Guardian’s anti-Zionist propagandist, Chris McGreal, responds to CiF Watch.


After consistently demonstrating the journalistic malice of Guardian reporter Chris McGreal, we were finally able to draw him out.

Our latest post about McGreal – a reporter singled out by the Community Security Trust in their 2011 report on antisemitic discourse – was titled ‘The Guardian’s lethal narrative about snipers who murder innocent children‘, and focused on two reports conjuring the image of IDF soldiers deliberately murdering innocent and defenseless Palestinian children.

We pointed to two stories by McGreal, in 2005 and 2012, which advanced this narrative, with the former being much more explicit.  Here are the relevant passages from the 2005 story, ‘Snipers with Children in their sites‘:

“It was the shooting of Asma Mughayar that swept away any lingering doubts I had about how it is the Israeli army kills so many Palestinian children and civilians.

Asma, 16, and her younger brother, Ahmad, were collecting laundry from the roof of their home in the south of the Gaza Strip in May last year when they were felled by an Israeli army sniper. Neither child was armed or threatening the soldier, who fired unseen through a hole punched in the wall of a neighbouring block of flats.

the army changed its account and claimed the pair were killed by a Palestinian, though there was persuasive evidence pointing to the Israeli sniper’s nest.

In southern Gaza, the killings take place in a climate that amounts to a form of terror against the population. Random fire into Rafah and Khan Yunis has claimed hundreds of lives, including five children shot as they sat at their school desks.Many others have died when the snipers must have known who was in their sights – children playing football, sitting outside home, walking back from school.”

We noted both the paucity of evidence in McGreal’s reports and the irresponsibility of advancing such a lethal narrative, that the Jewish state engages in the wanton murder of children, which his reports serve to reinforce – tales of Zionist savagery which, most recently, fueled the murderous rampage, at a Jewish school in Toulouse, of French Jihadist Mohammed Merah.

Yesterday, McGreal responded to our latest post in the comment section, thus.

mcgreal

McGreal links to his July 28, 2003 report, titled in a manner which speaks volumes about how the Guardian reporter views Israelis:

headline

The quote, by the father of one of the Palestinian victims named in McGreal’s report which most clearly illustrates the tone of the piece is this one:

“Almost every day here the Israelis shoot at random, so when you hear it you get inside as quickly as possible.”

That isn’t just a quote.

It’s a perfect example of the ideologically inspired anti-Zionist narrative which McGreal, and his Guardian colleagues, continue attempting to advance.

Here are a few of his examples, in the 2003 Guardian story, which McGreal uses to attempt to demonstrate that IDF snipers murder Palestinian kids.

1. Huda Darwish.

McGreal wrote:

“Weeks passed and another Israeli bullet shattered the life of another young Palestinian girl. Huda Darwish was sitting at her school desk when a cluster of shots ripped through the top of a tree outside her classroom and buried themselves in the wall. But one ricocheted off the window frame, smashed through the glass and lodged in the 12-year-old girl’s brain.”

First, not even the Palestinian Centre for Human Rights - a radical, pro-terror organization – has suggested that Darwish was deliberately shot.

PCHR writes the following:

“Also in March 2004, Huda Darwish, 13, a student in a UNRWA preparatory school, was wounded by a live bullet in the head and lost her eyesight.”

Further, a BBC report by Alan Johnston in 2004, about Palestinian casualties in Gaza, noted that “The shooting [in which Darwish was shot] began when Palestinian militants who oppose the Israeli occupation of Gaza launched a series of missiles at a nearby Jewish settlement”.

For some reason, Chris McGreal decided not to include that bit of information – due, it would seem, to the fact that such context would necessarily undermine his overall narrative of Israeli snipers deliberately murdering Palestinian children.

2. Khalil al-Mughrabi

McGreal wrote:

“The case of Khalil al-Mughrabi is telling. The 11-year-old was shot dead in Rafah by the Israeli army two years ago as he played football with a group of friends near the security fence.”

While McGreal notes a report on the incident by the NGO, B’tselem, he fails to report that, while the facts of the case are highly in dispute, nobody was refuting that the incident occurred in the midst of an IDF response to violent Palestinian rioting, which included the use of grenades against Israeli soldiers.

Again, why else would McGreal decide not to include such relevant context other than the fact that it would have undermined his preconceived conclusions that Israelis deliberately murder Palestinian children?

3. Mahmoud Kabaha

McGreal wrote:

“And children continue to die, even after the ceasefire declared by Hamas and other groups at the end of June. On Friday, a soldier at a West Bank checkpoint shot dead a four-year-old boy, Ghassan Kabaha, and wounded his two young sisters after “accidentally” letting loose at a car with a burst of machine-gun fire from his armoured vehicle.”

