aug. 3, 2001]

This official PA line that God demands the killing of Jews was expressed in graphic form on the Hamas website promising entry to Heaven to those who follow God’s command. The words read: “We shall knock on heaven’s doors with the skulls of Jews.” Dr. Mahmoud Mustafa Najem: “Servants of Allah, be you the ones by whom Allah tortures the Jews with harsh torment.” [PA TV (Fatah), Nov. 1, 2002]

Muhammad Abd Al Hadi La’afi, Responsible for Religious Teaching and Instruction in the Office of the Waqf: “The battle with the Jews will surely come: The decisive Muslim victory is coming without a doubt, and the prophet spoke about in more than one Hadith, and the Day of Resurrection will not come without the victory of the believers [the Muslims] over the descendants of the monkeys and pigs [the Jews] and with their annihilation.” [Al-Hayat Al-Jadida (Fatah), May 18, 2001]

It doesn't matter whether it is Hamas or Fatah, the aim is the same destroy Israel utterly, ensure there is no Jewish state in the Middle East and kill as many Jews as possible. Yet these are the people Israel are told to negotiate with as 'partners in peace'?

The BBC just won't report these regular statements from Hamas or Fatah that call for death for all Jews etc. but will report when one Israeli extremist makes threats against Arabs. I have complained about this to the BBC but their Middle East supremo, Tarik Kafala, seems uninterested in taking my complaints seriously.

The BBC respond

The BBC have responded rather promptly to my recent complaint:

'RE: Complaint

NewsOnline Complaints

Dear Mr MaybeaGoat,

Thank you for your comments regarding
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-18149573

The report never led the BBC News site or the Middle East page. It was a
feature by-lined by a correspondent in Jerusalem.

There is a great deal of violence by Palestinians, settlers and soldiers
that we do not report unless it causes serious injury or death.

In this case, we had detailed and revealing video footage of the
incident. It involved firearms aimed and fired at unarmed people while
IDF soldiers were on the scene. As you say, we reported that the
violence has disputed causes - all parties were given a say. What is not
disputed is that settlers fired on unarmed Palestinians, though they
were throwing stones, while IDF soldiers stood by.


Best regards and thanks,

Tarik Kafala
Middle East editor
BBC News website

http://www.bbc.co.uk/complaints/handle.shtml'

I have responded to Tarik Kafala thus:

'Nota Sheep
07:57

to NewsOnline

Dear Mr Kafala,

Thank you for your prompt response.

I never said that the report was 'the lead story' but that it was 'a lead story'. The report sat for some time on your Middle East News front page in the section that comprises just headlines rather than headline and short summary.

Is your explanation that: 'There is a great deal of violence by Palestinians, settlers and soldiers that we do not report unless it causes serious injury or death.' BBC policy? Is all violence that leads to 'serious injury or death' in Israel/Palestinian territories reported by the BBC? Will it be in the future?

I understand your point re your coverage of this incident, my complaint is not simply that you reported this incident but that you fail to report others.

I do understand the importance, to deciding whether to run a story, of the availability of good video of the event. Is the availability of video of an attack very important in deciding whether or not the BBC cover a story in Israel / Palestinian Territories?

Kind regards

NotaSheep MaybeaGoat'

Let's see if Mr Kafala is as prompt to reply this time. I have asked for nothing that is unreasonable and I estimate that a reply should take him much less than five minutes.

The BBC brush-off

My strongest complaint to the BBC about BBC bias has received a Stage 2 complaint response from the BBC and unsurprisingly it's a BBC brush-off albeit a better written one than normal.

'Stephanie Harris stephanie.harris@bbc.co.uk to me

show details 13:24 (21 hours ago)

Dear Sir/Madam
As explained by Alison Wilson of the Editorial Complaints Unit, your complaint has been passed to me to respond to as it fell outside the ECU's remit. You have asked Ms Wilson to make sure that I am aware of the crux of your complaint which you have expressed as follows:
'The BBC reported in August 2010 the despicable comments made by an extremist Israeli rabbi but when I asked why the BBC did not report the genocidal comments regularly made by Hamas and Fatah leaders (both secular and clerical), and I gave examples, I was told that 'We do not report every inflammatory comment by Israelis or Palestinians. There are many on both sides.'

When I pointed out that this was not a satisfactory response and explained why, I was told by Tarik Kafal (Middle East Editor, BBC News Website) in an email of 21 December that 'To report the shrill and extreme statements of some of the Hamas firebrands is therefore misleading.' However the BBC were happy to report the extreme statements of one firebrand Israeli Rabbi. This leads to my key question and main complaint:

Why is it 'misleading' to report the words of 'Hamas firebrands' but not those of an Israeli firebrand?


I have now had an opportunity to review the correspondence to date. I note that you have received substantial answers to all the points you have raised and I endorse these replies.  The replies you have received from Tarik Kafala are comprehensive and there would be no merit in my simply repeating the points he has made. I think the only thing I can add is that BBC journalists must make a judgement about what is newsworthy and there is no reluctance to report on those who make violent denunciations of Israel such as President Ahmadinejad. Here are some examples.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4912198.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/6173941.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/7628316.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/8010747.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/8007440.stm
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-11402101#

I hope that I have addressed your concerns but if not, it would be open to you to appeal to the BBC Trust, which is the final arbiter in the BBC’s complaints process. If you wish to contact the Trust, your correspondence should be addressed within 20 working days to Lucy Tristram, Complaints Manager at the BBC Trust Unit, 180 Great Portland Street, London W1W 5QZ or trust.editorial@bbc.co.uk.
Yours sincerely

Stephanie Harris
Head of Editorial Compliance & Accountability,
BBC News'

I will of course be appealing to the BBC Trust but more in hope than expectation...

I have also replied to Ms Harris:

'No Ms Harris you have not addressed my concerns and I am sure that you are well aware of that. Just like Tarik Kafala you have ignored my specific question.  
I will remind you of that question:

''The BBC reported in August 2010 the despicable comments made by an extremist Israeli rabbi but when I asked why the BBC did not report the genocidal comments regularly made by Hamas and Fatah leaders (both secular and clerical), and I gave examples, I was told that 'We do not report every inflammatory comment by Israelis or Palestinians. There are many on both sides.'

