International brands are on the rise with top brands like 5 star Intercontinatal (Jericho & Bethlehem Jacir Palalce) [sic] and Mövenpick Hotel Ramallah.

In addition to the three luxury hotels noted by Travel Palestine, we also pointed out the five-star Grand Park Hotel in Ramallah.

Now, NBC claims to have corrected the error, but the "correction" is not even third-rate. Here's a screen shot of the article as it now appears:

Despite the editor's note at the top of the article stating "This story includes a correction," in fact, the article is uncorrected. The first sentence erroneously referring to the "ballroom in the occupied West Bank’s only luxury hotel" remains completely unchanged. The editor's note, however, is hyperlinked to a separate Corrections and Clarifications page, which contains the not-so-informative, vague correction about West Bank hotels (the second correction below):

While the corrections above and below the West Bank hotels "correction" precisely identify the erroneous and corrects figures for garment workers' wages and for Mount Everest's height, the hotels correction gives neither the erroneous nor the correct figure.

If NBC were to seriously do its work, and to provide a consistent standard of correction, it would post the following:

A story published on May 6 misstated the number of luxury hotels in the occupied West Bank as just one. The correct figure is four five-star hotels.

And, of course, it would actually correct the article itself.

For the 12-month period ending May 13, 2013, anti-Israel Middle East commentator and former CIA staffer Michael Scheuer made a total of nine appearances on live national TV. All of the appearances were on Fox News Channel or its sister network, Fox Business Network.

Scheuer invariably includes Israel when listing his villains – as he did on Fox’s “Happening Now” on April 24, 2013 in providing his analysis of the April 15th Boston Marathon bombing:

… the young men who bombed Boston… their activities are a response to our support for the Saudi tyranny, our invasion of Iraq, our support for the Israelis [emphasis added]. Most recently Mr. Obama has invaded two Muslim countries, Mali and Libya.

Never one to be burdened by factual evidence, Scheuer is not reliable here either. The older of the two Chechnyan-American brothers who perpetrated the Boston bombing, openly disdained what he labeled the immorality of American society. News reports so far do not cite Tamerlan Tsarnaev ever mentioning Israel. They do suggest that he seemed to have been influenced by a Sunni Islamic radicalism which emphasizes the requirement for a world-controlling Islamic caliphate. The other major strain of Islamic radicalism is Iran’s Shi'ite version requiring actions to hasten, including by acts of destruction and chaos, the coming of the mahdi, Shiite Islam's messiah (the 12th Imam.)

Scheuer earned a Ph.D. in British Empire-U.S.-Canada-U.K. relations from the University of Manitoba. His credentials as an expert on the Middle East were examined by The Weekly Standard:

In any event, given the wholly irrelevant nature of Scheuer's doctoral research — his dissertation traced the comings and goings of an obscure Canadian diplomat in the years before World War II — assigning him to run the [CIA] bin Laden section [1996 to 1999] … can be taken as a symbol of the entrenched neglect of Islamic terrorism within the agency.

Scheuer’s bin Laden unit had utterly failed to find, kill, capture or stop bin Laden from attacking the United States. In 2004 he left the agency after writing the book “Imperial Hubris,” first published anonymously. As historian and syndicated columnist Victor Davis Hanson wrote,

Once Scheuer was publicly identified, the world could examine what he had to say on various topics. People weren't impressed — especially by Scheuer's assertions in interviews that Osama bin laden shouldn't be identified as a terrorist, and the Holocaust Museum in Washington was a means to make Americans feel guilty about the Holocaust.

Scheuer has been out of government nine years. He has written or said little in that time to burnish what were previously thin credentials as a Middle East expert, his CIA posting notwithstanding. He also seems to be obsessed negatively with the Jewish state and its supporters, repeatedly making false generalizations. Why is Fox so hospitable to Scheuer when he has so thoroughly discredited himself by his antisemitic bias and loony Middle East comments on TV and in other venues?

It's time for the network to upgrade in this regard. The less Scheuer, the more informative the conversation.

Update: Just before its May 13 ceremony, the Newseum issued a statement saying it was reevaluating the status of the two Hamas TV staffers slated to be added to its Journalists Memorial. Their names were on the complete list headed "Honoring Fallen Journalists" that appeared in the morning's print edition of USA Today.

