Medialens spotted that the BBC attributed a bomb attack on Monday in Iraq to “al-Qaeda”, with apparently little evidence. They wrote to the BBC’s “man in Baghdad”, Hugh Sykes, and asked him “what is the evidence that al-Qaeda, rather than some other insurgent group, were behind the attacks”?.
Hugh’s answer genuinely made me think this was an early April Fool’s joke. In fact I’m still not sure Medialens aren’t making me look like an idiot:
No proof, but circumstantial evidence and reasonable presumption of AQI [al-Qaeda in Iraq] involvement – very much their modus operandum. Suicide attacks are their signature method, and this was a dramatic detonation suggesting a lot of explosive – again, very AQI.
And…who else would do this?
So, process of elimination, history of AQI attacks in Diyala etc.
And the logic of it Sunni Arab vs Iraqi Kurds. As a man in Jalawla told Reuters:
“Al-Qaida is targeting the Kurds because it believes that
we are involved in the political process and collaborating
with the Americans.”
This blows my mind. “very AQI” and “a man in Jalawla told Reuters”. “Who else would do this?”
As Medialens point out, the BBC claim they are “committed to evidence-based journalism”. Except they pick and choose when their committment applies, such as when they refused to report the use of banned weapons by US forces in their November 2004 assault on Falljuah.
