Telegraph

Telegraph: Israel “argued” that Hamas attacked the country with rockets during the war


israelThe Telegraph’s coverage of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict is generaly fairer and more accurate than other British publications we comment on.  However, as we’ve noted since monitoring the paper consistently over the past year, they do, on occasion, inexplicably demonstrate the kind of egregious bias more typically found in the Guardian, Independent or Economist.

A passage in a Feb. 26th Telegraph report by  represents the latest instance of such skewed coverage. Akkoc’s story on the British graffiti artist known as Banksy, who produced a video criticizing conditions in Gaza, included a perfect contrast in credulity when faced with Israeli and pro-Palestinian ‘claims’. 

First, the pro-Palestinian claim:

In the less than two-minute long video published on the artist’s website, Banksy refers to the “development opportunities” then adds that no cement has been allowed in to the area.

The Telegraph reporter doesn’t challenge Bansky’s allegation that “no cement has been allowed into the area”, despite the fact that Reuters and other media outlets, including a separate Telegraph story on the video also published on Feb. 26, all reported that cement is indeed entering Gaza under an agreement struck with the UN.

Now, for the Israeli “claim”. 

The destruction the artist depicts was a result of the 50-day conflict which left 539 Palestinian children dead and close to 3,000 injured.

In total, more than 2,000 Palestinians and 67 Israeli soldiers were killed, according to United Nations figures.

Six civilians in Israel were also killed. Israel argued that Hamas militants attacked the country with rockets.

That’s right, Israel has “argued” that Hamas fired rockets at the country during the summer war!

The language used by the Telegraph journalist suggests she had no doubts regarding Bansky’s allegation that “no cement has been allowed into Gaza”, but wasn’t ready to confirm the veracity of the Israeli “argument” that “Hamas militants attacked the country with rockets”.

We have contacted Telegraph editors to request corrections to both passages and will update you when we receive a reply.

32 replies »

  1. It’s always better to avoid generalizing. The British press makes it difficult to avoid doing so.

  2. Telegraph: “Israel argued that Hamas militants attacked the country with rockets.”

    It’s open to interpretation. Perhaps the author meant that Israel’s argument was based on the fact that Hamas had launched rockets at Israel. If the article had said “Israel claims that Hamas …”, then obviously that would be misleading if not complete BS.

    • Utter bollocks. ‘argues’ in English has the same connotations as ‘claims’ (in this context).
      Pretzel continues with his usual contorted ‘logic’, always ready to find excuses for Jew-baiting.

      • Just yesterday some poster at CiF called me a hasbarist – and here you are accusing me of supporting anti-Semitism.

        What a pathetic bunch you both are – sharing the common ground of bigotry.

    • Perhaps, but, if that was her point, the writing was extremely poor and thus misleading to readers

    • Part of the problem I have with the excerpt is that everyone knows Hamas shot 3500 missiles into Israel last summer. To suggest that this is strictly the Israeli perspective whitewashes the crime.

      And whitewashing is what these artists, journos, and of course, Hamasniks accuse Israel of doing. So along with being Creative, they are also being Hypocritical Assholes.

    • There are 3 points to this post. Firstly a falsehood that “no cement has been allowed in to the area” (Gaza). It’s a falsehood. The inference is that the Israelis are causing the misery in Gaza even though cement is being sent into Gaza.

      The Second point is the numbers game. 6 Israelis dead (no mention of the soldiers who were killed and others injured of course and a disruption to life in Israel for virtually everyone having to run to shelters) versus the number of Palestinian casualties: the inference being disproportionate force being applied regardless of who is the aggressor and without reference to human shields and other “minor details that get in the way of a good Israel bashing point.

      And finally Israel claiming or arguing Hamas MILITANTS (note not terrorists) attacked the country with missiles. There is no cause and effect in this statement. The inference is that Israel was killing thousands but argues as a lame excuse (my reading) that Hamas was firing rockets.

      Pretz’s argument does not hold in the context of the whole piece and Adam is right to criticise the Telegraph for falling below reporting standards.

  3. The Telegraph seems to be on an ongoing slide towards the same crap we see in the Guardian et al, as I have said before.
    Banksy, of course, is a stupid git.

  4. So Banksy, the anonymous graffiti artist whose art supposedly turns into millions of dollars, but we’ve never seen him, nor the purveyors of his art, expects to be taken FOR HIS WORD when it comes to Israel’s right to exist.

    Just another example of how life on this planet is a joke, and that the Aliens who are watching us, are laughing.

      • Under silhouette? I saw Exit Through the Giftshop. He didn’t make himself known. And who is to say the person who calls himself Banksy on these interviews really is the guy?

        Point is, Banksy is far from a credible, reliable source. The first step to that status is to get out of the shadows and explain just what it is he filmed, when, and why. But he won’t, so…..

  5. Both the British and American Journalist today are either timid or ask the obvious and in some cases make statements to solicit an affirmative from the interviewee. They inject their own prejudice or make their own interpretations/speculations. They have no concept of probing questions, open ended questions, or investigative journalism; at best it can be said the report or regurgitate. What do the teach them today for 4-years at the University/Journalism Division?