BBC Refusal to air Gaza appeal in contrary with fundamental laws of civilisation
Astrid Essed | 30.01.2009 01:24 | Anti-militarism | Other Press | Palestine | Liverpool
With her refusal to air Gaza appeal, the BBC doesn't emphasize her ''impartiality'', but is guilty of violation to the most fundamental laws of civilisation
Dear Editor and Readers,
Undoubtedly you have learnt about the recent BBC refusal to air a TV spot about a Gaza aid appeal
See also
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2009/jan/26/gaza-israel-palestinians-bbc
Their main argument was referring to their ''impartiality'' in the conflict
Not only this argument makes no sense, since in that case, never an aid appeal for any civilian population in a war-zone should be aired, fundamentally the refusal is contrary with the universal laws of civilisation
Under P/S you'll see my reaction, which I have sent to the BBC
Kind greetings
Up to a free Palestine!!
Astrid Essed
Amsterdam
The Netherlands
P/S
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/2009/01/bbc_and_the_gaza_appeal.html
BBC
HALL OF SHAME
REFUSAL OF BROADCASTING IS NOT ''IMPARTIALITY'', BUT A DENIAL OF THE UNIVERSAL LAWS OF CIVILISATION
Dear Mr Thompson and the BBC Staff,,
According to my opinion, the BBC refusal to broadcast the DEC appeal for humanitarian help for Gaza, is a shameless denial of the universal humanitarian values, on which civilisation is based.
Access for help-organisations to Gaza
I can be short about your practical argument of no access to the suffering Gazan civilian population, which is invalid, since the access is the problem of all humanitarian help-organisations, the International Red Cross included
Therefore it is not to the BBC, but to the public for deciding whether to donate or not
''Impartiality''
However, the most important is your fundamental objection, that your impartiality is at stake
I quote your reaction
''The danger for the BBC is that this could be interpreted as taking a political stance on an ongoing story. ''
Your socalled ''political'' argument is invalid, since a political point of view is not at stake, but merely the humanitarian disaster of a civilian population
According to your line of thinking, no broadcasting could ever be done in any war-area, where the civilian population is victim, like Darfur, Congo etc
You know full well, that apart from ''taking sides'', the humanitarian disaster is caused by a kind of warfare, which violates International Humanitarian Law, demanding a strict distinction between combatants [military and fighters] and non-combatants [civilians]
This is applicable to ALL CONFLICTSPARTIES and not ''political'' at all
See International Humanitarian Law:
http://www.icrc.org/web/eng/siteeng0.nsf/htmlall/668BF8
In this case however, the Gazan civilian population has been subjected to Israeli indiscriminate atracks with phosphorusbombs, which led to 1300 dead and more than 5000 wounded
Thousands of people are homeless
See the Red Cross
http://www.icrc.org/web/eng/siteeng0.nsf/htmlall/weapons-interview-170109
http://www.icrc.org/web/eng/siteeng0.nsf/html/palestine-update-250109!OpenDocument
Hospitals have a lack of medicines by the continuing israeli blockade on Gaza
See the Red Cross:
http://www.icrc.org/web/eng/siteeng0.nsf/html/palestine-news-270109
Red Cross helpers were denied access to Gaza, ambulances were shoot at
As you have seen, my point of view is supported by the NEUTRAL International Red Cross
Mr Thompson, therefore a political point of view is not at stake here, nor the ''impartiality'' of the BBC, since it concerns the need of the civilian population, who always must be protected against the consequences of war, whether they are Palestinians or Israeli
So with your socalled ''impartiality'', you are closing your eyes for a civilian population in need, which means a support de facto, to the Israeli military attacks on Gaza
I hope you can live with that choice
Sincerely
Astrid Essed
Amsterdam
The Netherlands
Undoubtedly you have learnt about the recent BBC refusal to air a TV spot about a Gaza aid appeal
See also
![](/img/extlink.gif)
Their main argument was referring to their ''impartiality'' in the conflict
Not only this argument makes no sense, since in that case, never an aid appeal for any civilian population in a war-zone should be aired, fundamentally the refusal is contrary with the universal laws of civilisation
Under P/S you'll see my reaction, which I have sent to the BBC
Kind greetings
Up to a free Palestine!!
Astrid Essed
Amsterdam
The Netherlands
P/S
![](/img/extlink.gif)
BBC
HALL OF SHAME
REFUSAL OF BROADCASTING IS NOT ''IMPARTIALITY'', BUT A DENIAL OF THE UNIVERSAL LAWS OF CIVILISATION
Dear Mr Thompson and the BBC Staff,,
According to my opinion, the BBC refusal to broadcast the DEC appeal for humanitarian help for Gaza, is a shameless denial of the universal humanitarian values, on which civilisation is based.
Access for help-organisations to Gaza
I can be short about your practical argument of no access to the suffering Gazan civilian population, which is invalid, since the access is the problem of all humanitarian help-organisations, the International Red Cross included
Therefore it is not to the BBC, but to the public for deciding whether to donate or not
''Impartiality''
However, the most important is your fundamental objection, that your impartiality is at stake
I quote your reaction
''The danger for the BBC is that this could be interpreted as taking a political stance on an ongoing story. ''
Your socalled ''political'' argument is invalid, since a political point of view is not at stake, but merely the humanitarian disaster of a civilian population
According to your line of thinking, no broadcasting could ever be done in any war-area, where the civilian population is victim, like Darfur, Congo etc
You know full well, that apart from ''taking sides'', the humanitarian disaster is caused by a kind of warfare, which violates International Humanitarian Law, demanding a strict distinction between combatants [military and fighters] and non-combatants [civilians]
This is applicable to ALL CONFLICTSPARTIES and not ''political'' at all
See International Humanitarian Law:
![](/img/extlink.gif)
In this case however, the Gazan civilian population has been subjected to Israeli indiscriminate atracks with phosphorusbombs, which led to 1300 dead and more than 5000 wounded
Thousands of people are homeless
See the Red Cross
![](/img/extlink.gif)
![](/img/extlink.gif)
Hospitals have a lack of medicines by the continuing israeli blockade on Gaza
See the Red Cross:
![](/img/extlink.gif)
Red Cross helpers were denied access to Gaza, ambulances were shoot at
As you have seen, my point of view is supported by the NEUTRAL International Red Cross
Mr Thompson, therefore a political point of view is not at stake here, nor the ''impartiality'' of the BBC, since it concerns the need of the civilian population, who always must be protected against the consequences of war, whether they are Palestinians or Israeli
So with your socalled ''impartiality'', you are closing your eyes for a civilian population in need, which means a support de facto, to the Israeli military attacks on Gaza
I hope you can live with that choice
Sincerely
Astrid Essed
Amsterdam
The Netherlands
Astrid Essed
Comments
Display the following comment