An op-ed published today at the Indy is characteristically strong on propaganda and weak on facts – which is not surprising given that the author, Ryvka Barnard (Senior Campaigns Officer at War on Want), contributes to both Electronic Intifada and Mondoweiss.
Trump’s ban on citizens of seven foreign countries from entering the US represents a completely different dynamic than what he’s trying to describe in the Palestinian territories. There’s no Israeli “ban” on Palestinians. There are checkpoints and other security measures erected to prevent terrorism on both sides of the green line, but tends of thousands of Palestinians pass into Israel each day to work, visit family and receive medical care.
The putative ‘erosion’ of Israel’s democracy is one of those NGO and media-driven narratives that has developed into something akin to conventional wisdom among the state’s critics – despite the dearth of […]
Whilst she was in London, Zoabi was also interviewed by LBC host James O’Brien, who similarly failed to challenge multiple distortions and falsehoods by the extremist Arab Israeli MK. Here’s a list of the almost entirely unchallenged propaganda by Zoabi.
It’s important to note that, in 2012, the Press Complaints Commission ruled that it is wrong to state that Tel Aviv is the capital of Israel.
We have got so used to these extreme critiques of settlements, that we forget the basis on which they rest – that for a Palestinian state to exist, there must be no Jews whatsoever within its territory. This assumption is often unchallenged, but when one analyses it, it is hard to characterise it as anything other racist.
Whatever one’s views on Israeli construction across the green line, the narrative often advanced in the UK media – of new settlements expanding at ‘a record pace’, eating away at ‘huge swaths’ of Palestinian territory and rendering a future Palestinian state nearly impossible – is, at best, extraordinarily misleading.
Are Israeli homes built across the green line only considered “illegal settlement construction” when the homes are built for Jews?
The event was held at Queen Mary University of London (QMUL) campus, ‘discussing the BDS movement, its impact and importance’. Hosted by the QMUL Friends of Palestine Society, it was a Friends of Al Aqsa (FOA) event, and a bag of FOA material was handed out to all attendees.
Hebron is an important city to Israelis and Palestinians, to Jews and to Muslims, and the situation there is complex. The UK media should reflect this complexity, rather than warping a story to fit premade ideological outlooks.
CAMERA and other watchdog groups have refuted Adalah’s claims that there are 50 “racist laws” in Israel – a term used so carelessly by the NGO that even an Israeli public health law requiring that parents vaccinate their children is bizarrely included on their list of “racist laws”.
The Qatari government-funded channel appears to have embarked on an exercise that is nothing more than straightforward Jew-baiting dressed up as an investigation.
The fact that Rafsanjani was relatively more liberal than his contemporaries in Iran should not be used to cover up the uncomfortable truth – that anti-Israel hatred pervades all elements of the Iranian leadership, “moderates” and conservatives alike.
However you want to characterise demographic changes in the holy city since 1967, the implicit suggestion that Palestinians have been or are currently being ethnically cleansed in Jerusalem (or anywhere else in Israel for that matter) is the opposite of the truth.
By turning a complex and vexing political dispute into a binary moral paradigm, reducing the historical and diplomatic complexities of a more than 100 year-long conflict to one territorial dispute, and dismissing authentic, historically-informed Israeli fears of Palestinian intentions as nothing more than a failure of empathy and imagination, Emily Hilton is certainly not “challenging narratives”.
Al Jazeera on Sunday published “bombshell footage” covertly filmed in a West London restaurant involving Shai Masot, a political officer at the Israeli embassy, and Maria Strizzola, a civil servant and former aide […]
A guest post by Aron White A few weeks ago, Jewish Chronicle editor Stephen Pollard drew attention to the BBC`s “soft boycott” of Israel. The term, coined by Mr Pollard, describes the […]
Among those objecting to the government’s decision to adopt the Working Definition of Antisemitism were a group of anti-Zionists in the UK (such as Tony Greenstein) whose letter – accusing British Jews of falsely crying antisemitism to silence debate about Israel – appeared in the Guardian on Dec. 17th.
The wording of the Indy’s poll is extremely misleading, as it suggests that the mere criticism of Israel is defined as antisemitic by the WD. However, as the WD adopted by Theresa May makes perfectly clear, mere criticism of Israel is absolutely NOT considered antisemitic.
“International Law & the State of Israel: Legitimacy, Responsibility and Exceptionalism” is little more than the recycling of aged terrorist conflict-propaganda in an academic setting.