RSS
Why Is the BBC Giving Voice to Hamas and Palestinian Terrorists in Gaza?
The BBC logo is seen at the entrance at Broadcasting House, the BBC headquarters in central London. Photo by Vuk Valcic / SOPA Images/Sipa USA via Reuters Connect
While the world anxiously awaited the release of Israeli hostages last week following the Israel-Hamas ceasefire agreement, the BBC’s Jon Donnison had other priorities — giving Palestinian prisoners a platform to justify the unspeakable atrocities of October 7, 2023.
Donnison, a familiar face who previously proved to be something of a liability for the BBC’s coverage of Israel and Gaza, is back on the Middle East newsdesk — at least for now. Unsurprisingly, his first order of business was to head to Ramallah, where he began churning out sympathetic stories about the hostage-prisoner exchange.
In the lead-up to the exchange, Donnison ventured just a few kilometers from his presumed base in Ramallah to Beitunia. There, he tracked down a family member of a Palestinian prisoner — many of whom were jailed for violent offenses or membership in terrorist organizations — and published a piece featuring their joyful anticipation of the prisoners’ early release, titled, “Palestinians in West Bank wait anxiously for prisoners to be released.”
And last Monday, Donnison’s roving reporting around the West Bank was rewarded. He was able to file a glowing piece about Bushra al-Tawil, a Hamas-linked “journalist” whose father, Sheikh Jamal al-Tawil, is not merely a “Hamas politician” (as Donnison euphemistically labels him) but a senior figure in the terrorist organization.
The headline of Donnison’s piece, “‘The hostages meant I got out’: Freed Palestinian prisoner welcomes Gaza deal,” is as revealing as it is appalling.
This was an example of the publicly funded BBC handing a platform to a woman with well-documented ties to Hamas, a UK-proscribed terrorist organization, to justify the kidnapping of innocent civilians on the grounds that it gave Hamas the leverage to secure the early release of Palestinians convicted of violent offenses.
Did @BBCNews just give a Hamas-linked “journalist” the stage to justify the Oct. 7 Hamas attacks?
Yes, they did. This appalling excuse for journalism should make the BBC ashamed.
pic.twitter.com/OrY6KB4WXQ
— HonestReporting (@HonestReporting) January 22, 2025
The article generously indulges in the kind of sensational claims that Donnison appears to thrive on, with al-Tawil alleging she was frequently “badly beaten,” burned with cigarettes, stripped naked, and denied her headscarf.
To his credit, Donnison did manage to muster one tough question amid his otherwise soft-focus portrayal of al-Tawil: Does she support Hamas? Her refusal to answer was seemingly not followed up, and then it was straight back to giving her a publicly-funded platform to rationalize Hamas’ atrocities. After all, why shouldn’t British taxpayers be invited to look fondly on the release back into society of the likes of notorious mass murderer Zakaria Zubeidi? Or, as she put it, allowed to “go back home.” Truly heartwarming.
On Bushra al-Tawil’s father, Jamal al-Tawil, Donnison opts for a remarkably sanitized description, labeling him a “prominent Hamas politician.” It’s a curiously neutral way to describe a man who has publicly declared that Palestine “from the river to the sea” is “united under the banner of the resistance and the Intifada.”
In a 2021 speech honoring “martyrs,” broadcast on Palestine TV, Jamal al-Tawil proclaimed that Palestinians and their “martyrs” had “redrawn the map of Palestine,” with their blood blending together to achieve this goal. Hardly the kind of oration of a mere “politician.”
Donnison’s decision to frame al-Tawil this way is especially puzzling given that the UK — where the BBC is based — makes no distinction between Hamas’ so-called political and military wings. The entire organization is designated as a terrorist group.
We should hardly be surprised by Donnison’s reporting. After all, this is a journalist who, just weeks into the Israel-Hamas war, was widely criticized for suggesting the explosion at the Al-Ahli Hospital in Gaza must have been caused by an Israeli airstrike. That claim, which conveniently aligned with Hamas’ narrative, was proven false by US intelligence and video evidence, which showed the explosion was the result of a misfired Islamic Jihad rocket.