CAMERA's Eric Rozenman writes in the Washington Examiner today:

Located on Pennsylvania Avenue between the White House and U.S. Capitol, the Newseum claims it "educates the public about the value of a free press in a free society." Then why does it plan to honor propagandists for terrorist organizations and governments today? The Newseum's Journalists Memorial pays tribute to journalists fallen in the line of duty. Yet among those whose names are to be added to the memorial as news-people who died under fire in 2012 are staffers of Hamas' television station, designated by the U.S. government as a terrorist outlet; a representative of Syrian state television, the video face of Bashar Assad's bloody dictatorship; and a "reporter" for Press TV, the Iranian government's English-language propaganda channel.

There is nothing journalistic about them, their activities or their employers. Hamas is designated a terrorist organization by the governments of the United States, Israel, Canada, the United Kingdom and others.

Hamas, Syria and Iran are in the business of propaganda and censorship.

"A free press in a free society," the Newseum's proclaimed desideratum, is an enemy they routinely suppress, murderously when necessary. . .

Responding to critics, the Newseum, echoing Hamas claims parroted by some human rights and putative journalists' organizations, noted that al-Kumi and Salama's vehicle "was clearly marked 'TV'."

Given that Palestinian and Hezbollah terrorists have used ambulances to conceal gunmen and weapons and Hamas has a reputation for staged "news" events, that was a little like labeling a machine gun "For Deer Season Only."

See also "Salama, Shalamah, Shamalah, Shamallakh... and Why David Carr is Wrong Regardless"

In reporting on Stephen Hawking's boycott of the Israeli Presidential Conference, Raveena Aulakh of the Toronto Star alleges that Bruce Willis supports the cultural boycott of Israel. The environment reporter writes:

Celebrities from around the world have refused to perform in Israel in recent years as part of an effort to promote the Palestinian cause, including musicians Elvis Costello and Stevie Wonder, and Hollywood actors Bruce Willis and Meg Ryan.

Aulakh is apparently relying on the Palestinian Campaign for the Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel (PACBI) as her source, and that's her mistake. Indeed, according to PACBI, in July 2010:

Anti-apartheid fans of Hollywood actors Bruce Willis and Jean Claude Van Damme were relieved the two stars cancelled their planned visit to Tel Aviv, where they were scheduled to attend a local premiere screening of their latest film Expendables.

Reports indicate that Mr. Willis, Mr. Van Damme and Mr. Stallone, along with Avi Lerner, the Israeli-born chairman and founder of Millennium Films, canceled their trip to Israel in which they had planned to promote their film "Expendables II" due to the untimely death of Mr. Stallone's son -- and not due to any cultural boycott of Israel in support of Palestinians. As reported in the Algemeiner:

In an email, a spokesman from the film’s production company explained the cancellation of the premiere.

“I’m sure you heard about the Stallone family’s tragedy that happened in recent weeks,” he wrote. “In response to the unfortunate event we are forced to cancel our Israel premiere, because Sly will not be able to attend, as well as the other actors, due to changes in schedule.”

“Please accept our apologies for cancelling at such short notice,” he added, noting a promise to make it up to Israeli fans. “We will do our best to bring the actors to Israel at a later date in the future.”

And, as reported by the Los Angeles Times, Stallone canceled all of his public appearances following the July 2010 untimely death of his son Sage. (Avi Lerner was honored by the Israel Film Festival in October 2010. Would he accept an honor from an Israeli outfit three months after supposedly canceling his Israel trip due to anti-Israel sentiment?)

Finally, given the fact that Mr. Willis has come out in the past publicly expressing strong support for Israel, by signing, for instance a 2006 ad (below) in the Los Angeles Times condemning Hamas and Hezbollah, on what basis does the Star allege that his 2010 cancellation was intended to promote the anti-Israel boycott?

In response to a reader complaint, the Globe and Mail has already commendably corrected the unfounded assertion that Bruce Willis is a supporter of the anti-Israel boycott. The Globe clarification follows:

Editor’s Note: This story has been edited to reflect the fact that although Bruce Willis postponed a promotional trip to Israel, there is no evidence he is boycotting the country.

CAMERA has contacted Toronto Star editors to request a correction. Stay tuned for an update.

