The Trump White House on Tuesday formally asked Congress to rescind over $9 billion in approved spending, taking aim at lifesaving foreign aid programs as well as funding for U.S. public broadcasting outlets targeted by the president. The $9.4 billion rescission request, expected to be the first of several, is laid out in a memo authored by Office of Management and Budget Director Russell…
This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.
It is entirely unsurprising that Israel has yet again been caught out in a lie – a lie that the BBC once again spread far and wide on its news services.
Israel claimed that it had not fired at starving Palestinians queuing on Sunday morning to get food from one of its highly militarised “aid distribution hubs” – a system Israel imposed on Gaza in place of a long-established and successful aid network run by the United Nations.
More than 30 Palestinians are known to have been killed and dozens more injured in the weekend incident.
Israel blamed Hamas fighters for shooting Palestinian civilians, saying they were trying to stop the crowds from taking food boxes. The Israeli military dished up a video, taken by one of its drones, as supposed proof.
The BBC broadcast that video on its main shows, and then did one of its standard “Israel said, the Palestinians said. Who can really know the truth?” reports of the incident.
This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.
Taieri MP Ingrid Leary reflected on her years in Fiji as a television journalist and media educator at a Fiji Centre function in Auckland celebrating Fourth Estate values and independence at the weekend.
It was a reunion with former journalism professor David Robie — they had worked together as a team at the University of the South Pacific amid media and political controversy leading up to the George Speight coup in May 2000.
Leary, a former British Council director and lawyer, was the guest speaker at a gathering of human rights activists, development advocates, academics and journalists hosted at the Whānau Community Centre and Hub, the umbrella base for the Fiji Centre and Asia Pacific Media Network.
She said she was delighted to meet “special people in David’s life” and to be speaking to a diverse group sharing “similar values of courage, freedom of expression, truth and tino rangatiratanga”.
“I want to start this talanoa on Friday, 19 May 2000 — 13 years almost to the day of the first recognised military coup in Fiji in 1987 — when failed businessman George Speight tore off his balaclava to reveal his identity.
She pointed out that there had actually been another “coup” 100 years earlier by Ratu Cakobau.
“Speight had seized Parliament holding the elected government at gunpoint, including the politician mother, Lavinia Padarath, of one of my best friends — Anna Padarath.
Hostage-taking report
“Within minutes, the news of the hostage-taking was flashed on Radio Fiji’s 10 am bulletin by a student journalist on secondment there — Tamani Nair. He was a student of David Robie’s.”
Nair had been dispatched to Parliament to find out what was happening and reported from a cassava patch.
“Fiji TV was trashed . . . and transmission pulled for 48 hours.
“The university shut down — including the student radio facilities, and journalism programme website — to avoid a similar fate, but the journalism school was able to keep broadcasting and publishing via a parallel website set up at the University of Technology Sydney.
“The pictures were harrowing, showing street protests turning violent and the barbaric behaviour of Speight’s henchmen towards dissenters.
“Thus began three months of heroic journalism by David’s student team — including through a period of martial law that began 10 days later and saw some of the most restrictive levels of censorship ever experienced in the South Pacific.”
Leary paid tribute to some some of the “brave satire” produced by senior Fiji Times reporters filling the newspaper with “non-news” (such as about haircuts, drinking kava) as an act of defiance.
“My friend Anna Padarath returned from doing her masters in law in Australia on a scholarship to be closer to her Mum, whose hostage days within Parliament Grounds stretched into weeks and then months.
Invisible consequences
“Anna would never return to her studies — one of the many invisible consequences of this profoundly destructive era in Fiji’s complex history.
“Happily, she did go on to carve an incredible career as a women’s rights advocate.”
“Meanwhile David’s so-called ‘barefoot student journalists’ — who snuck into Parliament the back way by bushtrack — were having their stories read and broadcast globally.
“And those too shaken to even put their hands to keyboards on Day 1 emerged as journalism leaders who would go on to win prizes for their coverage.”
Speight was sentenced to life in prison, but was pardoned in 2024.
Leary said that was just one chapter in the remarkable career of David Robie who had been an editor, news director, foreign news editor and freelance writer with a number of different agencies and news organisations — including Agence France-Presse, Rand Daily Mail, The Auckland Star, Insight Magazine, and New Outlook Magazine — “a family member to some, friend to many, mentor to most”.
Reflecting on working with Dr Robie at USP, which she joined as television lecturer from Fiji Television, she said:
“At the time, being a younger person, I thought he was a little bit crazy, because he was communicating with people all around the world when digital media was in its infancy in Fiji, always on email, always getting up on online platforms, and I didn’t appreciate the power of online media at the time.
“And it was incredible to watch.”
Ahead of his time
She said he was an innovator and ahead of his time.
Dr Robie viewed journalism as a tool for empowerment, aiming to provide communities with the information they needed to make informed decisions.
“We all know that David has been a champion of social justice and for decolonisation, and for the values of an independent Fourth Estate.”
She said she appreciated the freedom to develop independent media as an educator, adding that one of her highlights was producing the groundbreaking documentary Maire about Maire Bopp Du Pont, who was a student journalist at USP and advocate for the Pacific community living with HIV/AIDs.
She later became a nuclear-free Pacific parliamentarian in Pape’ete.
Leary presented Dr Robie with a “speaking stick” carved from an apricot tree branch by the husband of a Labour stalwart based in Cromwell — the event doubled as his 80th birthday.
In response, Dr Robie said the occasion was a “golden opportunity” to thank many people who had encouraged and supported him over many years.
Massive upheaval
“We must have done something right,” he said about USP, “because in 2000, the year of George Speight’s coup, our students covered the massive upheaval which made headlines around the world when Mahendra Chaudhry’s Labour-led coalition government was held at gunpoint for 56 days.
“The students courageously covered the coup with their website Pacific Journalism Online and their newspaper Wansolwara — “One Ocean”. They won six Ossie Awards – unprecedented for a single university — in Australia that year and a standing ovation.”
He said there was a video on YouTube of their exploits called Frontline Reporters and one of the students, Christine Gounder, wrote an article for a Commonwealth Press Union magazine entitled, “From trainees to professionals. And all it took was a coup”.
Dr Robie said this Fiji experience was still one of the most standout experiences he had had as a journalist and educator.
Along with similar coverage of the 1997 Sandline mercenary crisis by his students at the University of Papua New Guinea.
He made some comments about the 1985 Rainbow Warrior voyage to Rongelap in the Marshall islands and the subsequent bombing by French secret agents in Auckland.
But he added “you can read all about this adventure in my new book” being published in a few weeks.
Biggest 21st century crisis
Dr Robie said the profession of journalism, truth telling and holding power to account, was vitally important to a healthy democracy.
Although media did not succeed in telling people what to think, it did play a vital role in what to think about. However, the media world was undergoing massive change and fragmentation.
“And public trust is declining in the face of fake news and disinformation,” he said
“I think we are at a crossroads in society, both locally and globally. Both journalism and democracy are under an unprecedented threat in my lifetime.
“When more than 230 journalists can be killed in 19 months in Gaza and there is barely a bleep from the global community, there is something savagely wrong.
“The Gazan journalists won the UNESCO/Guillermo Cano World Press Freedom Prize collectively last year with the judges saying, “As humanity, we have a huge debt to their courage and commitment to freedom of expression.”
“The carnage and genocide in Gaza is deeply disturbing, especially the failure of the world to act decisively to stop it. The fact that Israel can kill with impunity at least 54,000 people, mostly women and children, destroy hospitals and starve people to death and crush a people’s right to live is deeply shocking.
“This is the biggest crisis of the 21st century. We see this relentless slaughter go on livestreamed day after day and yet our media and politicians behave as if this is just ‘normal’. It is shameful, horrendous. Have we lost our humanity?
“Gaza has been our test. And we have failed.”
Other speakers included Whānau Hub co-founder Nik Naidu, one of the anti-coup Coalition for Democracy in Fiji (CDF) stalwarts; the Heritage New Zealand’s Antony Phillips; and Multimedia Investments and Evening Report director Selwyn Manning.
This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.
Tory leader says the quiet part out loud, admitting that both Israel and Ukraine are fighting for the West
If you have spent the past 20 months wondering why British leaders on both sides of the aisle have barely criticised Israel, even as it slaughtered and starved Gaza’s population of more than two million people, you finally got an answer last week.
Conservative Party leader Kemi Badenoch said the quiet part out loud. She told Sky: “Israel is fighting a proxy war [in Gaza] on behalf of the UK.”
According to Badenoch, the UK – and presumably in her assessment, other western powers – aren’t just supporting Israel against Hamas. They are willing that fight and helping to direct it. They view that fight as centrally important to their national interests.
This certainly accords with what we have witnessed over more than a year and a half. Both the current Labour government of Prime Minister Keir Starmer, and its Tory predecessor under Rishi Sunak, have been unwavering in their commitment to send British arms to Israel, while also shipping weapons from the United States and Germany to help with the slaughter.
Both governments used the Royal Air Force base Akrotiri in Cyprus to carry out surveillance flights to aid Israel with locating targets to hit in Gaza. Both allowed British citizens to travel to Israel to take part as soldiers in the Gaza genocide.
Neither government joined South Africa’s case at the International Court of Justice, which found more than a year ago that Israel’s actions could “plausibly” be considered a genocide.
And neither government proposed or tried to impose alongside other western states, as happened in other recent “wars”, a no-fly zone over Gaza to stop Israel’s murderous assault, or organised with others to break Israel’s blockade and get aid into the enclave.
In other words, both governments steadfastly maintained their material support for Israel, even if Starmer recently toned down rhetorical support after images of emaciated babies and young children in Gaza – reminiscent of images of Jewish children in Nazi death camps like Auschwitz – shocked the world.
If Badenoch is right that the UK is waging a proxy war in Gaza, it means that both British governments are directly responsible for the huge death toll of Palestinian civilians – running into many tens of thousands, and possibly hundreds of thousands – from Israel’s saturation bombing.
It also makes it indisputable that the UK is complicit in the current mass starvation of more than two million people there, which is indeed what Badenoch went on to imply in the coded language of political debate.
In reference to Starmer’s recent, and very belated, criticism of Israel’s starvation of Gaza’s entire population, she observed: “What I want to see is Keir Starmer making sure that he is on the right side of British national interest.”
According to Badenoch, Starmer’s implied threat – so far entirely unrealised – to limit the UK’s active collusion in the genocidal starvation of the people of Gaza could harm Britain’s national interests. How exactly?
Her comments should have startled, or at least baffled, Sky interviewer Trevor Phillips. But they passed unremarked.
Badenoch’s “proxy war” statement was also largely ignored by the rest of the British establishment media. Rightwing publications did notice it, but it appeared they were only disturbed by her equating the West’s proxy war in Gaza with the West’s proxy war in Ukraine.
Or as the opposition leader put it: “Israel is fighting a proxy war on behalf of the UK just like Ukraine is on behalf of western Europe against Russia.”
A column in the Spectator, the Tory party’s house journal, criticised her use of “proxy war” to describe Ukraine, but appeared to take the Gaza proxy war reference as read. James Heale, the Spectator’s deputy political editor, wrote: “By inadvertently echoing Russia’s position on Ukraine, Badenoch has handed her opponents another stick with which to beat her.”
The Telegraph, another Tory-leaning newspaper, ran a similarly themed article headlined: “Kremlin seizes on Badenoch’s Ukraine ‘proxy war’ comments.”
The lack of a response to her Gaza “proxy war” remark suggests that this sentiment actually informs much thinking in western foreign policy circles, even if she broke the taboo on articulating it publicly.
To reach an answer on why Gaza is viewed as a proxy war – one Britain continues to be deeply invested in, even at the cost of a genocide – one must also understand why Ukraine is seen in similar terms. The two “wars” are more related than they might appear.
Despite the consternation of the Spectator and Telegraph, Badenoch is not the first British leader to point out that the West is fighting a proxy war in Ukraine.
Back in February, one of her predecessors, Boris Johnson, observed of western involvement in the three-year war between Russia and Ukraine: “Let’s face it, we’re waging a proxy war. We’re waging a proxy war. But we’re not giving our proxies [Ukraine] the ability to do the job.”
If anyone should know the truth about Ukraine, it is Johnson. After all, he was prime minister when Moscow invaded its neighbour in February 2022.
