"Today's program, which contains the ridiculous false assertion that we used nerve gas against the Palestinians, was the last straw," says Israeli government spokesperson.
"The attitude of the BBC is more than a pure journalistic matter; it is dangerous to the existence of the state of Israel because it demonizes the Israelis and gives our terrorist enemies reasons to attack us."
(The BBC is the world's biggest television and radio news broadcaster.)
CONTENTS
1. "Israel breaks links with BBC in anger at 'demonisation'" (London Times, June 28, 2003)
2. Text of email sent last Monday, June 23, 2003, from Andrew Wilkie, Nuffield Professor of Pathology at Oxford University to Amit Duvshani of Tel Aviv University
3. "BBC refuses to say sorry for Iraq reporting" (Agence France Presse, June 26, 2003)
4. Blair-BBC (Associated Press, June 27, 2003)
“VERGING ON THE ANTI-SEMITIC”
[Note by Tom Gross]
I attach four articles with summaries first:
1. "Israel breaks links with BBC in anger at 'demonisation'" (London Times, June 28, 2003). Israel broke all contact with the BBC yesterday in protest at its repeated demonization of the country and today's planned showing on BBC World of a critical documentary on Israel's nuclear, biological and chemical arsenal. The move will involve a refusal to put up official spokesmen for BBC interviews. There will be visa restrictions, not imposed on other news organisations in Israel, to ensure that the bureau chief is rotated every few months and to make it hard for BBC staff to report. "After the way that the BBC have repeatedly tried to delegitimise the state of Israel, we, as hosts, have no goodwill left for them," Daniel Seaman, director of the Israel government press office, told The Times of London. A decision to expel all BBC correspondents has been put on ice, but not dismissed out of hand.
Representatives from the Office of the Prime Minister said the overall BBC attitude towards Israel were "verging on the anti-Semitic ... Today's programme, which contains the ridiculous false assertion that we used nerve gas against the Palestinians, was the last straw. We decided that we had to draw a red line rather than just complain about a consistent attitude in which successive BBC programs attempt to place us in the same context as totalitarian, axis-of-evil countries such as Iraq and Iran... There is no recognition inside the BBC of the sensitivity of a people who have faced attempted annihilation. The questions about nuclear weapons asked by the BBC are never directed against the US or Britain. Mr Sharon is never mentioned without some critical reference to his alleged right-wing tendencies or military past, while Islamic terrorists are politely referred to as 'militants' out of a reluctance by the BBC to upset Muslims by telling the truth."
[TG adds: Over the past years, several other examples of the way the BBC has demonized Israel have been sent out on this list. For those of you who haven't read it before, you may also wish to read the paragraphs about the BBC in my essay on the European media and the Intifada – originally published in 2001 by the National Review (an American publication – no British publication agreed to publish it). Unfortunately, it is as relevant today as then: www.honestreporting.com/articles/reports/European_Media_and_Anti-Israel_Bias.asp
2. Text of email sent last Monday, June 23, 2003, from Andrew Wilkie, Nuffield Professor of Pathology at Oxford University to Amit Duvshani of Tel Aviv University. Amit Duvshani had applied to Oxford for a doctoral position. Prof Wilkie rejects the applicant on the grounds that he is Israeli.
[This email has been authenticated for accuracy. It appears to contravene Oxford University's own "Equal Opportunities and Race Equality policies". It remains to be seen whether the university will actually take any action. It has not done so in the case of Tom Paulin and others.]
3. "BBC refuses to say sorry for Iraq reporting" (Agence France Presse, June 26, 2003). (This row over the BBC's Iraq reporting is separate from the BBC's row with Israel.) "The BBC dug in its heels and refused to bow to demands by British Prime Minister Tony Blair's "sultan of spin" to apologize for its reporting on the Iraq war and weapons of mass destruction. Blair's director of communications, Alastair Campbell, told the House of Commons foreign affairs committee: 'In relation to the BBC story: it is a lie, it was a lie, it's a lie that's continually repeated and until we get an apology for it I will continue making sure people know it's a lie.'"