Regarding the death of the four-year old boy named Mahmoud Kabaha  (who he incorrectly identifies as Ghassan Kabaha, the name of the town’s mayor), this was indeed a case of extreme negligence, but certainly not intent or policy.  The IDF not only immediately expressed regret over the incident, but investigated, court-marshaled and convicted the soldier.

Indeed, evidence that the shooting was the result of misconduct on behalf of one soldier, and not IDF policy, can be concluded by a New York Times report that the other soldiers in the unit, “beat the one who fired the machine gun because they were so angry at him.”

Again, such vital context can’t be part of McGreal’s reports, as such context would undermine his claim that Israelis deliberately murder Palestinian children.

4. Yousef Abu Jaza[r]

“Among the latest victims of apparently indiscriminate shooting were three teenagers and an eight-year-old, Yousef Abu Jazar, hit in the knee when soldiers shot at a group of children playing football in Khan Yunis.”

McGreal seems to be relying on nothing more than a short dispatch from PCHR on July 3, 2003 which reads like it’s out of a Hamas propaganda communique:

“At approximately 17:00, Israeli soldiers in a military location known as “al-Nouria,” located between “Gani Tal” and “Neve Dekalim” settlement, west of Khan Yunis, opened fire at a number of Palestinian children who were playing football in a nearby yard. Two Palestinian civilians, including a child [Yousef Faraj Mohammed Abu Jazar, 8] were wounded.”

You’d think that an incident in which Israeli forces literally opened fire on children playing football in Gaza would have been widely reported.  Yet, beyond the PCHR, there appears to be no mention of the purported attack.

5. Haneen Abu Sitta

McGreal writes:

“Haneen Abu Sitta, 12, was killed while walking home after school near the fence with a Jewish settlement in southern Gaza.”

Other than McGreal’s report, the only evidence seems to consist of a claim made by the PA observer at the UN in 2003.

Here’s the text from the PA observer testimony at the UN which preceded naming those who had purportedly recently been killed by the IDF.

“The Israeli occupation authorities persist in their daily aggressions, attacks, humiliation, war crimes, State-sponsored terrorism and systematic human rights violations against the Palestinian people. They continue to use more excessive and indiscriminate force, causing more deaths, wounds and humiliation to tens of families on a daily basis. Every single day, tens of Palestinian families mourn their beloved who have perished under Israeli fire just because they happened to be inside their homes when Israeli forces start shelling, for no reason, peaceful homes, or just because they went out to go to their work or school, or to buy basic means of subsistence for their children. Nobody is spared by Israeli fire, be they elderly, women, children, or even newborn babies.”

Could McGreal’s credulousness in the face of such propaganda be such that, as a reporter, he truly believes that such risible charges genuinely reflect reality?

In short, McGreal pieced together a few unrelated incidents of Palestinians killed or injured during a myriad of different circumstances over several years, omitted any evidence contradicting his desired narrative, and completely erased the context of Palestinian terrorism to impute unimaginable malevolence to Israeli soldiers.

As we wrote in our earlier post, what Chris McGreal engages in is not journalism.

McGreal is an ideologue drawn to extreme left agitprop who trades in crude anti-Zionist propaganda.

Related articles

61 comments on “Guardian’s anti-Zionist propagandist, Chris McGreal, responds to CiF Watch.

  1. Chris McGreal knows that Adam Levick exists!!!!

    I can only imagine Adan’s excitement and pride when he discovered that a genuine journalist working for a genuine TV channel knew his name. Does not happen every year.

      • Itsik, you’re wasting your time.
        “Hadara” — aka, “Nat”, is trolling, per his instructions.
        I only wonder though, why he, and his various reincarnations have not been permanently ousted from here.
        P.S.
        And this is aimed at “Nat”: “Hadara” is not an actual Hebrew name.
        Whoops, rookie, trolling mistake on your part; tut-tut.

        • So, “hadara-nat” should be punished for being such an incompentent troll. Let’s engage the Mossad.

          • Mossad agents are busy defending the country from hostile foreign nations and saving lives abroad, SerJew. They do not have time to monitor far right wing activists inside Israel – that would be the Shabak’s job.

    • The words “Guardian” and “journalist” go together like “politician” and “honesty” And the Al-Guardian being a failing low grade newspaper only employes failing low grade journalists

      • And the Al-Guardian being a failing low grade newspaper

        It used to be a newspaper. Now it is simply a propaganda platform for the loony LEFT. If it reported that it was raining outside I would never believe it unless I had gone outside to have a look. Such are the depths to which it has sunk.

        • There is a clear majority among the Israeli public that supports a Palestinian state existing side by side with a Jewish one. Shimon Peres said that there was no alternative to a two-state solution – the idea of a binational state endangers the Jewish, Zionist and democratic nature of Israel.

