A shocking new report has exposed how Gaza’s Health Ministry deliberately inflated death tolls, misclassified victims and included unrelated fatalities to fuel a narrative of Israeli atrocities. The Telegraph has the details.
Researchers accuse the Gaza Ministry of Health of overstating casualty data by including natural deaths, failing to differentiate between civilian and combat casualties and over-reporting the numbers of women and children killed.
The study by the Henry Jackson Society, a think tank, claims the figures have been manipulated by the Hamas-run authorities in Gaza for propaganda purposes, with international media outlets happy to repeat them uncritically.
The Gaza Ministry of Health has estimated that more than 44,000 people have been killed since Israel launched its military response to the October 7th Hamas attacks.
The Henry Jackson Society found that, based on Israeli and U.S. military and intelligence reports, around 17,000 of these were Hamas fighters, but claims that this has been frequently overlooked in media reports.
Its report states: “The Ministry of Health, operating under Hamas, has systematically inflated the death toll by failing to distinguish between civilian and combatant deaths, over-reporting fatalities among women and children and even including individuals who died before the conflict began.
“This has led to a narrative where the Israel Defense Forces are portrayed as disproportionately targeting civilians, while the a
ctual numbers suggest a significant proportion of the dead are combatants.”
Critics of Israel say that even if anomalies are excluded from the casualty figures, tens of thousands of innocent civilians have been killed in Gaza.
The report found numerous statistical anomalies and inaccuracies. Researchers say that around 5,000 natural deaths, which would have happened even without the conflict, appear to have been added to the list of casualties, including cancer patients who later appeared on lists of those still receiving hospital treatment.
Other errors – some of which were later rectified by the ministry – include adult casualties being recorded as children and several men being wrongly recorded as women, thereby artificially increasing the number of women and children recorded as killed.
Researchers, who established that the majority of those killed were men aged 15-45, said they found a pattern of victims’ ages being revised downwards by at least one year when compared to data on the Palestinian Population Register in an apparent attempt to inflate the number of children recorded as killed.
“This misclassification contributes to the narrative that civilian populations, particularly women and children, bear the brunt of the conflict, potentially influencing sentiment and media coverage,” said Andrew Fox, the report’s author.
The Henry Jackson Society said the casualty figures also failed to distinguish between Gazans killed by the IDF and those killed by misfired Hamas rockets or during the distribution of food aid.
Worth reading in full.
Stop Press: Israel is shutting its Dublin embassy, with Foreign Minister Gideon Saar blasting Ireland’s “extreme anti-Israel” stance, according to the Standard.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
Well pursued! It’s only persistent digging that turns up the worms.
Who cares what the BBC says, since when would any level of credibility be given to the BBC… Its like complaining to the flat earthers…
Ok prove to me the earth isn’t flat and is a sphere, without using anyone else’s photographs
And when is being rude been allowed here
When the moon landings are obviously fake
I rarely watch or believe anything the BBC says these days but sadly many older people in particular still turn to the Beeb for a trustworthy version of the truth.
The problem is, a significant proportion of the population look to the BBC’s their ‘trusted’ source, so it really is about fine the Govt clamped down on then and made it very clear that their legal Charter for impartiality is there deliberately and for a purpose. Will they though? I doubt it.
Since when has lying become acceptable?
Since the left went full woke, It’s now their main political lever!
“When it becomes serious, you have to lie.” ― Jean-Claude Juncker
Junker.. ex president of the European Commission.. says it all really..
“We all have to lie sometimes for the greater cause.” (Scientist to Prof Fenton referring to misinformation on climate change programme).
Well if its for the ‘greater cause’ then.. yes.. of course..
The left’s philosophy is ‘the end justifies the means’. If that means they have to lie, cheat and kill to rescue the public from capitalism and liberty, they’re willing to do it.
How far is far right I ask myself.. just up the road from extreme right. It seems you can’t safeguard your own well being today without being labelled.
I’m hovering between being an NVE (non violent extremist) and a DT (domestic terrorist).. and there was me thinking I was just a retired working class bloke who cared about his family, fellow man, and country.. I’m obviously mistaken.. silly me!
Exactly. If I’m “far right”, which the BBC probably thinks I am, then what’s wrong with being “far right”?
But by using these terms all the BBC do is reveal that climate is a political issue not a scientific one. ——Or as someone once pointed out “When you mix politics and science, what you get is —–Politics”.
Science only gets you so far. Ultimately everything is political. That’s why we have politics. In this case the science being used isn’t really science.
The BBC also reveal that they are happy to basically call everyone who doesn’t agree with them a Nazi, without having the balls to actually use that word.
They.. the BBC.. will never call anyone a Bolshevik either.. that would be a call too close to home..
I give you my version of what you just said. ——-Government cannot wait for the science so they use “consensus science” as the excuse for forging ahead with policies. Which by the way are mostly the same Liberal Progressives policies as they would want whether the climate was changing or not. —–In other words, it is and never was about the climate in the first place. ——-And as for the BBC, they are simply the climate crisis megaphone.
Indeed. I guess my point was that even with honest, accurate science there are political decisions to be made because there will always be tradeoffs – science is unlikely to come up with perfect solutions to complex problems. It’s a political decision to choose which competing interests are the most important. Even with covid I actually think it was right that politicians should have made the big decisions – they just made the wrong ones. In Sweden, politicians listened to experts and things turned out reasonably well, in the UK our politicians at least pretended to listen to experts and it was a shitshow.