4. Blair-BBC (Associated Press, June 27, 2003). "The British Broadcasting Corp. on Thursday sharply rejected a charge by Prime Minister Tony Blair's communications director that it lied about the government's use of intelligence on Iraqi weapons. The director of BBC News, Richard Sambrook, on Thursday denied that the network had ever accused Blair of lying and leading the country to war on a false premise. "We have never suggested anything of that kind," he told BBC radio."
Tom Gross adds:
In a note attached to the dispatch of June 25, 2003 ("Egypt bans 'Matrix Reloaded'"), the Director of the Library at Yad Vashem, a subscriber to this list, pointed out that the Daily Telegraph article sent out titled "Mein Kampf sequel to be published in English" was incorrect in stating that Hitler's second book has not previously been published in English.
A senior editor at the Daily Telegraph in London, who is also a subscriber to this list, responds:
Although the opening of the Daily Telegraph article states that "Hitler's Second Book, was dictated during 1928 but never published" our article does then clearly go on to state that "in 1961 Prof Weinberg planned to bring out an English version. But an inaccurate and poorly translated bootlegged version was rushed into print by a rival publisher. This pirate edition was criticised for its unreliability and soon went out of print but its appearance killed off the plans for a proper, fully annotated translation."
The whole point of our article in the Daily Telegraph last week was that this new edition, edited by Gerhard Weinberg, will put the book into its proper context, rather than irresponsibly sensationalising it. Other than that, thank you once again for your tremendous email service.
THE BBC “DEMONISES THE ISRAELIS AND GIVES OUR TERRORIST ENEMIES REASONS TO ATTACK US”
Israel breaks links with BBC in anger at 'demonisation'
By Christopher Walker
The Times (of London)
June 28, 2003
Israel broke all contact with the BBC yesterday in protest at its repeated "demonisation" of the country and today's planned showing on BBC World of a critical documentary on Israel's nuclear, biological and chemical arsenal. The move will involve a refusal to put up official spokesmen for BBC interviews. There will be visa restrictions, not imposed on other news organisations in Israel, to ensure that the bureau chief is rotated every few months and to make it hard for BBC staff to report.
"The BBC will discover that bureaucracy can be applied with goodwill or without it. And after the way that they have repeatedly tried to delegitimise the state of Israel, we, as hosts, have none left for them," Daniel Seaman, director of the government press office, told The Times.
"We see the well-known pro-Arab touch of the Foreign Office and the traditional anti-Semitism of parts of Britain's Establishment in the way they are acting against us."
Also planned are non-co-operation in all requests for assistance with such restrictions as military road blocks in the occupied West Bank and Gaza. A decision to expel all BBC correspondents has been put on ice, but not dismissed out of hand. The first test comes today when the BBC requests that Israeli officials go to its studios to comment on the weekend visit of Condoleezza Rice, the US National Security Adviser, who is to have talks with Israeli and Palestinian leaders about the "road map" to peace.
Mr Seaman, 42, said the sanctions had been decided at an angry meeting of representatives from the Office of the Prime Minister, the Foreign Ministry and the government press office because of what was seen as an overall BBC attitude towards Israel "verging on the anti-Semitic". They were in reaction to a series of programmes which had sought "to delegitimise Israel and showed some of the attitudes once familiar in Der Stürmer (the Nazi journal)."
Mr Seaman added: "Our complaint is with the BBC as an organisation rather than its bureau here, which does try from time to time to rectify its mistakes. The weapons programme, which contains the ridiculous false assertion that we used nerve gas against the Palestinians, was the last straw.
"We decided that we had to draw a red line rather than just complain about a consistent attitude in which successive BBC programmes attempt to place us in the same context as totalitarian, axis-of-evil countries such as Iraq and Iran."
"The attitude of the BBC is more than a pure journalistic matter; it is dangerous to the existence of the state of Israel because it demonises the Israelis and gives our terrorist enemies reasons to attack us. There is no dialogue between Israel and the BBC and no recognition inside the corporation of the sensitivity of a people who have faced attempted annihilation. The questions about nuclear weapons asked by the BBC are never directed against the US or Britain. Mr Sharon is never mentioned without some critical reference to his alleged right-wing tendencies or military past, while Islamic terrorists are politely referred to as 'militants' out of a reluctance by the BBC to upset Muslims by telling the truth."
