Guardian readers should – but, of course, won’t – take note: For Saeb Erekat, words and lofty, progressive rhetoric don’t have objective meanings. They mean ‘just what he chooses them to mean, neither more nor less’.
We contacted the journalist, Sachin Nakrani, to object the false claims that Arab Israelis are “restricted” to specific areas in Israel, and that they have “little or no political representation”.
As we enter a new decade, we thought it would be fun to look back at some of our more interesting and impactful posts over the past ten years.
In short: Soviet Bloc countries’ fences kept their own citizens from leaving. Israel’s fence keeps hostile non-citizens from entering. Any suggestion that both of these measures are morally or politically analogous is simply absurd.
Before we provide our examples of Guardian articles, op-eds, cartoons and letters that covered for Jeremy Corbyn’s well documented record of aiding, abetting and, at times, personally engaging in antisemitism, let’s begin with some numbers:
For an op-ed to suggest – in late 2019 – that the chrages of antisemitism against Corbyn were “manufactured”, after years of revelations attesting to his long and well-documented record of supporting anti-Semites who call for the mass murder of Jews, in the context of polls showing 87% of British Jewish believe he’s personally antisemitic, and in the midst of an EHRC investigation into whether the party has become institutionally antisemitic on his watch – is obscene.
A Guardian article on a new Human Rights Watch report vilifying Israel didn’t even feign objectivity or professionalism. In the 475 word piece by their Middle-East correspondent Michael Safim there isn’t even one sentence quoting someone critical of the report – neither an Israeli official nor NGO Monitor.
As even Nicholas Watt, Guardian’s former chief political correspondent, once acknowledged: “quite often on the left the term right-wing is just used to mean ‘bad'”.
The Labour Party’s reluctant acceptance of the IHRA Working Definition of antisemitism in 2018 didn’t occur without a fight. There was one notable dissenter to the proposal to adopt, in full, the […]
A Guardian article (“Lawyer criticises secretive Israeli case against Gaza aid worker”, Nov. 28), by their Jerusalem correspondent Oliver Holmes, included the following claim: More than 4,700 Palestinian security detainees and political […]
Contrary to the Guardian’s claim that the new US declaration rejects the US legal position on the issue since 1978, the 1978 US State Department Hansell Memorandum they’re referring to, which maintained that settlements are illegal, was not the basis of 40 years of U.S. policy, a time period which includes Ronald Reagan’s policy which held that the settlements are not illegal.
Oliver Holmes has been the Guardian’s Jerusalem correspondent for nearly two years, yet, as he shows in a recent article on the Jerusalem neighborhood of Kafr Aqab, he still fails to grasp some basic facts about the holy city.
Following communication from UK Media Watch, the Guardian revised an extremely misleading claim regarding US Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib’s proposed trip to the region.
As is often the case when reporting on anti-Israel NGOs, the Guardian article reads more like a HRW press release than anything resembling professional journalism.
One of the leading factors behind the Guardian’s institutional pro-Palestinian bias is their refusal to take Palestinians seriously as agents of their own fate – a failure to grant Palestinians agency which invariably leads to a mono-causal, Israeli focused explanation which is fundamentally ahistorical, thus grossly misleading readers on the root cause of the conflict
Once again, we see that a Guardian op-ed accusing Israel of systematic racism does not hold up to critical scrutiny.
it’s interesting that on the same day the Indy published Barghouti’s pro-BDS op-ed, the UN’s Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Religion or Belief published a report linking BDS to antisemitism, noting, for instance, the frequent use of antisemitic tropes by BDS activists – an unprecedented report contradicting Barghouti’s narrative that the Indy naturally failed to cover.
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
All of the British publications we surveyed ignored the UN report criticising the Palestinian Authority, despite the fact that most of the outlets routinely report on the UN’s egregiously disproportionate reports critical of Israel.
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.