August 19, 2020
NY Times Praises Ilhan Omar’s Book While Glossing Over Her Antisemitism
A recent New York Times book review boosts Rep. Ilhan Omar’s (D-MN) autobiography while glossing over her antisemitism. In the paper’s Aug. 16, 2020 edition, NYT reporter Christina Cauterucci writes:
The memoir offers breathing room for Omar, who has been the target of racist attacks and whose history-making tenure in Congress has been marked by disputes with colleagues, especially over their support for Israel, in the claustrophobic confines of Twitter threads. Her efforts to deter further outrage are evident throughout the book, which barely touches topics that have inflamed her critics... But, with unrepentant recollections of schoolyard brawls with bullies, Omar bolsters her image as a scrapper constitutionally incapable of backing down. “Fighting didn’t feel like a choice,” she writes. “It was a part of me.”
Yet Omar supports the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement. As CAMERA has noted, "BDS seeks the end of the Jewish state, singles out Israel for opprobrium, has been declared antisemitic by various legislative bodies, and is endorsed by terrorist organizations like Hamas."
Ilhan Omar's problems with Jews and Israel
• In July 2020, an Omar campaign mailer accused her congressional opponent of being “in the pocket of Wall Street” and mentions three Jewish donors by name. The mailer references only the three donors, plus “Michael, a donor from Scarsdale, New York.” This echoes the anti-Semitic trope that Jews exercise excessive political influence through use of outsize wealth.
• In February 2019, Omar employed the anti-Semitic dual loyalty trope while referring to American Jewish supporters of Israel: “[There is] the political influence in this country that says it is okay to push for allegiance to a foreign country.”
• In February 2019 Omar tweeted, “It’s all about the Benjamins, baby!” in response to a report about AIPAC, a pro-Israel organization. Omar’s tweet echoed a longstanding anti-Semitic trope — the implication that Jewish political influence operates entirely (“all about”) through money as well as the implication that Jews exercise undue political influence. The tweet refers to the fact that a representation of Benjamin Franklin is on the $100 bill, the largest U.S. dollar bill in circulation.
• In March 2019 Omar stated: “some people [who] did something” — in describing the Islamist terrorists who killed thousands of Americans on Sept. 11, 2001.
• In a November 2012 tweet, Omar accused Israel of “hypnotizing the world,” while insinuating that her fellow lawmakers are purchased by Jewish money, and that the Jewish Americans among them have dual loyalties. Her comments meet the widely accepted International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition of antisemitism, used by the U.S. State Department and others.
The Times, of course, has had its problems with Jews and Israel as has been chronicled by CAMERA since 1992. A recent example involves the Times repeatedly turning to the radical Peter Beinart’s advocacy for dissolving the Jewish state.
Another recent example involves the newspaper’s erroneous claim that that there had been a “longstanding American policy treating the settlements as illegal,” which remained in place until Secretary of State Pompeo announced a reversal in 2019. The newspaper is aware of the error but has refused to correct or put forward a defense for its claim.
Perhaps particularly shameful is the newspaper's record during the early to middle part of the previous century when it buried news about the Holocaust.
It should not come as a surprise that the New York Times glosses over Ilhan Omar’s problems with Jews and Israel.
Posted by MK at 02:54 PM | Comments (0)
August 11, 2020
When TV Interviews of Ilhan Omar Constitute Journalistic Malpractice
Rep. Ilhan Omar’s (D-MN) documented animosity toward Jews and Israel was ignored in recent interviews by MSNBC and C-SPAN.
MSNBC’s The Beat for July 23, 2020 included host Ari Melber’s 10-minute conversation at 6:16 pm EST with Omar (screenshot above left).
MSNBC’s The Reidout with Joy Reid for July 24, 2020 provided a 15-minute conversation at 7:18 pm EST with Omar (screenshot above right).
C-SPAN’s BookTV program aired on July 26, 2020 a 35-minute conversation between host Peter Slen and Omar about her book, “This Is What America Looks Like” dealing with “her journey from Somalia as a refugee to becoming one of the first Muslim women elected to the U.S. Congress.”
These interviews provided Omar with valuable public exposure during an election season, but they failed to note her history of antisemitism.
Ilhan Omar's problem with Jews and Israel
• In July 2020, an Omar campaign mailer accused her congressional opponent of being “in the pocket of Wall Street” and mentions three Jewish donors by name. The mailer references only the three donors, plus “Michael, a donor from Scarsdale, New York.” This echoes the anti-Semitic trope that Jews exercise excessive political influence through use of outsize wealth.