The final element in Israel's frustration was the BBC's promotion of the programme Israel's Secret Weapon, shown in Britain in March on BBC Two, with a series of provocative questions onscreen: "Which country in the Middle East has undeclared nuclear weapons? Which country in the Middle East has undeclared biological and chemical weapons capabilities? Which country in the Middle East has no outside inspections? Which country jailed its nuclear whistleblower for 18 years?" Israel said it would refuse to put up spokesmen to be interviewed on BBC programmes and would not co-operate with BBC requests for help in such matters as correspondents getting through road blocks and Tel Aviv airport, and in the issuing of press cards.
Israel has applied heavy pressure on the BBC not to re-broadcast the weapons programme. The sections that have caused such anger in Israel compare Israel to Iraq and raise the question of why the world had demanded UN inspections in Iraq, but not similar inspections on Israel.
Andrew Steele, chief of the BBC's six-strong bureau in Jerusalem, which includes the correspondents Orla Guerin, Jeremy Cooke and James Reynolds, said that he had not even seen the programme. He had referred all queries to the BBC press office in London.
Richard Sambrook, Director of BBC News said last night: "We regret that the Israelis felt the need to take this action but we stand behind the veracity of the film."
The questions posed by the BBC trailers
Which country in the Middle East has undeclared nuclear weapons?
Which country in the Middle East has undeclared biological and chemical capabilities?
Which country in the Middle East has no outside inspections?
Which country jailed its nuclear whistleblower for 18 years?
EMAIL FROM ANDREW WILKIE
From: "Andrew Wilkie"
To: "Amit Duvshani"
Sent: Monday, June 23, 2003 9:58 AM
Subject: Re: PhD application
Dear Amit Duvshani,
Thank you for contacting me, but I don't think this would work. I have a huge problem with the way that the Israelis take the moral high ground from their appalling treatment in the Holocaust, and then inflict gross human rights abuses on the Palestinians because the (the Palestinians) wish to live in their own country.
I am sure that you are perfectly nice at a personal level, but no way would I take on somebody who had served in the Israeli army. As you may be aware, I am not the only UK scientist with these views but I'm sure you will find another suitable lab if you look around.
Yours sincerely
Andrew Wilkie
Nuffield Professor of Pathology,
Weatherall Institute of Molecular Medicine,
The John Radcliffe,
Headington,
Oxford OX3 9DS,
UK.
Fax (44)-1865-222500
awilkie@worf.molbiol.ox.ac.uk
BBC REFUSES TO SAY SORRY FOR IRAQ REPORTING
BBC refuses to say sorry for Iraq reporting
AFP (Agence France Presse)
June 26, 2003
The BBC dug in its heels and refused to bow to demands by British Prime Minister Tony Blair's "sultan of spin" to apologize for its reporting on the Iraq war and weapons of mass destruction.
Blair's powerful director of communications, Alastair Campbell, took the world's biggest and best-known public broadcaster to task Wednesday when he appeared before a parliamentary committee.
He told the House of Commons foreign affairs committee that there was no truth to a BBC radio report, quoting an unnamed source, that Downing Street embellished a September 2002 dossier on Iraq to beef up the case for war.
"In relation to the BBC story: it is a lie, it was a lie, it's a lie that's continually repeated and until we get an apology for it I will continue making sure people know it's a lie," Campbell said.
But, speaking on BBC radio Thursday, the network's director of news Richard Sambrook snapped back at Campbell for "seriously misrepresenting" BBC journalism.
"He said we had accused him and the prime minister of lying. That's not true. We haven't," Sambrook said.
"He said we accused the prime minister of misleading the Commons. We have never said any such thing. He said we were trying to suggest the prime minister had led the country into war on a false basis. We've never suggested that," he said.
"He said the BBC had an anti-war agenda. That's untrue, we have no agenda. Finally he said we've not apologised. Well, that is true – because we have nothing to apologise for."
