BBC “Balancing” Refugee Claims
September 27, 2012 13:13 by GuestPostThis guest post was written exclusively for HonestReporting by Lyn Julius, the co-founder of Harif, a UK group representing Jews from the Middle East and North Africa.
There is good news and bad news from the BBC : on the one hand, they have actually reported (click on the player below to listen) on the campaign for Jewish refugee rights being driven by Israeli Deputy Foreign minister Danny Ayalon.
On the other hand, it is a pity that the BBC has waited until the Ayalon initiative before even mentioning Jewish refugees. Do a search for “Palestinian refugees” on the influential BBC website and you get 1,197 results. Do a search for “Jewish refugees” and you get only 187 results, and almost all concern Holocaust survivors.
Click here to listen
This BBC Radio 4 report takes great pains to ‘balance’ the accounts of two Jewish refugees with those of two Palestinian refugees. But slightly more time is devoted to the latter, and the reporter does not attempt to question any of the assertions made by the Arab side. By contrast, the implication is that the Israeli side has suddenly come up with this issue – a new excuse to avoid peace talks.
The Jewish refugees are now ‘ordinary citizens’ of Israel, but it never occurs to the reporter to ask why two refugees in a camp outside Ramallah, under Palestinian control, are still refugees. Why has the Jewish refugee question been solved while the Palestinian question has not?
The reporter also states that 850,000 Jews were refugees, an equal number to those on the Palestinian side. In fact there were more Jewish refugees than Palestinians. Those Jews who resettled in Israel constituted a rough exchange of populations with the Palestinians of around 650,000.
Still, I suppose we should be grateful that the BBC is beginning to discuss the Jewish refugee issue at all.
Image: CC BY-SA HonestReporting.com, ChadTrutt.com
EthanP
5:29 pm
Sep 27, 2012
Moral equivelency is the cowardice of our day. We see it every day. It means never having to make a choice. I’ve seen people equate a military strike on terrorists with a suicide bombing of a school bus. It should never be allowed to stand unanswered.
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
29 
1
martin
6:05 pm
Sep 27, 2012
There is a very good blog called HARIF, which represents the arguement for the Jewish refugees from Arab/Islamic lands. I always bring this up when I write to the newpapers here. in the UK.
In actual fact there is no truthful account for the Arab “refugees”, as any Arab can and do enter the Red Cross,, Oxfam etc and claim to be a refugee with no questions asked. Thereal estimate is about 350,000, this is a lot less than the 850-900,000 Jews made to leave their ancient ancestral homes in north Africa and the middle east. The comparison is ridiculous as the arabs only moved a few miles away. A little more or less than thosewho moved to London from the north to find work
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
19 
0
Stephen
7:36 pm
Sep 27, 2012
I had read years ago an article showing that the number of Jews forced out of what is now called the West Bank and Gaza numbered 320,000, and the Arabs who left Israel at 370,000. By 1950 the number of Arabs had increased to 450,00, then 500,000, then 600,000, 700,000… Now I have heard some of the PA claim over 1,000,000 left Israel – a number equal or greater than the entire population of the area in 1947.
Other articles, which included Jews from the WB and Gaza, the total number of Jewish refugees from 1947 to 1959 was about 970,000. Then there were the Jews escaping in the 1960s and 1970s, adding to the total yet not included.
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
10 
0
EthanP
8:40 pm
Sep 27, 2012
What has often been forgotten, that in days when few had identity papers in the Middle East, and poverty was rampant, many Egyptians, Syrians, etc, entered the camps for food, shelter and medical care. They then couldn’t get ot because the refugees became a political weapon. The host nations still keep them locked up. I’ve read that between 1/3 to 1/2 of the “current” Palestinian “refugees” are decended from them. (They also have one of the highest birthrates in the world.
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
15 
0
Annat
6:09 pm
Sep 27, 2012
Reminds me of the time I submitted a proposal to Channel 4′s “3 minute Wonder” slot. It was during the time of the blitz on Southern Israel in 2008. As a documentary filmmaker I wanted to document the plight, the experience, of Israelis living under a constant barage of rockets and mortar fire launched from Gaza. When the project was rejected by Kate Vogel’ the programme’s commissioning editor, I asked her for some feedback. She indeed told me why the project was rejected: It wasn’t balanced, she said. Balanced with what? I asked. There should also be a sagment on Gaza…. I wanted to retort (but didn’t) on whether she fancied me interviweung the rocket launching Hamasniks, etc…
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
32 
0
Michael Perloff
9:14 pm
Sep 27, 2012
A few years ago I had several professional actuaries work up an estimate of how many Arab refugees from the 1948 Israel war of independence should be alive today. Since they could not find demographic and living standard data for that specific Middle East population they made the assumption that the Arabs of 1948 Palestine had the same health standards as US citizens of that same period. Because of standard of living and infrastructure differences, It’s reasonable that the actual data would result in a much shorter lifespans for the Arabs than for Americans alive in 1948. According to the professional actuarial studies, 75 to 100 thousand Palestinian refugees should be alive today.
