Ha’aretz‘s Burston Likens Israel’s [Non-]Violation of Court Injunction to ‘Naqba’
Given that the news pages of Ha’aretz are falsely reporting that Israel violated a High Court injunction by evacuating Palestinian protesters from a tent camp in the controversial E-1 area, it comes as no surprise that their Op-Ed columnists are doing no better. Columnist Bradley Burston takes the false charge to a new level, charging that Israel’s alleged violation of Justice Neal Hendel’s injunction is no less than a “Naqba”(!). He writes that according to Prime Minister Netanyahu the protest camp:
needed to be destroyed despite a High Court order that appeared to give the new villagers six days to remain on the site. But in a peculiarly contemporary reinterpretation of the Naqba, the police announced that the injunction only applied to the tents. The people could be taken out. In the dead of night.
It’s a pity that Burston didn’t actually read the court injunction before he spouted off hysterical “Naqba” comparisons. The Palestinian protesters’ lawyer did read the document, and accurately characterized it. As the Jerusalem Post reported:
Attorney Tawfiq Jabareen who represented the Palestinians explain this to the High Court of Justice when he secured a temporary injunction against the outpost’s removal on Friday.
But the court’s language spoke of the tents, not the people, and added that security factors could shift the decision, Jabareen said.
So it’s not just a police claim that the injunction applied only to the tents. In fact, this is the case. For the benefit of Burston and his colleagues, here is the link to Justice Hendel’s injunction. The injunction states (CAMERA’s translation):
After studying the petition I hereby impose a temporary injunction according to clause 1 — preventing the removal or destruction of tents that were erected by the petitioners on a-Tur lands, east of Kfar al-Azeem, unless an urgent security need arises.
The respondents [the state] will respond to this temporary injunction within six days.
Traditionally, journalists read a court injunction before they report on it. Burston apparently prefers a peculiarly contemporary reinterpretation of journalism.
More from SNAPSHOTS
CNN’s Amanpour Condemns “power grab” By Israel’s Prime Minister and Others
April 1, 2020
We’ve said it often, but it’s worth repeating: Anyone interested in reasonably unbiased information about Israel (at least) should avoid the broadcasts of CNN’s Chief International Correspondent and Anchor, Christiane Amanpour. In characterizing responses to [...]
Seattle Media Oblivious To Imam’s Hateful Indoctrination Condemning Jews
January 7, 2020
The Masjid Ar-Rahmah mosque teaching – that Allah transformed Jews into apes and pigs for disobeying him – delivered by Imam (prayer leader) Mohamad Joban – was posted online by mosque personnel. This December 2019 [...]
AP Distorts: Bethlehem ‘Almost Completely Surrounded’
December 10, 2019
Over two years after improving inaccurate language falsely citing Israel's security "barrier surrounding the biblical city" of Bethlehem, the Associated Press once again misrepresents. AP's Joseph Krauss and Mohammad Daraghmeh wrote yesterday ("Palestinians in Bethlehem [...]
Reuters Errs on Administrative Detention For ‘Anti-Israel Activity’
November 5, 2019
The Ofer Prison, near Ramallah (Photo by Tamar Sternthal) A Reuters article today egregiously misrepresents administrative detention, erroneously asserting that it is mainly applied to "Palestinians suspected of anti-Israeli activities," when in fact the Israeli [...]