• In February 2019, Omar employed the anti-Semitic dual loyalty trope while referring to American Jewish supporters of Israel: “[There is] the political influence in this country that says it is okay to push for allegiance to a foreign country.”
• In February 2019 Omar tweeted, “It’s all about the Benjamins, baby!” in response to a report about AIPAC, a pro-Israel organization. Omar’s tweet echoed a longstanding anti-Semitic trope — the implication that Jewish political influence operates entirely (“all about”) through money as well as the implication that Jews exercise undue political influence. The tweet refers to the fact that a representation of Benjamin Franklin is on the $100 bill, the largest U.S. dollar bill in circulation.
• In March 2019 Omar stated: “some people [who] did something” — in describing the Islamist terrorists who killed thousands of Americans on Sept. 11, 2001.
• In a November 2012 tweet, Omar accused Israel of “hypnotizing the world,” while insinuating that her fellow lawmakers are purchased by Jewish money, and that the Jewish Americans among them have dual loyalties. Her comments meet the widely accepted International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition of antisemitism, used by the U.S. State Department and others.
Is there any other prominent ethnic/religious/national group that would be so egregiously overlooked or slighted as in these interviews on MSNBC or C-SPAN or, for that matter, any other major network?
Posted by MK at 03:30 PM | Comments (0)
July 07, 2020
Boston TV Station WCVB Teamed Up With Terrorist Supporter CAIR
WCVB-TV (channel 5) (Boston’s ABC network affiliate) recently misled area viewers about a matter involving antisemitic propaganda. This occurred on its local Sunday show Cityline hosted by Karen Holmes Ward who is described by the television station as “Director of Public Affairs and Community Services as well as host and executive producer of CityLine, WCVB's award-winning weekly magazine program which addresses the accomplishments, concerns and issues facing people of color living in Boston and its suburbs.”
Curiously, WCVB deemed the aftermath of George Floyd's murder an opportune moment to re-air a CityLine broadcast about the negative reaction to Member of Congress Ilhan Omar's comments that were widely condemned as antisemitic.
The broadcast
The May 31, 2020 CityLine, focusing on the Boston area Muslim community, featured an interview with John Robbins, the executive director of the Massachusetts chapter of CAIR, designated an unindicted co-conspirator in a criminal conspiracy to help fund Hamas.
Ward, noting that Ilhan Omar’s comments led to a U.S. House of Representatives resolution condemning antisemitism and other forms of hate, asked Robbins about his view that Islamophobia, rather than the nature of Omar's remarks, were driving criticism of Omar’s comments that were akin to classic antisemitic propaganda. “That’s in the pot along with anti-black racism,” responded CAIR's Robbins, apparently understanding that linking Omar's critics with anti-black racists demonizes them yet more.
Ward asked, “Do you feel politicians on both sides are treating her [Omar] harsher because she is Muslim?” “Over and over again,” answered Robbins.
Ward pointed out that Omar's words are thought to denigrate the Jewish community, but even this, she suggests, is a solely Jewish-centric view, turning to Robbins to confirm that "in the larger world" Omar's views are not necessarily considered antisemitic. She asks: “In fairness to the Jewish community, many feel her comments were inappropriate. How are her comments being interpreted to the larger world?”
“She [Omar] apologized for anyone offended by that … [but] the idea is that anybody should be able to freely criticize any individual lobbying organization in the U.S.,” argued Robbins, adding, “Our hope is that this could be a breakthrough moment in which American Muslims can feel open to discuss any issues without taboo affecting our community, especially those in the Palestinian community who have felt they have not been able to discuss important issues.”
But what’s the evidence that Palestinians and other Muslims have fear, or reason to fear, to openly state their views on important issues? The host fails to ask. Meanwhile, viewers were left in the dark about what CAIR and Ilhan Omar are really all about.
• In a November 2012 tweet, Omar accused Israel of “hypnotizing the world,” while insinuating that her fellow lawmakers are purchased by Jewish money, and that the Jewish Americans among them have dual loyalties. Her comments meet the widely accepted International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition of antisemitism, used by the U.S. State Department and others.
• In February 2019, Omar voiced the antisemitic dual loyalty trope while referring to American Jewish supporters of Israel, “[There is] the political influence in this country that says it is okay to push for allegiance to a foreign country.”
• In February 2019 Omar tweeted, “It’s all about the Benjamins, baby!” in response to a report about AIPAC, a pro-Israel organization. Omar’s tweet echoed a longstanding antisemitic trope — in particular, the implication that Jewish political influence operates entirely (“all about”) through money. The tweet refers to the fact that a representation of Benjamin Franklin is on the $100 bill, the largest U.S. dollar bill in circulation.