He was soon dispatched by Washington to Kyiv, where he appears to have strong-armed President Volodymyr Zelensky into abandoning ceasefire talks that were well advanced and could have led to a resolution.
There are good reasons why Johnson and Badenoch each understand Ukraine as a proxy war.
This weekend Keith Kellogg, Donald Trump’s envoy to Ukraine, echoed them. He told Fox News that Russian president Vladimir Putin was not wrong to see Ukraine as a proxy war, and that the West was acting as aggressor by supplying Kyiv with weapons.
For years, the West had expanded Nato’s offensive frontiers towards Russia, despite Moscow’s explicit warnings that this would cross a red line.
With the West threatening to bring Russia’s neighbour Ukraine into Nato’s military fold, there were only ever likely to be one of two Russian responses. Either Putin would blink first and find Russia boxed in militarily, with Nato missiles – potentially nuclear-tipped – on his doorstep, minutes from Moscow. Or he would react pre-emptively to stop Ukraine’s accession to Nato by invading.
The West believed it had nothing to lose either way. If Russia invaded, Nato would then have the pretext to use Ukraine as a theatre of war to bleed Moscow, both economically with sanctions and militarily by flooding the battlefield with western weapons.
As we now know, Moscow chose to react. And while it has indeed been bleeding heavily, Ukrainian forces and European economies have been haemorrhaging even faster and more heavily.
The problem isn’t so much a lack of weapons – the West has supplied lots of them – as the fact that Ukraine has run out of conscripts willing to be sent into the maw of war.
The West is not, of course, going to send its own soldiers. A proxy war means someone else, in this case Ukrainians, does the fighting – and dying – for you.
Three years on, the conditions for a ceasefire have dramatically changed too. Having spilled so much of its own people’s blood, Russia is much less ready to make compromises, not least over the eastern territories it has conquered and annexed.
We have reached this nadir in Ukraine – one so deep that even US President Donald Trump appears ready to bail out – precisely because Nato, via Johnson, pushed Ukraine to keep fighting an unwinnable war.
Nonetheless, there was a geopolitical logic, however twisted, to the West’s actions in Ukraine. Bleeding Russia, a military and economic power, accords with the hawkish priorities of the neoconservative cabals that run western capitals nowadays, whichever party is in charge.
The neoconservatives valorise what used to be called the military-industrial complex. They believe that the West has a civilisational superiority to the rest of the world, and must use its superior arsenal to defeat, or at least contain, any state that refuses to submit.
This is a modern reimagining of the “barbarians at the gate”, or as neoconservatives like to frame it, “a clash of civilisations”. The fall of the West would amount, in their view, to a return to the Dark Ages. We are supposedly in a life-or-death struggle.
In the US, the imperial hub of what we call “the West”, this has justified a massive investment in war industries – or what is referred to as “defence”, because it is an easier sell to domestic publics tired of the endless austerity required to maintain military superiority.
Western capitals profess to act as “global police”, while the rest of the world sees the West more in terms of a sociopathic mafia don. However one frames it, the Pentagon is officially pursuing a doctrine known as US “global full-spectrum dominance”. You must submit – that is, let us control the world’s resources – or pay the price.
In practice, a “foreign policy” like this has necessarily divided the world in two: those in the Godfather’s camp, and those outside it.
If Russia could not be contained and defanged by turning Ukraine into a Nato forward base on Moscow’s doorstep, it had to be dragged by the West into a debilitating proxy war that would neutralise Russia’s ability to ally with China against US global hegemony.
That is what Badenoch and Johnson meant by the proxy war in Ukraine. But how is Israel’s mass murder of Palestinian civilians through saturation bombing and engineered starvation similarly a proxy war – and one apparently benefitting the UK and the West, as Badenoch argues?
Interestingly, Badenoch offered two not entirely compatible reasons for Israel’s “war” on Gaza.
Initially, she told Sky: “Israel is fighting a war where they want to get 58 hostages who have not been returned. That is what all of this is about … What we need to make sure is that we’re on the side that is going to eradicate Hamas.”
But even “eradicating Hamas” is hard to square with British foreign policy objectives. After all, despite the UK’s designation of Hamas as a terrorist organisation, it has never attacked Britain, has said it has no such intention, and is unlikely to ever be in a position to do so.
Instead, it is far more likely that Israel’s destruction of Gaza, with visible western collusion, will inflame hotheads into random or misguided acts of violence that cannot be prepared for or stopped – acts of terror similar to the US gunman who recently shot dead two Israeli embassy staff in Washington DC.
That might be reason enough to conclude that the UK ought to distance itself from Israel’s actions as quickly as possible, rather than standing squarely behind Tel Aviv.
It was only when she was pushed by Phillips to explain her position that Badenoch switched trajectory. Apparently it wasn’t just about the hostages. She added: “Who funds Hamas? Iran, an enemy of this country.”
Cornered by her own logic, she then grasped tightly the West’s neoconservative comfort blanket and spoke of a “proxy war”.
Badenoch’s point was not lost on Stephen Pollard, the former editor of the Jewish Chronicle. In a column, he noted of the Sky interview: “Badenoch has a bracing attitude to the truth – she tells it as it is, even if it doesn’t make her popular.”
The “bracing” truth from Badenoch is that Israel is as central to the projection of western power into the oil-rich Middle East as it was more than a century ago, when Britain conceived of Palestine as a “national home for the Jewish people” in place of the native Palestinian population.
From Britain’s perspective, Israel’s war on Gaza, as Badenoch concedes, is not centrally about “eradicating Hamas” or “getting back the hostages” taken during the group’s attack on Israel on 7 October 2023.
Rather, it is about arming Israel to weaken those, like Iran and its regional allies, who refuse to submit to the West’s domination of the Middle East – or in the case of Palestinians, to their own dispossession and erasure.
In that way, arming Israel is seen as no different from arming Ukraine to weaken Russian influence in eastern Europe. It is about containing the West’s geostrategic rivals – or potential partners, were they not viewed exclusively through the prism of western “full-spectrum dominance” – as effectively as Israel has locked Palestinians into prisons and concentration camps in Gaza and the occupied West Bank.
This strategy is about averting any danger that one day Russia, China, Iran and others could unite effectively to oust the US and its allies from their heavily fortified hilltop. Alliances like BRICS are seen as a potential vehicle for such an assault on western dominance.
Whatever the rhetoric, western capitals are not chiefly concerned about military or “civilisational” threats. They do not fear being invaded or conquered by their “enemies”. In fact, their reckless behaviours in places like Ukraine make a cataclysmic nuclear confrontation more likely.
What drives western foreign policy is the craving to maintain global economic primacy. And terrorising other states with the West’s superior military might is seen as the only way to ensure such primacy.
There is nothing new about the West’s fears, nor are they partisan. Differences within western establishments are never over whether the West should assert “full-spectrum dominance” around the globe through client states such as Israel and Ukraine. Instead, factional splits emerge over which elements within those client states the West should be allying with the closest.
The question of alliances has been particularly fraught in the case of Israel, where the far-right and religious extremist factions in the government have a near-Messianic view of their place and role in the Middle East.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and many of those closest to him have been trying for decades to manoeuvre the US into launching an attack on Iran, not least to remove Israel’s main rival in the Middle East and guarantee its nuclear-armed regional primacy in perpetuity.
So far, Netanyahu has found no takers in the White House. But that hasn’t stopped him trying. He is widely reported to be deep in efforts to push Trump into joining an attack on Iran, in the midst of talks between Washington and Tehran.
Over many years, British hawks look like they have been playing their own role in these manoeuvres. In the recent past, at least two ambitious British government ministers on the right have been caught trying to cosy up to the most belligerent elements in the Israeli security establishment.
In 2017, Priti Patel was forced to resign as international development secretary after she was found to have held 12 secret meetings with senior Israeli officials, including Netanyahu, while supposedly on a family holiday. She had other off-the-books meetingswith Israeli officials in New York and London.
Six years earlier, then-Defence Secretary Liam Fox also had to step down after a series of shadowy meetings with Israeli officials. Fox’s ministry was also known to have drawn updetailed plans for British assistance in the event of a US military strike on Iran, including allowing the Americans to use Diego Garcia, a British territory in the Indian ocean.
Unnamed government officials told the Guardian at the time that Fox had been pursuing an “alternative” government policy. Former British diplomat Craig Murray was more direct: his sources within government suggested Fox had been conspiring with Israel in a “rogue” foreign policy towards Iran, against Britain’s stated aims.
The West’s behaviours are ideologically driven, not rational or moral. The compulsive, self-sabotaging nature of western support for Israel’s genocide in Gaza is no different – though far grosser – than the self-sabotaging nature of its actions in Ukraine.
The West has lost the battle against Russia, but refuses to learn or adapt. And it has spent whatever moral legitimacy it still had left in propping up an Israeli military occupier bent on starving millions of people to death, if they cannot be ethnically cleansed into Egypt first.
Netanyahu has not been the easy-to-sell, cuddly military mascot that Zelensky proved to be in Ukraine.
Support for Kyiv could at least be presented as taking the right side in a clash of civilisations with a barbarous Russia. Support for Israel simply exposes the West’s hypocrisy, its worship of power for its own sake, and its psychopathic instincts.
Support for Israel’s genocide has hollowed out the West’s claim to moral superiority for all but its most deluded devotees. Sadly, those still include most of the western political and media establishments, whose only rationale is to evangelise for the belief system over which they preside, claiming it to be the worthiest in history.
Some, like Starmer, are trying to moderate their rhetoric in a desperate attempt to protect the morally bankrupt system that has invested them with power.
Others, like Badenoch, are still so enthralled by the cult of a superior West that they are blind to how preposterous their rantings sound to anyone no longer rapt in devotion. Rather than distance herself from Israel’s atrocities, she is happy to place herself – and the UK – at the crime scene.
The scales have fallen from western publics’ eyes. Now is the time to hold our leaders fully to account.
This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.
To boil it all down (and the speakers here have never yet been found to be wrong about this war, which they have been analyzing ever since 2016): the only way that America and its allied countries can now avoid a total defeat in this war is by directly going to war themselves against Russia. Though that would not start out as being a nuclear war, what would the loser in the conventional war then do? Would it surrender? Or would it instead initiate nuclear war against the side that has won the conventional war (which would then become World War Three)? And why are the stakes in this war (possible annihilation of civilization) not even being discussed in U.S.-and-allied media? Is this the media that would be the media in a democracy, or instead in a dictatorship?
There already are indications that the U.S. and its allies are intensively preparing for WW3. Is this because there is a public demand for these multi-trillion-dollar measures, or is it instead because the individuals who are in control over our governments (and their news-media) want these expenses by their Government? Why are people not pondering these questions? But perhaps the reason is that they’re not being informed that this is even happening. And why aren’t they?
UK and Israel are part of this empire, and at 7:45-20:30 in this video is the U.S.-UK-Israel plan laid out and documented (see especially the map at 17:57) for the completion of their final solution to the Palestinian problem in Gaza. Then, from 29:00 till 34:00 is a truthful description of how the U.S. Government’s ceaseless craving to conquer both Russia and China — and to continue providing the weapons that Israel uses to exterminate Gazans — is increasingly foreclosing any other (any peaceful) paths by which America’s economy can even grow.
U.S.-and-allied major media say that alternative viewpoints are presented by them, but why are THESE alternative viewpoints NOT among the “alternatives” (I would instead call them truths) that they present? Why are these ‘viewpoints’ censored-out by them? How and why is that done? Is this a democracy? Or is it something else?
The post Why do US/EU Media Hide this Truth about the War in Ukraine? first appeared on Dissident Voice.This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.
California public schools are the latest target of Donald Trump’s Department of Justice, which is ramping up an investigation into high school sports after a transgender girl qualified for three track and field events at the upcoming state championships.
The DoJ is alleging that the California Interscholastic Federation (CIF) allowing transgender girls to compete in girls’ sports could violate Title IX, which prohibits discrimination based on sex.
The New York Times (5/28/25) covered this latest right-wing attack on trans youth in a fashion all too common for the paper (FAIR.org, 5/11/23): devoid of any perspectives from trans individuals.
The post Once Again, NYT Coverage Of Anti-Trans Attacks Leaves Out Trans Voices appeared first on PopularResistance.Org.
