BLOG OPINION : BBC bias belittles aggression and criminalises legitimacy

It's amazing and mind boggling the double standards of the UN and western media, not forgetting the Obama administration and EU. 

An Israeli soldier has been shot from across the Lebanon border, in a clear act of international violation, yet nobody has anything to say, not a whisper, or squeak from anyone. 

Now imagine if the shoe was on the other foot and an Israeli soldier had shot a Lebanese soldier from a cross the border? Imagine the condemnation from the Arab cartel from within the UN; the EU would be demanding boycotts and sanctions and the US under the direction of the appeaser in chief, Kerry, would be demanding all sorts of 'concessions' from Israel as compensation. 

But when it happens against Israel everyone are suddenly looking at the floor then. Suddenly, the fact that an international violation has occurred, seems not so bad.

Meanwhile the BBC are reporting the whole incident in their usual bias anti Israel fashion. In the BBCs view the whole focus was on the Israeli response and the fact that two Lebanese soldiers had been taken out of action after the original incident. 

The BBC headline read "Troops shot on Israel-Lebanon border" meaning Lebanese troops shot 'after' the fact that an innocent Israeli soldier was initially killed in an act of clear aggression. 

The fact that the Lebanese casualties were only wounded and not killed didn't really get much of a mention. One got the impression that the BBC was a little bit put out by this and they would have been much happier if the casualties had taken a head shot each with all the blood and splattered brain included, then they couldn't have had something even juicier to report and blacken Israel's name with.  

The BBC story then ran its usual biased course and during the write up it stated "There is no word on their condition and Lebanon has not yet commented....." Referring to the condition of the two Lebanese soldiers - how touching and caring of the BBC .

But when it came to the shooting of the Israeli soldier the BBC stated: "The shooting came after the 31-year-old Israeli soldier was 'fatally wounded' when his vehicle was hit by up to seven shots fired from Lebanon. 

Yes you heard right, "fatally wounded" - The BBC can't even bring itself to admit the Israeli soldier was killed, so they decided to gloss it over with a posh word to make it sound not so bad.

But when it comes to the Israeli response it's a clear case of Israeli aggression and that they "shot" two Lebanese soldiers. The whole layout is worded in a way that it sounds as if the Israelis were being somehow obstructive , aggressive and unreasonable. 

But look at this bit:

"An Israeli army spokeswoman said Israeli troops opened fire after noticing "suspicious movement".

You see how the BBC highlighted the "Suspicious movement" bit, hinting that somehow the Israeli suggestion could be somehow a lie, a false statement and an excuse to be 'aggressive'. 

The BBC is a public funded enterprise and instead of being fair, balanced to its readers and listeners it reports biasedly, unfairly and it clearly takes sides. 

This latest biased reporting of a clear act if aggression against Israel just proves that the public funding the BBC receives is funding a corporation if anti Semites and thus giving evil a platform to Israel's and the free worlds enemies to spread its tentacles into every household.