          Most Israelis are committed to peace. A few hard right wing loonies can not change the democratic nature of Israel.

      • There is a clear majority among the Israeli public that supports a Palestinian state existing side by side with a Jewish one. Shimon Peres said that there was no alternative to a two-state solution – the idea of a binational state endangers the Jewish, Zionist and democratic nature of Israel.

        Most Israelis are committed to peace. A few hard right wing loonies can not change the democratic nature of Israel.

  2. “a reporter singled out by the Community Security Trust”

    Mr Levick has an uncanny ability to quote reports from organizations that no one else has ever heard about.

      • Germolene, let’s give “Hadara” the benefit of the doubt and assume that he/she/it is unfamiliar with the key institutions of Anglo-Jewry. The CST is THE authoritative source on anti-semitism/defence of Jewry in the UK and is pretty much unanimously respected as such by media, government and the Jewish community as a whole. Now you have heard of them too, Hadara.

        Right – that’s enough Mr Nice Guy. It is indicative of how seriously we should take “Hadara”‘s views when he/she/it choses to belittle Adam’s sources simply because he/she/it can’t be bothered to look them up.

        • Well, it’s obvious that Hadara was stung by this article. Just look at his comment!

          “I can only imagine Adan’s excitement and pride when he discovered that a genuine journalist working for a genuine TV channel knew his name. Does not happen every year.”
          That’s “Nat’s” M.O.

          • “Hadara” is jealous of Adam. As I remember it, someone else referred to his behaviour here and his focus on Adam as being indicative of Oedipal rage.

    • Hadara: “rom organizations that no one else has ever heard about.”

      Such an unattractive mix of ignorance and arrogance. But revealing, that when you talk about yourself you represent the whole world.

    • @Nat et al: Well, I’ve certainly heard of them, and know the work they do, and I’m not even Jewish. I’m sure most British Jews know a great deal about them. The fact that you don’t is a poor reflection on you, not on them.

    • As a troll you should have heard about them. Not least because the ‘Guardian’ printed a smear piece about them last January which was neatly timed for Holocaust Memorial Day.

      The CST has done valuable work not just for British Jews, but also to provide advice and support across the board to support any community groups likely to be targeted by racists and other bigots. They’ve done more to combat fascism than you’ll ever do.

  3. i would be very interested in knowing how McGreal (or someone else at the Guardian) handled the deliberate murder by a Tanzim sniper of the infant Shalhevet Pass in March of 2001. The Associated Press headline read: “Jewish toddler dies in West Bank”
    is it so imaginable that a Palestinian would do that, that it’s not even worth mention, much less moral outrage?
    human rights complex anyone?

  4. “Guardian’s anti-Zionist propagandist, Chris McGreal, responds to CiF Watch.”

    OK I agree with you, Chris is confirmed as a complete idiot.

      • I’m sure he is. So bloody what? Your point is, (if there is a point buried in this pointless trolling) that because someone is employed by the BBC, they are immune from all criticism? Hmm. Very democratic of you.

        • Monitoring the media and criticizing journalists when they do not do their work properly is an excellent thing.

          Obsessively attacking foreign journalists to push one’s far right wing agenda is another.

      • It ain’t easy to be hired for the Guardian, Snigger. The question should read as: would the Grauniard consider Mr Levick experienced enough to hire him as a journalist? Considering that Mr Levick does not hold a press card, I’d say no.

        • Man, you have a serious envy issue. Maybe you should talk it over with your shrink, plus your alter egos ariel-the-moron and hadara-the-turd.

  5. i had the same experience with enderlin of france2. while i’m in his office he gets a fax and shows it to me: palestinian child killed by israel. how does he know? hospital report. how did the hospital know it was the israelis who killed him? at which point enderlin looks at me, as if to say, who else? if a palestinian dies, it’s obviously at the hands of israelis. except that the palestinians killed almost as many of their own as the israelis did in the first intifada (1000 to 1100). but to even suggest it is to be a racist. See Pat C on the subject: http://www.youtube.com/embed/TzCIckbZKUs?feature=player_embedded

      • Post-modern anti-Semites also want at the same time to be seen as paragons of anti-racism. Their cowardice is truly nauseating. Even neo-nazis are more honest than these folks.

        • They are themselves racist towards Palestinians and other Muslims because they expect much less of them than they would of other decent human beings. They are chief proponents of the racism of lowered expectations.

    • Hi rlandes

      I believe that the perennial problem here and with most MSM reporting of the I/P conflict is that of mindlessness – ie approaching even new situations in terms of what happened before in similar situations, without taking the trouble to investigate or research fully into the ways in which the current situation might be different.

