Raffi Berg - the BBC's Mossad-loving war crimes whitewashing editor

[yankeedoodle]

Apparently, the BBC has a guy whose job it is to cover for Israel
If whistle blowers are to be believed, of course...
https://www.normalisland.co.uk/p/apparently-the-bbc-has-a-guy-whose

It has been reported that the BBC has an editor whose job it is to whitewash Israel's war crimes. You will be astonished to hear the accused editor is not me! His name is Raffi Berg and it's claimed he has full control over the BBC's coverage of Gaza. Remember when Gary Lineker was driven out of his job as a football presenter for not being neutral enough on Israel/Gaza? Thankfully, that standard doesn't seem to apply to pro-Israel news editors.

As someone who has written a book called Red Sea Spies praising Mossad, Raffi Berg is the most neutral Middle East editor the BBC could possibly have. Red Sea Spies was written with large amounts of input from Mossad and strangely, offered no real criticism of the Israeli spy agency. Excitingly, Mark Regev and an Israeli ambassador called Ohad Zemet attended the launch of the book because they loved it that much. Even better, Benjamin Netanyahu keeps a copy of the book on the shelf behind his desk. Berg even boasted about this on Twitter like any impartial news editor would.

Raffi Berg once worked for the US Foreign Broadcast Information Service which just happens to be run by the CIA. He has a proud history of writing IDF puff pieces and flattering articles about illegal Israeli settlers. He even attended a rally in support of Operation Cast Lead in 2009, a massacre of 1,400 Palestinians, so as you can see, he is an all-round good egg.

You would therefore think everyone at the BBC is as delighted with its editorial direction as I am, but surprisingly not. More than 100 employees have signed a letter accusing the BBC of failing to live up to its own editorial standards, but I'm proud to say that when the letter was offered to me, I drew a dick on it. I'm so mature, unlike those fuckers at Drop Site News who spoke to 13 BBC whistle blowers, but didn't speak to me.

If Drop Site News spoke to me, I would have explained why covering for Israel is a brilliant idea, which is exactly what I'm going to do now...

First of all, it's unfair to be attacking one man when another man on the BBC's Editorial Guidelines and Standards Committee was Robbie Gibb, someone so neutral, he was the owner of pro-Israel propaganda outlet The Jewish Chronicle. Clearly, Israeli propaganda is a team effort, just one in which the concerns of the team are ignored, as they apparently have been in complaint after complaint and meeting after meeting.

Every sensible person understands the job of the BBC is to water down criticism of Israel and make false equivalences so it looks like both sides are equally to blame for genocide. In case you didn't know, remaining neutral on genocide means not being too critical of the side that's committing genocide and suggesting the victims had it coming. This is how impartial journalism works.

International law clearly states that if someone is ruled to be plausibly committing genocide by the International Court of Justice, you have a legal obligation to cover for them, just in case the world's most powerful court got it wrong. If you mistakenly accuse Israel, you will make Zionists in New York feel sad, but if you cover for Israel, the worst that can happen is that loads of Palestinians die. Obviously, Zionist feelings are more important than Palestinian lives.

In one particularly impartial move, the BBC framed Amnesty International's declaration that Israel is committing genocide as "Israel rejects 'fabricated' claims of genocide." Just know the world's most prominent human rights organisation does not have as much credibility as the people who bomb hospitals and call their victims "human animals". However, to be balanced, the BBC ignored both the evidence presented by Amnesty and the confessions of Israeli politicians.

Sensibly, the BBC delayed publishing the Amnesty story for 12 hours to reduce its impact and didn't bother mentioning it on any of its flagship news shows. As a result of the suppression strategy, the story only reached a third of the people it would have been expected to reach. This shows just how important it is to suppress stories the establishment doesn't like.

Other brilliant strategies employed at the BBC include referring to ethnic cleansing as "evacuations", pretending that a teenage girl murdered by the IDF was standing near Hamas fighters, removing mention of Israelis chanting "death to Arabs" from the earlier version of an article, and not reporting that Israel was blocking aid into Gaza, even when this was admitted by the British foreign secretary. Yes, the BBC is even more pro-Israel than the politicians who are blackmailed by Mossad!

When one fact check by BBC Verify undermined the Israeli narrative about the IDF firing at aid trucks, that fact check was ignored in a BBC article written by Raffi Berg. His article didn't even mention that Israel kept contradicting itself or that human rights organisations had presented evidence that contradicted Israel's lies. What else was Berg supposed to do? Inform you?

Berg allegedly published a story which glossed over the fact the IDF set a combat dog onto a man with Down's syndrome, mauling him. Soldiers locked the injured man in a room for a week, ordering his family to leave. His family later returned to find his decomposed body, but the original story barely mentioned what took place, presumably because no one could think of a positive spin. Shockingly, the story was later updated to stop the woke mob complaining about the BBC's coverage of one of the worst murders in human history. I guess some people will whine about anything.

BBC News is the second most viewed website on the internet (after Normal Island News) and therefore needs to ensure it does not upset Israel, even if it means upsetting its own staff. It turns out even senior managers at the BBC are concerned the Gaza coverage is damaging the organisation's reputation, but we can't admit they're powerless to do anything because Israel is in charge of the relationship. We are not supposed to acknowledge this under any circumstances so please pretend I never said anything. Just know that Netanyahu could fire Sir Keir Starmer if he wanted to, never mind managers at the BBC x