A Beautiful Gift from the BBC

by Ken O’Keefe

If you haven’t seen it, look for BBC Panorama’s “Death in the Med” program online (Part One, Part Two), you will be treated to first class propaganda as only the BBC can deliver.

I am one of the passengers/witnesses interviewed for this program and I am very much aware of BBC’s role in justifying war and covering up Israeli crimes. I am in no way naive about this; to the contrary my motivation for the interview lay largely in the all too likely opportunity to expose the BBC. A relevant job considering the BBC’s role in the slaughter of over one million Iraqis, a direct role by virtue of the war they justified. BBC from start to present, justifying Iraq, a massive war crime and crime against humanity based entirely on lies (propagated intensely by the BBC). The British Broadcasting Corporation, synonymous with millions of orphans and refugees and countless lives destroyed in Iraq, beating the drums of war without pause, the ultimate prostitutes of propaganda.

With this understanding I solicited an agreement with the BBC producers, in return for my interview the program would include the fact that we disarmed, captured and ultimately released three Israeli commandos (after giving them medical attention no less). That was the deal, a deal I made with an audio recorder in service.

And yes the poor Israeli commandos were beaten, just as any invader in any capable persons home would be beaten. I take no issue with that fact.

But truth be told, the commandos we captured should thank us for their lives. I ask the Israelis, British and American people specifically, if your home was invaded, your family being murdered, would you be willing to disarm, completely control, and then set a murderer of your family free?

You can lie to yourself if you like, bury that head right down deep in the sand, but that ship was our home, and we were all brothers and sisters, aunties and uncles, united, a family, engaged in a most righteous cause, with the vast majority of the planet behind us. The primary beneficiary of our mission, over 800,000 innocent children.

For those lost in a pit of ignorance and indoctrination, those currently stripped of all reason, absent of conscience, duped and hoodwinked, I know you very well because I was once you, a US Marine robot volunteering to kill or be killed. I see my past self in the Zionist who has no capacity at this moment to think, for in that state it is all about regurgitation, independent thought is but a possibility. For you I maintain no hate, for nobody actually, rather it is pity, pity for you that you sacrifice the greatest gift of all, the gift of humanity.

And so it is that the BBC, absent of integrity, contemptuous of humanity, attempts in this program to turn disarmed, helpless Israeli commandos into heroic self-rescuing commandos who managed to Superman their way out of a circle of well over 100 very motivated men whose brothers lay murdered with multiple gunshot wounds. That is what we call a bald-faced lie. Big time lie, in your face lie, you in the audience are a bunch of drooling idiots lie.

Returning from the Zionist alternate universe, we held in our power the fate of three boy commandos who may well have been murderers on that night. Think about that, under these circumstances, we let them go. That is what we call preserving life.

It is not that BBC does not know the truth, there are literally hundreds of witnesses and overflowing facts to reveal it; it is simply BBC’s slavish duty to produce a Zionist storyline of illusions and deceptions. And the story goes that we are the aggressors, “terrorists”, “extremists” and killers. Only in this context can the poor Israeli commandos be victims. How is it possible to dominate and control commandos simply to let them go if we are killers? Answer, it isn’t. And that is precisely why Panorama blatantly lied.

Ah but the irony, the kind of irony that always provides me a smile from the inside out, the irony of these lies being big, beautiful gifts. In all sincerity, thank you BBC.

The BBC says there is doubt as to who fired first. There is no doubt at all who shot who and when to the hundreds of us on the Mavi Marmara and other ships. The Israelis have said we shot at them, well where are their gunshot wounds? And even if you have gunshot wounds, how do we know you did not shoot yourselves? Exactly like you did in “Operation Cast Lead”?

Returning once again from the Zionist alternate universe, the Israeli military attacked in international waters and murdered within the first five minutes of the attack. The attack resulting in scores of gunshot wounds and death in rapid succession. Blood spilling all over the ship. In that environment I took possession of a 9mm pistol that I removed from one of the commandos… and I emptied it of the (real) bullets. Other weapons were seized by other brothers and thrown into the sea, one of which was an assault rifle. Yet when others and myself had the power to end life, and believe me it was as simple as release the safety, point, shoot, over. Instead we preserved life, by taking those weapons away from established killers, we prevented them from killing more. We literally saved our lives and their lives. That is what we call cold, hard facts.