The BBC quietly reassigned Donnison away from the region shortly thereafter, placing him back in London. But, as is tradition at the BBC — where no editorial “mistake” involving Israel ever seems to carry meaningful career consequences — Donnison is back. And judging by his latest output, he’s already hard at work doing fresh damage to the corporation’s reputation.
But then again, why should the BBC care? This is the same organization whose coverage of the Israel-Hamas war was found to have breached its own editorial guidelines at least 1,500 times in an independent review. If Donnison wants to spend his time padding out his contacts book with every Hamas sympathizer and jihadi from Tulkarm to Timbuktu, who at the BBC is going to stop him?
Israel’s hot war with Hamas may have paused for now, but it appears the BBC has no plans to slow its relentless campaign against the Jewish state.
The author is a contributor to HonestReporting, a Jerusalem-based media watchdog with a focus on antisemitism and anti-Israel bias — where a version of this article first appeared.
The post Why Is the BBC Giving Voice to Hamas and Palestinian Terrorists in Gaza? first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
‘We Didn’t Provide Aid to Nazi Germany’: US Sen. Tom Cotton Defends Israel’s Decision to Block Aid Into Gaza
US Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AK) speaks during a Senate Intelligence Committee hearing on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC, March 11, 2024. Photo: REUTERS/Julia Nikhinson
US Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AK) defended Israel’s decision to pause aid deliveries into the Hamas-run Gaza Strip, pointing out that the United States did not provide humanitarian assistance to Nazi Germany during World War II.
“We didn’t provide aid to Nazi Germany during World War II. The idea is preposterous. Why should Israel be forced to provide aid to Hamas-run Gaza?” Cotton posted on X/Twitter on Sunday night.
The White House also expressed support for Israel’s decision.
“Israel has negotiated in good faith since the beginning of this administration to ensure the release of hostages held captive by Hamas terrorists,” National Security Council spokesperson Brian Hughes said in a statement. “We will support their decision on next steps given Hamas had indicated it’s no longer interested in a negotiated ceasefire.”
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu announced earlier in the day that Israel would block humanitarian aid transfers into Gaza.
Netanyahu’s announcement came after his government presented the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas with a proposal for a six-week extension of the ongoing Gaza ceasefire and hostage-release deal. The proposal would mandate that Hamas release half of the remaining Israeli hostages who were kidnapped into Gaza at the beginning of the extension. The rest of the hostages would be released at the end, if Hamas and Israel can agree on a permanent ceasefire deal. Israel would retain the right to restart the war in Gaza if negotiations are unsuccessful by the 42-day mark.
According to Jerusalem, the ceasefire extension proposal was the brainchild of US President Donald Trump’s Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff.
Hamas has refused to extend the first phase of the ceasefire deal, claiming that the Jewish state has violated the terms of the original agreement.
The Netanyahu government reportedly believes that pausing aid transfers into Gaza will pressure Hamas into accepting the ceasefire extension. Hamas, which started the Gaza war when it killed 1,200 people and abducted 251 hostages during its Oct. 7, 2023, invasion of southern Israel, dismissed Israel’s decision on Sunday as “cheap blackmail.”
“Unfortunately, Hamas rejected the proposal. As the first phase of the framework has ended, we have halted the entry of trucks into Gaza,” Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Sa’ar said in a statement.
Israel’s decision to block aid deliveries into Gaza was met with widespread backlash, with some observers accusing Jerusalem of committing “genocidal acts” and violating “international law.”
However, others have pointed out that over the past few months, Gaza has experienced a surge of humanitarian aid.
“In the last six weeks, Israel has flooded Hamas Gaza with 25,000 trucks of aid,” noted former Israeli government spokesman Eylon Levy. “The enemy territory whose government is committed to permanent jihad against Israel is amply stocked for months.”
Cotton, the chairman of the US Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, has staunchly defended Israel’s defensive military operations in Gaza. In October 2024, Cotton wrote a letter to then-US President Joe Biden, condemning his administration for threatening an “arms embargo” against Israel.
