The BBC: By Not Describing Terrorism Accurately - BBC Encourages Terrorism

Jerusalem-----January 18.......Today, an Arab terrorist walked into a private family celebration and murdered six Israeli civilians in cold blood. The terrorist wounded over 30 people with a M-16 combat assault rifle. The terrorist was subdued before he could use his grenades against the children. This was a Bat Mitzvah – a coming of age party for a 13-year-old girl! According to the BBC there was no terror involved – they described the attacker as a “gunman”. Gunmen rob banks and shoot turkeys.
Terrorists spread fear through senseless acts of barbarism. Even the BBC in it’s own on-line coverage reports Arafat’s Fatah terror organization as stating: “There will be more successful attacks that will plant fear in the hearts of the Zionist enemies. Revenge is coming”

The US State Department described the bloody and cowardly act as: "vicious" and a "horrific act of terrorism."
But the BBC will not use the words “terrorist” or terrorism. They will only use the word “militants”!

HonestReporting.Com deserves our deepest thanks for voting the BBC as the most biased, global network - unless you happen to live in Syria, Libya, Iraq, Iran, PA / PLO controlled West Bank or any other country which supports and harbors international terrorism.

I was standing in the lobby of the Wellington Hotel in New York City two days after the World Trade Center was attacked, burned and fell to ashes. I couldn't resist asking a BBC producer who was staying at the Wellington: "How do you describe the people who attacked the World Trade Center and the Pentagon? Are they 'militants, gunmen, radicals or terrorists'?
The BBC producer actually had to think for a few seconds, before responding: "terrorists". If they were on TV's "Weakest Link" they now would have moved onto the second round.

I ask why is the Iranian backed Hamas group identified in the States as a terrorist organization, but in Israel as "militants". Did the BBC describe the IRA and their bombs attacks on civilians in London as "militants"? No. So then why the bias?

As for the "poor and suffering Palestinian people" - look at Arafat, name just ONE accomplishment that he has achieved in helping them to realize a better quality of life. Turning his back on Clinton, Barak and his own people and refusing to accept a peace deal at Camp David spoke volumes. The man is interested only in his own survival.

And Israel is not "occupying" Jerusalem or any Palestinian land - the Palestinians never lived in Israel - read your history!

Finally, why didn't Arafat take the millions of dollars that he spent in buying Iranian terror weapons and give that money to his own people who are living in poverty? Then again, Arafat never gave a penny from the million dollar a day revenue from the Oasis Casino in Jericho to the poor Palestinian children living in a refugee camp across the street.
Why hasn't the BBC ever filed a story on this?

If you ever wanted to witness consistent, distorted and bias reporting at it's best - tune into the BBC's reporting on Israel. While other networks strive to be objective and sometimes make human mistakes - the BBC never makes a mistake to attack Israel. Even when placing Israeli cities such as Netanya and Hadera miles away from their actual locales inside the "green line" and reports them as being in the West Bank - you never hear a correction being made. Here in Israel - we are so disgusted with the BBC, that our natural response has become a simple, Weakest Link - "good-bye".

What will it take for the BBC to wake up and accurately, objectively describe the terrorists as they describe themselves (above)? Must London be attacked, a BBC reporter be murdered or a BBC office be bombed by Islamic extremists for the BBC to finally describe Hamas, Hezbollah, Islamic Jihad, Tanzim and Arafat as terrorists? We hope not.