We could have taken out at least three of them, but we did not. Nope, we let them go.

The BBC mentions that we were in international waters at the very end of the story, as if this were an insignificant fact. The fact that Israel stole all the footage that it could, footage that undoubtedly shows them firing 4 bullets to the head of the 19-year-old American passenger, Furkan Dogan. No problem. Executing people at close range, no worries. The fact that the blockade itself is illegal, nah, don’t mention that. 800,000 plus children in Gaza, malnourished, anemic, traumatised… not important.

I would need to review this program many times over to identify every poisoned tactic that the BBC employed in order to do what they do so well, justify murder and war.

Nevertheless BBC’s perversion of the truth will elevate the cause of justice immensely, delegitimizing itself in such grand fashion was indeed a great big gift.

Hats off to ya BBC!

Ken O’Keefe is Managing Director of Aloha Palestine and blogs here. He was on board the Mavi Marmara.

Demonstration against ‘Death on the Med’ :: Location: BBC Television Centre, London :: Date: Sunday, 22 August 2010 ::
Time 13:00

Author: worldcitizenko

Ken O'Keefe (born July 21, 1969) is an American born activist who renounced his US citizenship on March 1, 2001. He has since acquired Irish, Hawaiian and Palestinian citizenship. On January 7, 2004, O'Keefe burned his US passport in protest of "American Imperialism" and called for US troops to immediately withdrawal from Iraq. He replaced his US passport with a World Citizen Passport, proclaiming “ultimate allegiance to my entire human family and to planet Earth." He is a former U.S. Marine who served in the 1991 Gulf War and subsequently spoke out about the use of depleted uranium as a "crime against humanity" and the US military using soldiers as "human guinea pigs" (with experimental drugs that were directly linked to Gulf War syndrome). He is also a social entrepreneur utilising direct action marine conservation in which he pioneered endangered Green Sea Turtle rescues in Hawaii. But he is more widely known for leading the Human Shield Action to Iraq (2003) and as a survivor of the Israeli attack on the MV Mavi Marmara (2010) in which he participated in "defending the ship" and "disarming two Israeli Commandos".

17 thoughts on “A Beautiful Gift from the BBC”

  1. Ken O’Keefe is in denial about the blood that he has on his own hands.
    What happened on Mavi Marmara was an avoidable tragedy caused by errors of judgement on both sides.
    For example, in the BBC documentary,Cevdet Kiclar is shown interviewed before the voyage as stating that he hoped to become a muslim martyr – i.e. die in battle with ‘non-believers’ and so go to heaven. Well, he died. A rousing and very aggressive speech is shown to be given by the head of the IHH. The head of media services on the boat explains how much this is all intended as more a political propaganda coup on behalf of Gaza rather than about just delivering ‘stuff’.
    So Ken O’Keefe – a very very angry, fit and fierce man – was there looking for a rumble, joined by “well over 100 very motivated men” (see above) and he got one.
    Congratulations Mr O’Keefe. I gather that you were fairly pleased with your work – and your own errors of judgement, until the BBC came along and spoilt your Mavi Marmara storyline, by just enough to show that you too are very culpable.

    Also, Ken O’Keefe seems to expect praise for not murdering the wounded Israeli soldiers in cold blood (as he intimates some of his “brothers” wanted to). Is that meant to be so very praiseworthy – especially after the Israelis had already taken control and murder charges and a trial would have been the consequence – not to mention the fact that only the Israelis had the medical facilities to treat all the wounded adequately, including O’Keefe’s ‘brothers’?

    1. Esther, I think its you in denial. Like Ken, I pity people like you and the disingenuous false equivalence you draw between purported errors of judgment “on both sides”. That’s nonsense. As Ken and others point out, this was a premediatated attack on an aid ship in international waters by the Israelis. I suggest you carefully re-read Ken’s statement and watch Midnight on the Mavi Marmara, but I doubt you will, since you display all the attributes of a hasbaranik shill.