This post was originally published on PopularResistance.Org.
The second week of May was a busy time for fact-checkers at Union government’s Press Information Bureau (PIB) as it put out 68 fact-checks related to Operation Sindoor. While examining the tweets on PIB Fact Check’s official X handle between May 7 and May 16, Alt News noticed a distinct pattern in their selection of who to fact check and who not. One category that was conspicuous in its almost total absence in PIB’s body of work in this crucial period was falsehoods amplified by the Indian mainstream media.
India announced the launch of Operation Sindoor in the early hours of May 7, targeting nine terror bases in Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK). Tensions escalated quickly into intense cross-border drone and missile strikes, leading to deaths of at least 21 civilians in Jammu and Kashmir in four days. On May 10, India and Pakistan reached an understanding of ceasefire and agreed to stop all firing and military action.
The Indian mainstream newsrooms, where hyper-nationalistic rhetoric bordering on jingoism has been the norm for quite some now, went absolutely berserk in these four days of armed conflict. Anchors and self-proclaimed defence experts made outrageous claims such as the destruction of the Karachi port by the Indian Navy, India attacking Islamabad, and even Pakistan Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif surrendering to Indian forces. On innumerable occasions, they showed unrelated, old visuals in adrenaline-driven prime-time shows, falsely linking them to the ongoing conflict, without any verification.
A detailed study of PIB fact checks from this period by Alt News shows that it chose not to call out media outlets for making false, baseless and misleading claims regarding Operation Sindoor. Out of 68 fact checks shared on its official X handle, only two concerned media outlets.
The PIB fact-check unit was set up in 2019 following the then Vice-President of India, Venkaiah Naidu, expressing concern over the spread of ‘fake news’. The official website does not mention the methodology or scope of PIB’s fact-checking work. The Facebook page states that it debunks misinformation related to government policies and schemes.
The ministry of electronics and information technology (MeitY) on January 17, 2019, uploaded a new draft of amendments to the IT (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021, which proposed that information identified as ‘fake or false’ by the PIB or any other agency authorized by the Union government be taken down by ‘intermediaries’.
At the time, Alt News had reported on the glaring gaps in PIB’s work in the domain of fact-checking. For instance, we noticed that while PIB had fact-checked misinformation by Opposition leaders such as Rahul Gandhi and activist-turned-TMC MP Saket Gokhale several times, not once did they fact-check a claim by any BJP leader. We also documented how PIB had flagged multiple YouTube channels and videos which were anti-BJP in nature.
Alt News noted a similar pattern during the post-Operation Sindoor India-Pakistan conflict.
The graphic below shows that during the flare-up PIB skipped fact-checking false claims by media houses, while independent outlets (Alt News, Boom Live and WebQoof by The Quint) did debunk misreports by these houses. The yellow column shows whether the media house in question has been fact-checked at least once by either Alt News, Boom Live, or WebQoof. The white column shows whether the media house in question has been fact-checked by PIB.
As readers can see, PIB fact-checked media outlets all but twice.
One of the two was a fact-check of claims about the “temporary closure of services on the Delhi-Mumbai airline route.” The accompanying tweet featured a screenshot from an NDTV news bulletin carrying the same claim, stamped with the word “Fake.”
It is being claimed that there is a temporary closure of services on Delhi-Mumbai airline route.#PIBFactCheck
This claim is #FAKE
The Airports Authority of India has extended the temporary closure of 25 segments of Air Traffic Service (ATS) routes within the Delhi &… pic.twitter.com/jdC630a1BA
— PIB Fact Check (@PIBFactCheck) May 9, 2025
The second was a quote-tweet of a post by the official handle of the district collector and magistrate of Jaipur, debunking a video shared by Times Now. The channel had claimed that explosions were heard at Jaipur airport. The collector clarified that the claim was false, and PIB amplified the statement.
Jaipur Airport is Safe
Claims are circulating that explosions were heard at #Jaipur Airport.#PIBFactCheck
https://t.co/qqbbFgGZ7x pic.twitter.com/rijeLipwhY
— PIB Fact Check (@PIBFactCheck) May 9, 2025
We also noticed something interesting in a tweet by PIB fact check on May 15, in which they pointed out that Union external affairs minister S Jaishankar had been misquoted by “several news channels and social media posts” regarding claims that Chinese satellites had been aiding Pakistan. The tweet included a screengrab of a India Today bulletin, but the channel’s name and logo had been blurred out.
Several news channels and social media posts have claimed that External Affairs Minister @DrSJaishankar stated Chinese satellites helped Pakistan.#PIBFactCheck:
EAM is being misquoted and he has not made this statement
— PIB Fact Check (@PIBFactCheck) May 15, 2025
Several X users urged the agency to reveal the name of the outlet. The comparison below clearly establishes that it was India Today. We found several similar graphics, with the same header saying ‘Operation Sindoor’, the same font of text and the same red background on India Today’s YouTube channel.
In contrast, PIB explicitly named the international media outlet Al Jazeera in two recent fact checks. On May 12, it debunked Al Jazeera’s claim that an Indian female pilot was in Pakistani custody. Earlier, on May 10, it called out the outlet again for reporting that 10 explosions had occurred near Srinagar airport following a ceasefire announcement.
Another glaring example of PIB’s selective fact-checking was its focus on viral gaming footage shared as visuals from the war, while ignoring similar misreports by mainstream media. In a thread, PIB asked its readers to be vigilant and not “fall prey to such propaganda posts” of gaming footage being circulated as visuals of war. At the same time, Aaj Tak aired gaming footage claiming it showed missiles being fired from India, which was not fact-checked by PIB.
On May 9, several mainstream Indian news channels dramatically reported that the Indian Navy had destroyed Karachi port. The coverage was presented as exclusive breaking news, replete with sirens, distant artillery sounds, and dramatic visuals.
Aaj Tak’s Anjana Om Kashyap said on air, “…Karachi par bhi Bharatiya navsena ki bhishan hamla. Yeh saaf bata rahaa ki chaari taraf se-ab hum sagar ke bhi taraf se gherna mein kamyaab ho rahe hai…” (Translation: Shweta, there has been a fierce attack by the Indian Navy on Karachi as well. This clearly shows that we are now succeeding in surrounding them from all sides, including from the sea.) Two visuals were shown on Aaj Tak as the attack on Karachi, and both videos were found by Alt News to be old, unrelated footage.
A similar tone of reporting was adopted by Zee News anchor Ram Mohan Sharma, who said “breaking news” just came in that Karachi port had been destroyed. “Is waqt ek bohot badi khabar mil rahi hai, samundar se Pakistan par ek bada action liya gaya hai… Is waqt ki bohot badi khabar, badi jaanakari iss waqt ki Karachi port tabah kar diya gaya hai! Navsena ne, Navy ne Karachi port ko tabah kar diya hai…” (Translation: We’re getting a major update at this moment. A significant action has been taken against Pakistan from the sea. Breaking news right now, important information coming in… The Karachi port has been destroyed. The Navy, the Indian Navy, has destroyed the Karachi port.)
The Karachi port had been ‘destroyed’ in several other newsrooms on the night of May 9, including India Today, TV9 Bharatvarsh and ABP News. The following morning, around 8:40 am, the Karachi Port Trust issued an official statement calling the Indian media reports “completely false and baseless,” and confirmed that the port was “operating normally and securely.”
The Karachi port claim is only the tip of the iceberg, as far as media misreports go. For instance, Zee News, News18, News18 Bihar Jharkhand, OneIndia and propaganda outlet Sudarshan News all claimed that Islamabad was under attack by the Indian armed forces, which soon turned to Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif’s house being under attack. Zee News even claimed that Sharif had surrendered. However, there is not a single credible source from either country confirming the attacks on Sharif’s house. Nor is there any report or credible information on PM Sharif surrendering.
Several mainstream media outlets, including Republic, CNN News18, ABP News, and Zee News, reported that a Lashkar terrorist named Qari Mohammad Iqbal had been killed during Operation Sindoor. The reports went to the extent of claiming that Iqbal was in hiding in Kotli, Pakistan, one of the locations targeted by the Indian armed forces in the operation. However, Alt News found that Iqbal, a resident of Poonch in Kashmir, was one of the civilians killed during the cross-border shelling by Pakistan. He was a teacher at a local high school in Poonch. Iqbal’s family also issued a statement condemning the blatant misinformation that was amplified by media channels. Our detailed report can be read here.
Click to view slideshow.News outlets Mathrubhumi, DNA, OneIndia and Great Andhra published articles claiming Asim Munir, chief of the army staff, Pakistan, had resigned and was to be replaced by General Sahir Shamshad Mirza. Like the aforementioned examples, there was not a single credible source that affirmed this. Fact-checking outlet BoomLive spoke to Pakistani news outlet Dawn’s deputy editor Zahrah Mazhar who said that there was no indication of Munir’s resignation.
Media outlets Firstpost, NDTV, Free Press Journal and The Statesman also reported on a deepfake video showing Ahmed Sharif Chaudhry, the director general of inter-services public relations (ISPR) of the Pakistan armed forces, admitting to losing two fighter jets amidst an escalating military conflict as a real statement.
Alongside these, several unverified videos and images were aired by mainstream media outlets. For example, a four-year-old video of Israel’s air defence system, the Iron Dome, was played by news channels with varied claims. Zee News, Times Now Navbharat and others aired the video linking it to the purported Karachi port destruction, while some others, like Aaj Tak, aired the clip claiming it to be visuals from the attack on Jaisalmer.
Again, a video broadcast by ABP Ananda and TV9 Bangla, among others, purportedly showing the situation in Pakistan after a strike by the Indian armed forces turned out to be three-month-old footage from a jet crash site in Philadelphia.
For reasons unknown, PIB Fact Check chose not to debunk any of these, though these falsehoods were consumed by crores of Indian television viewers. When one considers that most of these channels run pro-government propaganda in the name of news round the year, one begins to wonder if there was a method in the madness.
Even as the Indian mainstream channels drew flak from the international media for incessantly putting out false information during the conflict, BJP platformed Sushant Sinha, the consulting editor of Times Now NavBharat, to justify the blatant lies. In a video tweeted from the official X handle of BJP, Sinha slammed the ‘propaganda’ by those who called out misreports by the mainstream media. The falsehoods should be acceptable in national interest, Sinha observed, repeatedly referring to those who exposed outrageous falsehoods peddled by the media as a ‘two-rupee ecosystem’. With each passing minute in the 9-minute monologue, Sinha’s desperate defence of fake news, though fervent, became more and more bizarre. The ‘consulting editor’ went to the length of saying that when a ‘breaking news’ would come in, if the anchor would be live on air, he would have no time to verify it. Even if it turned out to be false, asking counter questions was an ‘anti-national’ agenda’, he declared.
ALSO READ: The fictional strikes on the Karachi port and what it says about Indian media
The post Op Sindoor: As Indian media made false, outrageous claims, PIB looked the other way appeared first on Alt News.
This content originally appeared on Alt News and was authored by Shinjinee Majumder.
This post was originally published on Radio Free.
New York, May 30, 2025—A punishing spate of laws targeting foreign-funded media will dramatically curb Georgia’s independent voices and force many news outlets to shutter or shift their business operations, say Georgian journalists and press freedom advocates.
Georgia’s populist ruling Georgian Dream party has pushed through its new Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA)—called an “exact copy” of the U.S. Foreign Agents Registration Act— granting the state authority to criminally prosecute media outlets, NGOs, and individuals for failing to register as a “foreign agent.”
Yet the way the law is written, “they can use it against anyone,” warned Mariam Nikuradze, executive director of the independent Georgia-based regional news outlet OC Media. Nikuradze said the increasingly authoritarian Georgian Dream party has weaponized uncertainty over how the law will be enforced to “create this environment [of fear]” and force compliance from outlets that refused to register under the country’s 2024 foreign agent law.
“They may arrest some people, as an example, to terrorize,” Nikuradze said.
Taking effect May 31, Georgia’s second ‘foreign agent’ law comes amid two separate bills passed in April that would restrict foreign funding crucial to large swathes of the country’s independent newsrooms. Nikuradze said that with these laws Georgian Dream is making it “almost impossible to exist as a media or rights group.”“Everything that is happening right now is leading towards the final goal of making these organizations disappear,” Nikuradze said, “just like it happened in Azerbaijan, Russia or Belarus, where there are no organizations on the ground, they go into exile or just shut down.”