• In March 2019 Omar stated “some people [who] did something” — in describing the Islamist terrorists who killed thousands of Americans on Sept. 11, 2001.
Why at this time of racial unrest including sometimes violent protests, would a Boston TV station rebroadcast a segment in which a disreputable source accuses critics of antisemitism of being racists?
WCVB viewers deserve better.
Posted by MK at 04:13 PM | Comments (0)
June 25, 2020
CNN’s Fareed Zakaria Declares That Israel Does Not Want Peace
In the teaser at the beginning of his June 21 show “Global Public Square” (GPS), Zakaria drew this unwarranted, likely agenda-driven conclusion:
Israel's Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu said if he was put back in office, he would annex parts of the West Bank. That dramatic act could happen just days from now. I will talk to Netanyahu's predecessor, Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, who said it is proof that Israel today does not want peace with the Palestinians.
In fact, Olmert’s assertions, as shown by CNN's transcript, fell far short of claiming that “it [annexing parts of the West Bank] is proof that Israel today does not want peace with the Palestinians.”
Zakaria, like his colleagues at CNN, can be depended upon to regularly disparage the Jewish state.
Posted by MK at 09:01 AM | Comments (0)
June 17, 2020
Haaretz Applies Inconsistent Standards to NGOs
A news story in Haaretz's English edition yesterday applied a double standard in its treatment of NGOs ("Fearing structural collapse, Israel halts dig in East Jerusalem," page 3, and online here.)
Nir Hasson's online article cited the "right-wing, settler Elad Association." Similarly, the print edition mentions "the right-wing Elad Association."
In contrast, when the article mentioned "The archeological group Emek Shaveh" it did not identify the organization as "left-wing" even though it has a clear left-wing agenda. Why the double standard?
If the political leanings of one organization is mentioned, then the leanings of the opposing organization should also be mentioned. Alternatively, if Emek Shaveh's political inclinations aren't mentioned, then why insert Elad's?
Nir Hasson's Hebrew article does not include political descriptions of either organization.
See also, "Haaretz, Lost in Translation"
Posted by TS at 04:22 AM | Comments (0)
June 02, 2020
Harper’s Magazine Echoed Palestinian Propaganda Condemning Israel And America
Writing in Harper's, Kevin Baker condemns the U.S. Middle East peace plan [“The Striking Gesture,” Easy Chair, May 2020], mischaracterizing it as, “Give up all your [Palestinian] hopes and your holiest places, embark on a terrible civil war with your brothers, hand over all your weapons …”
First, it’s not true that the Palestinians would be giving up their “holiest places.” Nowhere is it indicated in the peace plan that Muslims would lose any holy places.
Furthermore, the writer fails to inform readers why it would be dangerous to fail to limit the arming of a Palestinian state: There were the wars of 1948 and 1973 caused by attacks aimed at destroying the Jewish state by armies of Arab nations allied with the Palestinians. There was the war in 1967 precipitated by the hostile actions of Egypt, an ally of the Palestinians, endangering Israel. This had been preceded by an increase of Palestinian terrorist attacks upon Israelis.
Then, during the 1980s, 1990s and in 2000-2005, West Bank Palestinians perpetrated organized terrorist intifadas which killed over a thousand Jews.
The ongoing violence has been fueled by the Palestinian Authority's cradle-to-grave incitement of the people. For example, as the Wall Street Journal noted in 2015, “Mr. [Mahmoud] Abbas, the PA president, said the following on Palestinian television on Sept. 16: ‘We welcome every drop of blood spilled in Jerusalem. This is pure blood, clean blood, blood on its way to Allah. With the help of Allah, every martyr [murderer of Jews] will be in heaven, and every wounded will get his reward.'”
Hopefully, the next time a Harper’s writer deals with this subject matter or a similar topic, the approach will be more measured.
Posted by MK at 02:11 PM | Comments (0)
Reuters Arabic Misidentifies Dome of Rock
The following photo and caption appeared in the Arabic version of an article by Reuters’ Stephen Farrell, published on April 24 and dedicated to the opening Friday of Ramadan in the Old City of Jerusalem:
The Arabic reads: “Jerusalem’s Al-Aqsa Mosque with the Dome of the Rock behind it – a picture from the Reuters archive.”
However, the dome shown in the back of the photo belongs to the mosque itself, while the Dome of the Rock does not appear at all in the picture as is located behind the camera.
Notably, the English version of the same article is accompanied by a different photo and does not contain the error.