When I pointed out that this was not a satisfactory response and explained why, I was told by Tarik Kafal (Middle East Editor, BBC News Website) in an email of 21 December that 'To report the shrill and extreme statements of some of the Hamas firebrands is therefore misleading.' Yet the BBC were happy to report the extreme statements of one firebrand Israeli Rabbi. This leads to my key question and main complaint:

So my key question is this: Why is it 'misleading' to report the words of 'Hamas firebrands' but not those of an Israeli firebrand?'

I did not ask about President Ahmadinejad, I asked why the BBC saw fit to specifically mention the regular extreme statements of one minor Israeli Rabbi and not those of more high profile Hamas and Fatah leaders. Have you any examples of the BBC reporting the genocidal remarks of Hamas and Fatah leaders, I gave you plenty of examples from other sources?

Tarik Kafala and you have both chosen to ignore my question so I will be appealing to the BBC Trust. Hopefully they will actually answer my question rather than, as you have, the question you would have preferred to be asked.

Regards

NotaSheep MaybeaGoat'

A complaint to the BBC Trust will be sent soon, a copy will be posted here. Does anyone have any helpful hints as to how to best get a proper response from the BBC Trust; other than offering the members a Knighthood of course.

Complaining to the BBC, I have not forgotten (update)

Of all the complaints that I have made to the BBC about bias the one that dated back to 30 August last year always seemed the most incontrovertible and thus the one that I kept chasing up. For the full chain of complaints and responses this post from 13 June will bring you up to date. So I was intrigued to receive a response to my last chasing email just an hour and 14 minutes before the response I received re my Gerry Adams complaint (see previous post).

Here is the email that I received:

'Alison Wilson to me 27 Jun (3 days ago)

Thank you for your email.

I'm writing to let you know that your complaint has now been referred to the Head of Accountability for BBC News, who will arrange for a reply to be sent to you. You can expect to receive this within 20 working days, which is the BBC's target response time for Stage 2 complaints.

Regards

Alison Wilson

Complaints Manager
Editorial Complaints Unit
5170 White City
London W12 7TS '

20 working days, I make that 25th July. I do hope that the Head of Accountability for BBC News actually addresses my complaint rather than issuing an 'impartiallity is in our genes' assurance. In case he/she is reading this posting, the main question I have and it is one that arises from Tariq Kafala's response is this:
'The BBC reported in August 2010 the despicable comments made by an extremist Israeli rabbi but when I asked why the BBC did not report the genocidal comments regularly made by Hamas and Fatah leaders (both secular and clerical), and I gave examples, I was told that 'We do not report every inflammatory comment by Israelis or Palestinians. There are many on both sides.'

When I pointed out that this was not a satisfactory response and explained why, I was told by Tarik Kafal (Middle East Editor, BBC News Website) in an email of 21 December that 'To report the shrill and extreme statements of some of the Hamas firebrands is therefore misleading.' Yet the BBC were happy to report the extreme statements of one firebrand Israeli Rabbi. This leads to my key question and main complaint:

So my key question is this: Why is it 'misleading' to report the words of 'Hamas firebrands' but not those of an Israeli firebrand?


I await my next email with interest.

Hree is the email that I sent back...

'Many thanks for that. Please ensure that the Head of Accountability (what is their name, by the way?) addresses my key question which is this:

'The BBC reported in August 2010 the despicable comments made by an extremist Israeli rabbi but when I asked why the BBC did not report the genocidal comments regularly made by Hamas and Fatah leaders (both secular and clerical), and I gave examples, I was told that 'We do not report every inflammatory comment by Israelis or Palestinians. There are many on both sides.'

When I pointed out that this was not a satisfactory response and explained why, I was told by Tarik Kafal (Middle East Editor, BBC News Website) in an email of 21 December that 'To report the shrill and extreme statements of some of the Hamas firebrands is therefore misleading.' However the BBC were happy to report the extreme statements of one firebrand Israeli Rabbi.  This leads to my key question and main complaint:

Why is it 'misleading' to report the words of 'Hamas firebrands' but not those of an Israeli firebrand?

Regards
NotaSheep MaybeaGoat'

Complaining to the BBC - I have not forgotten

I chased up the BBC re a long-standing complaint. Here are the details...

Nota Sheep to Alison

11 Jun (2 days ago)

I note that you have seen fit not to respond to my email either, why?

Once again: I have still not received an adequate response to my complaint. How do I escalate this complaint?

Regads

NotaSheep

On 30 March 2011 10:46, Nota Sheep <notasheepmaybeagoat@googlemail.com> wrote:
I have still not received an adequate rsponse to my complaint. How do I escalate this complaint?

Kind regards

NotaSheep

On 16 February 2011 10:24, Nota Sheep <notasheepmaybeagoat@googlemail.com> wrote:
Please could you let me know who you have passed this complaint to as I have yet to have a reply. Also rather than inform me of the BBC's complaints procedure, maybe you should advise Tarik Kafala, your Middle East Web editor, who advised me to contact you..

Kind regards
NotaSheep

On 31 January 2011 15:32, Alison Wilson <Alison.Wilson-ECU@bbc.co.uk> wrote:

Dear NotaSheep

I’m afraid you’ve been incorrectly advised to contact the Editorial Complaints Unit, as our remit is confined to the question of whether there has been a breach of the standards expressed in the BBC’s Editorial Guidelines in the content of specific items broadcast or published by the BBC. 

Responsibility for the running order and subject matter of news bulletins and news online content lies with the news editors concerned, and the evaluation of their judgement does not fall within the remit of this unit; rather this is a matter for BBC management, to whom I have forwarded your email.  They will be in touch with a further response in due course.

If you’d like to know more about the BBC’s complaints process you’ll find it explained on the BBC website, along with a link to the full guidelines.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/complaints/complaints_process.shtml

Yours sincerely

 Alison Wilson

Complaints Manager
Editorial Complaints Unit5170 White City
London W12 7TS

---

From: Nota Sheep [mailto:notasheepmaybeagoat@googlemail.com]
Sent: 26 January 2011 17:26
To: ECU
Subject: A complaint about BBC Radio Bias

I have a complaint about blatant BBC bias that I have not been able to get properly addressed by either the individual who answered the original complaint or their, I presume, boss - Tarik Kafala.

I lay out below my signature the chain of emails; if you require any further information, do please ask.