An intensifying crackdown on Western influence
A Georgian parliament stripped of its opposition passed the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA) on April 1, as well as a bill banning foreign funding of broadcasters. Georgian Dream deputies hastily approved drafted amendments requiring government approval for foreign grants on April 16, which many believe will be used to block grants to critical Georgian media. In each case, Georgian Dream loyalist President Mikheil Kavelashvili, ratified each of the bills on the same day they were passed.
While Georgia’s existing 2024 foreign agent law remains unimplemented amid widespread refusal by media and nonprofits to register, legal experts argue that the criminal sanctions and “catch-all” provisions in Georgia Dream’s FARA law will likely be applied punitively because they are not subject to the same legal safeguards as in the U.S. Registration under the law offers little safety since FARA can penalize not only non-registration but also registrants’ alleged omissions and false statements with up to five years in prison.
Ignoring the new law is a risk many media workers will not take, said Lia Chakhunashvili, executive director of independent trade group Georgian Charter for Journalistic Ethics.
“If we don’t want to register—and none of us want to register—our understanding is that we should stop all donor-funded activities before May 31,” she told CPJ. “We will work as volunteers as long as we can. That I can do. But I cannot take any money from any donor past May 30, because I don’t want to go to jail.”
Over the past year, the Georgia Dream party has steadily escalated rhetorical attacks against the West and international donors, as well as donor-funded civil society groups and media, accusing them of attempting to overthrow the government. The party has faced months of protests over alleged fraud in October 2024 elections and its apparent reversal of the country’s bid to join the European Union.
FARA also comes as the Trump administration’s USAID cuts have left regional media facing what Georgia-based journalists have called an “extinction-level event.”
“Georgian media was highly reliant on support from USAID for many years,” via the global development and education organization IREX, which was the country’s most substantial media donor, Chakhunashvili said. She added that although the EU has promised to step in, “nothing can replace USAID funding.”
‘Locking all the doors’
Georgian Dream has enthusiastically embraced the Trump administration claims that USAID serves to “destabilize” nations, citing this as a reason to restrict foreign funding.
“The worldwide USAID scandal … has made it obvious that we should fully reclaim our country,” said Georgia Dream parliamentary leader Mamuka Mdinaradze as he unveiled the bills restricting foreign funding in February.To be “on the safe side,” Georgia Dream passed amendments giving the government explicit control over grants Chakhunashvili said. Similarly, she said the party moved quickly to prohibit broadcasters from receiving foreign funding after the EU pledged to redirect government aid to civil society and the media, fearing that European donors might start to fund oppositional broadcasters who are increasingly struggling financially.
“They are trying to put as many locks on the doors as possible. Even if it’s not necessary, they are readying the locks,” Chakhunashvili said.
Amid the new restrictions, the Georgian Charter for Journalistic Ethics expects some donors will “leave the country altogether,” Chakhunashvili said, explaining that applying for government approval for each grant adds a layer of difficulty amid increased government hostility towards donors and security fears for grantees under the new foreign agent law.
“Already now, money is not enough for our needs, and I expect that this will shrink even further what is available,” Chakhunashvili said.
Fighting for survival
Following the passage of Georgia’s 2024 foreign agent law, some media moved their financial operations abroad to sidestep the law’s restrictions. But many argue that under FARA’s more restrictive clauses, any payments from abroad to journalists inside Georgia would fall under the new law; however, it remains unclear how it will be applied.
Some Georgian media outlets are preparing for a “tectonic shift” in their operating model, said Nata Koridze, managing editor for independent news site Civil.ge.
“We have to change and become profit organizations, instead of nonprofit,” said Koridze, adding that independent media will have to “cut in many directions and not be able to maintain the same number of staff.”
Digital advertising in Georgia is limited by a small market and readers are not accustomed to paying for online news, said Koridze, who announced her departure from Civil.ge May 27, following the arrest of her husband, a prominent opposition leader.
Meanwhile, OC Media, Nikuradze’s outlet, has pioneered efforts in crowdfunding and now covers around 10 percent of its operating costs through membership. “Everybody is still trying to find ways to survive,” Nikuradze told CPJ, adding that her outlet is also experimenting with other options such as advertising and sponsored content. Other media, including major oppositional broadcasters TV Pirveli and Formula TV, are seeking donations via a unified platform, with varying results.
Ultimately, not all of Georgia’s media outlets will be able to endure with fewer resources to go around, Nikuradze said.
“There will probably only be a few organizations who will survive this, due to different reasons,” she said. “Unfortunately, there will be some that will be shutting down.”
This content originally appeared on Committee to Protect Journalists and was authored by Nick Lewis.
This post was originally published on Radio Free.
Journalists have been targeted, detained and tortured by the Israeli military in Gaza — and Reporters Without Borders (RSF) has now taken a new approach towards bringing justice these crimes.
The Paris-based global media freedom NGO has submitted multiple formal requests to the International Criminal Court (ICC) asking that Palestinian journalists who are victims of Israeli war crimes in Gaza be allowed to participate as such in international judicial proceedings.
If granted this status, these journalists would be able to present the ICC with the direct and personal harm they have suffered at the hands of Israeli forces, reports RSF.
RSF has filed four complaints with the ICC concerning war crimes committed against journalists in Gaza and recently joined director Sepideh Farsi at the Cannes Film Festival to pay tribute to Fatma Hassoun, a photojournalist killed by the Israeli army after it was revealed she was featured in the documentary film Put Your Soul on Your Hand and Walk.
After filing the four complaints with the ICC concerning war crimes committed against journalists in Gaza since October 2023, RSF is resolutely continuing its efforts to bring the issue before international justice.
The NGO has submitted several victim participation forms to the ICC so that Gazan journalists can participate in the legal process as recognised victims, not just as witnesses.
Being officially recognised as victims is a first step toward justice, truth, and reparations — and it is an essential step toward protecting press freedom and journalistic integrity in conflict zones.
Nearly 200 journalists killed
Since October 2023, Israeli armed forces have killed nearly 200 journalists in Gaza — the Gaza Media Office says more than 215 journalists have been killed — at least 44 of whom were targeted because of their work, according to RSF data.
Not only are foreign journalists barred from entering the blockaded Palestinian territory, but local reporters have watched their homes and newsrooms be destroyed by Israeli airstrikes and have been constantly displaced amid a devastating humanitarian crisis.
“The right of victims to participate in the ICC investigation is a crucial mechanism that will finally allow for the recognition of the immense harm suffered by Palestinian journalists working in Gaza, who are the target of an unprecedented and systematic crackdown,” said Clémence Witt, a lawyer at the Paris and Barcelona Bars, and Jeanne Sulzer, a lawyer at the Paris Bar and member of the ICC’s list of counsel.
Jonathan Dagher, head of the RSF Middle East desk, said: “It is time for justice for Gaza’s journalists to be served. The Israeli army’s ongoing crimes against them must end.
“RSF will tirelessly continue demanding justice and reparations. This new process in the ICC investigation is an integral part of this combat, and allowing journalists to participate as victims is essential to moving forward.
“They should be able to testify to the extreme violence targeting Gaza’s press. This is a new step toward holding the Israeli military and its leaders accountable for the crimes committed with impunity on Palestinian territory.”
Pacific Media Watch collaborates with RSF.
This post was originally published on IndigenousX.
ANALYSIS: By Ian Powell
When I despairingly contemplate the horrors and cruelty that Palestinians in Gaza are being subjected to, I sometimes try to put this in the context of where I live.
I live on the Kāpiti Coast in the lower North Island of Aotearoa New Zealand.
Geographically it is around the same size as Gaza. Both have coastlines running their full lengths. But, whereas the population of Gaza is a cramped two million, Kāpiti’s is a mere 56,000.
I find it incomprehensible to visualise what it would be like if what is presently happening in Gaza occurred here.
The only similarities between them are coastlines and land mass. One is an outdoor prison while the other’s outdoors is peaceful.
New Zealand and Palestine state recognition
Currently Palestine has observer status at the United Nations General Assembly. In May last year, the Assembly voted overwhelmingly in favour of Palestine being granted full membership of the United Nations.
To its credit, New Zealand was among 143 countries that supported the resolution. Nine, including the United States as the strongest backer of Israeli genocide outside Israel, voted against.
However, despite this massive majority, such is the undemocratic structure of the UN that it only requires US opposition in the Security Council to veto the democratic vote.
Notwithstanding New Zealand’s support for Palestine broadening its role in the General Assembly and its support for the two-state solution, the government does not officially recognise Palestine.
While its position on recognition is consistent with that of the genocide-supporting United States, it is inconsistent with the over 75 percent of UN member states who, in March 2025, recognised Palestine as a sovereign state (by 147 of the 193 member states).
Prime Minister Christopher Luxon’s government does have the opportunity to correct this obscenity as Palestine recognition will soon be voted on again by the General Assembly.
In this context it is helpful to put the Hamas-led attack on Israel in its full historical perspective and to consider the reasons justifying the Israeli genocide that followed.
7 October 2023 and genocide justification
The origin of the horrific genocide of Palestinians in Gaza and the associated increased persecution, including killings, of Palestinians in the Israeli occupied West Bank (of the River Jordan) was not the attack by Hamas and several other militant Palestinian groups on 7 October 2023.
This attack was on a small Israeli town less than 2 km north of the border. An estimated 1,195 Israelis and visitors were killed.
The genocidal response of the Israeli government that followed this attack can only be justified by three factors:
The first factor is the key. The second and third factors are consequential. In order to better appreciate their context, it is first necessary to understand the Nakba.
Understanding the Nakba
Rather than the October 2023 attack, the origin of the subsequent genocide goes back more than 70 years to the collective trauma of Palestinians caused by what they call the Nakba (the Disaster).
The foundation year of the Nakba was in 1948, but this was a central feature of the ethnic cleansing that was kicked off between 1947 and 1949.
During this period Zionist military forces attacked major Palestinian cities and destroyed some 530 villages. About 15,000 Palestinians were killed in a series of mass atrocities, including dozens of massacres.
During the Nakba in 1948, approximately half of Palestine’s predominantly Arab population, or around 750,000 people, were expelled from their homes or forced to flee. Initially this was through Zionist paramilitaries.
After the establishment of the State of Israel in May this repression was picked up by its military. Massacres, biological warfare (by poisoning village wells) and either complete destruction or depopulation of Palestinian-majority towns, villages, and urban neighbourhoods (which were then given Hebrew names) followed
By the end of the Nakba, 78 percent of the total land area of the former Mandatory Palestine was controlled by Israel.
Genocide to speed up ethnic cleansing
Ethnic cleansing was unsuccessfully pursued, with the support of the United Kingdom and France, in the Suez Canal crisis of 1956. More successful was the Six Day War of 1967, which included the military and political occupation of the West Bank and Gaza.
Throughout this period ethnic cleansing was not characterised by genocide. That is, it was not the deliberate and systematic killing or persecution of a large number of people from a particular national or ethnic group with the aim of destroying them.
In fact, the acceptance of a two-state solution (Israel and Palestine) under the ill-fated Oslo Accords in 1993 and 1995 put a temporary constraint on the expansion of ethnic cleansing.
Since its creation in 1948, Israel, along with South Africa the same year (until 1994), has been an apartheid state. I discussed this in an earlier Political Bytes post (15 March 2025), When apartheid met Zionism.
However, while sharing the racism, discrimination, brutal violence, repression and massacres inherent in apartheid, it was not characterised by genocide in South Africa; nor was it in Israel for most of its existence until the current escalation of ethnic cleansing in Gaza.
Following 7 October 2023, genocide has become the dominant tool in the ethnic cleansing tool kit. More recently this has included accelerating starvation and the bombing of tents of Gaza Palestinians.
The magnitude of this genocide is discussed further below.
The Biblical claim
Zionism is a movement that sought to establish a Jewish nation in Palestine. It was established as a political organisation as late as 1897. It was only some time after this that Zionism became the most influential ideology among Jews generally.
Despite its prevalence, however, there are many Jews who oppose Zionism and play leading roles in the international protests against the genocide in Gaza.