      So IHH delivered a passionate rousing speech to rally the troops, so to speak, so what? The cherrypicking of quotes by the BBC and the limited English of some of the participants is again disingenuously construed to sew together a picture of “propaganda coup”, for which Mr O’Keefe has provided a corrective.

      Yes, the fact that Ken O’Keefe afforded the Israeli combatants the humanity they failed to show them is indeed praiseworthy. But I doubt they want praise, only to point out the disparity. And I’m very glad you mention a crucial point, that the MM passengers would have been up for murder charges had they killed an Israeli combatant, even in self defence. That’s more that can be said for the Israeli murderers whom you callously defend.

  2. As my article states Esther, I feel pity for you, not even the terrible plight of 800,000 plus children can help you see beyond the conditioned conclusions that your indoctrinators have spoon-fed you. 800,000 is just a number, the innocent lives destroyed a non-issue. Without knowing it you condemn innocent children and adults to horrible agony simply because they are Palestinian. The truth, you would have made a good Nazi, unquestioning, easily manipulated, regurgitating the script, scapegoating an entire people, stripping them of any rights.

    According to your apparent position Esther, if someone invaded your home and murdered your family, you would lay down and let them kill you without resistance. If that be the case I am doubly sorry for you, for you are not only blind, but a coward as well.

    Those children are my family Esther, yours as well only you do not know it, and I am not a coward, and neither were my brothers who were willing to die in the cause of justice and humanity.

    No matter how much ignorance lives in our world, the developed conscience makes very clear what we can and must do to maintain our humanity. I hope for your sake that someday you manage to wrestle yours back.


  3. Here’s a letter our friend Frank Barat sent BBC:


    Dear all,

    To be honest, I had a very hard time picking a “complaint category” as your program last night ticked all -the wrong- boxes. This was one of the most biased piece of “journalism” I have seen in a really long time. The fact that it posed as investigative journalism was simply offensive and an insult to your viewers intelligence. The great I.F Stone must have rolled in his grave last night.

    Jane Corbyn tooks all the Israeli navy facts for granted and hardly challenged them. One the other hand, she challenged every single fact put by the flotilla organisers. TheFlotilla was portrayed as an Islamist one, omiting to mention that the main organisers, the Free Gaza Movement, were mainly Westerners coming from all walks of life. The program only addressed the Mavi Marmara issue when all 6 boats had been very violently seized by the Israeli Navy. There was hardly no mention of the fact that this happened in International Waters, that all possessions of the passengers (of the 6 boats) had been stolen, that the passengers arriving in Israel had been paraded (an illegal act) taken to jail,interrogated for hours, humiliated constantly….

    The above showing an obvious bias towards the Israeli Navy.

    But something is worse than being biased when you portray yourself as an investigative journalist.Blatant factuals errors.

    1) The audio footage:

    Jane Corbin said that the audio footage authenticity is disputed. WRONG. The Israeli Navy itself admittedthat that had edited footage and played around with it. (Some of itdated from 2008). This has been widely reported and could not havebeen missed by your team of investigative journalists, right. Here is one article about this:http://maxblumenthal.com/2010/06/idf-admits-it-doctored-flotilla-audio-clip-washington-posts-kessler-must-retract/

    2) The Hamas quote:

    Jane Corbin said that Gaza was controlled by Hamas, a political party who “does not recognise Israel’s existence”. WRONG again. Once more the fact that Hamas recognises Israel’s existence as a fact has been widely published including in mainstream newspapers such as the guardian. (once more an investigative journalist must have heard about such a paper,right?). Here 2 articles from the Guardian:



    3) the “some passengers wanted to be martyrs” quote:

    Jane Corbin’s voice over, at one point said: “Some passengers on the boat wanted to be martyrs”and then shows some footage of a Turkish passenger. Problem is, the passenger does not say at any point that he WANTS to be a martyr.Passenger say that if there is violence, he’ll respond, and that IF he died as a martyr, he’ll be proud to have died for a just cause.Totally different, right?