However in summary - The BBC reported in August 2010 the despicable comments made by an extremist Israeli rabbi but when I asked why the BBC did not report the genocidal comments regularly made by Hamas and Fatah leaders (both secular and clerical), and I gave examples, I was told that 'We do not report every inflammatory comment by Israelis or Palestinians. There are many on both sides.'

When I pointed out that this was not a satisfactory response and explained why, I was told by Tarik Kafal (Middle East Editor, BBC News Website) in an email of 21 December that 'To report the shrill and extreme statements of some of the Hamas firebrands is therefore misleading.' Yet the BBC were happy to report the extreme statements of one firebrand Israeli Rabbi.  This leads to my key question and main complaint:
Why is it 'misleading' to report the words of 'Hamas firebrands' but not those of an Israeli firebrand? 

To put some more flesh on that:Do the BBC consider that Rabbi Ovaida's statements are isolated sentiments or representative of those of much of Israel? Does the BBC apply different standards to the speeches of Israeli and Palestinian 'firebrands'?


I look forward to your considered but also prompt response in this matter.

Kind regards

NotaSheep



Here is the chain of emails:

1) 30 August - Original complaint:
'Your news bulletins featured a piece about an Israeli rabbi who had called for a 'plague' on Mahmoud Abbas. A despicable comment I agree but maybe you could point me to the 5Live news bulletins that reported the genocidal statements of senior Hamas and Fatah politicians and/or religious leaders. For example did 5Live report Hamas cleric Ziyad Abu al-Haj's Friday sermon of 3 April 2009 in which he said "The time will come, by Allah’s will, when their property will be destroyed and their children will be exterminated, and no Jew or Zionist will be left on the face of this earth."? Did 5Live report the words of Dr. Ahmed Yousuf Abu Halabiah, a member of the Palestinian Sharia (Islamic religious law) Rulings Council, and Rector of Advanced Studies at the Islamic University on 13 October 2000 when he said "The Jews are the Jews. There never was among them a supporter of peace. They are all liars… They are terrorists. Therefore it is necessary to slaughter them and murder them, according to the words of Allah… It is forbidden to have mercy in your hearts for the Jews in any place and in any land. Make war on them any place that you find yourself. Any place that you meet them – kill them. Kill the Jews and those among the Americans who are like them… The Jews only understand might. Have no mercy on the Jews, murder them everywhere."

If you did not report such Palestinian calls, why not? Why are the words of one Israeli cleric, however vile, newsworthy whereas those of Palestinian clerics and politicians are not?'



2) 26 October - Original BBC reply:
'Dear Sir or Madam, We do not report every inflammatory comment by Israelis or Palestinians. There are many on both sides.
Rabbi Ovadia Yosef’s comments were reported because he is such an important figure, and because the comment came at a time when Israeli-Palestinian peace talks were being resumed. He is the spiritual leader of Shas, a party represented in current Israeli government, and a former Chief Rabbi.
The comments were widely criticised by US and Israeli leaders.
I am sorry for the delay ion replying to your complaint.

Best regards,
Middle East desk
BBC News website'

3) 28 October - My response:
'Thank you for finally replying to my complaint, although I note that you have not actually answered my complaint.


You write that 'We do not report every inflammatory comment by Israelis or Palestinians. There are many on both sides.' - My complaint acknowledged that the comments were 'reprehnsible' and 'despicable' and asked you to 'point me to the BBC web site news articles that reported the genocidal statements of senior Hamas and Fatah politicians and/or religious leaders.'  I don't ask that the BBC report every genocidal statement made by a Hamas politician or religious leader, where would you find the space? But to report none of these comments does look rather strange.

I gave you some examples to help you in your search, did you find any examples reported by the BBC?  Did you even look? If not, how do you know that you give equality of coverage?  If you did not report such Palestinian calls, why not? Why are the words of one Israeli cleric, however vile, newsworthy whereas those of Palestinian clerics and politicians are not?'



You write that 'Rabbi Ovadia Yosef’s comments were reported because he is such an important figure, and because the comment came at a time when Israeli-Palestinian peace talks were being resumed.' - I cannot disagree with your point about the timing of his remarks. Maybe you could point me to the BBC's coverage of Yasser Arafat's comments on Jordanian TV on the very day that he signed the Declaration of Principles on the White House lawn in 1993 "Since we cannot defeat Israel in war, we do this in stages. We take any and every territory that we can of Palestine, and establish a sovereignty there, and we use it as a springboard to take more. When the time comes, we can get the Arab nations to join us for the final blow against Israel."



You write that 'He is the spiritual leader of Shas, a party represented in current Israeli government, and a former Chief Rabbi.' - Indeed he was albeit the Sephardi Chief Rabbi and from 1973-1983; he is not a member of the Knesset. Maybe you could show me where the BBC reported the words of Hamas' spiritual leader, until 2004, Ahmed Yassin when he said that "Reconciliation with the Jews is a crime" and that Israel "must disappear from the map".



You write that 'The comments were widely criticised by US and Israeli leaders.' - Indeed they were and rightly so, but my complaint was not about the coverage of Rabbi Ovadia Yosef’s comments, but about the lack of coverage of equally or more reprehensible comments by Palestinian political and religious leaders. By not addressing this point you have not answered my complaint, preferring to answer a different question.



I must ask you to actually answer my question rather than a question of your choosing.


Regards

NotaSheep '

4) 13 November - My chasing email:
'Any chance of a reply to my last email or will it take the BBC a month to reply like last time?

Your last email did not answer my questions and I think I deserve proper answers to serious questions.

Regards

NotaSheep'


5) 16 November - First reply from Tariq Kafala
'Dear Notasheep,
Thank you for your further comments.
I tried to explain in my first email why we felt it editorial justified to report Rabbi Ovadia Yosef’s comments because of his importance and their timing.
We have, of course, reported the actions, policies and statements of Hamas and other Palestinian leaders. We tend, where possible to conduct our own interviews with such figures. 
The answer to one of your specific questions, based on a search of the site, is no. We did not report the statement by Ahmed Yassin regarding reconciliation with Israel being a crime or that Israel. In our obituary of Yassin we say: It was there that he formed the belief that Palestine was an Islamic land "consecrated for future Muslim generations until Judgement Day", and that no Arab leader had the right to give up any part of this territory.
Our current profile of Hamas makes it absolutely clear that Hamas' charter calls for the destruction of Israel, though its leaders often talk about a long tern truce following the withdrawal of Israel from occupied territory. This, I would argue, covers the substance of Yassin's comments and points to some range or nuance ion Hamas' position. 
The BBC News website was launched in 1997, so it's not possible for me to check whether we reported the Yasser Arafat comment that you refer to.
Best regards,
Tarik Kafala, Middle East editor, BBC News website'

6) 24 December - My response (07:41)
'Thank you for your reply and I apologise for not replying sooner but I managed to miss your email arriving.