Based on Zionist ideology, the justification for replacing Mandate Palestine with the state of Israel rests on a Biblical argument for the right of Jews to retake their “homeland”. This justification goes back to the time of that charismatic carpenter and prophet Jesus Christ.
The population of Palestine in Jesus’ day was about 500,000 to 600,000 (a little bigger than both greater Wellington and similar to that of Jerusalem today). About 18,000 of these residents were clergy, priests and Levites (a distinct male group within Jewish communities).
Jerusalem itself in biblical times, with a population of 55,000, was a diverse city and pilgrimage centre. It was also home to numerous Diaspora Jewish communities.
In fact, during the 7th century BC at least eight nations were settled within Palestine. In addition to Judaeans, they included Arameans, Samaritans, Phoenicians and Philistines.
A breakdown based on religious faiths (Jews, Christians and Muslims) provides a useful insight into how Palestine has evolved since the time of Jesus. Jews were the majority until the 4th century AD.
By the fifth century they had been supplanted by Christians and then from the 12th century to 1947 Muslims were the largest group. As earlier as the 12th century Arabic had become the dominant language. It should be noted that many Christians were Arabs.
Adding to this evolving diversity of ethnicity is the fact that during this time Palestine had been ruled by four empires — Roman, Persian, Ottoman and British.
Prior to 1948 the population of the region known as Mandate Palestine approximately corresponded to the combined Israel and Palestine today. Throughout its history it has varied in both size and ethnic composition.
The Ottoman census of 1878 provides an indicative demographic profile of its three districts that approximated what became Mandatory Palestine after the end of World War 1.
| Group | Population | Percentage |
| Muslim citizens | 403,795 | 86–87% |
| Christian citizens | 43,659 | 9% |
| Jewish citizens | 15,011 | 3% |
| Jewish (foreign-born) | Est. 5–10,000 | 1–2% |
| Total | Up to 472,465 | 100.0% |
In 1882, the Ottoman Empire revealed that the estimated 24,000 Jews in Palestine represented just 0.3 percent of the world’s Jewish population.
The self-determination claim
Based on religion the estimated population of Palestine in 1922 was 78 percent Muslim, 11 percent Jewish, and 10 percent Christian.
By 1945 this composition had changed to 58 percent Muslim, 33 percent Jewish and 8 percent Christian. The reason for this shift was the success of the Zionist campaigning for Jews to migrate to Palestine which was accelerated by the Jewish holocaust.
By 15 May 1948, the total population of the state of Israel was 805,900, of which 649,600 (80.6 percent) were Jews with Palestinians being 156,000 (19.4 percent). This turnaround was primarily due to the devastating impact of the Nakba.
Today Israel’s population is over 9.5 million of which over 77 percent are Jewish and more than 20 percent are Palestinian. The latter’s absolute growth is attributable to Israel’s subsequent geographic expansion, particularly in 1967, and a higher birth rate.
The current population of the Palestinian Territories, including Gaza, is more than 5.5 million. Compare this with the following brief sample of much smaller self-determination countries — Slovenia (2.2 million), Timor-Leste (1.4 million), and Tonga (104,000).
The population size of the Palestinian Territories is more than half that of Israel. Closer to home it is a little higher than New Zealand.
The only reason why Palestinians continue to be denied the right to self-determination is the Zionist ideological claim linked to the biblical time of Jesus Christ and its consequential strategy of ethnic cleansing.
If it was not for the opposition of the United States, then this right would not have been denied. It has been this opposition that has enabled Israel’s strategy.
Comparative value of Palestinian lives
The use of genocide as the latest means of achieving ethnic cleansing highlights how Palestinian lives are valued compared with Israeli lives.
While not of the same magnitude appropriated comparisons have been made with the horrific ethnic cleansing of Jews through the means of the holocaust by Nazi Germany during the Second World War. Per capita the scale of the magnitude gap is reduced considerably.
Since October 2023, according to the Gaza Health Ministry (and confirmed by the World Health Organisation) more than 54,000 Palestinians have been killed. Of those killed over 16,500 were children. Compare this with less than 2000 Israelis killed.
Further, at least 310 UNRWA (United Nations Relief and Works Agency) team members have been killed along with over 200 journalists and media workers. Add to this around 1400 healthcare workers including doctors and nurses.
What also can’t be forgotten is the increasing Israeli ethnic cleansing on the occupied West Bank. Around 950 Palestinians, including around 200 children, have also been killed during this same period.
Time for New Zealand to recognise Palestine
The above discussion is in the context of the three justifications for supporting the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians strategy that goes back to 1948 and which, since October 2023, is being accelerated by genocide.
Unless the government, including Foreign Affairs Minister Winston Peters, shares these convictions (especially the “here and now” second and third) then it should do the right thing first by unequivocally saying so, and then by recognising the right of Palestine to be an independent state.
Ian Powell is a progressive health, labour market and political “no-frills” forensic commentator in New Zealand. A former senior doctors union leader for more than 30 years, he blogs at Second Opinion and Political Bytes, where this article was first published. Republished with the author’s permission.
This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.
By Don Wiseman, RNZ Pacific senior journalist
Papua New Guinea’s state broadcaster NBC wants shortwave radio reintroduced to achieve the government’s goal of 100 percent broadcast coverage by 2030.
Last week, the broadcaster hosted a workshop on the reintroduction of shortwave radio transmission, bringing together key government agencies and other stakeholders.
NBC had previously a shortwave signal, but due to poor maintenance and other factors, the system failed.
Its managing director Kora Nou spoke with RNZ Pacific about the merits of a return to shortwave.
Kora Nou: We had shortwave at NBC about 20 or so years ago, and it reached almost the length and breadth of the country.
So fast forward 20, we are going to celebrate our 50th anniversary. Our network has a lot more room for improvement at the moment, that’s why there’s the thinking to revisit shortwave again after all this time.
Don Wiseman: It’s a pretty cheap medium, as we here at RNZ Pacific know, but not too many people are involved with shortwave anymore. In terms of the anniversary in September, you’re not going to have things up and running by then, are you?
KN: It’s still early days. We haven’t fully committed, but we are actively pursuing it to see the viability of it.
We’ve visited one or two manufacturers that are still doing it. We’ve seen some that are still on, still been manufactured, and also issues surrounding receivers. So there’s still hard thinking behind it.
We still have to do our homework as well. So still early days and we’ve got the minister who’s asked us to explore this and then give him the pros and cons of it.
DW: Who would you get backing from? You’d need backing from international donors, wouldn’t you?
KN: We will put a business case into it, and then see where we go from there, including where the funding comes from — from government or we talk to our development partners.
There’s a lot of thinking and work still involved before we get there, but we’ve been asked to fast track the advice that we can give to government.
DW: How important do you think it is for everyone in the country to be able to hear the national broadcaster?
KN: It’s important, not only being the national broadcaster, but [with] the service it provides to our people.
We’ve got FM, which is good with good quality sound. But the question is, how many does it reach? It’s pretty critical in terms of broadcasting services to our people, and 50 years on, where are we? It’s that kind of consideration.
I think the bigger contention is to reintroduce software transmission. But how does it compare or how can we enhance it through the improved technology that we have nowadays as well? That’s where we are right now.
This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.
This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.
Donald Trump Jr. has been crisscrossing the planet using his dad’s name, his name, of course, to get all of these business deals and put money in his pocket, into Dad’s pocket, into everybody’s pockets named Trump and the administration got furious because Politico and Business Insider recently ran a story calling Don Jr the […]
The post Trump Threatens Media Outlet Over Don Jr’s Comparison To Hunter Biden appeared first on The Ring of Fire Network.
This post was originally published on The Ring of Fire.
NPR sued U.S. President Donald Trump on Tuesday over his recent executive order aiming to end federal funding for the outlet, a move that the lawsuit calls an illegal attack that “threatens the existence of a public radio system that millions of Americans across the country rely on for vital news and information.” Colorado Public Radio, KSUT Public Radio, and Roaring Fork Public Radio joined…
By Stanley Simpson in Suva
I am saddened by the death of one of the most inspirational Pacific women and leaders I have worked with — Motarilavoa Hilda Lini of Vanuatu.
She was one of the strongest, most committed passionate fighter I know for self-determination, decolonisation, independence, indigenous rights, customary systems and a nuclear-free Pacific.
Hilda coordinated the executive committee of the women’s wing of the Vanuatu Liberation Movement prior to independence and became the first woman Member of Parliament in Vanuatu in 1987.
Hilda became director of the Pacific Concerns Resource Centre (PCRC) in Suva in 2000. She took over from another Nuclear Free and Independent Pacific (NFIP) giant Lopeti Senituli, who returned to Tonga to help the late ‘Akilisi Poviha with the pro-democracy movement.
I was editor of the PCRC newsletter Pacific News Bulletin at the time. There was no social media then so the newsletter spread information to activists and groups across the Pacific on issues such as the struggle in West Papua, East Timor’s fight for independence, decolonisation in Tahiti and New Caledonia, demilitarisation, indigenous movements, anti-nuclear issues, and sustainable development.
On all these issues — Hilda Lini was a willing and fearless chief taking on any government, corporation or entity that undermined the rights or interests of Pacific peoples.
Hilda was uncompromising on issues close to her heart. There are very few Pacific leaders like her left today. Leaders who did not hold back from challenging the norm or disrupting the status quo, even if that meant being an outsider.
Banned over activism
She was banned from entering French Pacific territories in the 1990s for her activism against their colonial rule and nuclear testing.
She was fierce but also strategic and effective.
We brought Jose Ramos Horta to speak and lobby in Fiji as East Timor fought for independence from Indonesia, Oscar Temaru before he became President of French Polynesia, West Papua’s Otto Ondawame, and organised Flotilla protests against shipments of Japanese plutonium across the Pacific, among the many other actions to stir awareness and action.
On top of her bold activism, Hilda was also a mother to us. She was kind and caring and always pushed the importance of family and indigenous values.
Our Pacific connections were strong and before our eldest son Mitchell was born in 2002 — she asked me if she could give him a middle name.
She gave him the name Hadye after her brother — Father Walter Hadye Lini who was the first Prime Minister of Vanuatu. Mitchell’s full name is Mitchell Julian Hadye Simpson.
Pushed strongly for ideas
We would cross paths several times even after I moved to start the Pacific Network on Globalisation (PANG) but she finished from PCRC in 2004 and returned to Vanuatu.
She often pushed ideas on indigenous rights and systems that some found uncomfortable but stood strong on what she believed in.
Hilda had mana, spoke with authority and truly embodied the spirit and heart of a Melanesian and Pacific leader and chief.
Thank you Hilda for being the Pacific champion that you were.
Stanley Simpson is director of Fiji’s Mai Television and general secretary of the Fijian Media Association. Father Walter Hadye Lini wrote the foreword to Asia Pacific Media editor David Robie’s 1986 book Eyes Of Fire: The Last Voyage of the Rainbow Warrior.
This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.
Asia Pacific Report editor David Robie was honoured with Member of the New Zealand Order of Merit (MNZM) at the weekend by the Governor-General, Dame Cindy Kiro, in an investiture ceremony at Government House Tāmaki Makaurau.
He was one of eight recipients for various honours, which included Joycelyn Armstrong, who was presented with Companion of the King’s Service Order (KSO) for services to interfaith communities.
Dr Robie’s award, which came in the King’s Birthday Honours in 2024 but was presented on Saturday, was for “services to journalism and Asia-Pacific media education”.
His citation reads:
Dr David Robie has contributed to journalism in New Zealand and the Asia-Pacific region for more than 50 years.
Dr Robie began his career with The Dominion in 1965 and worked as an international journalist and correspondent for agencies from Johannesburg to Paris. He has won several journalism awards, including the 1985 Media Peace Prize for his coverage of the Rainbow Warrior bombing.
He was Head of Journalism at the University of Papua New Guinea from 1993 to 1997 and the University of the South Pacific in Suva from 1998 to 2002. He founded the Pacific Media Centre in 2007 while professor of journalism and communications at Auckland University of Technology.
He developed four award-winning community publications as student training outlets. He pioneered special internships for Pacific students in partnership with media and the University of the South Pacific. He has organised scholarships with the Asia New Zealand Foundation for student journalists to China, Indonesia and the Philippines.