My actual status would be ‘peak common sense’ which in today’s terms translates to ‘far right.’
Oh well.
We should perhaps take comfort from our enemy’s desperate attempts to smear us – the more desperate they get the more it’s clear they feel threatened
The ‘far right’ are left wing extremists. They have nothing to do with conservatives and libertarians.
Well said George. I’m probably considered “far right” but all that’s happened is we’ve probably stayed politically where we’ve always been and “the establishment” has moved further and further to the left. Just my theory, like my conspiratorial ones, which seem to be coming remarkably true.
BBC reporters said they had seen someone at the demonstration who had made social media postings. How did they know his/hee name and user name and why did they trawl the internet looking for it.
this suggests to me a very active political agenda and deployment of significant resources by the BBC. We’re they promoted by Khan’s staff on this too.
Much indignation expressed on this thread about BBC bias but I wonder how many commentators are still paying their TV propaganda tax? This was a nasty habit I gave up long ago.
I’ve got mixed feelings about this. In general, making the BBC look like the far left political organisation that they are is a good thing. On the other hand, are we being too defensive and/or not questioning the right things.
What do the BBC mean by “far right”? What is wrong with being “far right”? Why do we accept it as a “smear” term?
Believing there are people trying to bring about a New World Order might sound far-fetched (I’m undecided) but why is that belief “far right”?
“Far right” is basically a way to call people Nazis or Fascists (by Fascists I mean Mussolini’s lot) without saying say.
“Believing there are people trying to bring about a New World Order might sound far-fetched (I’m undecided) but why is that belief “far right”?”
Well you do surprise me tof. You will be on my side within twelve months and that’s a certainty.
I don’t doubt there is evil afoot, just unsure of the extent to which it is coordinated
‘Twas ever thus – the new elements that seem most dangerous to me are it’s global nature and the ease with which technology can be used to control people
Never forget that Hitler had at least one islamic batallion (common enemy the jews) – that to me makes Khan Far-Right
Meloni, Orban, LePen, AfD, BBB, VOX, any leader or party, ostensibly with concerns about immigration & supports traditional ideas of ‘family’ is labelled ‘far right’ by the BBC. It’s exactly the attitude demonstrated in the Lady Chatterley’s Lover trial (1960), when the QC asked “would you let your wife or servant read this?” It’s the Left now demonstrating a kind of patronising contempt for the rest of us. “Let them eat cake”, could well be a slogan by either main party at the next election.
Perhaps we should all jump on the Prime Miniters house. That doesn’t seem to bother the Progressive left (like the BBC) very much as they fall for the “global boiling” narrative coming from the one world government people at the UN.—– Yep you can stop traffic and sporting events and glue yourself to the street but to the BBC you are simply “highlighting” a serious “emergency”. But if you don’t want your car taken away and your gas central heating ripped out you are FAR RIGHT.
Or be White of course..
Far right is only far when viewed from the extreme left.
Many conspiracy theorists are now being proved to be so far right.
Excellent work Richard. The BBC reporter clearly holds a worldview whereby anything challenging the confected consensus/elite narrative on climate change is seriously triggering. That’s why she made up stuff about Nazi signs. The fact that authoritarian Mayor Khan uses his ethnicity as does the SNP leader to “other” his opponents is typical of the contemporary left. Unfortunately media are now far from disinterested in issues, as the increasingly histrionic Justin Rowlatt shows, they are activists for a cause. That means they have to find ways to discredit their opponents. The Far Right slur is the standard reply. However it’s wearing thin, and the genuine coalition of concerned Londoners cannot be silenced.
The weasel-wording in the BBC statement is excellent — We sent reporters supposed to do nothing but take images supporting our preexisting far-rightness theory but they couldn’t find any. As we were convinced they must have been there, though, we simply reported our theory as fact without having evidence for it — after all, compared to the number of people watching our programmes, London is village and most of our audience won’t have been there.
The BBC and the rest of the MSM do this all the time, so you can either complain and pursue every single instance, or embrace your position on the political spectrum as they define it. If resisting progressive nonsense makes me “far right”, so be it.
The first step is to ask them what they mean by “far right”.
The BBC need to be shut down permanently they are a toxic rumor in this country, protecting paedophiles, promoting racism and advocating transgenderism
Like all petty dictators Khan doesn’t like it when people see through his lies (children’s health vs more tax for me to waste) and complain. Typical, leftie nut case. Thank heavens I’m not living up there anymore
“I hope that doesn’t make me a “conspiracy theorist”
I love being called a conspiracy theorist. I take it as kudos nowadays and it usually means they’ve lost the argument.
Does anyone take the Beeb seriously these days..? Oh dear sadly yes many still do.
This one excruciatingly long boiling frog!
“In short, Khan appears to be exercising at the very least some form of influence over the BBC’s coverage of anti-Ulez protests.”
Khan is a mendacious snake. A Bare-faced liar and a self-serving villain.
I’ve posted this before, but if you haven’t seen it, just watch London Mayor Sadiq Khan, unable to answer simple questions about his claims, quickly resorting to insults. He is a disgrace and should be thrown out of public office and locked up.
This clip should be seen by everyone of voting age in and around Greater London.
https://www.facebook.com/TogetherDeclaration/videos/9400281276650412/?extid=CL-UNK-UNK-UNK-AN_GK0T-GK1C&mibextid=1YhcI9R