I note that you have looked into the BBC's reporting of Ahmed Yassin's comments and assure me that you reported in his obituary that 'It was there that he formed the belief that Palestine was an Islamic land "consecrated for future Muslim generations until Judgement Day", and that no Arab leader had the right to give up any part of this territory.' I think that is rather milder than the statements that I asked if the BBC had ever reported. It seems that the BBC is eager to  report the wilder comments of a relatively minor Israeli Rabbi but connives in hiding the true feelings and objectives of many Hamas and Fatah religious and secular leaders. Look at what the BBC wrote in the obituary and ask yourself if that comes close to truly representing the words that I quoted? 

I ask again, did the BBC web news report Hamas cleric Ziyad Abu al-Haj's Friday sermon of 3 April 2009 in which he said "The time will come, by Allah’s will, when their property will be destroyed and their children will be exterminated, and no Jew or Zionist will be left on the face of this earth."?

Maybe you could also show me where BBC web news reported the words of Dr. Ahmed Yousuf Abu Halabiah, a member of the Palestinian Sharia (Islamic religious law) Rulings Council, and Rector of Advanced Studies at the Islamic University on 13 October 2000 when he said "The Jews are the Jews. There never was among them a supporter of peace. They are all liars… They are terrorists. Therefore it is necessary to slaughter them and murder them, according to the words of Allah… It is forbidden to have mercy in your hearts for the Jews in any place and in any land. Make war on them any place that you find yourself. Any place that you meet them – kill them. Kill the Jews and those among the Americans who are like them… The Jews only understand might. Have no mercy on the Jews, murder them everywhere."


You go on to say that 'Our current profile of Hamas makes it absolutely clear that Hamas' charter calls for the destruction of Israel, though its leaders often talk about a long tern truce following the withdrawal of Israel from occupied territory. This, I would argue, covers the substance of Yassin's comments and points to some range or nuance ion Hamas' position.' I disagree. By choosing to report just one nuanced type of comments made by Hamas and Fatah leaders you are skewing public opinion, public opinion that should be allowed to see the full extent of Hamas avowed hatred for all Jews and declared murderous intent towards them. Maybe you could explain to me the nuance in the position that "The time will come, by Allah’s will, when their property will be destroyed and their children will be exterminated, and no Jew or Zionist will be left on the face of this earth."?' Maybe you could show me the range in saying " It is forbidden to have mercy in your hearts for the Jews in any place and in any land. Make war on them any place that you find yourself. Any place that you meet them – kill them. Kill the Jews and those among the Americans who are like them… The Jews only understand might. Have no mercy on the Jews, murder them everywhere."?

Do the BBC consider that sentiments like those I have quoted above are not worthy of reporting or were the BBC unaware of them?

Do you consider that Yasser Arafat's comments are worthy of reporting and would BBC Online have reported them had the means been available in 1993?


Once again I consider that the BBC have not fully addressed my complaint, please do so now.


Regards

NotaSheep'


7) 21 December - Another email received from Tarik Kafala - Seemingly in response to another copy of my complaint:
'Dear Sir or madam,
Thank you for your further comments on http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-11127409
I explained in my first email why we felt it editorially justified to report the story as we did. You appear to agree that it was reasonable to report Rabbi Ovadia Yosef’s comments as we did.  
I also felt that I answered your question, but I will try again.
Hamas, the Palestinian Authority and other Palestinian groups and organisations speak with several voices. At different times and to different audiences they say different things. Sometimes their comments are might be seen as “conciliatory”, sometimes very warlike. There are Hamas leaders, for example, who regularly call for violent Jihad to reclaim all of “Palestine”. Others have indicated that they are ready to accept (maybe live with for the foreseeable future) a truce with Israel and a Palestinian state along the 1967 borders. Hamas’ true position is somewhere in between and the argument within the movement is an important one. To report the shrill and extreme statements of some of the Hamas firebrands is therefore misleading.
So, to answer your question, no we have not reported Ziyad Abu al-Haj's comments, nor other comments by of Dr Ahmed Yousuf Abu Halabiah. But we do feel that across our coverage and in our background features we reflect accurately, fairly and in detail and the position of Hamas on the key issues.
Bets regards,
Tarik Kafala
Middle East editor
BBC News website'

8) 24 December - My response (08:28)
Dear Tarik,

Thank you for your reply which I find interesting, if incomplete.

I have responded to your points in turn as that is the most convenient way for me, however I have also highlighted the key question that I have posed so as to try and ensure that you do not miss answering it when you reply to all of my points.


I do indeed consider it reasonable to report Rabbi Ovaida's comments as I always said I did;  my complaint is that the BBC seem unwilling to report the hate-speech often expressed by Hamas and Fatah's religious and secular leaders.

I accept that 'Hamas, the Palestinian Authority and other Palestinian groups and organisations speak with several voices' and that what they say often depends on the audience to whom they are speaking. You mention that there are 'Hamas leaders, for example, who regularly call for violent Jihad to reclaim all of “Palestine”' and I presume that you can show me coverage on the BBC of such leaders' sentiments. However can you also show me where the BBC have reported sentiments such as those I presented to you that not only should all of Palestine be reclaimed but that Palestinians are enjoined to "Kill the Jews and those among the Americans who are like them…  Have no mercy on the Jews, murder them everywhere."?

You say that 'Others have indicated that they are ready to accept (maybe live with for the foreseeable future) a truce with Israel and a Palestinian state along the 1967 borders.' and I accept that some Fatah and other Palestinians have taken this line in discussions with the West, I am less certain that any Hamas leaders have, maybe you could tell me who?

You go on to state that 'Hamas’ true position is somewhere in between', how do you know this? How do you know that Hamas's position is somewhere in between the two extremes? Is it not possible that their true position is as in their Charter and statements made for home consumption and not anything to do with their statements made for the benefit of a gullible West? Do you know the meaning of the word taqiyya in this context?

