The Guardian simply has no credibility on the issue of anti-Jewish racism, and we seriously doubt that the editor responsible for the piece condemning attacks on Soros was motivated by a genuine anger towards antisemitic expressions. As Guardian journalist Michael White tweeted, on an unrelated controversy, “we all cherry pick our outrage sometimes”.
The suggestion in the EU report that the Jewish “narrative” is being promoted “at the expense of other religions” represents the opposite of the truth, as Israel continues to safeguard Muslim holy sites in Jerusalem, whilst Palestinian leaders continually deny Jewish history in the holy city and incite their people to view any Jewish presence on Judaism’s holiest site as an intrusion onto an exclusively ‘Muslim’ site.
Despite the fact that Burke acknowledges that “the emergence of terrorism as we know it today” begun “in the second half of the 19th century”, his historical overview of modern terror somehow manages to avoid any mention of Palestinian attacks against Jews in Israeli cities, or Palestinian attacks on Jewish targets in Western cities.
Indy’s former Jerusalem reporter: Gaza tunnels are a testament to Palestinian “hard work and ingenuity”
Macintyre, the Indy’s former Jerusalem correspondent, said that Hamas were “a relatively pragmatic Islamist regime”, suggested Gazans are free to criticise the regime, and that the terror group’s building of tunnels was “testament to their hard work and ingenuity”.
It is entirely logical for Israel to not allow BDS activists into the country. It is not because they are documenting human rights violations – human rights organisations work freely in Israel. It is because they have made the choice to join a movement whose stated aim is to harm Israel. Why do such people have the right to enter the country they seek to harm?
There seems to be no limit to the lengths the Guardian will go to ignore, obfuscate or excuse Palestinian extremism, incitement or historical revisionism. Their former Middle East Editor, Ian Black, provided his take on Mahmoud Abbas’s recent speech in Ramallah and characteristically airbrushed the most indefensible parts in order to maintain the narrative of a ‘moderate’, even “principled” Palestinian President.
The low lights of a diatribe against the world in Ramallah last night by the Palestinian “president”, who today celebrated the 12th year of a 4 year term, included his characterisation of Israel as a European “colonialist project, which has nothing to do with the Jews”. Thus far, among UK media outlets, only The Telegraph covered Abbas’s speech. However, their article ignored his antisemitic smear.
Following communication between UKMW and the Guardian, their editors also agreed to change their caption beneath the photo, used to illustrate a recent article (Israel imposes travel ban on 20 foreign NGOs over boycott movement, Jan. 7th), to reflect the more accurate translation of the Arabic sign.
Contrary to what Rehman and countless other Guardian contributors and journalist have alleged, BDS is not a ‘progressive’ civil rights movement, but represents quite the opposite: a regressive campaign by radical activists, all of whom share an unhealthy fixation on the ‘sins’ committed by a historically oppressed minority, and some of whom openly seek to turn back the clock on Jewish civil rights by denying Jews, and only Jews, the right to self-determination and freedom
Though we’re of course accustomed to errors, distortions and omissions in Guardian op-eds about Israel, this piece by the Orthodox Patriarch, suggesting some sort of sinister Jewish plot to ethnically cleans Christians from the holy land, rises to a whole other level of dishonesty.
Within the media echo chamber where Harriet Sherwood operates, the question of what Palestinians actually believe about peace and violence is far less important than the role assigned to them in a drama where the antagonists and protagonists have been pre-determined.
The Guardian report, through their egregious omission, as well as legitimising a risible comparison between Tamimi and the Pakistani heroine, obfuscated the Palestinian teen’s disturbing support for murdering Israeli civilians – representing yet another example of the media group’s ongoing efforts to whitewash widespread Palestinian support for violence.
Narrowing down an entire year of Guardian anti-Israel reporting on Israel to the seven most egregious examples is not an easy task, but, as a public service to our loyal readers, here are a few errors and lies by their contributors and reporters in 2017 which especially stand out:
Regardless of the Guardian writer’s intent, it’s extremely troubling that editors at a self-styled ‘anti-racist’ publication would sanction words which necessarily evoke such a historically toxic, antisemitic calumny while ruminating on the motives of Israeli Jews.
During his speech in Istanbul, Mahmoud Abbas not only claimed that Jews fabricate their history in the land – reinforcing the Palestinian lie that Jews have no connection to Jerusalem – but that Jews are liars by nature. Remarkably, even UK media outlets which covered Abbas’s Istanbul address and cited some of his remarks (such as the Guardian, Telegraph and Times of London) managed to ignore the antisemitic part.
As Karma Nabulsi’s polemical assault on Jewish national rights in their ancestral homeland again indicates, the Palestinian national movement is governed far more by antipathy towards Jews and propaganda, than by truth, justice or historical accuracy.
There is a clear picture being presented by the Guardian, whereby the Israeli government is becoming more and more extreme, making life for Israel Arabs a misery with no prospects for improvement. But is this really true? An examination of the record of this government reveals a very different picture – this much maligned government has actually done a very significant amount to improve the lives of Israeli Arabs.
The repeated media lie that ‘Tel Aviv is Israel’s capital’ represents a broader UK media pattern of what we call ‘advocacy journalism’: the belief held by many reporters that they have a moral duty (in the spirit of ‘comforting the afflicted and afflicting the powerful’) to advocate on behalf of Palestinians and give credence to their narrative, a duty which transcends their ethical responsibilities as professional journalists to be objective and tell the truth.
It’s not just that the Guardian gives the erroneous impression that the movement is larger and more influential than it really is. Their contributors, journalists and editors also continually downplay the true goals of BDS, misleadingly casting their leaders as ‘progressives’ who merely seek to end the occupation.
Israel, and only Israel, is judged exclusively by a list of its (perceived and real) flaws. With remarkable confidence, journalists throw together opinions, a few stories, select quotes, and feelings of impending doom – and hey presto, Israel is demonised. Israel is not a uniquely bad country. Journalism about Israel is often uniquely bad journalism