      The antidote is, of course, a more mindful approach, but that would involve approaching every incident as a completely new occurrence whilst at the same time providing context. It would also involve a considerable amount of research on the part of the reporters before they went to press, as well as intelligence and a commitment to ethical reporting in that they should be able and willing to set their own biases aside.

      McGreal would be incapable of this, as would most of the Guardian team, having nailed its colours to the pro-Palestinian anti-Israel mast, as well as showing no discernible evidence of a grasp of even basic journalistic ethics

      • i think it has too much to do with emotions to be subject the kind of intellectual discipline you’re talking about. the desire to crap on israel is much stronger than any kind of commitment to honesty.

      • Nat, two questions/comments:

        1) do you know what the category children includes (ages, activities)? i get the sense from your use of CAPTIALS that you’re hinting such deeds are inexcusable.

        2) does it matter to you that Israel fires these rockets because, as Pat Condell points out so limpidly, Palestinian “freedom fighters” fire at Israeli civilians from the midst of their own civilians, hoping to provoke the damage that they can then complain to you about? does it occur to/bother you that you might be complicit in the terrible abuse that the Palestinian leadership afflicts on its own people?

    • Rlandes, when you do airstrikes over densely populated areas, you end up killing civilians, including children.

  6. British troops did shoot children in Northern Ireland. Coalition troops have shot children in Iraq and Afghanistan. Only the most extreme far-left and far-right lunatics have claimed that these have occurred as a deliberate policy of murder, rather than because in war innocents get killed and wounded, and that the latter can be literally caught in the crossfire whenever a riot turns lethal, or there’s a gun-battle between insurgents and their enemies (not least if the former uses human shields).

    But if it’s IDF, then any shooting of this kind is treated as a deliberate act by ‘Der Sturmer’.

    • And when it is a deliberate policy of murder, like the deliberate shooting of the girl on the bus in Afghanistan, by Islamists, they are virtually struck dumb and phobic of spelling out the reason for it.

      • you point to a key part of our epistemological dilemma (how do we judge what’s really going on), clear in the Mohamed Merah/Toulouse case: false accusations of Israeli murder produce real murders, then “explained” in terms of the false accusation.

        The obsession with Israeli sins and the desperate downplaying of Islamist violence – Brennan, “radical Islam” we don’t use that term – produces a case that literally substitutes false accusations of Israeli murder, for false denials of Islamist murder.

        The “theology of substitution” (Christians or Muslims for Jews) becomes in its secular 21st century version a holocaust inversion: Israeli Nazis/Palestinian Jews. it may make (sadistic) moral sense, but it’s no way to understand reality.

        Harder to find a more striking case of turning against a friend and embracing a ferocious enemy.

  7. Adam Levick:

    In short, McGreal pieced together a few unrelated incidents of Palestinians killed or injured during a myriad of different circumstances over several years, omitted any evidence contradicting his desired narrative, and completely erased the context of Palestinian terrorism to impute unimaginable malevolence to Israeli soldiers.

    Actually he did mention it, but so briefly it was like finding a needle in a haystack:

    Yet among the most shocking aspects of the past three years of intifada that has no shortage of horrors – not least the teenage suicide bombers revelling in mass murder – has been the killing of children by the Israeli army.

    He devotes one clause to it, inserted in the middle of one sentence and embedded in a grindingly-long, Israel-bashing propaganda text.

    And the wording is interesting: no mention, of course, of Israeli children being slaughtered and no mention of the fact that they are terrorist attacks. There is also the contrast between the teenage suicide bombers and the Israeli army, with the implication that suicide bombing is only carried out by irresponsible teenagers, not adults, and can one really blame them, the poor dears.

    I’m surprised he described them as “revelling in mass murder.” That appears to be an extremely rare flash of honesty from McGreal.

  8. Pretty ironic for McGreal to show up in the comments here, given how CIF deletes any comment mentioning CIFWatch. Mr. McGreal, care to do anything about the blatant cowardice at CIF?

  9. The Guardian’s CIF deletes racist comments and hate speech. Racism and hate speech are not acceptable in Western democracies, Omri.

  10. Surely it’s common knowledge that the bravest army in the world regularly targets civilians,including children in defense of the greatest democracy in the Middle East.Why is it Anti-Zionist to say this? Why more than 800 civilians,including 300 children were targeted during Operation Cast Lead. Nobody disputes that there is a growing mountain of bodies ( 2 more today!) out there with so-called Israeli bullets in them! If the so-called Zionist project IS to kill as many Palestinians as possible then,I might describe myself as Anti-Zionist.However,we are led to believe that these acts are committed in self-defense so that’s probably alright then.

    ________________________________

Comments are closed.