If one person says that Sir Isaac Newton is dead and one says that Sir Isaac Newton is dead, is it necessarily the truth that Sir Isaac Newton is neither dead nor alive? Or is it the case that one person is telling the truth and one lying? Is it the BBC's position that the truth always lies between two sets of opinions?


You say that 'To report the shrill and extreme statements of some of the Hamas firebrands is therefore misleading. ' Yet the BBC were happy to report the extreme statements of one firebrand Israeli Rabbi.  Why is it 'misleading' to report the words of 'Hamas firebrands' but not those of an Israeli firebrand?  Do the BBC consider that Rabbi Ovaida's statements are isolated sentiments or representative of those of much of Israel? Does the BBC apply different standards to the speeches of Israeli and Palestinian 'firebrands'?


You conclude that 'So, to answer your question, no we have not reported Ziyad Abu al-Haj's comments, nor other comments by of Dr Ahmed Yousuf Abu Halabiah. But we do feel that across our coverage and in our background features we reflect accurately, fairly and in detail and the position of Hamas on the key issues.'. I disagree, it seems to me that by not reporting the often genocidal comments made by Palestinian leaders the BBC is deliberately skewing UK and world public opinion against Israel and in favour of the Palestinians. The BBC is meant to be unbiased and I do not believe that in this respect you are. Where is the detailed reporting of the regular anti-Semitic and murderous broadcasts by the Palestinian media for example?


I would appreciate your response to my above questions as I consider there still to be areas that need addressing regarding BBC bias in this matter.


Kind regards

NotaSheep 


9) 11 January - Tark Kafala tells me that he has 'tried to reply to your specific questions as well as I can.If you wish to take the matter further please write to: Editorial Complaints Unit, Room 5170, White City, 201 Wood Lane, London W12 7TS or you can e-mail the Unit at the address: ecu@bbc.co.uk'



10) 11 January - My final response to which I have had no reply

'You have not addressed my specific questions as you have ignored my last email completely. Try answering just the one point that I think gets to the heart of the matter:

You say that 'To report the shrill and extreme statements of some of the Hamas firebrands is therefore misleading. ' Yet the BBC were happy to report the extreme statements of one firebrand Israeli Rabbi. Why is it 'misleading' to report the words of 'Hamas firebrands' but not those of an Israeli firebrand?  Does the BBC apply different standards to the speeches of Israeli and Palestinian 'firebrands'?

Regards

NotaSheep'

Whitewashing the Muslim Brotherhood, BBC style

Tarik Kafala the BBC's Middle East (Web) Editor is in Cairo, I knew this because that is one of the excuses that the BBC are using as to why my complaint from last year about anti-Israel bias is still being investigated - you can read more about this matter from this link. Tarik Kafala posted an article over the weekend and it is entitled 'Egypt's Muslim Brotherhood promotes moderate path'. The article starts by eulogising the Muslim Brotherhood for its building and running of 'hospitals, schools, banks, community centres, and facilities for the disabled in cities and towns all over the country (Egypt).' The article devotes a lot of space to portraying the Muslim Brotherhood as a social services organisation, operating outside that of Egypt itself.

But the article starts with this sentence 'The Muslim Brotherhood - the biggest opposition force in Egypt - is mistrusted in the West and by some in Egypt. The BBC's Tarik Kafala investigates its platform and activities.'
So does Tarik Kafala address the reasons for the mistrust?

If you read right down the article, and most peoiple as Tarik Kafala knows, won't then you find this section:

'With its conservative Islamist agenda and its historical links to radical and sometimes violent groups, it is feared and mistrusted in the West and to some extent in Egypt.

Its many critics fear it will seek to come to power through the ballot box and institute Sharia Islamic law, moving Egypt in a far more conservative and anti-Western direction.

Dr Issam al-Arian, the Muslim Brotherhood's spokesman, is himself a medic. He runs his own private medical lab and volunteers three days a week at the Islamic Medical Association.

"The worry about us in the West is the result of bias and double standards," Dr Arian says.

The movement, he says, wants to be a party representing all kinds of Egyptians.

"We will serve Muslims, Christian, men and woman, young and old. Many friends - Christians I am talking about - are asking us when we will form a party."

He insists the movement is genuinely democratic, and will have to compete with emerging parties for the votes of Egyptians.

"The West should respect this, and after elections respect the wishes of the Egyptians.

"It is in the West's interest to honestly pursue its own interests in the Middle East. The main demand of our revolution was for democracy, and this cannot be put this on hold across the region because of the fears of six million Israelis."'

So some people fear that the Muslim Brotherhood will institute Sharia law if elected. Why might some people think that? Maybe because the Muslim Brotherhood believe that the Quran and Sunnah constitute a perfect way of life and that Islamic governments must be based on this system and eventually unified in a Caliphate. The Muslim Brotherhood's goal was originally stated as to reclaim Islam’s manifest destiny, an empire, stretching from Spain to Indonesia. The Muslim Brotherhood teaches that Islam enjoins man to strive for social justice, the eradication of poverty and corruption, and political freedom to the extent allowed by the laws of Islam. The Muslim Brotherhood's sister organisation runs Gaza, ask the people there whether they feel free and liberated under the rule of thugs who throw opponents off of the top of buildings, shoot at wedding parties and hide rocket launchers in residential buildings.

Did you spot the omission in the above quoted promise?

"We will serve Muslims, Christian, men and woman, young and old. Many friends - Christians I am talking about - are asking us when we will form a party."

What about the remaining Jews in Egypt, will they be served by the Muslim Brotherhood? Or will the Muslim Brotherhood that disseminates Hitler's Mein Kampf and The Protocols of the Elders of Zion widely in Arab translations and whose Supreme Guide, Mustafa Mashhur, told journalist Khalid Daoud in 1997 that he thought Egypt's Coptic Christians and Orthodox Jews should pay the long-abandoned jizya poll tax?

Tarik Kafala's article also includes some quotations from Mrs Makram-Ebied, a professor of political science at the American University in Cairo, who:

'believes that the Brotherhood was savvy in its handling of the protests.

"They were there, but they did not overwhelm things," she says.

Mrs Makram-Ebied believes that the Muslim Brotherhood can and should become a legal party if it "plays by the rules".

These are, she argues: "no Sharia law and real democratic elections, not just once, but again and again".