    4) The “this was a political flotilla” discovery:

    After 30 mins of such groundbreaking investigative journalism, Jane Corbyn had a huge SCOOP. “This was not a humanitarian aid flotilla, but a political one, which attended to put pressure on Israel and to push the country to end thesiege on Gaza”. Amazing! Thanks. Problem is that this SCOOP had been announced more than 6 months ago by the flotilla organisers and repeated over and over again since then.

    I could go on and on, as yesterday’sprogram was so clearly flawed and blatantly biased.

    Not sure what was Panorama agenda in making this program. Totally discrediting the BBC as an impartial broadcaster? totally discrediting the profession of journalist?

    Or maybe it was both.

    Best regards

    Frank Barat


  4. Someone else wrote it, but it deals with more than enough issues;
    * why was only video vetted and approved by the Israeli authorities used in this programme?

    * why was no reference made to the fact that Israel had confiscated all video shot by independent journalists on board the Mavi Marmara (in contravention of international law)? (and consequently used stolen credit cards)

    * why was no reference made to the fact that a journalist was executed by Israeli commandos, with a bullet through his forehead, whilst carrying out his profession?

    * why was no reference made to the manner in which the aid workers were shot (e.g. a 19-year-old shot five times from less that 45cm, in the face, in the back of the head, twice in the leg and once in the back).

    * why was highly disputed false audio used in this programme?

    * why was it necessary to have an Israeli producer?

    * why were none of the British nationals present on the Mavi Marmara interviewed for this programme?

    * presumably Israeli commandos only agreed to appear following guarantees that they would be portrayed by the BBC in a positive light?

    * why was no mention made of the fact that the Mavi Marmara was intercepted on the high seas, in international waters? (until the very end)

    * why was no mention made of the fact that, when organisers of previous aid convoys to Gaza have agreed to surrender the aid to Israel for safe conveyance to Gaza, most of that aid is never then subsequently permitted to transfer to Gaza (this alone would explain the ferocity of the resistance of some of those who spent months working hard to raise millions of dollars’ worth of aid)?

    * why wasn’t it made clear that the aid workers released the Israeli commandos?

    * why was reference made to Hamas rockets without any wider contextual reference to Israel’s occupation of Palestinian territory? *why did Jane Corbin say that the IDF boarded the boat with non lethal weapons, then go on to contradict that statement and say the IDF carried pistols?

    *why wasn’t it reported that the IDF admitted it doctored the tapes of alleged threats made by the IDF?

    *why was a photo used of an alleged ‘Muslim’ brandishing a dagger reported to be taken after the IDF boarded the ship, when it is clear to see the photo was taken in broad daylight? (the MM was boarded in darkness)

    *why was it alleged that some medicines on board were out of date? (any medicine in a war zone is better than none)

  5. So silly, schoolyard tactics with no end in sight.

    Esther, I wish you the best, genuinely, because what is good for you is good for me and vice versa. Sadly however, I suspect you are likely to die with the views you share now, views that defy humanity. How many times do I mention 800,000 innocent children before it must be concluded that you could care less about them, “security for Israel” is more important than humanity. I will agree to disagree, humanity is far, far more important than the farcical security you seek.

    I can only return to my pity for you that you have lost and will likely never recover the humanity that was in you at birth but robbed from you somewhere along the way. I do not think you find the wisdom to seek to retain it, I hope to be wrong.

    I leave you to it, say you what have to say, I stand on my position and make clear my purpose in life, to see a just and peaceful world that we can all be proud to hand over to our children.


  6. Esther’s schoolyard tactics have been properly consigned to the bin; genuine comments that actually add to the discussion are more than welcome.

  7. Fiachra O’Luain’s Letter to the BBC
    by Fiona Bateson on Tuesday, 17 August 2010 at 13:44

    Dear BBC Panorama team,

    I write to you as a concerned viewer. However I am also a victim of Israeli state terrorism and an eyewitness to the initial attack on the MV Mavi Marmara.

    This evening in Derry, co-incidentally in the home of a former British soldier, I watched your programme on the attack about the Israeli attack on our flotilla. I have not spoken to anybody else about it yet and am ignorant of the reactions of others, but I want to convey to you how both a loyal servant of your Majesty the Queen and I both agreed that what we witnessed from BBC was, yet again, apologism for State terrorism and British tax pounds being used to do what BBC colluded in doing in the aftermath of Bloody Sunday, blaming of the victims while taking the word of the aggressors as unadulterated gospel.