He was founding editor of Pacific Journalism Review journal in 1994 and in 1996 he established the Pacific Media Watch, working as convenor with students to campaign for media freedom in the Pacific.
He has authored 10 books on Asia-Pacific media and politics. Dr Robie co-founded and is deputy chair of the Asia Pacific Media Network/Te Koakoa NGO.
The investiture ceremony on 24 May 2025. Video: Office of the Governor-General
In an interview with Global Voices last year, Dr Robie praised the support from colleagues and students and said:
“There should be more international reporting about the ‘hidden stories’ of the Pacific such as the unresolved decolonisation issues — Kanaky New Caledonia, ‘French’ Polynesia (Mā’ohi Nui), both from France; and West Papua from Indonesia.
“West Papua, in particular, is virtually ignored by Western media in spite of the ongoing serious human rights violations. This is unconscionable.”
This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, who has pledged to do his part in making the Trump administration the most transparent in history, issued a memo Friday imposing tight restrictions on reporters’ movements at the Pentagon in an apparent bid to crack down on leaks. Under the new policy, which takes effect immediately, journalists are prohibited from entering many locations across the…
This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.
At the height of the India-Pakistan armed conflict, several Pakistani X accounts on May 10 shared a picture of a woman in army uniform. It was claimed by users who shared the photo that Pakistan had captured an Indian female pilot. X user Dr. Taha posted this picture with the same claim. (Archived Link)
Indian
female pilot captured pic.twitter.com/NaAMfxGE2E
— Dr. Taha چیمہ (@MuhammadTahaCh1) May 10, 2025
X account Chand Sitara also posted this picture with the same claim. However, the user deleted the post later. (Archived link)
Another X account shared this picture with a similar claim.
Numerous X users also posted this picture taking a dig at India.
While investigating the viral image, Alt News came across a video report by The News Minute dated June 1, 2023. The video contained visuals of the wreckage of a plane crash along with the viral image. According to the caption, the visuals depicted an Indian Air Force (IAF) Kiran training aircraft which crashed on June 1 in the Bhogpur village of the Chamarajanagar district of Karnataka. However, before the crash, flight instructor Wing Commander Tejpal and trainee pilot Bhumika were able to safely evacuate from the aircraft.
The Indian Air Force had also tweeted about this on June 1, 2023.
A Kiran trainer aircraft of the IAF crashed near Chamrajnagar, Karnataka today, while on a routine training sortie. Both aircrew ejected safely. A Court of Inquiry has been ordered to ascertain the cause of the accident.
— Indian Air Force (@IAF_MCC) June 1, 2023
Star of Mysore published an article covering this and shared pictures of the incident, which also included the viral image.
PIB Fact Check, the fact-checking wing of Union government’s press information bureau, shared a tweet explaining the truth behind the photo.
To sum up, the viral picture is of an IAF aircraft crash that took place in a village in Karnataka on June 1, 2023. It is being falsely shared by Pakistani users who claim that a Indian woman pilot had been captured.
At the same time, another video clip was being widely shared with the same claim. In the video, a person is seen stuck in a tree with a parachute. Alt News found this clip in a post by Samachar First dated March 16, 2025. Hence, this clip also has nothing to do with the recent armed conflict between India and Pakistan.
The post Photo from 2023 IAF lane crash peddled by Pakistani social media users as Indian pilot captured appeared first on Alt News.
This content originally appeared on Alt News and was authored by Kinjal.
This post was originally published on Radio Free.
The Lilo & Stitch remake has landed, and it’s drawing big crowds. While some film buffs remain unimpressed by Disney’s latest retelling, the movie has earned over 70 percent on Rotten Tomatoes and is projected to bring in around $165 million at the box office over Memorial Day weekend.
According to The Hollywood Reporter, much of that buzz is coming from families with young children, as well as nostalgic Gen Z and Millennial viewers who grew up with the 2002 original.
Disney
If you’re riding the nostalgia wave and heading to the theater to revisit the story of Lilo—a lonely Hawaiian girl who adopts what she thinks is a dog but turns out to be a destructive alien named Stitch—why not celebrate with a themed feast?
Below, we’ve gathered some of our favorite Hawaiian-inspired and Lilo & Stitch-themed recipes, perfect for a post-movie snack and debrief.
Kitchen Sanctuary
Snow cones are a fun nod to Hawaiian shave ice—a beloved island treat and a staple at local gatherings. Since Lilo & Stitch is set in Hawaii, and Luki’s Shave Ice stand even makes recurring appearances in Lilo & Stitch: The Series, this sweet, icy snack is a perfect (and on-theme) addition to your movie night feast.
Get the recipe
Spam musubi is a beloved Hawaiian snack, but it doesn’t have to include processed meat. In this plant-based version, vegan blogger Deborah Gleason swaps the Spam for maple-glazed tofu, packed with umami flavor. It’s a delicious nod to Lilo & Stitch’s island roots—and the perfect handheld bite for your post-movie feast.
Get the recipe
Domestic Gothess
No, pepperoni pizza isn’t traditionally Hawaiian, but it does feature in Lilo & Stitch. In the 2002 movie, Nani gives pepperoni pizza to Lilo, not a Hawaiian one (which, fun fact, was actually invented in Canada), making it the pizza of choice in their household. This tasty recipe from Domestic Gothess gives the classic a plant-based twist, using seitan instead of meat for a delicious vegan version that Stitch himself would probably demolish.
Get the recipe
The Herbivorous Butcher
Kālua pork, traditionally slow-cooked in an underground oven, is a staple of Hawaiian cuisine. This delicious plant-based version from The Herbivorous Butcher Cookbook swaps pork for smoky, shredded jackfruit, delivering all the island flavor without the meat. Served on sweet buns, these sliders nod to Lilo & Stitch’s Hawaiian roots while keeping things fun, flavorful, and vegan-friendly—perfect for a tropical movie night.
Get the recipe
Leinana Two Moons
Poke bowls are a staple of Hawaiian cuisine, traditionally made with diced raw fish—but this vibrant version uses juicy, marinated, and sautéed watermelon instead. It’s a refreshing, nourishing meal that’s perfect to enjoy after a few hours of movie popcorn and Lilo & Stitch nostalgia.
Get the recipe
Vegan With Gusto
Huli huli is a beloved Hawaiian barbecue sauce, traditionally used on chicken—but in this plant-based twist, it’s paired with baked tofu for a sweet and tangy main dish. This oil-free version captures the spirit of island flavors while keeping things light, making it a flavorful centerpiece for your Lilo & Stitch-themed spread.
Get the recipe
Floured Frame
Finally, a little something for dessert. Malasadas are actually Portuguese, but they’re a firm favorite across the Hawaiian islands, where they’ve become a staple at local bakeries. This vegan version skips the eggs and dairy but keeps the pillowy texture and sugary coating, making them the perfect sweet finish to your feast.
Get the recipe
This post was originally published on VegNews.com.
The EU Council’s latest sanctions, intended to deter Russia’s war with Ukraine, include red. media founder Hüseyin Doğru, and AFA Medya (which operates red.), citing their coverage of Germany’s pro-Palestine protests which the council claims “supports” Russia.
Since the EU began rolling out one sanctions package after another in the wake of Russia’s 2022 invasion of Ukraine, the targeting of Doğru marks the first time the EU has used this weapon in the service of Germany’s crackdown on Palestine solidarity, a crackdown which has been condemned by UN officials and human rights groups.
The post EU Sanctions Red. Media For Covering Crackdown On Palestine Protests appeared first on PopularResistance.Org.
This post was originally published on PopularResistance.Org.
The brief videos posted by a group called Seniors 4 Better Care to YouTube look just like the political ads that take over the airwaves during campaign season. The voiceover in one breezy video claims without context that former President Joe Biden “broke” Medicare, the popular government insurance program for seniors, and that only President Donald Trump can “fix it.”
Another video suggests policies left over from the Biden era are thwarting research into a cure for cancer, while Trump’s election will bring a “golden age” and the elusive cure for cancer by “promoting innovation.” The video fails to mention that the Trump administration’s massive cuts to federal health agencies are causing mass layoffs at the National Institutes of Health, the largest funder of cancer research in the world.
The post Big Pharma Front Groups Muddle Debate Over Drug Prices appeared first on PopularResistance.Org.
This post was originally published on PopularResistance.Org.
A punitive defamation charge filed against one of Samoa’s most experienced and trusted journalists last week has sparked a flurry of criticism over abuse of power and misuse of a law that has long been heavily criticised as outdated.
Talamua Online senior journalist Lagi Keresoma, who is also president of the Journalists Association of Samoa (JAWS), was charged with one count of defamation under Section 117A of Samoa’s Crimes Act 2013 on May 18.
She was elected in 2021 as the first woman to hold the presidency.
The charge followed an article she had published more than two weeks earlier on May 1 alleging that a former police officer had appealed to Samoa’s Head of State to have charges against him withdrawn.
The accused was charged with “allegedly forging the signature of the complainant as guarantor to secure a $200,000 loan from the Samoa National Provident Fund”. He denies the allegation.
It was reported that the complainant was another senior police officer.
Police Commissioner Auapaau Logoitino Filipo reportedly said the officer had filed a complaint over the May 1 article, claiming its contents were false and amounted to defamation.
Criminal libel removed, then restored
The criminal libel law was removed by the Samoan government in 2013, but was revived four years later in 2017. It was claimed at the time that it was needed to deal with issues triggered by social media.
JAWS immediately defended their president, saying it stood in “full solidarity” with Keresoma and calling for an immediate repeal of the law.
The association said the provision was a “troubling development for press freedom in Samoa” and added that it “should not be used to silence journalists and discourage investigative reporting”.
“It is deeply concerning that a journalist of Lagi Keresoma’s integrity and professionalism is being prosecuted under a law that has long been criticised for its negative effect on press freedom,” said the association.
Keresoma told Talamua Online she had been summoned twice to the police station and the police suggested that she apologise publicly and to the complainant and the complaint would be withdrawn.
However, she said: “To apologise is an admission that the story is wrong, so after speaking to my lawyer and my editor, it was decided to have the police file their charges, but no apology from my end.”
Her lawyer also contacted the police investigating officer informing that her client was not making a statement but to prepare the charges against her.
Keresoma was summoned to the police headquarters on Saturday and Sunday and the charges were only finalised on Monday morning before she was released.
She is due to appear in court next month.
Lagipoiva Cherelle Jackson, the JAWS gender spokesperson with the International Federation of Journalists (IFJ), said in a statement Keresoma was a veteran Samoan journalist with “decades of service” to the public and media.
‘Outdated and controversial provision’
“Her arrest under this outdated and controversial provision raises serious concerns about the misuse of legal tools to silence independent journalism. The action appears heavy-handed and disproportionate, and risks being perceived as an abuse of power to suppress public scrutiny and dissent,” Lagipoiva said.
“The United Nations Human Rights Committee and UN Special Rapporteurs, particularly the UN Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, have repeatedly called for defamation to be treated as a civil matter, not a criminal one.
“The continued application of criminal defamation in Samoa contradicts international standards and poses a chilling threat to press freedom, particularly for women journalists who already face systemic risks and intimidation.”
Pacific Media Watch notes: “This is a disturbing development in Pacific media freedom trends. Clearly it is a clumsy attempt to intimidate and silence in-depth investigation and reporting on Pacific governance.
“For years, Samoa has been a beacon for media freedom in the region, but it has fared badly in the latest World Press Freedom Index and this incident involving alleged criminal libel, a crime that should have been struck from the statutes years ago, is not going to help Samoa’s standing.
“Journalism is not a crime.”
This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.
By Don Wiseman, RNZ Pacific senior journalist
An Auckland University law academic says Samoa’s criminal libel law under which a prominent journalist has been charged should be repealed.
Lagi Keresoma, the first female president of the Journalists Association of Samoa (JAWS) and senior journalist of Talamua Online, was charged under the Crimes Act 2013 on Sunday after publishing an article about a former police officer, whom she asserted had sought the help of the Head of State to withdraw charges brought against him.
JAWS has already called for the criminal libel law to be scrapped and Auckland University academic Beatrice Tabangcoro told RNZ Pacific that the law was “unnecessary and impractical”.
“A person who commits a crime under this section is liable on conviction to a fine not exceeding 175 penalty units or imprisonment for a term not exceeding 3 months,” the Crimes Act states.