"This appears to be what they want and, in time, they should become something akin to the Christian Democrats in Europe."'

Tarik Kafala's piece ends with this section:

'For Egypt's eight million or so Christians, the Brotherhood's call for Sharia law to be made the law of the state is particularly worrying.

Attacks on Christians have been on the increase. On New Year's Eve, 21 people were killed in a suicide bombing outside a church in Alexandria.

"I felt this solidarity building after the massacre of New Year's Eve. People were aghast. So there was a beginning and Tahrir Square epitomised what we were all looking for," says Mrs Makram-Ebeid, herself a Christian.

"My hope is that the new generation will come out with new ideas for a secular, democratic and pluralistic country. But it will take time." '

Finally a mention, albeit a brief one, of the anti-Christian attacks that have become more frequent in recent years, not that people who rely on the BBC for their news would have heard of all of them, or all of the facts of those that the BBC did manage to report.

So there we have it, a report on the Muslim Brotherhood by the BBC's Web Middle East Editor, Tarik Kafala, that deals gently with the fears that many have about the Muslim Brotherhood and portrays the Muslim Brotherhood primarily as a extra-State social services organisation. Nary a mention of the Muslim Brotherhood's past, it's Islamist beliefs or its leaders' comments over the years that they want to "Kill Jews – to the very last one.” Not even a mention that one reason why 'six million Israelis' have 'fears' is partly because one Muslim Brotherhood leader told an Arab language newspaper recently that Egyptians "should prepare for war against Israel."

Complaining to the BBC

If you have been following this blog for a while then you will know that I do on occasions make complaints to the BBC about bias in their news coverage. Last August I complained about some blatant anti-Israel bias and had an interesting, and in one respect illuminating, correspondence with BBC staff. In January Tarik Kafala, the BBC's Middle East Web Editor, advised me to contact the 'Editorial Complaints Unit', which I did. I have just discovered an email from this unit that had slipped my attention, it reads thus:

'Dear NotaSheep

I’m afraid you’ve been incorrectly advised to contact the Editorial Complaints Unit, as our remit is confined to the question of whether there has been a breach of the standards expressed in the BBC’s Editorial Guidelines in the content of specific items broadcast or published by the BBC.

Responsibility for the running order and subject matter of news bulletins and news online content lies with the news editors concerned, and the evaluation of their judgement does not fall within the remit of this unit; rather this is a matter for BBC management, to whom I have forwarded your email. They will be in touch with a further response in due course.

If you’d like to know more about the BBC’s complaints process you’ll find it explained on the BBC website, along with a link to the full guidelines.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/complaints/complaints_process.shtml

Yours sincerely

Alison Wilson
Complaints Manager
Editorial Complaints Unit
5170 White City
London W12 7TS '

And so the BBC's delaying tactics march onwards.

I have replied to Alison Wilson:

'Please could you let me know who you have passed this complaint to as I have yet to have a reply. Also rather than inform me of the BBC's complaints procedure, maybe you should advise Tarik Kafala, your Middle East Web editor, who advised me to contact you..

Kind regards
NotaSheep '

I have also emailed Tarik Kafala:

'Why did you advise me to contact the Editorial Complaints Unit re my complaint about the bias you showed in your 30 August 2010 bulletin, when as you can see from the response I have had from that unit, it does not fall under their remit? As the Middle East editor should you not be better informed about BBC complaints procedures?

Incidentally I have yet to receive a reply to my last email to you.

Regards

NotaSheep'

I am not giving up on this one but I am getting the feeling that the BBC would rather I did.

Complaining to the BBC about anti-Israel bias

I have taken up my long-running complaint with the BBC's Editorial Complaints Unit, ecu@bbc.co.uk, here is what I have said. I wonder if I will get a response, how long it will take them and whether they will actually address my substantive points?



from: notasheepmaybeagoat@googlemail.com
to: ecu@bbc.co.uk
date: 26 January 2011 17:25
subject: A complaint about BBC Radio Bias

I have a complaint about blatant BBC bias that I have not been able to get properly addressed by either the individual who answered the original complaint or their, I presume, boss - Tarik Kafala.

I lay out below my signature the chain of emails; if you require any further information, do please ask.

However in summary - The BBC reported in August 2010 the despicable comments made by an extremist Israeli rabbi but when I asked why the BBC did not report the genocidal comments regularly made by Hamas and Fatah leaders (both secular and clerical), and I gave examples, I was told that 'We do not report every inflammatory comment by Israelis or Palestinians. There are many on both sides.'

When I pointed out that this was not a satisfactory response and explained why, I was told by Tarik Kafal (Middle East Editor, BBC News Website) in an email of 21 December that 'To report the shrill and extreme statements of some of the Hamas firebrands is therefore misleading.' Yet the BBC were happy to report the extreme statements of one firebrand Israeli Rabbi.  This leads to my key question and main complaint:
Why is it 'misleading' to report the words of 'Hamas firebrands' but not those of an Israeli firebrand? 

To put some more flesh on that:
Do the BBC consider that Rabbi Ovaida's statements are isolated sentiments or representative of those of much of Israel? Does the BBC apply different standards to the speeches of Israeli and Palestinian 'firebrands'?


I look forward to your considered but also prompt response in this matter.

Kind regards

NotaSheep



Here is the chain of emails:

1) 30 August - Original complaint:
'Your news bulletins featured a piece about an Israeli rabbi who had called for a 'plague' on Mahmoud Abbas. A despicable comment I agree but maybe you could point me to the 5Live news bulletins that reported the genocidal statements of senior Hamas and Fatah politicians and/or religious leaders. For example did 5Live report Hamas cleric Ziyad Abu al-Haj's Friday sermon of 3 April 2009 in which he said "The time will come, by Allah’s will, when their property will be destroyed and their children will be exterminated, and no Jew or Zionist will be left on the face of this earth."? Did 5Live report the words of Dr. Ahmed Yousuf Abu Halabiah, a member of the Palestinian Sharia (Islamic religious law) Rulings Council, and Rector of Advanced Studies at the Islamic University on 13 October 2000 when he said "The Jews are the Jews. There never was among them a supporter of peace. They are all liars… They are terrorists. Therefore it is necessary to slaughter them and murder them, according to the words of Allah… It is forbidden to have mercy in your hearts for the Jews in any place and in any land. Make war on them any place that you find yourself. Any place that you meet them – kill them. Kill the Jews and those among the Americans who are like them… The Jews only understand might. Have no mercy on the Jews, murder them everywhere."