    Your programme is called Panorama. In the past you have had excellent reports on a whole range of topics, however I personally had a panoramic view of the initial attack on the flotilla and rather think that your programme should have been renamed BBC Myopia or BBC Selective Blindness to accurately represent the standard of your investigative reporting. The Commandoes started shooting from the get go, from the zodiac assault boats and the helicopters and that is a fact, so why attempt to plant any doubt in the public imagination?

    I am interested in the timing of your programme, as was stated correctly at the beginning, there are several investigations underway. I will be in London later this week to testify before the UN’s OHCHR fact finding team. I am also awaiting a response from Senator John Kerry to my request for a US Senate Committee for Foreign Affairs hearing that would establish the facts about the murder of US citizen Furkan Dogan, as well as the armed attack on our US registered vessel, the Challenger 1. These investigations are long, drawn out affairs and as such; require its media coverage to be like that of a marathon race, diligent commentary of every stage, as opposed to your hop, skip and a jump into an Israeli propaganda sandpit of predefined conclusions.

    Like others, I have been asked to keep my testimony out of the media until these legal and fact finding investigations have reached their conclusions. The point being that if we all do this, then all sides can begin to deal with the facts and not the heresy, propaganda and doctored footage that your programme expounded for half an hour this evening at the expense of the British people and your own credibility. So why did you implicate the BBC in the state terrorism of Medinat Yisrael by broadcasting a biased programme before all the investigations have concluded?

    Why did you use audio and video footage that has proven to be doctored? I am referring to the clip you showed of a percussion grenade exploding in one of the Israeli zodiac assault boats when this never happened? The IDF have admitted that this clip was doctored, as well as the audio purported to be anti-Semitic remarks issued over the radio by members of the flotilla, this never happened either. However, you broadcast it as if this doctored footage and audio as if it was in anyway credible? It is not as if there was a lack of sensational evidence for you to use. Why did you not air the radio threats from the IDF to use “all military means necessary” to take all our ships while we were in international waters, stating they would blame the captains for any injuries/ loss of life? I heard that live, why wasn’t it in your documentary? Surely this is relevant for any journalist interested in a fair portrayal of the events that morning? Would it be that BBC, as it did after Bloody Sunday, is offering its considerable powers to Israel as it paints a picture that is so scornful of reality?

    As far as I am concerned the order must have come from somewhere for the Commandoes to murder Muslims but not Europeans or White Americans. It is interesting how 19 year old Furkan Dogan’s nationality has changed from American to Turkish once Israeli bullets passed through his back, face and legs. Would this be because he has brown skin? There wasn’t much on that in your programme either. Why was there no focus on the brutality experienced by our flotilla brothers and sisters on the Challenger 1 and other boats? What about the Scottish-Palestinian, Dr. Hassan Nowarah, who had his leg broken five times by the Commandoes during custody precisely because he was already wearing a cast to support a badly sprained ankle? Is it because he is a Muslim and the BBC does not allow Muslims to be victims just as Irish Catholics weren’t allowed to be victims until recently?

    Why was the focus so narrow? If you wanted a panoramic understanding of what happened you should have waited until the investigations are over and interviewed more of us instead of dragging the reputation of the BBC flagship documentary through the blood and dirt in your haste to abet Israeli State Terrorism. What about those of us who were threatened with death for requesting to see our embassy staff and lawyers in Ben Gurion? I wanted to meet my legal arraignment to appear in court and defend myself from the spurious charges and was beaten up by 17 IDF members and threatened with death for doing so. This happened three and a half days after the attack on the flotilla and directly under a CCTV in the airport. Why didn’t we see that video on BBC? Because the IDF decide what “evidence” is released and the BBC is bending over backwards to give them credibility, and that is criminal.