(Hat tip: Joseph)

May 18 Update: Toronto Star Corrects: Bruce Willis Never Boycotted Israel

The Jerusalem Post reports:

Not only was 12-year-old Gazan Muhammad al-Dura not killed by IDF fire in 2000 – he was not even hurt.

That was the preliminary finding of a special commit- tee formed several years ago by Defense Minister Moshe Ya’alon and headed by Brig.- Gen. (res.) Yossi Kuperwasser, the former head of the Research and Analysis Division of the IDF Military Intelligence Directorate, and the current director-general of the Strategic Affairs Ministry. . .

A few days ago, MK Nachman Shai met with Ya’alon to give him a copy of his new book, Media War Reaching for Hearts and Minds , which deals with the role of media in cur- rent military conflicts, including the Dura affair. Ya’alon then surprised Shai by saying that an investigation carried out by Israel shows that Dura was never hurt.

This theory has been circulating on the Internet for a few years already, but this was the first time that an Israeli defense minister was stating so publicly.

Today, Dura should be about 25-years-old, alive and kicking somewhere (unless he was killed later in a separate incident).

Kuperwasser confirmed the committee’s conclusion that that Dura had not been hurt at all and that the video clip, which was filmed by France 2 TV and aired around the world, had indeed been staged. This means that the France 2 TV channel report was erroneous, perhaps even knowingly.

Kuperwasser added that the full results of the investigation would be ready in the near future, and that most of the work had already been completed.

See CAMERA's detailed timeline of the Mohammad Al Dura, as well as our backgrounder.

On Thursday (May 9), the English-language Israeli news site reported on a B'Tselem report regarding civilian casualties in last November's "Pillar of Defense" operation. (For a moment, we will set aside B'Tselem's reported findings that most killed were civilians. B'Tselem has a troubled record regarding civilian casualties, and others have already raised questions about the organization's report.)

To illustrate the report about Gaza civilian casualties inflicted by Israel, Ynet chose to post a screen shot from the Washington Post featuring the infamous image of Jihad Masharawi cradling his son's corpse. Ynet labeled the image "Washington Post reports on year-old Gaza casualty during operation Pillar of Defense," and provided no indication that the baby, Omar Masharawi, was killed by a Hamas rocket, and NOT an Israeli air strike. Here is a screen shot of the page as it appeared for some time last week:

And here's an enlarged image:

True, a different photograph would not change the substance of the article. Nor would it change the fact that Israeli forces did in fact inflict civilian casualties during Pillar of Defense. Rather, our message to Ynet is the following:

1) First of all, be professionals. Understand what it is you choose to publish, and familiarize yourselves with the facts. You published an image from the Washington Post, after the Post had already corrected the misinformation, apologized and clarified that the baby was not killed by Israel. Most readers were probably completely unaware of those developments, and you therefore promoted a completely false story.

2) You defamed Israel, blaming it for something it did not do. Most readers look only at the headlines and images. You chose a powerful, emotive image. The picture, together with the headline, are a gift to anti-Israel propagandists.

But perhaps we shouldn't be too hard on Ynet's English site. After all, as of press time, the Hebrew site, unlike Western media outlets which have long since corrected, still carries a story falsely claiming that Israeli fire killed Omar Masharawi.

CAMERA's Israel office contacted Ynet editors on Thursday. Editors removed the Washington Post image some eight hours after the article first appeared.

-- Post by Yishai Goldflam. To see the Hebrew version of this post, visit Presspectiva.

The Economist is the latest media organization to misinform its readers by whitewashing the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement.

The British weekly stated in a recent article that BDS "wants Israel ostracised until it withdraws to its pre-1967 borders."

As we and others have noted before, BDS calls for much more than an Israeli withdrawal to the boundaries that existed before Jordan attacked the country in 1967. It seeks the end of Israel.

But don't take our word for it. Take it from Omar Barghouti, a BDS spokesperson quoted in the Economist's article. Barghouti has admitted that his goal is not for Israel to change its borders, but for it to be replaced with a "unitary state, where, by definition, Jews will be a minority."