If you did not report such Palestinian calls, why not? Why are the words of one Israeli cleric, however vile, newsworthy whereas those of Palestinian clerics and politicians are not?'



2) 26 October - Original BBC reply:
'Dear Sir or Madam,

We do not report every inflammatory comment by Israelis or Palestinians. There are many on both sides.
Rabbi Ovadia Yosef’s comments were reported because he is such an important figure, and because the comment came at a time when Israeli-Palestinian peace talks were being resumed. He is the spiritual leader of Shas, a party represented in current Israeli government, and a former Chief Rabbi.
The comments were widely criticised by US and Israeli leaders.
I am sorry for the delay ion replying to your complaint.

Best regards,
Middle East desk
BBC News website'


3) 28 October - My response:
'Thank you for finally replying to my complaint, although I note that you have not actually answered my complaint.


You write that 'We do not report every inflammatory comment by Israelis or Palestinians. There are many on both sides.' - My complaint acknowledged that the comments were 'reprehnsible' and 'despicable' and asked you to 'point me to the BBC web site news articles that reported the genocidal statements of senior Hamas and Fatah politicians and/or religious leaders.'  I don't ask that the BBC report every genocidal statement made by a Hamas politician or religious leader, where would you find the space? But to report none of these comments does look rather strange.





You write that 'Rabbi Ovadia Yosef’s comments were reported because he is such an important figure, and because the comment came at a time when Israeli-Palestinian peace talks were being resumed.' - I cannot disagree with your point about the timing of his remarks. Maybe you could point me to the BBC's coverage of Yasser Arafat's comments on Jordanian TV on the very day that he signed the Declaration of Principles on the White House lawn in 1993 "Since we cannot defeat Israel in war, we do this in stages. We take any and every territory that we can of Palestine, and establish a sovereignty there, and we use it as a springboard to take more. When the time comes, we can get the Arab nations to join us for the final blow against Israel."



You write that 'He is the spiritual leader of Shas, a party represented in current Israeli government, and a former Chief Rabbi.' - Indeed he was albeit the Sephardi Chief Rabbi and from 1973-1983; he is not a member of the Knesset. Maybe you could show me where the BBC reported the words of Hamas' spiritual leader, until 2004, Ahmed Yassin when he said that "Reconciliation with the Jews is a crime" and that Israel "must disappear from the map".



You write that 'The comments were widely criticised by US and Israeli leaders.' - Indeed they were and rightly so, but my complaint was not about the coverage of Rabbi Ovadia Yosef’s comments, but about the lack of coverage of equally or more reprehensible comments by Palestinian political and religious leaders. By not addressing this point you have not answered my complaint, preferring to answer a different question.



I must ask you to actually answer my question rather than a question of your choosing.


Regards

NotaSheep '


4) 13 November - My chasing email:
'Any chance of a reply to my last email or will it take the BBC a month to reply like last time?

Your last email did not answer my questions and I think I deserve proper answers to serious questions.

Regards

NotaSheep'




5) 16 November - First reply from Tariq Kafala

'Dear Notasheep,
Thank you for your further comments.
I tried to explain in my first email why we felt it editorial justified to report Rabbi Ovadia Yosef’s comments because of his importance and their timing.
We have, of course, reported the actions, policies and statements of Hamas and other Palestinian leaders. We tend, where possible to conduct our own interviews with such figures. 
The answer to one of your specific questions, based on a search of the site, is no. We did not report the statement by Ahmed Yassin regarding reconciliation with Israel being a crime or that Israel. In our obituary of Yassin we say: It was there that he formed the belief that Palestine was an Islamic land "consecrated for future Muslim generations until Judgement Day", and that no Arab leader had the right to give up any part of this territory.
Our current profile of Hamas makes it absolutely clear that Hamas' charter calls for the destruction of Israel, though its leaders often talk about a long tern truce following the withdrawal of Israel from occupied territory. This, I would argue, covers the substance of Yassin's comments and points to some range or nuance ion Hamas' position. 
The BBC News website was launched in 1997, so it's not possible for me to check whether we reported the Yasser Arafat comment that you refer to.
Best regards,
Tarik Kafala, Middle East editor, BBC News website'


6) 24 December - My response (07:41)

'Thank you for your reply and I apologise for not replying sooner but I managed to miss your email arriving.

I note that you have looked into the BBC's reporting of Ahmed Yassin's comments and assure me that you reported in his obituary that 'It was there that he formed the belief that Palestine was an Islamic land "consecrated for future Muslim generations until Judgement Day", and that no Arab leader had the right to give up any part of this territory.' I think that is rather milder than the statements that I asked if the BBC had ever reported. It seems that the BBC is eager to  report the wilder comments of a relatively minor Israeli Rabbi but connives in hiding the true feelings and objectives of many Hamas and Fatah religious and secular leaders. Look at what the BBC wrote in the obituary and ask yourself if that comes close to truly representing the words that I quoted? 

I ask again, did the BBC web news report Hamas cleric Ziyad Abu al-Haj's Friday sermon of 3 April 2009 in which he said "The time will come, by Allah’s will, when their property will be destroyed and their children will be exterminated, and no Jew or Zionist will be left on the face of this earth."?

Maybe you could also show me where BBC web news reported the words of Dr. Ahmed Yousuf Abu Halabiah, a member of the Palestinian Sharia (Islamic religious law) Rulings Council, and Rector of Advanced Studies at the Islamic University on 13 October 2000 when he said "The Jews are the Jews. There never was among them a supporter of peace. They are all liars… They are terrorists. Therefore it is necessary to slaughter them and murder them, according to the words of Allah… It is forbidden to have mercy in your hearts for the Jews in any place and in any land. Make war on them any place that you find yourself. Any place that you meet them – kill them. Kill the Jews and those among the Americans who are like them… The Jews only understand might. Have no mercy on the Jews, murder them everywhere."