    I know that both of you are used to being called in to film bags of US AID grain being dropped in one part of Muslim countries while any coverage of the White Phosphorus and Depleted Uranium raining down on another part is omitted. This perhaps explains your scepticism about the humanitarian purpose of our mission. I am fascinated that your IDF embedded reporter seems to have come up with the statement; “Two thirds of the Medical Aid was out of date and therefore useless” as an unprofessional addendum at the end of the programme. Really? Did she personally inspect the more than 10,000 tonnes of aid and feel qualified enough to make such a statement? Where is the evidence and what procedures were observed before such a lie was broadcast? Who is culpable? To whom should we make out the affidavit? Did she mention anything about the batteries taken out of the electric wheelchairs by the IDF because they were deemed to be “dual purpose”? How about the reports of IDF personnel urinating on the medical aid? No, it seems she added that statement because she wasn’t confident her report had sufficiently transferred the blame of the attack from the perpetrators to the victims. The BBC are also obviously ignorant of the legal proceedings that IHH is taking against the New York Times for defamation, because there again your programme repeated the lie that IHH is not the globally reputed humanitarian organisation that it is.

    This shotgun wedding between the IDF and the BBC is a short-sighted and ill-fated venture. People in Derry and politicians like Prime Minister Cameron have proved that politics can move on once we establish the facts. However, like FOX Television’s Tea party agenda since 2009, BBC proves that it cannot respect change by continuing its complicity in war crimes. Despite the Saville Report, the BBC has still not learned. It must be force of habit that sees media outlets like the BBC and FOX Television get into bed with xenophobes and war criminals even when it is clear that people will not suffer your unethical divisiveness any longer. This is not an official letter of complaint; however please expect many of those to follow through the appropriate channels.

    I just want to let you know that your programme has made me decide to write to the families of the Bloody Sunday massacre victims to see if they would support the idea of continuing the tradition of marching in January to commemorate those who were assassinated on the Mavi Marmara as well as the countless other murders in Palestine that the BBC continues to brush under the carpet. As the world embraces the culture of justice that has defined Derry over the past decades, and begins to make it its own, the world also sees how the BBC continues its own culture of vilifying the victims and supporting the assassins. This too must one day change.

    If you feel like answering my letter, please feel free but I already think your position regarding State terrorism is blatant enough already.

    Yours Sincerely,

    Mr. Fiachra Ó Luain

    B.A. 1st Class Honours

    2nd Mate, Challenger 1

  8. I made the mistake of the watching the Panorama programme and was appalled just how hideously biased it was, propaganda for the Israeli State. There was no political context about Gaza and the blockade. Also the way the activists on the flotilla were presented was appalling…. how are people expected to respond when they are confronted by armed IDF thugs? It is called self-defence…. But instead the reporting was geared towards sympathy for the IDF. Nothing about boarding the ship in international waters. And the way the story was presented where the activists on the flotilla were presented with having ulterior motives – not interested in getting aid to the Palestinians but really they are terrorists…. That made me so angry … Corbin’s “investigation” was propaganda and nothing more than a mouthpiece for the Israeli State.

    Well, what do you expect from the BBC? They wouldn’t show the DEC appeal for Gaza, the “reporting” at the time when the flotilla was attacked was utterly shockingly one-sided, biased with Mark Regev appearing every few minutes along with top brass from the IDF… With the usual line that the people on the flotilla were terrorists ….

    When the biggest terrorists are the Israeli State!

  9. Peace to all. I don’t care what anyone else thinks. Ken O’ Keefe you are a hero and the deceased from Israeli terrorists are martyrs.


  10. Trash.

    I can’t believe they used those bleedingly obvious and stereotypical audio forgeries (“go back to Auschwitz”, etc.). Anyone with critical thinking skills and a decent ear, and who did a little research, knew immediately that they were falsified recordings, which was revealed soon afterwards by several REAL journalists (Max Blumenthal, etc.). It’s obvious that was done for domestic consumption by Israelis (“see, they hate us…”), and yet the BBC repeats them here!

    They conveniently slipped in a refrain of “Allahu Akbar” chanting in video 1 @ 6:30. It is repeated as it fades into the distance, with reverb added, in order to give it a “menacing” flavor for the westerners.

