Shocker in London: Guardian reporter refers to some Palestinians as ‘terrorists’ (without quotes)

The Guardian – like other UK papers – seems to have an unwritten rule against using the term ‘terrorist’ to characterize Palestinians – even those affiliated with groups designated as ‘terrorists’ by the US and Europe – except when safely surrounded in quotes.  Typically, the word ‘militant’ is used instead – reflecting the sage advice of their Style Guide which counsels their journalists that “the most important thing is that, in news reporting, we are not seen – because of the language we use – to be taking sides”. 

Indeed, banish the thought that Guardian journalists may be taking sides in the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict!

In fact, some Guardian journalists have taken the politically correct terminology to a whole other level. Last year, Harriet Sherwood initially referred to the 104 pre-Oslo Palestinian prisoners who are to be released by Israel as a good will gesture to the PA as “political prisoners” – suggesting that these Palestinians are arguably nothing less than prisoners of conscience. 

Ahead of a three-hour session with Kerry on Tuesday morning, Netanyahu stated that he was “determined not only to resume the peace process with the Palestinians, but to make a serious effort to end this conflict once and for all”…But he has refused to meet the Palestinians’ key precondition of freezing settlement expansion, although it is thought that Israel may avoid announcing any new construction projects in the coming weeks….The Palestinians also want the release of 123 political prisoners who have been in jail since before the Oslo accords were signed…

The Guardian only revised Sherwood’s propagandistic euphemism after this blog demonstrated to their editors quite convincingly that every single prisoner was convicted in an Israeli court for murder, attempted murder or being an accessory to murder.

So, given their history with such terms, we were left scratching our collective Zionist heads after reading the following passage in a Guardian report by their political editor Patrick Wintour, in a March 13th piece titled ‘Tony Blair briefs David Cameron for meeting with Palestinian president‘.

Israel and the Palestinians are preparing to confront the issue of whether Israeli Arabs will be included in the next prisoner release later this month. Palestinian officials have said in recent days that they expect Israel to release Israeli Arabs in the final group of 26 prisoners due to go free on 28 March…Under the framework agreement from last July that led to the current Israeli-Palestinian negotiations, Israel was to release 104 convicted terrorists in four stages. Israel has already released 78 prisoners.

However, we’re not entirely convinced that the counter-revolutionary act of referring to Palestinian murderers in the pejorative is consistent with the papers ‘editorial standards’.  So, we took a snapshot of the page in case the inevitable complaint from a Palestinian hasbaraist is upheld by Guardian editors and the offending term is removed. 

Enhanced by Zemanta

27 replies »

  1. Be fair, The Guardian is surely permitted one Freudian slip occasionally. On the other hand maybe Mr Wintour is looking for a job with The Telegraph.

  2. You see your just a paranoid load of zionists , everyone’s afraid of the Jewish lobby, if you want to target someone pick on Melanie phillips she writes for the mail, they supported Germany in the 30s

    • Hello Jan> How are you? Keep taking the medication and patiently wait for the men in white coats to arrive. I assume you are on day release and it’s nearly 4.30 pm.Take care. Love Joshua

      • Josh, how much medication have you been taking recently, that you would believe illegal settlements are legal?

        • The same one 1000 leagl expery from all over the world took when they sign this:
          More than 1,000 international lawyers, ambassadors and professors from 30 different countries signed a petition protesting the European Union’s recent funding ban on Israel’s settlements.
          The EU is incorrectly asserting that the pre-1967 lines are Israel’s borders and that the settlements are illegal. That is a misreading of international law,”

    • Jan or jan, whichever one you are today, if you want to write about support for totalitarian dictatorships in the 1930s how about this;
      “Now, however, we are shown that Bukharin not only opposed Lenin but tried to overthrow him and even to murder him. Again, there is someone well known to have held Trotskyist opinions on the world revolution; he is shown to have plotted with Britain, Germany and Japan to overthrow the Soviet regime and restore capitalism in Russia.”
      That was written on 14th March 1938, the following day Bukharin and Rykov were shot by firing squad.
      The newspaper, as it was known then, “The Manchester Guardian” as it is known today “The Guardian”

      • Notice you don’t mention old Melanie Phillips, every time she’s on question time and she defends Israel, she is almost booed out of the place, the audience , the bewildered herd even know it’s a load of old crap.

