BBC fucks itself over globalise the intifada

The BBC has shown its true colours over an article which correctly explained the context of ‘globalise the intifada’. After receiving backlash from the Israel lobby, the BBC edited the article to align with Tel Aviv’s talking points.

Incredible. The BBC gets the context right – for once – and then proceeds to panic and correct it. No news organisation has ever wrecked its reputation over one story the way it has over the last two years. https://t.co/rFkDqe38Er

— Barry Malone (@malonebarry) December 18, 2025

The original article read:

The term intifada came into popular use during the Palestinian uprising against Israeli occupation of the West Bank and Gaza Strip in 1987.

It was a largely unarmed and popular uprising that continued until the early 1990s. The intifada also saw the development of groups outside the control of the Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO) — notably Hamas.

The second Intifada began in September 2000 after a controversial visit by Ariel Sharon, then opposition leader, to a holy site in Jerusalem. It is sometimes referred to as “al-Aqsa intifada” after the al-Aqsa Mosque in the Haram al-Sharif site, known to Jews as Temple Mount.

However, the BBC‘s brief truth-telling stint was not going to last.

It was then replaced with:

The term intifada came into popular use during the Palestinian uprising against Israeli occupation of the West Bank and Gaza Strip in 1987.

Some have described the term as a call for violence against Jewish people.

Others have said it is a call for peaceful resistance to Israel’s occupation of the West Bank and actions in Gaza.

Of course, the powers that be do not want an Arabic phrase associated with words like “popular” or “unarmed”. It wouldn’t fit their narrative.

Uh oh, it looks like a bit of history might have just been Berg’d at the BBC. Don’t want people associating “intifada” with ‘unarmed’ or ‘popular’ it seems.

Note also the load bearing “Some” in 2nd para of the correction. Who? Why? Berg’d.

h/t @FisunGuner for raising the alarm. pic.twitter.com/zW4lt7DZeH

— Ben Goren (@BanGaoRen) December 18, 2025

The Israel lobby has made it clear it will do whatever it takes to remove any semblance of a positive narrative when it comes to Palestine or the Palestinian people.

Ah … life moves fast but not as fast as the frenzied feeding of the Israel lobby as it mass attacks to expunge any positive mention and memory of Palestine from our media and news platforms via the useful tools who edit and host them. pic.twitter.com/wnUGji3Ycu

— Ben Goren (@BanGaoRen) December 18, 2025

Globalise the intifada distorted with Tel Aviv’s talking points

The BBC’s original article included a very rare explanation of the emergence of Hamas — which of course, the corporate media almost always fails to include.

From🔒accnt – BBC has since removed even ‘largely unarmed’ as well as *any* context for Hamas emergence.

I don’t want this racist org to survive as a news outlet tbh -if liberals can excuse its omissions & lies pls don’t expect support from those objecting to racist propaganda https://t.co/hv7fJckN4N pic.twitter.com/qAAYxw5ghP

— Fisun Guner 🇵🇸🍉 (@FisunGuner) December 18, 2025

So much for an ‘impartial broadcaster’. Impartial would involve doing a tiny bit of actual journalism — instead of copying and pasting press releases straight from Mossad’s PR list.

@BBCNews is an Occupied Territory. Edits an accurate story to align with Tel Aviv talking points. https://t.co/De45e16FGP

— Kathleen Tyson (@Kathleen_Tyson_) December 19, 2025

And of course, BBC journos could apply their critical thinking skills to the BS their bosses are spouting.

BBC 2025 – replacing what actually happened with ‘some people say’ https://t.co/SBaA90eBOR

— Gazorpazorpfield (@CSUnderstander) December 18, 2025

What the powers that be do not want people to know is that calling for intifada is literally calling for the end to the occupation, apartheid, and genocide in Palestine.

In the context of Palestine, intifada literally means *to shake off* the Israeli occupation. Calling for intifada, or for globalising the intifada is a call to end occupation, to end apartheid, to stop genocide. The Met is criminalising speech that aligns with international law. https://t.co/DQfhM6FfCS

— Sam of the Nord (@SamerAbdelnour) December 19, 2025

The First Intifada began in December 1987. International communities had already condemned Israel for being excessively violent.

Yes — some Israelis were killed. But that is against a backdrop of Israeli forces killing over 1,000 Palestinians.

And let’s not forget that people living under occupation have a right to armed resistance under international law.

The rule of law gives people the right to rise up against their oppressors. Intifada – beautiful noble Arabic – is exactly the right word. https://t.co/1n5yPZIjXh

— EconomicsAotearoa (@economicsNZ) December 17, 2025

The BBC doesn’t quite go there, but the first intifada was non-violent (civil disobedience and boycotts) *but* was met with shocking levels of military (and settler) violence and collective punishment by the IOF, which is when Hamas and other groups emerged. https://t.co/bnquYrp3wZ

— Fisun Guner 🇵🇸🍉 (@FisunGuner) December 17, 2025

Now, the Met Police is effectively criminalising something that is legal under international law.

The BBC has changed its story on today’s arrests of pro-Palestine chants of intifada because it described the 1st intifada as “largely unarmed” and this is clearly not acceptable to pro-Israel historians who police the BBC’s news output pic.twitter.com/m3d1B1S1Vt

— Des Freedman (@lazebnic) December 17, 2025

The BBC has been playing this game for years. Changing the script and rewriting the narrative. This time it’s globalise the intifada.

But what should we expect when forces like UK Lawyers for Israel are throwing their weight around, and zionist millionaires are funding our politicians? Add in some fake antisemitism claims, and the truth really doesn’t stand a chance.

The BBC needs to either grow a pair, or drop the ‘impartial public broadcaster’ bullshit — because it is clear who is pulling the strings.

Feature image via HG