    About the “martyrs”: The sad fact is that those resisting or showing solidarity have every reason to believe that they will be targeted or even killed, in light of Israel’s behavior in the past – so it is Israel who has created this. In a sense, it has given people a stark choice between being totally submissive, or suffering aggression. Those using the “martyr” argument as cheap propaganda (giving the activists a “jihadist” character for the westerners) are arguing this point totally backwards, insinuating that any activists coming up against Israel somehow have a death wish, so somehow they deserve what they get. This very insidious argument is made partly to absolve the IDF or Israeli police of their responsibilities in the murders they commit.

    1. A little late on the draw, but I sent a little letter too. For what it’s worth :

      Dear BBC,
      Your special on the Israeli flotilla raid recently contained some factual errors, and was the product of serious and flagrant bias.

      1. At around 9:10, there are the supposed racist comments (which I don’t need to repeat) coming through the radio at the IDF skipper – these have been shown to be disinformation, even tacitly admitted by the IDF. The very fact that no one seems to have verified this, save a very timid recognition that the laughable, manipulated recordings were “controversial”, speaks volumes of the level of investigative journalism practiced at the BBC (at least in this instance). The journalist commenting says : “The recording’s authenticity has provoked controversy”. Not so, it has rather been debunked :


      2. The fact that the IDF confiscated the material of the flotilla members is not even mentioned, nor is the fact that the “Cultures of Resistance” video – of which you make use – survived only because of the ingenuity of the activists on the Mavi Marmara, which would have been confiscated as well had the IDF known about it.

      3. 10:35 – “Martyrs”: The sad fact is that those resisting or showing solidarity have every reason to believe that they will be targeted or even killed, in light of Israel’s behavior in the past – so it is Israel who has created this. In a sense, it has given people a stark choice between being totally submissive, or suffering aggression. The man does not state here that he wished to sacrifice himself as a “shahid” – rather, it he were to die, that it would be for a good cause (in his view) – this is not criminal, as far as I am aware. The result, however, is to give the activists a “jihadist” character for the viewers, insinuating that any activists coming up against Israel somehow have a death wish, so somehow they deserve what they get. This very insidious argument is made partly to absolve the IDF or Israeli police of their responsibilities in the murders they committed in an unprovoked commando operation on civilians in international waters.

      Such omissions are not simply omissions, but indeed factual errors, as misrepresentations of events imply certain conclusions that are to be drawn by the viewing audience. The more common word for it is “propaganda”.

      Rob Gehrke

  11. I have only now watched this ‘documentary’ and am speechless at the amount of bias and downright lies and to be frank, dangerous reporting by Jane Corbin. This is not journalism – it is Israeli propaganda.
    Only IDF edited footage was shown – some of it already proven to be doublessly fake. No mention was made of the footage confiscated from hundreds of passengers – why was this not stated in the programme? Worst of all, the IHH is labelled a terrorist organisation – this is a dangerous and irresponsible accusation for the BBC to make..
    We are told that there is no humanitarian crisis in Gaza – did Jane Corbin visit the hospitals where people are dying for lack of medical equipment? Did she visit the thousands of families living in tents? Did she see the malnourished and anemic children or was she so intent on impressing Giora Eiland and getting her ‘documentary’ out there that all this by-passed her?
    Nothing was mentioned about the illegality of a night-raid on a ship in international waters. The passengers were shown to be ‘shahids’ and the real meaning of this word distorted. No mention was made of the passengers who bled to death because the commandos ignored their friends’ pleas for help for hours. No mention was made of the autopsy reports showing people were shot from helicopters through the top of the head. She did not ask why, or seem to find it curious, that the ship has been re-painted and has hundreds of bullet-holes. She ignored the fact that Israel had full personal details of ALL the passengers on the flotilla and photos taken months beforehand. This in spite of the IDF’s excuse for the deaths by saying their intelligence on the flotilla was poor.!
    Jane Corbin states finally at the end that Israel is co-operating with the UN inquiry. Far from it – they will not allow the commandos or their officers to be interviewed.
    I have watchd Panorama in the past but am so digusted at this programme that I think Jane Corbin should resign. She can no longer be seen as a credible reporter and I for one wouldn’t believe a word of anything she says from now on. Unbelievable and disgusting that this programme was aired.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s