JAWS said this week that the law, specifically Section 117A of the Crimes Act, undermined media freedom, and any defamation issues could be dealt with in a civil court.
JAWS gender representative to the International Federation of Journalists (IFJ) said Keresoma’s arrest “raises serious concerns about the misuse of legal tools to independent journalism” in the country.
Lagipoiva Cherelle Jackson called on the Samoan government “to urgently review and repeal criminal defamation laws that undermine democratic accountability and public trust in the justice system”.
Law removed and brought back
The law was removed by the Samoan government in 2013, but was brought back in 2017, ostensibly to deal with issues arising on social media.
Auckland University’s academic Beatrice Tabangcoro told RNZ Pacific that this reintroduction was widely criticised at the time for its potential impact on freedom of speech and media freedom.
She said that truth was a defence to the offence of false statement causing harm to reputation, but in the case of a journalist this could lead to them being compelled to reveal their sources.
The academic said that the law remained unnecessary and impractical, and she pointed to the Samoa Police Commissioner telling media in 2023 that the law should be repealed as it was used “as a tool for harassing the media and is a waste of police resources”.
Tonga and Vanuatu are two other Pacific nations with the criminal libel law on their books, and it is something the media in both those countries have raised concerns about.
This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.
This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.
BBC News regularly proclaims its supposed editorial principles of fearless, independent, impartial, fair and accurate journalism. In a January 2023 speech to the Whitehall & Industry Group in London, then BBC Chairman Richard Sharp boasted that BBC journalism is the ‘global gold standard’ of credible news reporting.
Two years previously, in 2021, the public broadcaster had proudly published a focused, 10-point plan to ensure the protection of the highest ‘impartiality, whistleblowing and editorial standards’. BBC director general Tim Davie asserted:
‘The BBC’s editorial values of impartiality, accuracy and trust are the foundation of our relationship with audiences in the UK and around the world. Our audiences deserve and expect programmes and content which earn their trust every day and we must meet the highest standards and hold ourselves accountable in everything we do.’
When it comes to the broadcaster’s coverage of Gaza since October 2023, and long before, BBC audiences have seen for themselves the hollowness of such BBC rhetoric.
For example, the BBC’s withdrawal of its own commissioned powerful documentary, Gaza: How to Survive a Warzone, earlier this year epitomised how much the UK’s national broadcaster bends to the will of the Israel lobby. The BBC dropped the documentary from iPlayer, soon after it was broadcast on BBC Two on 17 February, when it emerged that the film’s narrator, 13-year-old Abdullah al-Yazuri, is the son of Ayman al-Yazuri, a deputy minister of agriculture in Gaza’s government which is administered by Hamas. The film was withdrawn after a campaign by pro-Israel voices, including David Collier, a self-described ‘100 per cent Zionist’ activist, Tzipi Hotovely, Israel’s ambassador to the UK, and Danny Cohen, a former director of BBC television, who said that the broadcaster ‘is at risk of becoming a Hamas propaganda mouthpiece.’
Another documentary, Gaza: Medics Under Fire, made by Oscar-nominated, Emmy and Peabody award-winning filmmakers, including Ben de Pear, Karim Shah and Ramita Navai, has been held back by the BBC, even though it had been signed off by BBC lawyers. The film includes the testimony of Palestinian doctors working in Gaza under Israeli bombardment. It has been ready for broadcast since February after months of editorial reviews and fact-checking.
Over 600 prominent figures from the arts and media, including British film director Mike Leigh, Oscar-winning actor Susan Sarandon and Lindsey Hilsum, the international editor of Channel 4 News, have signed an open letter criticising the BBC for withholding the documentary:
‘We stand with the medics of Gaza whose voices are being silenced. Their urgent stories are being buried by bureaucracy and political censorship. This is not editorial caution. It’s political suppression. The BBC has provided no timeline, no transparency. Such decisions reinforce the systemic devaluation of Palestinian lives in our media.’
This, of course, is all part of an endemic pattern of BBC bias towards Israel under the guise of ‘impartiality’; a façade that has now been obliterated. The corporation’s longstanding, blatant protection of Israel, considered an ‘apartheid regime’ by major human rights organisations, has been particularly glaring since Benjamin Netanyahu’s extremist government ordered genocidal attacks on Gaza in October 2023.
The public has been subject to repetition and amplification of the Israeli narrative above the Palestinian perspective. Moreover, the broadcaster regularly omits ‘Israel’ from headlines about its latest war crimes committed in Gaza and the West Bank. Another remarkable feature of the BBC’s performance has been the dismissive treatment by senior BBC management of serious concerns about bias raised by their own journalists. A very brief summary of the BBC’s biased reporting on Gaza, and criticism by some of their own journalists, can be found in this thread on X. The essential conclusion concerning BBC News coverage of Gaza, wrote one dissident BBC journalist, is that of:
‘a collapse in the application of basic standards and norms of journalism that seems aligned with Israel’s propaganda strategy.’ [Our emphasis]
BBC management have ignored or dismissed ‘a mass of evidence-based critique of coverage’ from members of staff. So much for the BBC’s claimed commitment to taking whistleblowers seriously.
Karishma Patel, a former BBC researcher, newsreader and journalist, wrote earlier this year about her reasons for leaving the BBC. She observed ‘a shocking level of editorial inconsistency’ in how the BBC covers Gaza. Journalists were ‘actively choosing not to follow evidence’ of Israeli war crimes ‘out of fear’.
In a follow-up article last month, she observed that:
‘many [BBC] journalists are afraid to speak their minds – to challenge editorial decisions or speak freely to powerful presenters and executives. This isn’t a newsroom environment conducive to robust journalism – a profession all about the pursuit of truth and accountability.’
She added:
‘It’s important the public understands how far editorial policy can be silently shaped by even the possibility of anger from certain groups, foreign governments, our own government, mega-corporations – any powerful actor – and how crucial it is that more junior journalists who see it can speak up.’
‘A Precious National Asset’
Last week, the BBC’s director general warned of a disinformation ‘trust crisis’ that was putting ‘the social fabric’ of the UK ‘at risk’. Tim Davie pointed the finger at social media platforms such as TikTok and YouTube where, as a Guardian report on Davie’s speech put it, ‘disinformation can go unchecked’. We have previously written (for example, here and here) about how ‘mainstream’ editors and journalists love to point at social media as prime purveyors of disinformation, diverting attention from their own culpability in much larger crimes of state-approved propaganda that fuels wars, the erosion of democracy and climate catastrophe.
Davie said:
‘The future of our cohesive, democratic society feels for the first time in my life at risk.’
He called for ‘strong government backing’ for the BBC as a ‘precious national asset’ to be ‘properly funded and supported’. The fact that the BBC has itself massively contributed to a ‘trust crisis’ in disinformation and propaganda, encapsulated by its complicity in Israel’s genocide, went unmentioned, of course.
The late, great journalist John Pilger put it succinctly in an interview with Afshin Rattansi:
‘The BBC has the most brilliant production values, it produces the most extraordinary natural history and drama series. But the BBC is, and has long been, the most refined propaganda service in the world.’
Daily examples abound of why the public should regard BBC News with deep scepticism. On 12 May, BBC News at Ten reported the release of US-Israeli dual citizen Edan Alexander by Hamas. Senior BBC reporter Lucy Williamson said that Alexander had originally been ‘kidnapped as a soldier’. The terminology is deceptive: civilians are kidnapped; soldiers are captured. Why did BBC editors approve this loaded use of the wrong word, ‘kidnapped’?
Consider another example. Richard Sanders, an experienced journalist and documentary filmmaker, noted via X on 15 May that the BBC had included this line in one of its news bulletins:
‘Israel says a hospital [in Gaza] along with a university and schools … have become terrorist strongholds for Hamas’.
Sanders commented:
‘The BBC knows such statements are untrue. Yet that sentence took up more than a third of its 22 sec 7.30 am news bulletin on Gaza – with no rebuttal.’
He added:
‘8am they go to [BBC] correspondent Yolande Knell for a lengthier report. She repeats exactly the same sentence – again, with no rebuttal.
‘The listener is left with the entirely false impression it’s perfectly possible it’s true.
‘Bad, bad journalism.’
And yet this is standard BBC ‘journalism’: the ‘global gold standard’, remember.
Jeremy Bowen, the BBC’s international editor, is supposedly an exemplar of this gold standard. But his capitulation to the Israel lobby is repeatedly apparent in his interviews and articles. Media activist Saul Staniforth captured this clip where a BBC presenter said to Bowen:
‘[Netanyahu is] looking for other countries to take in Gazans’.
Bowen responded: ‘Well, that’s called…’
He then paused momentarily and continued: ‘… that will be called, by Palestinians and by a lot of people around the world, ethnic cleansing.’
Bowen presumably stopped himself simply stating the truth: ‘that’s called ethnic cleansing.’ This is what he would have said in any context involving an Official Enemy, such as Russia, rather than the Official Friend, Israel.
Jonathan Cook dissected an even more egregious example of Bowen’s favouring the Israeli perspective when the BBC journalist interviewed Philippe Lazzarini, head of United Nations refugee agency UNRWA. Before airing the interview, Bowen introduced the Lazzarini interview with a contorted cautionary statement:
‘Israel says he is a liar, and that his organisation has been infiltrated by Hamas. But I felt it was important to talk to him for a number of reasons.
‘First off, the British government deals with him, and funds his organisation. Which is the largest dealing with Palestinian refugees. They know a lot of what is going on, so therefore I think it is important to speak to people like him.’
As Cook observed, Bowen would never preface an interview with Netanyahu in a similar way:
‘The International Criminal Court has issued an arrest warrant for the Israeli prime minister, accusing him of crimes against humanity. But I felt it was important to talk to him for a number of reasons.’
During the interview, Lazzarini told Bowen that he was running out of words ‘to describe the misery and the tragedy affecting the people in Gaza. They have been now more than two months without any aid’. The UNRWA chief added:
‘Starvation is spreading, people are exhausted, people are hungry… we can expect that in the coming weeks if no aid is coming in, that people will not die because of the bombardment, but they will die because of the lack of food. This is the weaponisation of humanitarian aid.’
Cook noted:
‘Lazzarini’s remarks on the catastrophe in Gaza should be seen as self-evident. But Bowen and the BBC undermined his message by framing him and his organisation as suspect – and all because Israel, a criminal state starving the people of Gaza, has made an entirely unfounded allegation against the organisation trying to stop its crimes against humanity.’
He continued:
‘This is the same pattern of smears from Israel that has claimed all 36 hospitals in Gaza are Hamas “command and control centres” – again without a shred of evidence – to justify it bombing them all, leaving Gaza’s population without any meaningful health care system as malnutrition and starvation take hold.’ [Our emphasis]
As Cook pointed out, it is quite possible that it was not Bowen’s choice ‘to attach such a disgraceful disclaimer to his interview. We all understand that he is under enormous pressure, both from within the BBC and outside.’ But just imagine the huge moral standing and public impact it would have if Bowen resigned from the BBC, citing the intolerable pressure not to speak the full truth about Israel’s genocide and war crimes.
For those with long memories, recall the exceptional courage and honesty when two senior UN officials, Denis Halliday and Hans von Sponeck, resigned in 1998 and 2000, respectively, rather than continue to administer the ‘genocidal’ (their term) UN sanctions against Iraq that had led to the deaths of up to 1.5 million people, including around half a million children under the age of five.
One of the most insidious forms of ‘bad’ BBC ‘journalism’ is propaganda by omission, as we have noted in media alerts over the years (for example, see here and here). On 13 May, the investigative news organisation, DropSite, reported that Israeli troops had shot and killed Mohammed Bardawil, a 12-year-old boy. He was one of only four surviving eyewitnesses of the Israeli military’s execution of 15 paramedics, rescue workers and UN staff in Rafah, Gaza, in March 2025.
DropSite noted:
‘Mohammed had testified that some of the paramedics were shot at point-blank range – “from one meter away.” He was also interviewed by The New York Times for their investigation into the massacre, though his most damning claims were omitted from their final report.’
DropSite added:
‘Mohammed had been scheduled for a second round of testimony with investigators, this time with pediatric psychologists present. Instead, the 12-year-old war crime witness was killed by Israeli forces.’
