If the Guardian journalist had done some fact checking, he would have easily found such evidence clearly contradicting the WCC spokesperson’s claims that they have “no connection to BDS”.
As readers of The London Magazine will learn in the latest issue of the publication, the American writer Ben Ehrenreich thinks “that the word ‘terrorism’ forms this very powerful narrative function in silencing Palestinian voices and giving the sole authority to Israelis.”
The Independent continues to lead the British media pack when it comes to story selections designed to paint Israel in the worst possible light. Here’s a recent example from the Indy’s Israel page of two stories published within a day of each other which each focusing on sexual attitudes within Israeli society.
Though most in the West could be forgiven for failing to appreciate that Israelis have a life beyond the conflict and actually occupy themselves with quotidian concerns such as ‘What’s on TV?”, the reality is that – in addition to the fact that Israelis can now (legally) enjoy popular Netflix shows like The Crown and House of Cards – the country has actually become one of the world’s leading exporters of home-grown tv show formats.
When the Guardian talks about Benjamin Netanyahu`s election victory, there is no semblance of balance. Netanyahu is described as having “crossed red lines,” “dealt a grievous blow to any prospect of peace process,” and is accused of having “trampled” upon democratic principles
Here’s the latest installment in our ongoing series of posts highlighting BDS Fails.
We contacted Times of London editors to ask if they typically use the word “Jews” (in their headlines) as a synonym for “Israel”, “Israelis” or “Israeli MKs”.
Yesterday, we posted about an article titled: ‘The Economist Explains: The status of Arabic speakers in Israel‘, included the bizarre claim that “Arabic songs were banned from Israeli radio for several decades.” We contacted the editor responsible for the article, who promptly responded to inform us that they upheld our complaint and removed the sentence in question.
A Nov. 27th article in The Economist titled ‘The Economist Explains: The status of Arabic speakers in Israel’, included the claim that “Arabic songs were banned from Israeli radio for several decades.” However, evidence suggests there couldn’t possibly have been such a ban (“for several decades”) on Arabic songs.
Our point isn’t to debate the merits of the Knesset’s muezzin bill, but to question why Fraser highlighted only Israeli efforts to limit noise from mosque loudspeakers – in a column focused on noise from a British airport – when he could have used similar examples from anywhere in the world.
Arab leaders have always treated Palestinian refugees as a political, rather than a humanitarian issue, and have placed political attacks against Israel above the welfare of the Palestinian people.
As the Jerusalem Post noted, the most recent FBI hate crime stats for 2015 showed that a shocking 53.3 percent of the religiously motivated hate crimes (or 664 incidents) were directed at Jews, who make up less than 2 percent of the population.
By uncritically repeating such toxic canards, and fail to make a serious effort to separate facts from anti-Zionist fiction, the Indy may increasingly be viewed by many within the British Jewish community as something akin to a purveyor of fake news about the Jewish state.
British magazine collaborates with Palestine Solidarity Campaign to produce ‘news’ about Israel (Update)
Though the PSC (whose Patrons include Jenny Tonge and Caryl Churchill) has every right to spread this kind of propaganda, the New Statesman – which, despite it’s hostility to Israel, fancies itself a serious news magazine guided by “scepticism” and “free thinking” – owes its readers more than to amplify, license and legitimise such one-sided, intellectually unserious hyperbole.
Cross posted from the blog of the Zionist Federation Prolific anti-Israel campaigner Ben White has announced the publication of his latest book: “The 2014 Gaza War: 21 Questions And Answers.” Given that […]
At times we take our collective memory of Guardian coverage of Israel for granted, so we’ve decided to provide a list of some egregious examples of bias and over the years – information helpful in contextualizing our ongoing analysis of the ‘liberal’ British newspaper.
The goal of journalism is to report the facts and inform the reader. When the Independent chose to mislead with a photo of Netanyahu, they were not engaging in journalism, but were involved in polemic and slander.
The spread of anti-Semitism – from university campuses to the heart of Westminster – is pernicious. Many may think of anti-Semitism as being a disease of another time. I, too, shared that belief. Yet the troubling truth is that this is wrong: anti-Semitism is alive and well. It’s time to kill it off before it’s too late.
In the Guardian mentality, you cannot carry a story of an ex-muslim persecuted for his apostasy for fear of inspiring hate against muslims. Thus a genuine case of hate crime is ignored on the grounds it could lead to other, imagined hate crimes.
The British do need to “reflect on a painful legacy”. Balfour was written in 1917. By 1922 the Mandate was in place. If the British had swiftly finished the job they had been given international license to carry out, just how many Jewish lives could have been saved?