Live data from Hacker News

Open letter accuses BBC board member of having a conflict of interest on Gaza

theguardian.com

231–240 of 434 posts

Re: Open letter accuses BBC board member of having a conflict of interest on Gaza

#231
post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not that hard for a new idea to look good for a couple short months/years. Building an ongoing, self-sustaining society that doesn't go completely off the rails is a whole other thing. There's a reason all these idyllic examples people give (Catalonia, Pre-USSR Ukrainian socialism, Paris Commune) were short-lived. If the Bolshevist revolution had been quashed in 1919, it would be idealized today.

They never collapsed from anything innate, though. They were always destroyed from outside forces. When your society represents actual freedom, you become the enemy of everyone, from capital to stalinism. Centralization of power has so far made every society deeply flawed or even hellish. The three societies you mentioned are the only ones where power was purposefully decentralized, and that seems to be the most prom…

I would argue that Rojava is one modern case that still shows hope. Although not as decentralized as those other examples, perhaps this is also why they're still there 11 years later.

Re: Open letter accuses BBC board member of having a conflict of interest on Gaza

#232
post #222
post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is it possible they influence so much of what happens in western politics, or at least how whole nations respond to their genocidal war anyway?

Many US states actually have laws on the books that prohibits anybody that works with or I think event contracts with the state gov from "discrimination against Israel", in various forms, etc, depending on the particular state. To my knowledge, no US state has any other sort of legal recognition of any other foreign government/state.

Further reading: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-BDS_laws

Re: Open letter accuses BBC board member of having a conflict of interest on Gaza

#233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a Russian, I wouldn’t trust anything that comes out on RT. Banning it though is a really bad move – something I would expect from the Russian government itself, not Europe. One of the reasons I’ve become disillusioned in EU recently.

> Banning it though is a really bad move Why? With how confidently you state that, I'm rather curious what reasons you have.

Because free people should be able to decide for themselves what to read and listen to.

If you want a longer answer, George Orwell penned an eloquent one all the way back in 1944: https://www.orwellfoundation.com/the-orwell-foundation/orwel...

Re: Open letter accuses BBC board member of having a conflict of interest on Gaza

#234
post #228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, you are putting words in my mouth and being very reductive. Majority of powerful people is not jewish nor zionist, but there is probably a lot of zionists amongst them. And no, not all jews are zionists, nor all jews are in powerful positions.

[flagged]

[flagged]

Re: Open letter accuses BBC board member of having a conflict of interest on Gaza

#235
post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

No, you are putting words in my mouth and being very reductive. Majority of powerful people is not jewish nor zionist, but there is probably a lot of zionists amongst them. And no, not all jews are zionists, nor all jews are in powerful positions.

In addition, not all Zionists are Jews.

From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_Zionism

> Christian Zionism is a political and religious ideology that, in a Christian context, espouses the return of the Jewish people to the Holy Land.[1] Likewise, it holds that the founding of the State of Israel in 1948 was in accordance with biblical prophecies transmitted through the Old Testament: that the re-establishment of Jewish sovereignty in the Levant—the eschatological "Gathering of Israel"—is a prerequisite for the Second Coming of Jesus Christ.[1][2][3] The term began to be used in the mid-20th century, in place of Christian restorationism, as proponents of the ideology rallied behind Zionists in support of a Jewish national homeland.[1][4][5]

Re: Open letter accuses BBC board member of having a conflict of interest on Gaza

#236
post #218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Instead, the report says, the BBC’s coverage has involved the systematic dehumanisation of Palestinians and unquestioning acceptance of Israeli PR. This has allegedly been overseen by BBC Middle East Editor and apparent Binyamin Netanyahu admirer, Raffi Berg, who is accused by anonymous journalists of “micromanaging” the section." - https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/bbc-impartiality-trust-isra... "Comprehensive new r…

Anyone who call it "Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza" is hardly a reliable source. And the entire criticism is amount of coverage per death? I men the Israeli deaths have names attached to them and you can verify them, the Palestinian ones are just numbered by Hamas. Obviously the coverage will be different. I skimmed the article by CfMM and it's hardly a neutral source. Like they complain that BBC doesn't call Palesti…

[dead]

Re: Open letter accuses BBC board member of having a conflict of interest on Gaza

#237
post #154
post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/bbc-impartiality-trust-isra ... The tagline is "As many question BBC’s coverage, three academics tell openDemocracy why they don't think the broadcaster is impartial", which I think sums up the article accurately. That doesn't seem to add much aside from proving that there are outsiders (impartial or biased, we don't really know) that agree with one side. It shouldn't be surprising…

>>It was also found to have attached “Hamas-run health ministry” to Palestinian casualty figures in 1,155 articles – almost every time the Palestinian death toll was referenced across BBC articles. > Why is this an issue? In the Russsia-Ukranie war for instance, if you cite casualty figures from Russia, it's pretty obvious that it's from the Kremlin. The Gaza Health Ministry is actually Hamas run, and that fact isn't…

[deleted]

Re: Open letter accuses BBC board member of having a conflict of interest on Gaza

