The Guardian are obsessed with Israel, that much was already clear. But the Guardian’s reporting on Israel also contains a vindictive hostility. An endless stream of negative articles, all carefully worded to present Israel as the most vile, oppressive, Muslim hating, Christian hating, gay hating, Palestinian hating, murderous nation on earth
The Itamar couple was gunned down in front of their four children while driving the family car, and As-Sayeh’s was found responsible for funding and authorizing it. While AFP and Independent Arabia mentioned his involvement as merely an Israeli accusation used to justify his “arrest” (thus omitting his conviction), Sky News Arabia ignored his connection to the attack altogether:
The original article included the wild and completely unsubstantiated claim that, upon invading Lebanon in 1982, the IDF rounded up “all males” as young as 9 years old.
The main point – one that we’ve made continuously at this blog when getting corrections from UK outlets suggesting that Tel Aviv was Israel’s capital – is that, regardless of the question over diplomatic recognition, Jerusalem has been Israel’s official capital since 1949. It is the seat of government, and the city where the Knesset, Supreme Court, Prime Minster’s office and most government ministries are located.
Sky News Arabia did not address the terror attack directly at all. However, after three days, in a report entitled “Israel avenges the ‘Dolev attack’ with 300 houses in the settlements”, it falsely described the innocent victim of the attack as “a settler”,
Though we contacted Daily Mail editors to ask for an editor’s note acknowledging the error, in light of the fact that the claim was made in an actual paper map that nearly one million Britons received (and not merely online), the damage can’t really be undone.
Our analysis showed that, based on our review of other news outlets that published a version of that same AP article, the Guardian was the only one that omitted AP’s paragraph noting the Palestinian violence which caused the clashes.
Those Labour activists who advocate for anti-Zionism (an opposition to the existence of a Jewish state) are doing just that by demanding that, for acceptance into their ‘progressive’ community, Jews renounce and abandon a key component of their Jewish identity.
In comparisons to other British media outlets, The Times is normally one of the more reasonable and thoughtful news outlets in their coverage of the Israel-Palestinian issue and antisemitism in the UK, a fact that makes their glorification of a pro-violence, antisemitic teen especially perplexing.
After ten years, we remain dedicated to promoting accurate coverage of Israel, and to combating antisemitic narratives and tropes which often accompany reports compromised by anti-Israel bias.
The Guardian review suggests there’s little self-criticism or reflection on display from these Palestinian writers – no evidence of stories in the anthology premised on the view that Palestinians are masters their own fate, that a distopian future is not pre-ordained and that better Palestinian decisions in 2019 will likely result in better outcomes in 2048.
Called “No Room for anti-Semites, We’re Already Full,” the website provides “some basic tools to understand antisemitism so that we can hide it better.”
The truncated quote significantly alters the true meaning and significance of the prime minister’s words, and thus fails to adhere to the Editors’ Code, which demands that newspapers avoid publishing inaccurate, misleading or distorted information.
Even by British media standards, this represents an egregious example of anti-Israel bias, as not a word in the report even alludes to Israel’s motivation for erecting the security barrier – the 2nd Intifada’s campaign of Palestinian suicide bombing that claimed the lives of hundreds of Israeli civilians in the early 2000s.
Here’s the latest installment in our ongoing series of posts documenting BDS fails.
Even for those who avoid employing explicit classic antisemitic tropes while vilifying Israel, the acceptance of the view that the Jewish state isn’t merely a state that’s flawed as all states are, but, rather, represents, as the late Robert Wistrich phrased it, a singularly “organic obstacle to peace and progress” necessarily vilifies Jews qua Jews.
The Guardian is now indistinguishable from the very antisemitic organs that the newspaper itself used to hate
We’re not sure at this point if the article has been temporarily removed pending an edit, or if it was taken down for good. Either way, it marks a positive trend within the British media whereby editors are far less inclined than they used to defend the counterfactual assertion that Tel Aviv is the capital of Israel.
Regardless of journalists’ individual views on the logic behind the economics-first approach of the new US peace plan, their insistence on treating Palestinians and their leaders like children by robbing them of agency serves, as much as any other single factor, to grossly distort their readers’ understanding of the conflict.
In a classic case of burying the lede, the Guardian obfuscated the fact that the only baby among the triplets born in the Jerusalem hospital to have survived did so because she received intensive state-of-the-art medical care for six months – the same exact level of care that a Jewish baby would have received.