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
5 
0
EthanP
9:25 pm
Sep 27, 2012
Of course the real problem is that the Palestinians are the only refugees whose decendents are considered refugees, forever. Another anti-Zionist weapon. And of course the corrupt UN functionaries keep up the fiction so they can continue to collect those fat paychecks>
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
16 
0
josephBaruhovic
10:41 pm
Sep 27, 2012
Mr Ayalon rise the question of jewish refugees corectly. but why so late. why not 20 years earlye .
Regards Joseph
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
14 
0
Independent
10:39 am
Sep 28, 2012
Surely those who left the Holy Land because they were ordered to do so by the Arab authorities are not refugees in the sense that the Jews forcibly ejected from Arab lands are?
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
5 
1
Independent
3:48 pm
Sep 29, 2012
I said nothing about anyone being forcibly ejected by Jews, , please read what I said Martin. I was contrasting the Arabs who at the request of the Arab High Command and in order to avoid a war zone fled the Holy Land in 1948 with those who were forcibly ejected from Arab States. While sympahising with your case I suggest you exercise more care in reading comments upon it.
Agree or Disagree:
1 
0
martin
11:30 am
Sep 28, 2012
Forcibly ejected by Jews is revisionist history, Independent. You have a choice to be your names sake and keep to the truth, or you can act as the same namesake of the leftwing paper ,
The reasosn why it took so long.
Mizrakhi Jews felt their condition was not as bad as that for Euro survivors of the Shoah.
Very few Mizrakhi Jews within the elite establishment.
Israeli hasbara has beeen virtually worthless, depending only upon the truth for its arguements
The stablishment looked favourably upon Euro Holocaust Jewish (understandably) survivors and felt the Mizrkhi could get along with what they had (not understandable). The oriental Jews were looked down upon by the salonim in Tel Aviv.
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
5 
0
EthanP
5:33 pm
Sep 28, 2012
Martin; I don’t question what you say. However I would point out that few of the Jews expelled from Arab nations were killed or injured. And considering the current attitude on the Shoah, denial, why don’t you get over it, it happened so long ago, I doubt anyone is that interested in “Jewish” refugees. Who ever has, but other Jews.
Agree or Disagree:
0 
2
Brent Pudsey
1:56 pm
Sep 28, 2012
It is good that this issue has finally come to light. Jews were refugees and this is an historic fact. It is too bad that this gets so little recognition and that Israel is always treated as the aggressor.
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
5 
0
martin
3:19 pm
Sep 29, 2012
Ethan, what do you ean, too long ago? Therefore, the Fakestinian issue is too long ago ,as well. What about the Jews expelled from Algeria in 1952, which is later than 1948.
I do agree that this business of refugees is ridiculous, when one considers the 100s of millions of refugees (real ones, unlike the Arab) after the second world war. Every nation had refugees, every victorious nation kept it’s new advantageous borders. All this, but only Israel is singled out. You are correct, only some Jews are concerned about Jewish refugees and dead.
How about Jews having to leave the mellakh where they were classed as Dhimmis, 2nd class people whose lives were cheap where they were massacred?
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
5 
0
EthanP
6:38 pm
Sep 29, 2012
Martin; I was being tongue in cheek. The anti-semites/Zionists, including many “Jews” feel we should stop pleading the Holocaust. They say get over it. It was so long ago. I’m not even going to talk about the denyers. Just remember, if you think 1933-1945 was too long ago, the Arab Muslims still seek vengeance for the Crusades. And they won! And if you read what they say amongst themselves, they want every square inch of what was once Muslim land. Spain, the Balkins, the Black Sea nations, and Israel. They do not see things with out short western perspective. The remember every percieved loss, slight, or wrong and want vengeance. And in mosques around the world, Imams are preaching Jihad.
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
5 
0
iris claire blutreich
7:09 pm
Sep 29, 2012
Why is the BBC featured on NPR? WE WON OUR INDEPENDENCE FROM BRITAIN IN 1776. We are tottering on bankruptcy and I don’t see why our hard earned dollars are being squandered on British slander/propaganda dressed up to look like news. I for one don’t think we should have an American Pravda.NPR- State supported news organizations are the business of criminal dictatorships.
Agree or Disagree:
1 
0
EthanP
7:17 pm
Sep 29, 2012
Iris; At least some PBS TV used to have Sky News, a Murdock company. That’s also been replaced with BBC. And while this reflects the more liberal slant of PBS/NPR stations, chances are that BBC has extensive if slanted international news. These days you could be forgiven if you wondered if American news, including CNN, even have international news.
Agree or Disagree:
2 
0
martin
11:19 pm
Oct 01, 2012
Ethan, pleased to understand your humour. I have agreed to your statement, this is an arguement that I continue to use continually. What is happening today in europe, and other countries is just past of the Islamic conquest. you are absolutely correct about “lost” lands being required to submit to Islam again.
These are very dangerous times and unfortunately, the 1st man in the White House is definitely the wrong man in the wrong position ast the wrong time. I’m unsure about Romney, but the western world needs a western thinker unafraid of speaking truthfully to the islamic world without fear.
Agree or Disagree:
2 
0