He has also explained, in so many words, that BDS wants the same thing:

BDS unambiguously defines the three basic Palestinian rights that constitute the minimal requirements of a just peace and calls for ending Israel’s corresponding injustices against all three main segments of the Palestinian people. Specifically, BDS calls for ending Israel’s 1967 military occupation of Gaza, the West Bank (including East Jerusalem), and other Arab territories in Lebanon and Syria; ending its system of racial discrimination against its Palestinian citizens; and ending its persistent denial of the UN-sanctioned rights of Palestine refugees, particularly their right to return to their homes and to receive reparations.

Got that? While The Economist claims BDS has one demand, its own source has admitted to three demands. And the two demands ignored by the magazine are tied to BDS's dream of a world without Israel. Demand two, in misleadingly noble-sounding language, actually relates to the demand that the Jewish state no longer be the national home in which the Jewish people exercise their UN-guaranteed right to self-determination. Equally euphemistic is demand three, which envisions the influx into Israel of millions of Palestinians born abroad, the descendents Palestinian refugees from 1948. This would lead to Barghouti's dream of rewinding history so that the Jewish people are forced back to the dark era in which being a Jew meant everywhere being an ethnic minority.

If the BDS movement's leaders are willing to tell the truth about the movement, why does The Economist insist on hiding that truth?

The Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI) recently reported that Mehdi Taeb, who is close to Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and heads Khamenei’s Ammar Base think tank, spoke to students at a religious seminary in Ahwaz, Iran on April 20, 2013, saying:

The Jews are currently subjecting us to an unprecedented trial. As you read in the Koran, [King] Solomon ruled the world… and God ordered a group of sorcerers to come out against him. The Jews have the greatest powers of sorcery, and they make use of this tool.

All the measures that have been brought against us originate with the Zionists. The U.S. is a tool in their hands. So far, they have not used the full [scope of] their sorcery against us.

Just because one Iranian nut accuses Jews of using witchcraft, doesn’t make this a story worth reporting by major media, right? So what if he is a highly placed, influential advisor to the absolute ruler of a country attempting to acquire nuclear weapons with the sworn aim of wiping the Jewish state off the face of the earth? After all, doesn’t one need two points to draw a line? Okay, here’s point number two.

In March, according to MEMRI’s translation, an Iranian Web site associated with the religious seminaries in Qom, posted an article about Jewish use of sorcery and numerology:

The [Jewish] people think that ruling over man, nature, and divine traditions can be achieved only by means of sorcery. They believe that it is possible to conquer nature and control the world, and even to control God's decisions, by using sorcery methods…

Sorcery is known to be a practice of which the divine books [i.e., the Old Testament, the New Testament and the Koran and] and the monotheistic religions disapprove. But Jewish mysticism regards it as a [legitimate] means to uncover the secrets of the holy book [the Old Testament].

Only Israeli media and the Jewish press covered this story. And it’s not as if The New York Times is above writing articles about sorcery. During this same time period, “the newspaper of record” covered candidates reportedly using witchcraft in Iraqi elections, theme weddings based on Harry Potter, and even witchy fashions including pointy-toed boots and peaked hats.

But in case major media outlets did want to keep it serious, they might take into consideration the fact that Iran is sending sophisticated and dangerous weapons to the Hezbollah terrorist group, committed to the destruction of Israel, and arming and sending fighters to prop up the brutal Assad regime in Syria, a sworn enemy of the Jewish state. So, when Iranian official sources make troubling accusations about Jews, one must ask… Where’s the Coverage?

In 2008, Ha'aretz Gideon Levy falsely claimed that there is just one swimming pool for Palestinians in all of the West Bank. In fact, there is at least one pool in every city, and Ramallah has at least 10.

In 2009, Noam Ben-Zeev of Ha'aretz wrongly claimed there was not open movie theater in Nablus. In fact, there was the then-brand new Cinema City, with 175 seats.

More recently, last month Carol J. Williams falsely wrote in the Los Angeles Times that "locally made olive oil has disappeared," and that Gaza residents are also deprived of semolina and tehina. In reality, Palestinian statistics show that the number of local olive presses have increased over the last few years, as have their output, and that consumption of tehina and semolina is steady.

West Bank luxury hotels are the latest item to take a hit -- but only in the minds of misinformed NBC reporters. Covering a Palestinian reality TV show, called "The President," NBC claims that there is just one luxury hotel in the West Bank.