#238
post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wasn't it calling for death to a military force leading a campaign of total war, and not a death call against Israelis in general? Like nobody would say "death to the Khmer Rouge" is a death call against Cambodians. It technically would be, since it was Cambodians in the Khmer Rouge who were killing innocent children, but it's a specific subset of Cambodians (the Khmer Rouge) and only those who were actually doing th…

Yes, the coverage of this has been a weird one to watch. How does this remark differ from what the Israeli government regularly says about the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, just as much an official body in Iran as the IDF is in Israel? No one, to my knowledge, would consider calling for the demise of the IRGC to be hate speech against Iranians. No one has ever shut off a live transmission of a Netanyahu speech b…

They also regularly say there are no innocent Palestinians [1] [2] [3] [too many others to count] but weirdly it's not considered evidence of genocidal intent when Zionists say it!

[1] https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/social-media/israel-posts-video...

[2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6eICdhG1qgI

[3] https://mondoweiss.net/2025/07/poll-overwhelming-majority-of...

Re: Open letter accuses BBC board member of having a conflict of interest on Gaza

#240
post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pretty much all Israeli serve in the IDF. He called for their death. The mental gymnastics. He chanted for death but he didn't call for the death of Israelis. Right. He also chanted "From the River to the Sea" which is another call for the death of Israelis and he had some other antisemitic content to add to that. But yeah, he's just a great guy and BBC just let him have a stage.

> Pretty much all Israeli serve in the IDF. He called for their death. The mental gymnastics. This argument makes no sense to me. You're basically saying that it's bad to call for the deaths of a genocidal military… once a certain percentage of the country enlists? Like, at what threshold do you think it would have been unacceptable to chant "death to the Nazis" or "death to the Imperial Japanese Army"?

Let's help you make sense of this:

- Israel is at war with Gaza after it was attacked by Gaza. This war will end as soon as Hamas surrenders and the hostages are returned. Could have ended a long time ago.

- Gaza is ruled by Hamas that just like Bob Vylan advocates for the murder of all Israelis and Jews. That is the genocidal party to this conflict, by their own declaration and actions.

- The correct analogy is the US going to war with Japan after Japan attacked Pearl Harbour. Even that analogy is weak because Pearl Harbour was a military target while Gaza attacked civilians including massacring random people who went to a music festival. Just like Glastonbury. What would the UK do if Glastonbury was attacked by ISIL, 10's of thousands of people murdered, and thousands taken hostage? I mean we've seen what it did for a lot less than that.

- Israel's defensive war looks exactly like this war would look like if any other western country had similar military action. It is generally targeting military targets and civilians unfortunately also get hurt. If you compare to similar recent campaigns and adjust for the significantly more dense population, tunnels, the use of civilian infrastructure, you will see that Israel is waging this war with less impact to civilians compared to e.g. the western allies war against ISIL or Al Qaeda. None of Israel's critics are able to give a realistic option here for Israel to achieve its legitimate goals of self defense. Hamas has been attacking Israeli cities with rockets and massacred Israeli civilians. Israel can not let it remain in control, and a force, in Gaza.

- No other country in the world would do less in terms of military action under similar circumstances. We've seen countries like the US, the UK, Australia, France, take significantly more violent measures in significantly less serious (to their self defense) circumstances.

- The argument that Gaza was somehow occupied before Oct 7th and Palestinians had no choice to improve their situation without violence is a lie. Their violence, against civilians, is an explicit, declared, contiunous, choice. Gaza was handed to the Palestinians in 2005. Even if you can somehow twist the blockade on Gaza to be something else there is still no other country in the world that would act any differently. Gaza has received billions of dollars in support since 2005 and Hamas has invested it in weapons and tunnels.

- The IDF is not a "genocidal military". It's just a military. It's fighting a difficult war to defeat a brutal enemy that is holding hostages, doesn't care about deaths of its own people, and refuses to surrender. No other western military would fight in a more "clean" or "fair" way under the same circumstances and non-western militaries would be a lot more brutal and violent (like Russia did to the Chechens or Turkey to the Kurds). The allegations of genocide are false. They are an antisemitic blood libel. Civilian casualties are unfortunately an outcome of this kind of war which Hamas started and is continuing to date.

- The media, including the BBC, is reporting Hamas PR as news and certain media (like Al-Jazeera) is basically engaged in a PR campaign on behalf of Hamas. According to Hamas any militant that dies is a civilian and civilians that die without relation to any military activities are also killed by the IDF, including Palestinians killed by Hamas. According to the media there are no combatants and no military infrastructure and no tunnels e.g. in Gaza. All targets are civilians and all infrastructure is civilian. The truth is the opposite.

- According to the media "there is no safe place in Gaza". The truth is the humanitarian zone, designated as a safe area, accounts for a tiny minority of casualties in this war, mostly related to Hamas commanders hiding there. Palestinians who have chosen to move there are significantly more safer than those who for whatever reason do not.

It's generally bad to call for the death of anyone. Doing it in a music festival given Hamas' massacre of music festival goers is doubly stupid/insensitive/evil. Sometimes you have to fight, and kill, but you should never wish for anyone to be dead.

Post reply on HN