Given the great importance of both buildings to Muslims worldwide, it is rather striking that editors of Reuters' Arabic service made this error. CAMERA had notified editors of the error, and yet they have failed to correct.
Posted by TS at 08:24 AM | Comments (0)
April 02, 2020
When Palestinians Like Checkpoints
To some pundits, it goes without saying that checkpoints in the West Bank should be discussed with the bleakest of terms.
The checkpoints Israel erected in the West Bank during waves of Palestinian suicide bombings are understood by Israelis to be life-saving, and there is no shortage of examples they could point to of would-be bombers stopped at a checkpoint before they could reach their target.
Outside of Israel, though, they are often cast in a different light. They inflict "moral and physical suffering" for no other reason than to "humiliate and intimidate another people," insisted a pair of foreign visitors to the West Bank wrote the New York Times international edition, having once passed through a checkpoint.
"I can no longer endure the anxiety" caused in part by traffic created by checkpoints, insisted Raja Shehadeh, a frequent New York Times contributor who just last week absurdly claimed Israel's curfew on the West Bank in 2002 was imposed as "normal life" continued in the Jewish state, though 2002 was a year of relentless Palestinian suicide bombings and hundreds of Israeli deaths, unprecedented in Israeli history.
"Some of the checkpoints create terror rather than prevent it," declared the head of an advocacy group.
It was striking, then, to hear NPR correspondent Daniel Estrin reference West Bank checkpoints this Tuesday on Morning Edition as follows:
There are over a hundred cases of Palestinians who have caught the [corona]virus in the West Bank. … And Palestinian authorities very quickly imposed lockdowns even earlier than Israel did, much stricter lockdowns. It's very difficult to move around in the West Bank. Palestinians can't drive between cities. There are checkpoints that Palestinian security officials have set up. And Palestinians are rallying around their leadership right now. They like these strict measures.
The approval of these "strict measures" makes sense. Burdensome interventions like checkpoints are sometimes necessary to save Palestinian lives. When the alternative is hospitalization or death for sick Palestinians, they not only can handle restrictions on movement, but welcome them.
Editors rushing to print hyperbole about Israeli measures might also keep in mind that burdensome interventions like checkpoints are also sometimes necessary to save Israeli lives, too.
Posted by gi at 11:14 AM | Comments (0)
April 01, 2020
CNN’s Amanpour Condemns “power grab” By Israel’s Prime Minister and Others
We’ve said it often, but it’s worth repeating: Anyone interested in reasonably unbiased information about Israel (at least) should avoid the broadcasts of CNN’s Chief International Correspondent and Anchor, Christiane Amanpour.
In characterizing responses to the Coronavirus epidemic, Amanpour asserted on March 31: “Many leaders are using this crisis to grab special powers and violate civil rights… And Israel and even the U.K. grab emergency powers without an end in sight.”
The first third of the broadcast consisted of a conversation with William Burns, former U.S. Deputy Secretary of State, “about pandemic and politics.”
Amanpour asserted that there is
a power grab by Prime Minister Netanyahu. He's managed to consolidate his power even though he didn't win the election. And Benny Gantz, his opposition, has essentially given up his choice to form a government and decided to go into an emergency government of national unity. And Netanyahu has closed down courts and everything, which presumably, you know, inoculates him from the corruption trial that he was about to face.
But this charge contains typical Amanpour disinformation. As CAMERA’s Tamar Sternthal pointed out in responding to the same disinformation by others: “But Netanyahu did not shut down the courts. Nor did he delay his own trial. Nor have the courts been shuttered, though their activities have been curtailed… it was Justice Minister Amir Ohana, a Netanyahu ally, who ordered the courts to restrict their activity.”
And Amanpour asks Burns, “What does this all mean for that part of the world?”
Burns replies obligingly:
Well, I think in Israel, I mean, the pandemic has provided, in a sense, of a new political lease on life for Prime Minister Netanyahu. He can fight the criminal indictments that have been brought against him from the prime ministry assuming this government is formed, he can begin to rehabilitate his political image. It's not for nothing that, you know, a lot of Israeli political commentators call Netanyahu the magician… But, you know, at this moment, it seems as if, you know, what's being strengthened is an attitude in an Israeli government that doesn't see the urgency in trying to revive a two-state solution.
Amanpour responds here by ending the conversation, “Bill Burns, thank you so much for joining us. Thank you very much, indeed.”
Indeed – Amanpour unsurprisingly fits Israel’s response to the pandemic into her anti-Israel narrative.