Lawahez Jabari, Ranna Khalil and Dave Copeland, the authors of the May 6 piece, did not do their homework.

According to Travel Palestine, which bills itself as "The Official Site for Tourism in Palestine," there are three five-star hotels in the West Bank: the Mövenpick Hotel in Ramallah, the Intercontinental in Jericho, and Bethlehem Jacir Palace.

The five-star Jacir Palace Intercontinental Bethlehem

The luxury Intercontinental Jericho

And the Grand Park Hotel in Ramallah (see below) looks quite upscale. According to Booking.com, it is five stars as well.

May 21 Update: 1/4 Star NBC Correction on 5 Star West Bank Hotels

Those who can get through the Jerusalem Post paywall to read Jerusalem Report content can find an interesting review of the book "The Sons of Pigs and Apes: Muslim Antisemitism and the Conspiracy of Silence."

Tibor Krausz writes:

In his new book, "The Sons of Pigs and Apes," Neil J. Kressel, who directs the Honors Program in the Social Sciences at William Patterson University in New Jersey, cites ... videos in tackling what he sees as a blind spot — "a conspiracy of silence" — among Western academics, policymakers and journalists about the extent of Muslim anti-Semitism. In Arab societies, he notes, the very words "Jew" and "Zionist" have become generic slurs. "For many [Muslims], Israel has become a central element in a collective obsessional delusion," Kressel writes.

Yet many Western opinion formers, Jews included, remain willfully blind to the issue, Kressel argues. "Otherwise reliable opponents of bigotry too often duck when confronted with massive evidence of Jew-hatred in Arab and Islamic countries," he notes. "They offer either dismissive interpretations or complex justifications in lieu of plainspoken opposition. Those who don't ignore the subject outright prefer to downplay it, dismiss it as a peripheral cultural phenominon, or justify it as a righteous response to Israel's maltreatment of the Palestinians.

The reviewer goes on to cite an Egyptian cleric who admitted that anti-Semitism is not about the Palestinians. "If the Jews left Palestine to us, would we start loving them? Of course not," Muhammad Hussein Ya'qub said, shortly before adding: "They would be our enemies even if they had not occupied anything."

The Israeli air strike on Iranian missiles intended for Hezbollah on May 2 and May 3, 2013, highlights the increasing role of Iran and Hezbollah in the Syrian conflict. The Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs published a report on May 2, 2013, by retired Israeli general Shimon Shapira describing Iranian plans to take over Syria. Two days earlier, Hezbollah chief Hassan Nasrallah pledged that the Syrian regime's friends would not allow it “to fall into the hands” of America, Israel and Islamic extremists.

Arab commentators too are increasingly blunt about how they view Hezbollah. Abdulrahman Al-Rashed, general manager of Al Arabiya News Channel, wrote,

Hezbollah is merely an Iranian brigade which has been founded for more than 30 years to serve the aims of the Ayatollah’s regime in Tehran.

In this new spirit of refreshing openness about the Iranian-backed group, it is worth recalling the praise heaped on it by Western intellectuals when its main target was Israel.

There's former U.S. ambassador and Gaza flotilla spokesman, Edward Peck, who was effusive in his praise for Hezbollah and its current leader Hassan Nasrallah. In a July 2006 interview with Fox News, Peck equated Hezbollah fighters with American soldiers parachuting into Germany during World War II.

Former professor Norman Finkelstein told a Lebanese Future TV "I do want to express solidarity with them...I am going to honor Hezbollah... they show discipline, I respect that..."

But no one tops radical icon Noam Chomsky, who, with his wife in tow, paid a visit to Hezbollah in 2005. Chomsky has long been comfortable embracing genocidal groups; he was a defender of the Khmer Rouge during their brief murderous reign in the 1970s. Hezbollah leaders warmly embraced the beaming Chomsky. He in turn made a point of exclaiming that he didn't care what his fellow American citizens thought of his visit and support for Hezbollah.

One wonders what the Syrians facing the Hezbollah onslaught would have to say to professor Chomsky.

The caption reads:

A military training zone Thursday in the Golan Heights, which Israel captured from Syria in the 1967 war. Mr. Netanyahu rejects any mention of the 1967 lines as the basis for talks.