Sambrook spoke on the Today program, the early-morning soap box of Britain's political class, whose defense correspondent Andrew Gilligan had orignally reported the allegation about the September dossier.
It was made by an unidentified individual close to the intelligence community who, Sambrook said, was "a senior, credible and reliable source."
According to the BBC, a one-sentence claim in the 50-page dossier – that Iraq could deploy chemical and biological weapons within just 45 minutes – was inserted under political pressure from Downing Street.
Many assumed that that pressure came straight from Campbell, a former tabloid political reporter with no shortage of enemies among politicians and journalists who resent the power he wields behind the scenes.
As Blair's media strategist, and first official spokesman, the 46-year-old Campbell is nicknamed "the sultan of spin" for his presumed ability to manipulate the news media.
Though nominally part of the government, the British Broadcasting Corp. – a vast web of radio stations, television channels, magazines and Internet sites, largely financed by a rigorously enforced tax on television sets – is fiercely protective of its editorial independence.
Gilligan, who like many BBC star reporters also writes for non-BBC print media, stood by his story when he appeared before the foreign affairs committee last week.
It is looking into the decisions that led to Britain's participation in the Iraq war. On Friday it will hear from Foreign Secretary Jack Straw for the second time this week, but behind closed doors.
Blair has ordered a separate inquiry by parliament's intelligence and security committee. Though it usually meets in camera, he has promised that its findings will be published.
BLAIR AND THE BBC
Blair-BBC
By Michael Mcdonough
The Associated Press
June 27, 2003
The British Broadcasting Corp. on Thursday sharply rejected a charge by Prime Minister Tony Blair's communications director that it lied about the government's use of intelligence on Iraqi weapons.
The dispute centers on a BBC report that Blair's spokesman, Alastair Campbell, was involved in redrafting an intelligence service dossier to emphasize a claim that Iraq could deploy chemical or biological weapons within 45 minutes of Saddam Hussein giving the order.
On Wednesday, Campbell testified before a parliamentary inquiry into the government's use of intelligence to bolster its case that the threat from Iraqi weapons justified military action.
"I find it incredible ... that people can report, based on one single anonymous, uncorroborated source ... that the prime minister, the Cabinet, the intelligence agencies, people like myself, connived to persuade Parliament to send British forces into action on a lie," Campbell told the House of Commons Foreign Affairs Committee.
"Until the BBC acknowledge that is a lie, I will keep banging on ... and they better issue an apology pretty quick."
But the director of BBC News, Richard Sambrook, on Thursday denied that the network had ever accused Blair of lying and leading the country to war on a false premise.
"We have never suggested anything of that kind," he told BBC radio. "We're not going to apologize for something we haven't said. ... I think Alastair Campbell seriously misrepresented the BBC's journalism."
Sambrook defended a report by BBC defense correspondent Andrew Gilligan claiming that British intelligence sources were unhappy about the prominence of the 45-minute claim in a dossier published last September.
"We have always said that we had one senior and credible source in the intelligence services who told us that some of those involved in compiling the September dossier were unhappy about how it was finally presented," he said.
In Wednesday's hearing, Campbell sought to discredit the initial BBC report on the 45-minute claim.
"I've seen the defense correspondent change his story time and time again, talk about one source, then there were four sources, then his sources were journalists on other newspapers," Campbell told the inquiry. "If that is BBC journalism, then God help them."
But Sambrook robustly rejected that attack.
"I'm entirely satisfied that it is a senior, credible and reliable source," he said. "And frankly ... I don't think the BBC needs to be taught lessons in the use of sources by a communications department which plagiarized a 12-year-old thesis and distributed it unattributed."
The government has admitted it lifted material from a graduate thesis posted on the Internet in another dossier on Iraq published in February.
Campbell pressed again, writing to Sambrook on Thursday afternoon to ask whether the BBC stood by its reports on the September dossier, and how it obtained them. He said he wanted a reply "by the end of the day."
Sambrook issued a statement saying, "We stand by our entire story," and adding, "In my experience, this is an unprecedented level of pressure on the BBC from Downing Street.
"The BBC will respond properly to these matters, but not to a deadline dictated by Mr. Campbell," Sambrook said.