• Existing user of old message board?

    Your username will have transferred over to this new message board, but your password will need to be reset. Visit our convert your account page, to transfer your old password over.

Israel v Hamas

DanH said:
Oh look. The White House talking utter bollocks again. Is there any gigantic whopper you don't swallow whole?

"The BBC has rejected incorrect White House criticism of its Gaza coverage, describing a claim it had taken down a story as "completely wrong".

At Tuesday's White House briefing, President Trump's press secretary Karoline Leavitt accused the BBC of taking "the word of Hamas" when reporting on the number of people killed in a shooting near an aid distribution site on Sunday.

She also claimed, wrongly, that the BBC had retracted a story.

"The claim the BBC took down a story after reviewing footage is completely wrong. We did not remove any story and we stand by our journalism," the BBC said in a statement.

Karoline Leavitt criticised the BBC for changing the number of casualties in the story's headline. The corporation said its coverage was updated with new figures throughout the day, which is "totally normal practice on any fast-moving news story".

The numbers were "always clearly attributed, from the first figure of 15 from medics, through the 31 killed from the Hamas-run health ministry to the final Red Cross statement of 'at least 21' at their field hospital," the statement said."
Click to expand...

The White House has a point calling out the BBC for using Hamas run health ministry figures.

Hamas is a terrorist group with a track record of inflating casualty numbers to paint Israel as the villain. The BBCs practice of updating headlines does not excuse relying on unverified data from a terrorist organisation.

Leavitts pushback is about holding the BBC accountable for sloppy reporting in a war.
 
eaglesdare said:
The White House has a point calling out the BBC for using Hamas run health ministry figures.

Hamas is a terrorist group with a track record of inflating casualty numbers to paint Israel as the villain. The BBCs practice of updating headlines does not excuse relying on unverified data from a terrorist organisation.

Leavitts pushback is about holding the BBC accountable for sloppy reporting in a war.
Click to expand...
I thought they did test against hospital records of treatments and operations?
 
chris123 said:
There was a surgeon on the radio the other day and I'm sure they weren't Hamas/Iran reporting on the operations they were performing.
Click to expand...
A surgeon talking about their work on the radio does not mean they are verifying Gazas casualty numbers. They are focused on saving lives and not auditing Hamas run hospital records.

Hamas controls the health ministry and the data it feeds to the BBC.
 
eaglesdare said:
A surgeon talking about their work on the radio does not mean they are verifying Gazas casualty numbers. They are focused on saving lives and not auditing Hamas run hospital records.

Hamas controls the health ministry and the data it feeds to the BBC.
Click to expand...
How is a British surgeon speaking from a hospital in Gaza not to be believed?
 
chris123 said:
How is a British surgeon speaking from a hospital in Gaza not to be believed?
Click to expand...
Let me state the obvious again....A British surgeon in Gaza focuses on saving lives not verifying casualty data. Hamas controls the health numbers.

Does a Croydon surgeon analyse casualty stats for the news or focus on surgery?
 
What about the reports from surgeons, of different nationalities, who are not reporting any figures but are reporting children killed or injured with gunshots to the head and upper body, suggesting sniper fire?

I'm not thinking these people have a political axe to grind so what are we to do with these reports?
 
Glazier#1 said:
What about the reports from surgeons, of different nationalities, who are not reporting any figures but are reporting children killed or injured with gunshots to the head and upper body, suggesting sniper fire?

I'm not thinking these people have a political axe to grind so what are we to do with these reports?
Click to expand...
Sorry for butting in doctors are people and have agendas. I have no idea of the truth here but what if the reason that these doctors are there is because they are sympathetic to the Palestinian cause.

The idea that doctors are impartial doesn't fly. Look at the rubbish the BMA comes out with in the UK on all sorts of things most of us can see it's because they have an agenda.

So I guess the answer is to know more about these individuals.
 
Wisbech Eagle said:
Hiroshima and Dresden were indeed terrible things during wars. They though were calculated acts intended ultimately to stop wars against powerful enemies and ultimately to lower the loss of life.

Not so the actions of the IDF in Gaza. The impact on loss of life will be to increase it, both directly and in the future by baking in anger and the desire for retribution across the Islamic world. Wiping out and/or relocating the Palestinians just kicks the problem elsewhere. It doesn’t solve it.
Click to expand...
We're just so blasé about the fact that when some other countries kill Muslims, we all have to put up with reprisals. I'm not sure it's a sustainable position but it looks like that's the way it is now. I'm not sure what that says about Islam.
I think the least that can be said is that there's a sizeable radical element - and, as you say, it will be worsened now.
I suppose some think all non Muslim western countries are complicit in this. I wouldn't like to hear what's being said in the Muslim Brotherhood mosque down the road. But I also guess some would think we deserve it.
 
Badger11 said:
Sorry for butting in doctors are people and have agendas. I have no idea of the truth here but what if the reason that these doctors are there is because they are sympathetic to the Palestinian cause.

The idea that doctors are impartial doesn't fly. Look at the rubbish the BMA comes out with in the UK on all sorts of things most of us can see it's because they have an agenda.

So I guess the answer is to know more about these individuals.
Click to expand...
So the implication is that they may be lying??
 
Last edited:
Glazier#1 said:
So the implication is that they are lying??
Click to expand...
Not at all. The implication is that everyone has an agenda, plenty of MPS have been doctors. It doesn't mean they are liars but a they are biased in the nicest sense of the word.

How many times has the BBC had to apologise after posting a report from an unbiased journalist whose social media then revealed the opposite. It doesn't mean they were lying just that they had a position.

Like I said foreign doctors who are volunteering in Gaza are likely to by sympathetic to the Palestinian cause how far that goes is down to the individual.
 
Glazier#1 said:
What about the reports from surgeons, of different nationalities, who are not reporting any figures but are reporting children killed or injured with gunshots to the head and upper body, suggesting sniper fire?

I'm not thinking these people have a political axe to grind so what are we to do with these reports?
Click to expand...

As with many instances in life it'll come down to the individual.

You will get those that are there, significantly risking their lives to ease suffering.....god's work. These people are found all over the world helping the poorest and most vulnerable (it doesn't have to be dual purpose though we know it often is).

Of those people a probably high percent will also have strong political views or motives....Only a small percent are likely risking their lives out of pure altruism.

As long as they aren't taking up arms it's good that they are there....Red Cross stuff and the like should always be respected by all sides.
 
Last edited:
Badger11 said:
Not at all. The implication is that everyone has an agenda, plenty of MPS have been doctors. It doesn't mean they are liars but a they are biased in the nicest sense of the word.

How many times has the BBC had to apologise after posting a report from an unbiased journalist whose social media then revealed the opposite. It doesn't mean they were lying just that they had a position.

Like I said foreign doctors who are volunteering in Gaza are likely to by sympathetic to the Palestinian cause how far that goes is down to the individual.
Click to expand...
Yes but these are specific reports by many different surgeons about specific gunshot wounds. What position would they have to have to make up such reports?
 
Glazier#1 said:
Yes but these are specific reports by many different surgeons about specific gunshot wounds. What position would they have to have to make up such reports?
Click to expand...

You're missing the point. They can't say anything that makes Israel look good and Hamas bad as they will get killed by the terrorists.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Holmesdale Online Shop

Back
Top