The iconic signs indicating the distances to Baghdad, Amman, Damascus, and Jerusalem, among other Middle Eastern cities, is situated at a lookout point on Mount (or Har) Bental in the Golan Heights. The Mount Bental lookout is a tourist destination, not a military training zone.

The original Reuters caption got it right:

A sign post near Kibbutz Merom Golan in the Golan Heights shows the distance from Israel's northern border to other destinations May 2, 2013. Israel's military said on Tuesday it had called up hundreds of reservists for a drill in northern Israel where tensions are high with neighbours Syria and Lebanon, but a military spokesman said there was no change in the overall security situation. Israel captured the Golan Heights from Syria in the 1967 Middle East war and annexed the territory in 1981, a move not recognised internationally. REUTERS/Nir Elias

Here are photographs of tourists by the famous Mount Bental signs:

Israelis visit on Mount Bental on August 23 2009 in the Golan Heights, Israel.Israel captured it in 1967 war and annexed it in 1981 in a move not recognized internationally.Photo by Rafael Ben-Ari/Chameleons Eye

A tourist takes a photo of a sign showing different distances, including Damascus, near an old army outpost on Mount Bental in the Golan Heights, Israel, July 27, 2012. Israelis and tourists are visiting the sight to look into Syria from Mount Bental. Syrian President Bashar al-Assad has warned that he could use chemical weapons if Syria is attacked by an external force. UPI/Debbie Hill

The Tribune ought to correct this factual error, which is at least as substantive as the error which was corrected in today's paper:

An article on Friday about charges that have been filed against three friends of Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, the surviving suspect in the Boston Marathon Bombings, described incorrectly a visit between Mrs. Tsarnaev and another friend who was charged, Dias Kadyrbayev. When the two chatted outside Mr. Tsarnaev's dormitory two days after the explosions, it was Mr. Kadyrbayev who smoked a cigarrete, not Mr. Tsarnaev.

Stay tuned for news of a correction.

May 9 Update: CAMERA Prompts Correction on Golan Heights

Not for the first time, Ha'aretz displays questionable judgment in selecting the most newsworthy items to place on the front-page.

Today's page one of the English edition (see below) features an article headlined "Former Bush official: Israel may have used chemical arms in Syria."

According to the article, by Chemi Shalev:

Retired U.S. Army Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson, who once served as Secretary of State Colin Powell’s Chief of Staff, believes that the chemical weapons used in Syria may have been an Israeli “false flag” operation aimed at implicating Bashar Assad’s regime.

Wilkerson made his astounding assertion in an interview on Current TV, the network once owned by former Vice President Al Gore and recently purchased by Al-Jazeera.

Wilkerson said that the evidence that it was Assad’s regime that had used the chemical weapons was “flaky” and that it could very well have been the rebels or Israel who were the perpetrators. Asked why Israel would do such a thing, Wilkerson said: “I think we’ve got a basically geostrategically, geopolitical inept regime in Tel Aviv right now.”

At approximately 2 PM EST yesterday, the story was the top item on Ha'aretz's web site, above a story about attacks on Iranian missiles in Syria. So who exactly is this Colonel Wilkerson, an ex-official whose unsubstantiated (some might say "flaky") claims about Israel using chemical weapons in Syria warrants front-page coverage at Ha'aretz? Those who bother to read to the seventh paragraph of the story learn:

Wilkerson, 63, a former Army helicopter pilot who flew combat missions in Vietnam, served as Colin Powell’s chief of staff in 2002-2005. He was responsible for reviewing the intelligence information used by Powell in his by now infamous February 2003 United Nations Security Council appearance on Saddam Hussein’s weapons of mass destruction.

After his retirement, Wilkerson described this presentation as “a hoax” and became an outspoken critic of the Bush Administration’s handling of the Iraq war.

So, one of the U.S. officials who apparently flubbed American intelligence on Iraq warrants front-page coverage for his outlandish allegations about alleged Israeli weaponry in Syria? And Wilkerson's record on Israel is no more reassuring. For instance, he has endorsed the discredited Walt-Measheimer study on "The Israel Lobby" as containing "blinding flashes of the obvious."