Posted by MK at 04:16 PM | Comments (0)
March 25, 2020
Italian Artist Posts Image of Jewish Ritual Murder on Facebook Page
Giovanni Gasparro, a popular artist in Italy, has posted images of a painting of a Jewish ritual murder on his Facebook page. The title of the painting, which appears to have been produced by Gasparro during the end of 2019 and the beginning of 2020, is “The Martyrdom of Saint Simon of Trent, For Jewish Ritual Murder.” Images of this painting can be found on Gasparro’s Facebook page. The painting is apparently in a private collection. Gasparro has been commissioned by Catholic officials in Italy to adorn their basilicas and churches with his work.
The painting (which CAMERA will not show) depicts numerous hook-nosed Jews of varying ages looking on in glee as one of their fellows prepares to plunge a dagger into the baby’s chest. Another hook-nosed Jew holds a silver chalice in place, ready to catch the blood from the ritual murder. It is a truly horrific painting clearly intended to reawaken age-old hostilities toward the Jewish people.
CAMERA has contacted the artist himself via email asking why he would post such a horrific image during a time of plague. CAMERA has also contacted the Papal Nuncio in Washington, D.C. asking that he alert the proper officials in the Vatican about this outrage.
Posted by dvz at 02:11 PM | Comments (0)
March 16, 2020
NY Times Shows How Framing Slants Coverage
A couple of days ago, we highlighted how David Halbfinger, the New York Times bureau chief in Jerusalem, cast Israel's prime minister as a scold for, well, trying to protect vulnerable populations from a pandemic.
If that's how Halbfinger responds to helpful messages from the Israeli government, we noted, it should come as no surprise that, on the same day, the journalist also suggested Israel denies its Arab population democracy, simply because many Jewish lawmakers are skeptical of partnering with the Joint List. The Joint List is a mostly Arab political alliance that includes a communist party, an Islamist party, and lawmakers who reject the continued existence of the Jewish state and have praised terrorists.
Today, Halbfinger followed up with a piece noting that the Joint List itself refuses to join the Israel government. The contrast between his framing of Jewish lawmakers who don't want Joint List to be part of the government and Arab lawmakers who don't want to be part of the government is telling.
In exhibit one, from the New York Times's March 12 story, Halbfinger frames Jewish Knesset members who don't think the Arab List party should be part of the government as racists who see Arabs as "enemies." The political gulf is proof of bad behavior by Israeli Jews.
In exhibit two, from today's story, the shoe is on the other foot. We have Joint List Knesset members who don't want to join Jewish lawmakers in a government. The distaste goes both ways. But this time, Halbfinger doesn't wave the point around as proof that the mostly Arab MKs see Jews as "the enemy." Readers aren't told that the lawmakers reject the legitimacy of Jewish votes. Instead, the story is again framed in terms of what readers will see as bad behavior by Israeli Jews:
Posted by gi at 10:58 AM | Comments (0)
January 07, 2020
Seattle Media Oblivious To Imam’s Hateful Indoctrination Condemning Jews
The Masjid Ar-Rahmah mosque teaching – that Allah transformed Jews into apes and pigs for disobeying him – delivered by Imam (prayer leader) Mohamad Joban – was posted online by mosque personnel. This December 2019 indoctrination at the Seattle, Washington area mosque was mainly in English.
This inflammatory anti-Semitic rhetoric is an Islamist trope used to attack Jews and the Jewish state. Note that the “apes and pigs” teaching has long been a staple of Palestinian anti-Israel propaganda. Here is an example from Palestine Today (Palestinian news agency) via Palestinian Media Watch (PMW):
Headline: “The will of Martyr Omar Al-Abd who carried out the stabbing operation next to Ramallah”
“You [Israeli Jews], the sons of apes and pigs, if you do not open the gates of the Al-Aqsa Mosque, I am certain that after me will come a man who will strike [you] with an iron hand, I warn you! I know that I’m going there and I’ll never come back here; rather I’ll come back to Paradise, in the embrace of Allah’s mercies. How good and pleasant is death and Martyrdom (Shahada) …”
The Joban video clip was posted to the Free Speech Video Platform site (3speak). P L A Y:
Excerpts from the nearly hour-long presentation
[…]The question now Is whether they [the Jews who turned into apes] continued to have generations [of apes] after their death. The scholars have two opinions. He [one] said that after a while, all of them died. Because Allah made them monkeys as a punishment, they died already. But some say: “No, they have generations…”
[…]
Allah just wanted to tell us what Allah told you a long time ago that people turned into monkeys and that this is true. It is religion, look at them, some of them stayed apes and pigs …
Media covering Joban’s teaching
The only Washington media entity, that could be found, reporting the event is little-known MyNorthwest which nevertheless extracted an apology from the mosque but the apology appears nowhere else (yet).