In December 2024, Cotton introduced legislation to mandate the US federal government refer to the West Bank as “Judea and Samaria” — terminology preferred by Israel. Cotton has also lambasted the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNWRA) for allegedly diverting funds intended for humanitarian aid into the hands of the Hamas terrorist group.
The post ‘We Didn’t Provide Aid to Nazi Germany’: US Sen. Tom Cotton Defends Israel’s Decision to Block Aid Into Gaza first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Israel Cut Off Aid to Gaza After Hamas Rejected Ceasefire Deal — And That’s Completely Legal
Trucks carrying aid move, amid a ceasefire between Israel and Hamas, in Rafah in the southern Gaza Strip, Feb. 13, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Hussam Al-Masri
In what may be perhaps the most significant single strategic move since the start of the war in Gaza, the Israeli Prime Minister’s Office announced this weekend that, “the entry of all goods and supplies into the Gaza Strip will be halted.”
Contrary to claims of “war crimes” and “starving civilians,” this new approach to Gaza is not only completely consistent with international law — but is likely to save civilian lives on all sides and bring the war to a close far more quickly than any other approach.
The massacre of October 7, 2023, saw the largest murder of Jews since the Holocaust. The internationally-designated Hamas terror organization, along with Palestinian civilians and UN staff, invaded Israel, killed over 1,200, took 251 hostage, committed mass torture and mass rape, and brought about 16 months of war.
As I wrote the other day, Israel and Hamas completed “Phase 1” of a three stage ceasefire agreement, which resulted in the release of some of the Israeli hostages. However, the parties have so far failed to negotiate the terms of “Phase 2.” US Special Envoy to the Middle East, Steve Witkoff, presented a framework for continuing negotiations, which Israel accepted but Hamas rejected.
In response, Israel made this weekend’s announcement, and closed Gaza to aid deliveries.
Israel maintains a legal weapons blockade on Gaza, which is governed by the Geneva Conventions, The Hague Conventions, and the San Remo Convention. Under these agreements, a legal blockade is permitted as a defense against armed attack. Israel’s blockade of Gaza, which began in 2007, fits this requirement, as it is a response to Hamas’s ongoing rocket barrages on Israeli civilians.
Under these same international rules, the blockading party may not intentionally starve civilians as a tool of warfare. This effectively means that the blockading power is required to transfer humanitarian aid into the blockaded area — a requirement that Israel has fulfilled at a massive scale.
However, the aid that enters into Gaza is typically not transferred to civilians. To the contrary, Hamas, habitually steals international aid, as well as torturing and killing civilians who attempt to take the aid for themselves.
This reality has been confirmed by multiple international sources including the United Nations, and has been caught on camera numerous times.
Hamas uses stolen aid supplies to fuel its rockets, equip its troops, and sells some of what’s left to civilians as a way of raising funds for its war effort. Indeed, many of the resources Hamas used on October 7, and in the months since, were taken from aid supplies, including the tunnels where Israeli hostages are currently held, which were built with cement funded by America’s USAID agency.
In effect, Israel has been fighting a war of survival while also funding both sides: a strategy doomed to fail. This kind of national suicide is absolutely not required by international law.
To the contrary, Article 23 of Geneva Convention IV specifically states that a power is not required to allow the passage of humanitarian aid unless it is satisfied that the aid will not be diverted to enemy combatants. Therefore, not only is Israel not required to transfer aid under the present circumstances, but pressuring Israel to do so is, in itself, a war crime.
International law is structured this way for good reason: funding both sides of a conflict only serves to prolong hostilities and thus increase completely avoidable harm to civilian populations on all sides.
In this case, aid to Gaza ends up almost exclusively in the hands of an internationally -designated terror organization that is also an enemy combatant. The international community has had 18 years since the beginning of the blockade in 2007, and 16 months since the October 7 massacre, to find a solution to this particular war crime, yet has both failed and refused to do so. The consequence has been to prolong the current war, the captivity of the Israeli hostages, and also war’s deleterious impact on the lives of both Israeli and Palestinian civilians.