At the time of writing, it is unclear whether he was specifically targeted in an attack, or caught up in an Israeli raid.
This shocking news has been blanked by the BBC, as far as we can see from searching its website. Indeed, our search of the Nexis newspaper database reveals not a single mention in any UK newspaper.
Imagine if Russia had executed fifteen Red Cross medics, first responders and a UN staff member in Ukraine, burying them in a mass grave along with their vehicles, including an ambulance.
Imagine if Russia had lied about this appalling war crime, as proved by footage recovered from the telephone of one of the executed victims.
Imagine if a 12-year-old Ukrainian witness to this Russian war crime was later shot dead by Russian soldiers. His killing would have been major headline news around the world and serious questions would have been asked.
The Fiction of BBC ‘Transparency’
As mentioned, BBC editors love to proclaim their accountability to the public and transparency of their editorial processes. How, then, would they explain their secrecy in holding private meetings with one of Israel’s former top military officers during Israel’s genocidal war against Gaza?
Declassified UK is a small publicly-funded independent news organisation that runs rings around BBC News, and the rest of the ‘mainstream’ media, on UK foreign policy and the impact of British military and intelligence agencies on human rights and the environment. Declassified UK reported earlier this year that BBC, Guardian and Financial Times editors had secret meetings with Israeli General Aviv Kohavi one month after the Gaza bombardment began.
In attendance were Katherine Viner, editor-in-chief of the Guardian, Richard Burgess, director of news content at the BBC, and Roula Khalaf, editor of the Financial Times. According to documents obtained under the Freedom of Information Act, Kohavi’s itinerary also included meetings with Sky News chairman David Rhodes at the Israeli embassy, and then shadow foreign secretary David Lammy, between 7 and 9 November 2023.
Kohavi had only stepped down from running Israel’s military months earlier. According to Declassified UK’s investigation, Kohavi had subsequently been ‘tasked with cultivating support for Israel as it escalated its brutal military offensive in Gaza.’
A journalist who was working for the BBC at the time of the visit told Declassified UK:
‘I don’t recall any internal correspondence about the meeting, which the BBC would ordinarily send out if there was a high-profile visit of this kind. I also find it very difficult to believe that the organisation would hold an equivalent meeting with the Hamas government.’
The journalist, who requested anonymity, added:
‘Not only is Kohavi’s visit unprecedented but it’s also outrageous that one of the most senior editors at the BBC should court company with a foreign military figure in this way, especially one whose country stands accused of serious human rights violations.
‘It further undermines the independence and impartiality that the BBC claims to uphold, and I think it has done irreparable damage to any trust audiences had in the corporation.’
Des Freedman, a professor of media at Goldsmiths, University of London, told Declassified UK he could find no mention of General Kohavi in any BBC, Guardian or FT coverage since 2023, when searching on the Nexis database.
He added:
‘Obviously off the record briefings have a place in journalism. However, meeting secretly with a senior IDF representative in the middle of a genocidal campaign as part of an organised propaganda offensive raises serious questions about integrity and transparency.
‘You would hope that news titles would go out of their way to avoid accusations of bias by rejecting the offer to meet privately and instead to put such meetings on the record. In reality, editors at the Guardian, BBC and FT appear willing to open their doors to Israeli spokespeople – no matter how controversial and offensive – in a way which is denied to Palestinian representatives.’
Conclusion: ‘Palestine Is The Rock’
The function of the major news media, very much including BBC News, is not to fully inform or educate the public about what our governments or other elite forces in society are doing. Their primary role is to maintain structures of state and corporate control that keep the public away from the levers of power.
Jason Hickel, a professor of anthropology at the Autonomous University of Barcelona and a visiting fellow at the London School of Economics, made these cogent observations recently via X:
‘Palestine is the rock on which the West will break itself.
‘Put yourself in the shoes of people in the global South. For nearly two years they have watched how Western leaders, who love to talk about human rights and the rule of law, are happy to shred all these values in the most spectacular displays of hypocrisy in order to prop up their military proxy-state as it openly conducts genocide and ethnic cleansing against an occupied people, even in the face of *overwhelming* international condemnation.’
He continued:
‘What do you think people in the South are supposed to conclude from this? What would *you* conclude from this in their position? Decades of Western propaganda have been shattered, this time in full technicolour. Western governments have made it clear that they do not care about human rights and the rule of law when it comes to people of colour, the global majority.’
In fact, Western governments do not even care about human rights and the rule of law in their own countries, where these conflict with the requirements of power and control by elites. As Noam Chomsky has pointed out over many decades, ‘there is a very elaborate propaganda system’ in capitalist societies:
‘involving everything, from the public relations industry and advertising to the corporate media, which simply marginalizes a large part of the population. They technically are allowed to participate by pushing buttons every few years, but they have essentially no role in formulating policy. They can ratify decisions made by others.’
(Noam Chomsky and James Kelman, Between Thought and Expression Lies a Lifetime: Why Ideas Matter, PM Press, 2021, p. 159)
BBC News is a crucial component of this elaborate propaganda system. No amount of self-serving managerial rhetoric about ‘trust’, ‘transparency’ and ‘impartiality’ can refute that fundamental reality.
The post Genocide in Gaza: The BBC’s Self-Inflicted “Trust Crisis” first appeared on Dissident Voice.This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.
By Patrick Muuh in Port Moresby
Journalists in Papua New Guinea are likely to face legal threats as powerful individuals and companies use court actions to silence public interest reporting, warns Media Council of PNG president Neville Choi.
As co-chair of the second Community Coalition Against Corruption (CCAC) National Meeting, he said lawfare was likely because Parliament had passed no laws to protect reporters and individuals from such tactics.
Choi said journalists were being left unprotected against Strategic Litigation Against Public Participation (SLAPPs) — legal actions used by powerful individuals or corporations to silence criticism and reporting.
“In Papua New Guinea right now, we don’t have any law to stop SLAPPs,” Choi said.
“Big corporations or organisations with more money can use lawsuits to silence people, civil society and the media. That’s the reality.”
SLAPPs are lawsuits filed not to win on merit, but to drain resources, silence critics, and stop public debate.
In some other countries, anti-SLAPP laws exist to protect journalists and whistleblowers. But in PNG, no such legal shield exists.
Legal pressure for speaking out
“We’ve seen it happen,” Choi added, referring to ACTNOW PNG’s Eddie Tanago, a civil society advocate who has faced legal pressure for speaking out.
“He’s experienced it. And we know it can happen to journalists too.”
Despite increasing threats, journalists do not have access to legal defence funds or institutional protection.
Choi confirmed that there was no system in place to defend reporters who were hit with defamation lawsuits or other forms of legal retaliation.
“Our advice to journalists is simple. Do your job well. The truth is the only protection we have,” he said.
“If you stick to facts, follow professional ethics and report responsibly, you reduce your risk. But if you make a mistake, you leave yourself open to lawsuits.”
The Media Council, in partnership with Transparency International under the CCAC, are discussing the idea of drafting an anti-SLAPP law but no formal proposal has been put forward yet.
Republished from the PNG Post-Courier with permission.
This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.
A forthcoming new edition of David Robie’s Eyes of Fire honours the ship’s final mission and the resilience of those affected by decades of radioactive fallout.
PACIFIC MORNINGS: By Aui’a Vaimaila Leatinu’u
The Greenpeace flagship Rainbow Warrior III ship returns to Aotearoa this July, 40 years after the bombing of the original campaign ship, with a new edition of its landmark eyewitness account.
On 10 July 1985, two underwater bombs planted by French secret agents destroyed the Rainbow Warrior at Marsden Wharf in Auckland, killing Portuguese-born Greenpeace photographer Fernando Pereira and sparking global outrage.
The Rainbow Warrior was protesting nuclear weapons testing in the Pacific, specifically targeting French atmospheric and underground nuclear tests at Moruroa and Fangataufa atolls.
The vessel drew international attention to the environmental devastation and human suffering caused by decades of radioactive fallout.
The 40th anniversary commemorations include a new edition of Eyes of Fire: The Last Voyage of the Rainbow Warrior by journalist David Robie, who was on board the ship during its historic mission in the Marshall Islands.
The Rainbow Warrior’s final voyage, Operation Exodus, helped evacuate the people of Rongelap after years of US nuclear fallout made their island uninhabitable.
The vessel arrived at Rongelap Atoll on 15 May 1985.
Dr Robie, who joined the Rainbow Warrior in Hawai‘i as a journalist at the end of April 1985, says the mission was unlike any other.
“The fact that this was a humanitarian voyage, quite different in many ways from many of the earlier protest voyages by Greenpeace, to help the people of Rongelap in the Marshall Islands . . . it was going to be quite momentous,” Dr Robie says.
“A lot of people in the Marshall Islands suffered from those tests. Rongelap particularly wanted to move to a safer location. It is an incredible thing to do for an island community where the land is so much part of their existence, their spirituality and their ethos.”
He says the biggest tragedy of the bombing was the death of Pereira.
“He will never be forgotten and it was a miracle that night that more people were not killed in the bombing attack by French state terrorists.
“What the French secret agents were doing was outright terrorism, bombing a peaceful environmental ship under the cover of their government. It was an outrage”.
Russel Norman, executive director of Greenpeace Aotearoa, calls the 40th anniversary “a pivotal moment” in the global environmental struggle.
“Climate change, ecosystem collapse, and accelerating species extinction pose an existential threat,” Dr Norman says.
“As we remember the bombing and the murder of our crew member, Fernando Pereira, it’s important to remember why the French government was compelled to commit such a cowardly act of violence.
“Our ship was targeted because Greenpeace and the campaign to stop nuclear weapons testing in the Pacific were so effective. We posed a very real threat to the French Government’s military programme and colonial power.”
As the only New Zealand journalist on board, Dr Robie documented the trauma of nuclear testing and the resilience of the Rongelapese people. He recalls their arrival in the village, where the locals dismantled their homes over three days.
“The only part that was left on the island was the church, the stone, white stone church. Everything else was disassembled and taken on the Rainbow Warrior for four voyages. I remember one older woman sitting on the deck among the remnants of their homes.”
Robie also recalls the inspiring impact of the ship’s banner for the region reading: “Nuclear Free Pacific”.
“That stands out because this was a humanitarian mission but it was for the whole region. It’s the whole of the Pacific, helping Pacific people but also standing up against the nuclear powers, US and France in particular, who carried out so many tests in the Pacific.”
Originally released in 1986, Eyes of Fire chronicled the relocation effort and the ship’s final weeks before the bombing. Robie says the new edition draws parallels between nuclear colonialism then and climate injustice now.
“This whole renewal of climate denialism, refusal by major states to realise that the solutions are incredibly urgent, and the United States up until recently was an important part of that whole process about facing up to the climate crisis.
Nuclear Exodus: The Rongelap Evacuation. Video: In association with TVNZ
“It’s even more important now for activism, and also for the smaller countries that are reasonably progressive, to take the lead. It looks at what’s happened in the last 10 years since the previous edition we did, and then a number of the people who were involved then.
“I hope the book helps to inspire others, especially younger people, to get out there and really take action. The future is in your hands.”
Aui’a Vaimaila Leatinu’u is a multimedia journalist at Pacific Media Network. Republished with permission.
This content originally appeared on Asia Pacific Report and was authored by APR editor.
How global power struggles are impacting in local communities, culture and sovereignty in Kanaky, New Caledonia, the Solomon Islands and Samoa.
In episode one, The Battlefield, broadcast today, tensions between the United States and China over the Pacific escalate, affecting the lives of Pacific Islanders.
Key figures like former Malaita Premier Daniel Suidani and tour guide Maria Loweyo reveal how global power struggles impact on local communities, culture and sovereignty in the Solomon Islands and Samoa.
The episode intertwines these personal stories with the broader geopolitical dynamics, setting the stage for a deeper exploration of the Pacific’s role in global diplomacy.
Fight for the Pacific, a four-part series by Tuki Laumea and Cleo Fraser, showcases the Pacific’s critical transformation into a battleground of global power.
This series captures the high-stakes rivalry between the US and China as they vie for dominance in a region pivotal to global stability.
The series frames the Pacific not just as a battleground for superpowers but also as a region with its own unique challenges and aspirations.
Republished from Al Jazeera.