The question is why didn’t leading local or state media outlets report about such anti-Semitic incitement in the form of a publicized sermon by a local mosque? Why didn’t these outlets — such as the Seattle Times, Spokane Spokesman-Review, The Herald, News Tribune or Seattle TV stations KING (NBC), KIRO (CBS), KOMO (ABC), KCPQ (Fox), KCTS (PBS) — consider this matter to be newsworthy?
It’s disturbing that during the current period of greatly increased violence victimizing Jews, local and state media outlets failed to inform the public of this instance of incitement to such violence.
Posted by MK at 01:07 PM | Comments (0)
December 10, 2019
AP Distorts: Bethlehem 'Almost Completely Surrounded'
Over two years after improving inaccurate language falsely citing Israel's security "barrier surrounding the biblical city" of Bethlehem, the Associated Press once again misrepresents.
AP's Joseph Krauss and Mohammad Daraghmeh wrote yesterday ("Palestinians in Bethlehem look beyond religious tourism"):
Bethlehem itself is almost completely surrounded by the barrier and a string of Jewish settlements
The Peace Now map shown below clearly shows where the barrier exists (solid red line) or is planned (dotted red line) on the northern and western sides of Bethlehem. On the south east, there are the settlements (solid pinks blocks) of Tekoa, Nokdim and Sde Bar. To the north and west of this block of settlements there are significant stretches with no barrier and no settlements. (The block with red lines, dubbed Givat Eitam, due south of Bethlehem, is slated for Israeli construction, according to Peace Now's map.)
In December 2016, AP's Isma'il Kushkush accurately referred to "the concrete barrier that surrounds part of Bethlehem."
Given that neither the barrier nor settlements abut significant portions to the east and south of the city, AP's description of Bethlehem as "almost completely surrounded by the barrier and a string of Jewish settlements" is unfounded.
Dec. 11 Update: "Times of Israel Corrects AP Error on 'Surrounded' Bethlehem"
Posted by TS at 07:27 AM | Comments (0)
Variety Redraws Israel's Map
"Variety is the most authoritative and trusted source of entertainment business news," boasts its web site but readers should not have any expectations about the accuracy of its geopolitical coverage. A May 2019 movie review which just came to our attention erroneously placed the northern Israeli city of Nazareth in "Palestine."
Asserting that movie director Elia Suleiman, "the eternal observer, trusts his audience to know the facts," Variety's Jay Weissberg gets the facts wrong, erroneously reporting: "'Heaven' begins in Palestine -- Nazareth, to be precise . . . " ("Film Review: 'It Must Be Heaven,'" May 24, 2019).
Nazareth is a city in northern Israel, within the undisputed pre-1967 boundaries of the country. It is not in "Palestine," the West Bank or the occupied territories, as this United Nations map makes clear.
Hat tip: Tomer Ilan
Posted by TS at 04:12 AM | Comments (0)
November 13, 2019
Again, NY Times Silent on Islamic Jihad Terror Designation
As we noted yesterday, the New York Times chose to remove the word “terror” from its article about fighting between Palestinian Islamic Jihad and Israel. While early versions of the story informed readers that Islamic Jihad is recognized internationally as a terrorist group, that information was scrubbed from the article shortly after 9am in New York.
Today’s follow-up story on the fighting, too, neglects to tell readers of Islamic Jihad’s terror designation. In fact, it’s been over six months since the paper informed readers that the group is listed as a terror organization.
CAMERA’s article yesterday pointed out that the Times repeatedly used the T-word after the U.S. operation that lead to the death of ISIS leader Abu Bakr al Baghdadi. But we don't have to look even that far back. Today and yesterday, on the very days the newspaper avoided noting — made edits to avoid noting — Islamic Jihad’s terror designation, it did see fit to inform readers that, e.g.,
• “Turkey regards the Syrian Kurdish militia [SDF] as a terrorist organization”;
• and that “Turkey also considers the Islamic State a terrorist organization”;
• and that the Chinese government claims Hong Kong protesters are engaged in “brazen terrorism”;
• and that ISIS is a “terror group.”
So why weren’t readers informed that Islamic Jihad is considered a terrorist group by the US, EU, Canada, UK, Australia, New Zealand and others? Is it somehow less important to share fundamental context about an organization that targets Jewish-Israeli civilians?