For the moment, this war crime of compelling Israel to provide aid to enemy combatants, in violation of Article 23 of Geneva Convention IV, has come to an end. This can only result in a quicker defeat of Hamas, and a quicker end to the current war. Such a result will, in turn, provide immeasurable benefits to Israelis, to Palestinians, and to the entire world at large.
Daniel Pomerantz is the CEO of RealityCheck, an organization dedicated to deepening public conversation through robust research studies and public speaking.
The post Israel Cut Off Aid to Gaza After Hamas Rejected Ceasefire Deal — And That’s Completely Legal first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Pro-Palestinian Activists Blame Bibas Children for Their Own Murders
Kfir Bibas. Photo: Hostages and Missing Families Forum.
The confirmation of the murders of the red-haired Bibas boys was a gut punch for Israelis. For some pro-Palestinian activists, it was an opportunity to blame the victims.
Last Tuesday, the South African-based Gift of the Givers, the self-described “largest disaster response, non-governmental organisation (NGO) of African origin on the African continent,” decided to share a short video justifying the kidnapping of Shiri, Ariel, and Kfir and blaming Israel for their deaths.
It was bizarre for a supposed human rights organization to share this pro-Hamas propaganda. Some of this mystery can be explained by Gift of the Givers’ alleged membership in a Hamas funding network. The United States sanctioned the charity umbrella group Union of Good in 2008 for funding Hamas. The union’s website in the early 2000s listed Gift of the Givers as a South African-based member.
The South African government’s anti-Israel hostility may also help explain why Gift of the Givers felt comfortable sharing the victim-blaming material. The South African government has been one of Israel’s most vocal critics and a key player in Hamas’ strategy of using Palestinian suffering to isolate the Jewish State.
Six weeks after Hamas’ October 7 atrocities, South Africa’s leader had already accused Israel of war crimes “tantamount to genocide.” A month later, the government in Pretoria initiated an International Court of Justice (ICJ) case based on this false accusation. Pretoria’s Hamas cheerleading has caused friction with Washington, with Trump citing the ICJ case as part of his decision to cut aid to South Africa this February. South African President Cyril Ramaphosa is trying to reset relations with the United States, but hasn’t declared his intention to reset his approach to Palestinian terrorism.
The clip that Gift of the Givers shared began with a gunpoint recording of a ragged Yarden Bibas, Ariel and Kfir’s father, in Hamas captivity, blaming Israel’s prime minister for the death of his wife and children.
The seemingly coerced condemnation was intended to prove Israel’s guilt — and Hamas’ innocence.
The video then justified Shiri’s abduction by claiming that Palestinian terrorists “arrested” the “soldier,” and that she worked for the army and had been a member of Israel’s intelligence services. A Gazan fighter in the video even attempted to portray the kidnapping of children as a humanitarian gesture, saying, “upon her arrest, we allowed her to take her children out of mercy for them.” If those terrorists had an ounce of mercy, they would not have kidnapped babies into Gaza.
The video also repeatedly claimed that the “Nazi Israeli army” killed the Bibas family in one of its “indiscriminate airstrikes.” That fact was completely disproved by the Israeli government in forensics evidence it shared around the world, but no one seemed to care.
The attempt to draw comparisons between Israel and the Nazis is both an inversion of reality and employs the antisemitic tactic of delegitimizing Israel by claiming that the victims of Nazism have now become its perpetrators. Much like the erroneous charge of genocide, this absurd accusation erodes an important definition related to human rights.
Gift of the Givers has had other antisemitism controversies of late, with leaders declaring, “Zionists … run the world with fear. They control the world with money.”
October 7 was a “mask off” moment for many, including Gift of the Givers. The humanitarian organization and its leaders have been increasingly bold in their support of antisemitism and pro-Hamas propaganda. And why shouldn’t they, when their government serves as Hamas’ lawyer at the ICJ and accuses Israel — the victim of genocidal acts — of being the perpetrator?
David May is a research manager and senior research analyst at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD), a Washington, DC-based, nonpartisan research institute focusing on national security and foreign policy. Follow David on X @DavidSamuelMay. Follow FDD on X @FDD.
The post Pro-Palestinian Activists Blame Bibas Children for Their Own Murders first appeared on Algemeiner.com.