First BBC English language report on a Gaza missile attack in eight months

Cross-posted from BBC Watch.

Well over 24 hours after the incident took place, a day after colleagues at BBC Arabic published two articles on the story and following the appearance of this post, the BBC News website finally informed its English speaking audiences that a missile had been fired by “Palestinian militants” in the Gaza Strip at an Israeli town.Sderot attack art

Titled “Israel launches Gaza strikes after rocket attack on Sderot“, in its fourth paragraph the report from August 22nd tells readers that:

“Earlier, a rocket launched in Gaza landed near a house in the Israeli town of Sderot without causing any injuries.”

It continues:

“Israel and militants in Gaza led by Hamas, which dominates the coastal territory, fought a 50-day war in the summer of 2014.

Since then, a ceasefire has largely held, but some small jihadist groups have defied the agreement and periodically fired rockets at Israel.”

Does that portrayal provide BBC audiences with an understanding of the rate of missile fire from the Gaza Strip since the end of the 2014 conflict?

Read the rest of this post at BBC Watch.

Categories: BBC

Tagged as: , , , , ,

32 replies »

    • UN Inquiry on 2014 Gaza Conflict states ..
      “38. In six of the cases examined, and in most cases reported on by non-governmental organizations, there is little or no information available to explain why residential buildings, which are prima facie civilian objects immune from attack, were considered to be legitimate military objectives. In relation to each attack on residential buildings that resulted in significant destruction and civilian deaths or injuries, the onus is on Israel to explain the factual elements that rendered the houses or the person(s) present inside a military target. Israel should provide specific information on the effective contribution of a given house or inhabitant to military action and the clear advantage to be gained by the attack. Should a strike directly and intentionally target a house in the absence of a specific military objective, this would amount to a violation of the principle of distinction. It may also constitute a direct attack against civilian objects or civilians, a war crime under international criminal law.”

      In the West Bank Israel is guilty of ‘collective punishment’ through its practice of destroying familiy homes of suspected terrorists.

      • That would be acceptable if similar detailed schedules were demanded from other forces in the ME. Can you show me where Turkey is asked to provide reasons for destroying whole Kurdish cities, house by house?

        Where are the UN’s directives laying out steps required of Russia before it is allowed to bombard Aleppo?

        Naturally these are not Israel so it is the height of absurdity to expect that the UN would dare to interfere

  1. Is there no crime committed by the Islamists who aim to kill all of the Jews in Israel that would motivate you to have even a modest amount of sympathy for the position Israel is in? And would you care to list Israel’s war crimes?

    • Of course the firing of missiles into Israel is to be deplored, as is the destruction of Gazan infrastructure, the preferred Israeli practice. Israel has imposed a blockade on Gaza, therefore they are in conflict. and no side is holier than the other when munitions are exchanged. While the occupation of the Palestinians continues both the West Bank and Gaza will resist. This conflict has little to do with Islam, it’s a consequence of the occupation and continued stealing of Palestinian land.

      • “palestine” exists on the EAST bank of the Jordan River, at the pleasure of King Abudullah – as long as they behave civilly.

        Israel, like all other sovereign nations has the Right to Resist Islamofascism. Britain can learn from Israel – but Socialists want to hamstring the UK.

      • Farmboy,
        The firing of missiles into Israel is to terrorize and kill Jews, the preferred Hamas practice. If you consider rocket launchers a part of Gaza’s infrastructure then your claim of Israel’s “preferred” practice would be accurate. But, of course, rocket launchers are not infrastructure as you would have us believe. Hamas is not at war with Israel because of a blockade. You are inverting cause and effect, a propagandistic practice employed ad nauseam by Israel haters and their pets. This conflict has quite a bit do with Islam and the zionists’ utter rejection of the Pact of Umar and preference for Enlightenment values, such as the equality of all people, denied to them in Europe and of course in the Middle East. The only real ‘occupation’ of the “Palestinians” is the destruction of Israel, the dream of throwing the Jews into the sea and re-establishing a supremacist Arab/Muslim dominion. They are the aggressors in this conflict. The Jews have the far stronger historical claim, and the “Palestinians” have no actual legal claim, old bean.

      • I really like the use of the word “deplored”, as in “the firing of missiles into Israel is to be deplored”. Refers to an action which is felt to be worthy of disapproval. These are missiles that are not part of a scientific exercise to see how well they perform, these are missiles fired expressly to try and kill human beings. So, according to Michael Farmer, it is meet that the human beings that are threatened by death or maiming should shake their heads, pull down the corners of their mouths, and decide to deplore this all. Tut tut. Not quite the right thing to do. But then Michael Farmer is, I presume, not sleeping (or just nipping down to the supermarket) somewhere in Israel. Michael Farmer doesn’t have to worry about missiles fired with the express purpose of killing him and his loved ones. Michael Farmer can shake his head and deplore. Not everyone has that luxury.

      • Aren’t there sanctions on Fascist Hamass who continue to wage Jihad against Israel as Islamofascists do in the UK, France, Belgium, Denmark, US, Australia, Canada, Denmark, India, Nigeria, Kenya, Iraq, Afghanistan…

        Israel has the Right and the Means to Resist and Fight terrorist Islamofascism. The UK needs to Man Up too. Jihad is being wages ALL OVER THE WORLD.