Posted by gi at 03:39 PM | Comments (0)
November 05, 2019
Reuters Errs on Administrative Detention For 'Anti-Israel Activity'
A Reuters article today egregiously misrepresents administrative detention, erroneously asserting that it is mainly applied to "Palestinians suspected of anti-Israeli activities," when in fact the Israeli practice applies in cases of suspected security offenses. The Nov 4. article ("Jordan says two citizens held in Israel to return 'before the end of the week'") errs:
Israel mainly uses “administrative detention”, or imprisonment without trial, against Palestinians suspected of anti-Israeli activities. (Emphasis added.)
The identical error also appears in this earlier Oct. 29 article.
Israel does not mainly use administrative detention against Palestinians suspected of "anti-Israeli activities" generally. Rather, the measure may only be applied in cases of suspicion regarding security-related offenses.
Thus, B'Tselem, an NGO highly critical of Israeli government policies and activity in the West Bank, explains:
In the West Bank (not including East Jerusalem), administrative detention is carried out under the Order regarding Security Provisions. The order empowers the military commander of the West Bank, or another commander to whom the power has been delegated, to place individuals in administrative detention for up to six months at a time, if the commander has “reasonable grounds to believe that reasons of regional security or public security require that a certain person be held in detention”.
The Associated Press, another leading wire service, accurately described administrative detention yesterday, stating that the two Jordanian citizens to be released later this week
are being held in administrative detention, an Israeli policy that allows for open-ended detentions without filing charges against people suspected of security offenses.
CAMERA has contacted Reuters to request a clarification. Stay tuned for an update.
Posted by TS at 07:38 AM | Comments (0)
October 06, 2019
In English, Haaretz Whitewashes Temple Mount Killings
In an article last week on the occasion of IDF's Brig. Gen. Eran Niv wrapping up his post as commander of the Judea and Samaria Division, Haaretz's English edition whitewashes the July 2017 killing of two Druze police officers shot dead by three Israeli Arab assailants just outside the Temple Mount.
Haaretz's English edition, both in print (page 4, Sept. 29) and online refer to the "deaths of two Border Police officers" in the summer of 2017:
The perceived violation of religious symbols is a particularly potent accelerant for violence, Niv says, recalling the violence that erupted after Israel installed metal detectors at the Temple Mount in the summer of 2017, following the deaths of two Border Police officers, as well as the brief outburst that followed visits by Jews to the Temple Mount in August on Tisha B'Av, which coincided with the Muslim holiday of Eid al-Adha. (Emphases added.)
Why does the English edition fail to note that the border police officers were killed by Israeli Arab assailants leaving the Temple Mount? Indeed, violence didn't erupt only after the officers' "deaths" -- their deaths themselves, ie murders, were violent.
The Hebrew version of the same article more precisely reported that the officers were killed (CAMERA's translation):
Niv identifies several negative accelerants which could contribute to an escalation: blood, the harming of religious symbols and nationalist friction between Palestinians and settlers. The religious element is particularly sensitive. The storm over the installation of metal detectors, after the killing of two border policemen at the Temple Mount in the summer of 2017, was a good example. In August [2019], we experienced a brief escalation following Palestinian rage, when Jews went up on the mount on Tisha B'Av -- which coincidentally overlapped with Eid al-Adha.
See here for more instances of "Haaretz, Lost in Translation," in which the English edition downplays, whitewashes or omits instances of Arab violence or other wrongdoing which were reported in the parallel Hebrew article.
Posted by TS at 05:21 AM | Comments (0)
September 24, 2019
Media Confounds, Calling Israel's Voting Arab Citizens 'Palestinian'
The impressive turnout on the part of Arab citizens of Israel in last week's elections -- making the Joint List of Arab parties the country's third largest party and placing it in position to lead the opposition -- garnered significant media coverage. Some media outlets, unfortunately, provided confusing coverage by insisting on referring to Israel's Arab voting population as "Palestinians," despite the fact that they are Israeli citizens, they do not reside in Palestinian controlled areas, and the overwhelming majority of them do not identify as Palestinian.
Particularly in the context of Arab citizens exercising their right to vote in Israeli elections, the "Palestinian" label is unjustified and misleading.
In The New York Times, for example, bureau chief David Halbfinger confounded:
Mr. [Ayman] Odeh’s ads practically beg Palestinian citizens to vote on Tuesday, saying that one million citizens, if they all voted, would translate into 28 seats in the Knesset. . . .
Indeed, such misleading nomenclature for Arab citizens of Israel confuses them with Palestinians -- Arabs who live in Palestinian-controlled territories and who do not hold Israeli citizenship. For example, in the same article, Halbfinger refers to "Israel's treatment of the Palestinians living under the occupation" and also to an Instagram photo of an "iconic Tel Aviv skyscraper with its facade displaying the Palestinian national flag." How are all but the already well-informed readers meant to unpack this terminology, and distinguish between the voting "Palestinians" versus Arabs in the West Bank or Gaza who are not Israeli citizens?