        • “Notice you don’t mention old Melanie Phillips…”

          No I didn’t mention old Father Christmas either, so what?

        • You are being unfair. Melanie Philips is almost as famous and respected than Caroline Glick. LOL

          • “Melanie Philips is almost as famous and respected than Caroline Glick”

            And both of them write in a coherent style, which is a lot more than can be said for the drivel you post.

    • “everyone’s afraid of the Jewish lobby…”

      I suppose we should be grateful you didn’t pretend it’s the “Zionist lobby” you’re afraid of.

      Interestingly, Jews, at highest estimates, makes up less than 1/4 of a percent of the World’s population (very few of whom are involved in the “Jewish lobby” as you put it) and have NO history at all of violence against those who “offend” them (other than those directly involved in violence against Jews or Israel, which is known as self-defence).

      By contrast, of course, Muslims make up 23% of the World’s population, and have a long and colourful history of flag and effigy burning, rioting, fatwah, murder and other forms of violent intimidation against anyone who so much as draws a picture of the Prophet.

      Yet, you say “everyone is afraid of the Jewish lobby…”


      • It’s not about being Jewish, it’s about your strategic usefulness, what’s more important land or human lives. Of course its land , and in the USA chess game your a very useful pawn , for now, but the game will change. Nothing lasts forever

        • Your ignorance realloy knows no bounds! To which side of the conflict is land more important than human lives?

          Is it:

          a) Israel, which accepted the UN Partition Plan, despite the fact it assigned a tiny, indefensible part of the land promised to it under the Balfour Declaration; which is the only country as far as I know that has voluntarily given up huge tracts of land that it has conquered (Sinai, Southern Lebanon and Gaza) in exchange for promises of peace (or in the case of Gaza, not even that); which puts such a high value on its’ own people’s lives that it is willing to swap 1,000s of convicted terrorists for just ONE kidnapped soldier; which rather than simply dropping bombs from the air, conducts house-to-house ground operations (e.g. in Jenin) in order to minimise loss of innocent civilian life, even at the cost of her own soldiers’ safety; which also warns people near a building to be targetted so they have a chance to move away?


          b) the Palestinians, who not only don’t discourage, but actively encourage and fete those “martyrs” who needlessly throw their lives away by attacking Israeli civilians and/or soldiers; who educate and propogandise their children to pray that they too can one day become shahid; who repeatedly refuse to consider making peace (which will surely lead to less loss of human life) unless they have ALL their territorial and other demands met; who refused the UN Partition Plan because they hoped to have ALL the land after wiping out the Jews; who deliberately gather women and children as human shields in the houses that the IDF have warned them are going to be targetted; who, in contravention of all moral, legal and ethical codes, launch unguided rockets by the thousand against civilian targets and do so from the midst of densely populated civilan areas, particularly schools, mosques and other buildings of civilian use; who insist on a fictitious and illusory “right to return” at the expense of condemning generations to squalor, welfare-dependence and poverty as “refugees” – even within their own land (why are there still “refugee camps” in Gaza)?


        • Your comment, Jan, about Israel being a US pawn is fascinating. In your earlier post you state that “everyone’s afraid of the Jewish lobby…” and that would suggest you believe that the US is a pawn in Israel’s “game”. I wonder whether I could prevail on you to make up your mind. Is it not the case that when one argument runs out you use the opposite one? After all no argument “lasts forever”.

          • No , the power of the lobby is linked to the uses of Israel, in other words the power exists whilst the USA fund ,arm and control Israel for its own benefit, why else fund it? It’s quid pro quo for being a military base, that the US need to endure for the time being

            • Noam, I think what you are saying is that there is a Jewish lobby of some influence in the US so long as it is in the interests of the US to react favourably to it. That is a perspicacious point to make. However I was in fact asking Jan why she contradicted her own position in two posts only 7 hours apart. She has yet to respond.

      • Labenal:

        “(Jews) … have NO history at all of violence against those who “offend” them “.

        Blasphemy laws were vry harsh.
        Perhaps you mean in the new age?

      • Remind us again which is so fear inspiring that cartoons of it’s central figure cannot be published

    • As the old saying goes ‘just because we’re paranoid doesn’t mean the bastards are not out to get us’. Incidentally I assume you will be applying for the political editor’s job at the Guardian as I understand the position will be vacant soon.