          • Stupid MFer. The US wasn’t interested in Israel until AFTER 1973. And at that point, it was a Cold War interest. As in, your buddies in Arabia were being armed to their teeth by the Soviets.

            The thing is, the Soviets made shitty weaponry. And then Reagan came and outspent them. That’s how the Soviet Union fell back into Russia, and how the Arabs came to America and said, “But what about us?”

            I know all of this goes over your head.

          • By the way, MFer, Saudi Arabia has an American military base. That is why Osama bin Laden attacked America on 9-11.

            Also, there aren’t any American military bases in Israel. If there were, America would have to remove its bases from all of Arabia. This is why America gives Israel so much in military aid, however. I’d go on to argue that $3 billion in defense technology is more affordable than running a full military base 24/7/365, but you don’t want to read any of that.

            Silly, stupid, and full of shit. That’s the special sauce of pro-Palestinian political wannabes.

            • Meanwhile Mohammeds OPEC raped the ENTIRE World for with overpriced $100 per barrel oil for years. Now that oil is down to ~$40 per barrel (still overpriced), OPEC is crying, Venezuela is in shambles, Russia is teetering on collapse…

          • “it’s because Israel is America’s base in the Middle East and, as so, has been appeased for decades.”

            You mean America, the Great Satan? Enjoy your little conspiratorial big bad America vs. the neo-marxist “people o’color” as proletariat wet dreams, do you?

            Whereas no one has been appeasing the Arab/Muslim world and the “Palestinian cause?” lol No one comes close to the appeasing whores of Europe in their dealings with the Arabs and Muslims, and their historically well-documented willingness to sell out the Jews at the drop of a hat, whilst covering up their craven pursuit for wealth and power using some completely bullshit moral arguments complete with accompanying harrumphs.

            • ” No one comes close to the appeasing whores of Europe in their dealings with the Arabs and Muslims, and their historically well-documented willingness to sell out the Jews at the drop of a hat,”

              So that would be the well known President of Europe, President Obama, and the equally well known Secretary of State of Europe Kerry and their deal with the Iranians you’re thinking about?
              Except that, of course, Obama is the elected President of the USA (elected and re-elected by the American people) and Kerry is the Secretary of State of the USA and not Europe.

              Both of these gentlemen outstrip any of the “appeasing whores of Europe” in their “well-documented willingness to sell out the Jews at the drop of a hat”
              Sorry jeff21st if reality bites you on the arse, but you deserve it.

                • If jeff21st had written that there are some people in Europe who are as bad as some people in the USA.
                  Then I would agree.

                  But jeff21st did not write that, and I have sufficient respect for his vocabulary and intelligence to believe that the contents of his post reflect what he means to write.

              • Many of Obama’s critics, from the beginning, have asserted that Obama resembles, if anything, a European leader, rather than a traditional American leader. These critics even include some who are British. I am not pointing a finger at any and all Europeans, Gerald, nor all of those who are left of center. But I think debating as a whole Europe’s treatment of Jews and Israel vs. America’s would be pointless. Historically, much of the current American demonization of Israel was and is disseminated by those who take their cues on a whole host of issues from the european left. Please don’t take it personally. I don’t think we need to go into the 1973 war and the refusal to let Americans land and refuel in Europe as they were rushing to resupply the Israelis. Also, Obama wasn’t exactly honest in his campaign rhetoric concerning his support for Israel. I can also assure you that his reelection was not due to me. One rather reluctant vote for that buffoon from me was one too many.
                BTW, I hope you’re not saying that European leaders and businesspeople were not on board for the Iran deal. The prospect of opening up the Iranian market had them salivating. I’ll tell you who didn’t like it – a substantial number of Congressmen and Senators, and the majority of the American public. But such small things don’t stop rigid ideologues like Obama.

                • jeff21st you are correct that I am not saying that European leaders and business people were not on board for the Iran deal.
                  I do believe that they were more honest than some in the American administration in being more open about the prospect of opening up the Iranian market and freeing up billions of dollars frozen in Iranian accounts as a high priority for the talks.
                  Frankly I do not see a problem with honesty in international relations, of course it is about trade and has been for many centuries. Anyone who believes that diplomacy and international relations are about spreading liberty and democracy (they are just a useful by-product) is at the best naïve, and should not be let near Government office in any country.
                  I agree with the wise words of Lord Palmerston;

                  ” We have no eternal allies, and we have no perpetual enemies. Our interests are eternal and perpetual, and those interests it is our duty to follow.”

                  Perhaps in the future, when I have more time, I will start the ‘Campaign for Honesty in Diplomacy and International Relations.’

        • Jeff,
          A) You are correct.
          B) Everything Farmhand posts is aimed at deflecting attention away from the accuracy of this site’s posts, which is why he’s never written anything that’s fundamentally honest (from his POV, I suppose he could delude himself into thinking he’s smart, but he isn’t). He’s not going to change his mind or the subject, but let’s keep making it clear he’s a worthless troll.

  2. BBC is at it again washing stale news when it suits them. It is a sick society that is prepared to let the BBC get away with it, this includes the JLC and BOD.
    Is it they did not have an English speaker prepared to go to Gaza – perhaps they were too busy siting in the cafes of Tel Aviv or Jerusalem where they hand out with the anti Israel media circus.