Indeed, NPR's Daniel Estrin seems to recognize the problem with referring to Israel's Arabs as "Palestinian" even as he does so. He refers to "Palestinian Arab citizens of Israel" but then feels compelled to clarify:
And another thing to note here is that the party representing Palestinian Arab citizens of Israel - I'm not talking about the Palestinians of the West Bank and Gaza, they don't have voting rights in Israel - but the Arab party is poised to be the third-largest party in the Parliament.
Besides confusing uniformed news consumers, referring to Israel's Arabs as "Palestinians" does not reflect how the vast majority self-identify. A poll released this week by the Guttman Center for Public Opinion and Policy Research at the Israel Democracy Institute found that 13 percent of Israeli Arabs identify primarily as Palestinians. As Haaretz reported:
Nearly two-thirds (65 percent) of Arab citizens said they were proud to be Israelis – the highest rate since 2003. Asked how they self-identify, 38 percent said as Arab, 36 percent said by religion (Muslim, Christian or Druze), 13 percent said as Palestinian and 9.5 percent said as Israeli.
Posted by TS at 07:31 AM | Comments (0)
September 10, 2019
Mahmoud Abbas’ Diatribe Threatening Israel Included Bogus Canaanite Claim
Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas’ recent anti-Israel diatribe that aired on PA TV was monitored and translated by Palestinian Media Watch (PMW).
Excerpt: "I say to [Israel]: Every stone you have built on our land [present day Israel and the West Bank] and every house you have built on our land — there is no escaping that they will disappear, Allah willing. And the more they announce houses here or settlements there — they will all disappear, Allah willing, and will be in the garbage dump of history. And [Israelis] will remember that this land belongs to its people; this land belongs to its inhabitants; this land belongs to the Canaanites who were here 5,000 years ago — and we are the Canaanites!... We will enter Jerusalem as fighters by the millions…”
(PMW is an Israel-based nongovernmental non-profit organization that monitors Arab media in the West Bank, eastern Jerusalem and the Gaza Strip.)
Palestinian historical histrionics
The Canaanite claim even goes against at least one passage in the Quran (Koran) (Islam’s bible). Chapter 5, verse 21 teaches that the land of Israel (from the river to the sea) belongs to the Jewish people: “Moses said to his people: O my people! Remember the bounty of God upon you when He bestowed prophets upon you and made you kings and gave you that which had not been given to anyone before you amongst the nations. O my people! Enter the Holy Land which God has written for you, and do not turn tail, otherwise you will be losers.”
Moreover, the Canaanite claim is unsupported by any historical or scientific evidence. On the other hand, contradicting Palestinian denials of Jewish rights to the Land, there is a continuous Jewish diaspora history from the Roman expulsions to the rebirth of Israel as a Jewish state. And ample archeological evidence and biological (DNA) evidence exists — cited here, here and here.
Other such hateful diatribes indoctrinating the Palestinian people are plentiful; for example, a teaching on television by the PA’s Supreme Shari’a Judge Mahmoud Al-Habbash, PA Chairman Abbas’ personal advisor on Islam. Al-Habbash stated that Israelis/Jews are the “enemies of Islam,” have a “culture of Satan,” and represent “evil.”
And finally, why do virtually all mainstream media entities — although extensively covering the Palestinian conflict with Israel — continue to ignore all the hateful Palestinian brainwashing?
Posted by MK at 05:30 PM | Comments (0)
August 07, 2019
A Skewed NY Times Story on BDS, Then a Skewed Letters Section
After the New York Times published a skewed story about the anti-Israel BDS campaign, we detailed how the newspaper's reporters "put their fingers on the scales in support of BDS."
One of the many examples we noted: The authors quoted all of five words by critics of the BDS movement, which seeks to eliminate Israel. (This was alongside over 75 quoted words by the movement and its founders.)
The newspaper hardly did better in its subsequent Letters section, which was likewise skewed in favor of anti-Israel and pro-BDS voices.
In all, three short letters totaling 308 words focused on criticism of the BDS campaign. In the remaining five letters, 815 words were dedicated to defending BDS, attacking Israel, and slamming critics of BDS.
So the final words of our critique of the Times news story bear repeating, this time about the Letters section:
If the BDS movement’s few successes were “public-relations victories,” as the Times put it, perhaps it is only because they have people in the media who serve as good PR agents. The New York Times reporters might want to consider how they fit in to this.
Posted by gi at 10:58 AM | Comments (0)