You go on to say that 'Our current profile of Hamas makes it absolutely clear that Hamas' charter calls for the destruction of Israel, though its leaders often talk about a long tern truce following the withdrawal of Israel from occupied territory. This, I would argue, covers the substance of Yassin's comments and points to some range or nuance ion Hamas' position.' I disagree. By choosing to report just one nuanced type of comments made by Hamas and Fatah leaders you are skewing public opinion, public opinion that should be allowed to see the full extent of Hamas avowed hatred for all Jews and declared murderous intent towards them. Maybe you could explain to me the nuance in the position that "The time will come, by Allah’s will, when their property will be destroyed and their children will be exterminated, and no Jew or Zionist will be left on the face of this earth."?' Maybe you could show me the range in saying " It is forbidden to have mercy in your hearts for the Jews in any place and in any land. Make war on them any place that you find yourself. Any place that you meet them – kill them. Kill the Jews and those among the Americans who are like them… The Jews only understand might. Have no mercy on the Jews, murder them everywhere."?

Do the BBC consider that sentiments like those I have quoted above are not worthy of reporting or were the BBC unaware of them?

Do you consider that Yasser Arafat's comments are worthy of reporting and would BBC Online have reported them had the means been available in 1993?


Once again I consider that the BBC have not fully addressed my complaint, please do so now.


Regards

NotaSheep'





7) 21 December - Another email received from Tarik Kafala - Seemingly in response to another copy of my complaint:

'Dear Sir or madam,
Thank you for your further comments on http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-11127409
I explained in my first email why we felt it editorially justified to report the story as we did. You appear to agree that it was reasonable to report Rabbi Ovadia Yosef’s comments as we did.  
I also felt that I answered your question, but I will try again.
Hamas, the Palestinian Authority and other Palestinian groups and organisations speak with several voices. At different times and to different audiences they say different things. Sometimes their comments are might be seen as “conciliatory”, sometimes very warlike. There are Hamas leaders, for example, who regularly call for violent Jihad to reclaim all of “Palestine”. Others have indicated that they are ready to accept (maybe live with for the foreseeable future) a truce with Israel and a Palestinian state along the 1967 borders. Hamas’ true position is somewhere in between and the argument within the movement is an important one. To report the shrill and extreme statements of some of the Hamas firebrands is therefore misleading.
So, to answer your question, no we have not reported Ziyad Abu al-Haj's comments, nor other comments by of Dr Ahmed Yousuf Abu Halabiah. But we do feel that across our coverage and in our background features we reflect accurately, fairly and in detail and the position of Hamas on the key issues.
Bets regards,
Tarik Kafala
Middle East editor
BBC News website'


8) 24 December - My response (08:28)

Dear Tarik,

Thank you for your reply which I find interesting, if incomplete.

I have responded to your points in turn as that is the most convenient way for me, however I have also highlighted the key question that I have posed so as to try and ensure that you do not miss answering it when you reply to all of my points.


I do indeed consider it reasonable to report Rabbi Ovaida's comments as I always said I did;  my complaint is that the BBC seem unwilling to report the hate-speech often expressed by Hamas and Fatah's religious and secular leaders.

I accept that 'Hamas, the Palestinian Authority and other Palestinian groups and organisations speak with several voices' and that what they say often depends on the audience to whom they are speaking. You mention that there are 'Hamas leaders, for example, who regularly call for violent Jihad to reclaim all of “Palestine”' and I presume that you can show me coverage on the BBC of such leaders' sentiments. However can you also show me where the BBC have reported sentiments such as those I presented to you that not only should all of Palestine be reclaimed but that Palestinians are enjoined to "Kill the Jews and those among the Americans who are like them…  Have no mercy on the Jews, murder them everywhere."?

You say that 'Others have indicated that they are ready to accept (maybe live with for the foreseeable future) a truce with Israel and a Palestinian state along the 1967 borders.' and I accept that some Fatah and other Palestinians have taken this line in discussions with the West, I am less certain that any Hamas leaders have, maybe you could tell me who?

You go on to state that 'Hamas’ true position is somewhere in between', how do you know this? How do you know that Hamas's position is somewhere in between the two extremes? Is it not possible that their true position is as in their Charter and statements made for home consumption and not anything to do with their statements made for the benefit of a gullible West? Do you know the meaning of the word taqiyya in this context?

If one person says that Sir Isaac Newton is dead and one says that Sir Isaac Newton is dead, is it necessarily the truth that Sir Isaac Newton is neither dead nor alive? Or is it the case that one person is telling the truth and one lying? Is it the BBC's position that the truth always lies between two sets of opinions?


You say that 'To report the shrill and extreme statements of some of the Hamas firebrands is therefore misleading. ' Yet the BBC were happy to report the extreme statements of one firebrand Israeli Rabbi.  Why is it 'misleading' to report the words of 'Hamas firebrands' but not those of an Israeli firebrand?  Do the BBC consider that Rabbi Ovaida's statements are isolated sentiments or representative of those of much of Israel? Does the BBC apply different standards to the speeches of Israeli and Palestinian 'firebrands'?


You conclude that 'So, to answer your question, no we have not reported Ziyad Abu al-Haj's comments, nor other comments by of Dr Ahmed Yousuf Abu Halabiah. But we do feel that across our coverage and in our background features we reflect accurately, fairly and in detail and the position of Hamas on the key issues.'. I disagree, it seems to me that by not reporting the often genocidal comments made by Palestinian leaders the BBC is deliberately skewing UK and world public opinion against Israel and in favour of the Palestinians. The BBC is meant to be unbiased and I do not believe that in this respect you are. Where is the detailed reporting of the regular anti-Semitic and murderous broadcasts by the Palestinian media for example?


I would appreciate your response to my above questions as I consider there still to be areas that need addressing regarding BBC bias in this matter.


Kind regards

NotaSheep 




9) 11 January - Tark Kafala tells me that he has 'tried to reply to your specific questions as well as I can.If you wish to take the matter further please write to: Editorial Complaints Unit, Room 5170, White City, 201 Wood Lane, London W12 7TS or you can e-mail the Unit at the address: ecu@bbc.co.uk'




10) 11 January - My final response to which I have had no reply

'You have not addressed my specific questions as you have ignored my last email completely. Try answering just the one point that I think gets to the heart of the matter:

You say that 'To report the shrill and extreme statements of some of the Hamas firebrands is therefore misleading. ' Yet the BBC were happy to report the extreme statements of one firebrand Israeli Rabbi. Why is it 'misleading' to report the words of 'Hamas firebrands' but not those of an Israeli firebrand?  Does the BBC apply different standards to the speeches of Israeli and Palestinian 'firebrands'?

Regards

NotaSheep'