In another indication of Wilkerson's credibility problem with respect to Israel, on Jan. 31, 2011, he addressed American policy with respect to the Egyptian uprising, saying on MSNBC:

. . . our growing affection and bonding to a state that provides us no real strategic value at all, Israel, and being perceived in that world of so many millions of Arabs and others of Muslim faith, who don`t look on Israel the same way we do, including 70 million Iranians, is not necessarily the best security policy to be pursuing.

If Wilkerson really believes that Israel is of no strategic value to the United States whatsoever, maybe he also genuinely believes that Israel is behind the chemical attacks in Syria. That's his right. And it's not surprising that Current TV, owned by Al Jazeera, gives him air time. But why do Ha'aretz editors feel compelled to upgrade his twisted, unfounded charges to front-page news?

Khaled Abu Toameh of the Jerusalem Post reports today:

Palestinian Authority prime minister Salam Fayyad on Saturday denied statements attributed to him by The New York Times that criticized the Palestinian leadership and Fatah.

Fayyad said that he did not grant an interview to the Times or any other other newspaper or news agency since he submitted his resignation to PA President Mahmoud Abbas last month.

At the request of Abbas, Fayyad continues to head a caretaker cabinet until the formation of a new government.

Abbas was quoted last week as saying that he did not rule out the possibility that he would ask Fayyad to stay in his position and form a new government.

Fayyad was quoted by the Times over the weekend as saying “Our story is a story of failed leadership, from way early on. It is incredible that the fate of the Palestinian people has been in the hands of leaders so entirely casual, so guided by spur-of-themoment decisions, without seriousness. We don’t strategize, we cut deals in a tactical way and we hold ourselves hostage to our own rhetoric.” . . .

The attack on the PA leadership and Fatah clearly embarrassed Fayyad, who said in a statement that the Time‘s Roger Cohen had published an op-ed and not an interview.

(Cohen's piece reportedly citing Fayyad appears in today's print edition of the International Herald Tribune.) This bizarre episode raises at least two points for consideration. First, either the Times or Fayyad is not being truthful about an interview taking place. Second, if Fayyad gave an interview which provoked Fatah's wrath, resulting in the prime minister's subsequent denial, then this is yet another reminder about sources and journalists self-censoring when it comes to unflattering information about the Palestinian Authority.

Former Egyptian Interior Minister Mansour al-Essawy told the independent Egyptian daily newspaper al-Masry al-Youm that Hamas and Hezbollah terrorists killed Egyptian anti-regime protesters in Tahrir Square and were instrumental in breaking Muslim Brothers out of prison during the so-called Arab Spring. According to The Times of Israel:

Hamas and Hezbollah activists were involved in killing Egyptian protesters in Tahrir Square, as well as storming Egyptian jails and releasing political prisoners, during the early days of the Egyptian revolution, a former Egyptian minister said on Tuesday.

[…]

Hundreds of Muslim Brotherhood prisoners broke out of jail just four days after protests began across Egypt in January 2011, aided by anti-government activists who engaged Egyptian security forces in gun battles. Eight prisoners were reported killed.

“Hamas certainly had a large role in storming the prisons,” Essawy said. “All information indicates that members of the movement and members of the Lebanese movement Hezbollah attacked the prisons where political activists were held, smuggled them out, and then opened other prisons by breaking down their doors using trucks, as happened in the Abu-Z’ubul and Marj prisons,” he continued.

Both Hamas and Hezbollah are designated terrorist organizations by the U.S. State Department. Egypt, now and under the previous, Mubarak, regime, is an American ally. The upheaval in North Africa and throughout the Arab Middle East is having a profound impact on American interests. And yet, CAMERA could find not one major American news outlet that has covered this story. Not one.

When the protests that eventually led to the fall of Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak and the rise of the Muslim Brotherhood were taking place in Tahrir Square, the media were falling over themselves to report on the “Facebook revolution” and the “Twitter activists”. Time Magazine named “The Protester” its 2011 “Person of the Year”.

Yet, now that the unpleasant underside of those uprisings comes to light and the results –Egypt’s faltering economy and violence against Christians, not to mention Syria’s civil war and the tens of thousands killed and displaced– are proving to be anything but spring-like, the media are silent. Now that word emerges that known terrorist groups murdered the very “Person of the Year” once celebrated… nothing. Where’s the journalistic curiosity? Where’s the drive to uncover the truth? Where’s the Coverage?