Since its creation in 1979, the Islamic Republic of Iran has been, according to U.S. government listings, a leading state-sponsor of terrorism. Among its surrogates and/or recipients of Iranian largesse are the Lebanese-based Shi’ite Hezbollah and Palestinian Arab groups Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ). All three are U.S.-designated terror groups. Tehran is now directing support to a new Palestinian terror group operating in the Gaza Strip, called Harakat as-Sabeereen Nasran il-Filastin (The Movement of the Patient Ones for the Liberation of Palestine), also known as Hesn or al-Sabireen.

Writing for the Gatestone Institute, Israeli Arab journalist Khaled Abu Toameh profiles Tehran’s latest proxy.

Al-Sabireen is led by Hisham Salem, a former commander of PIJ’s Quds (Jerusalem) Force Brigades in Gaza. Salem also headed a Shi’ite charity based in Jabaliya refugee district also in Gaza. The self-described goal of his group is to “eliminate the Zionist entity.”

Initial hints of al-Sabireen’s emergence appeared in May 2014, according to a June 18, 2014 report by Jonathan Schanzer and Grant Rumley of the D.C.-based think tank Foundation for Defense of Democracies (“Iran Spawns New Jihadist Group in Gaza,” The Long War Journal). Toameh notes the terror group has recently drawn increased attention when one of its leaders, Ahmed Sharif Al-Sarhi, was killed by Israeli Defense Forces near the Gaza Strip on Oct. 20, 2015 (“Pro-Iran group in Gaza says IDF killed one of its members,” The Times of Israel, Oct. 20, 2015).

Al-Sabireen was established following tensions between the Islamic Republic and its beneficiaries Hamas and PIJ, who refused to publicly support another ally of Tehran: Syrian dictator President Bashar al-Assad, currently engaged in a bloody civil war. For this lack of support, Hamas and PIJ leaders were kicked out of Syria and Iran has decreased its funding.

Toameh writes that “most of the Al-Sabireen terrorists” are “disgruntled” former members of Palestinian Islamic Jihad.

Salem’s group is thought to have 400 followers so far in the Gaza Strip. The organization’s symbols are similar to that of fellow Iranian-backed terror group Hezbollah, a fist gripping a Kalashnikov assault rifle featured prominently in the center of the al-Sabireen flag.

Each al-Sabireen member receives a monthly salary of $250-$300 in U.S. dollars, while high-ranking officials receive more than twice as much.

Iranian support goes beyond funding salaries. Tehran is thought to have supplied Salem and his group with Grad and Fajr missiles that can reach Tel Aviv, from the Strip, a distance of about 35 miles. Other weaponry also has been presented to al-Sabireen, including long-range sniper rifles.

Toameh reports that Salem’s “activities and rhetoric” worry PIJ and Hamas, both of whom fear that al-Sabireen is “beginning to attract many of their followers.”

Hamas and PIJ are not the only Palestinian Arab groups losing members to the new terror group. Toameh says that the group is “believed to have succeeded in recruiting scores of militiamen belonging to [Palestinian Authority] President Mahmoud Abbas’s Fatah faction in the Gaza Strip. These militiamen have gone to the Iranian-backed group mostly for financial considerations.”

Salem was stabbed and lightly wounded by unidentified assailants thought to belong to either Hamas or PIJ shortly after giving an interview to a newspaper in the northern Gaza Strip two weeks ago. The terrorist leader and his group have been accused by Hamas of helping the Islamic Republic spread Shiite Islam within the largely Sunni Muslim Gaza Strip. In the past, Hamas has leveled similar charges against Palestinian Islamic Jihad (Hamas vs. Fatah, Jonathan Schanzer, Palgrave Macmillan, 2008).

FDD’s Schanzer and Rumley noted that al-Sabireen’s “very existence is a sign that Iran is not prepared to allow for quiet in the Palestinian territories…This serves only to underscore Iran’s goals in the Palestinian arena…Iran appears intent to push the Palestinians into conflict with Israel—or even themselves.”

The guide below, complete with case studies, could have easily been written by New York Times Jerusalem bureau chief Jodi Rudoren. See “Updated: New York Times: Journalism of Few Facts” for further details.

Goal:
To promote a selected party’s allegations while pretending to report objectively about “dueling” narratives

Tactic 1: Ignore and conceal the most incriminating evidence against the selected party.

Case Studies: 1) “The Dueling Narratives of the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict“
2) “Israel Bolsters Security in East Jerusalem After Violence“

These examples demonstrate how to conceal incriminating evidence, for example, televised footage of a knife-wielding assailant charging toward his victim.

Tactic 2: Cast doubt and minimize other evidence against the selected party, by using descriptions that conjure up wholesome values.

Case Studiy: “The Dueling Narratives of the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict”

This example A) supports the suggestion that a photo of the assailant’s knife was planted evidence; and
B) describes the attack knife as a much more innocent “boy scout” knife.

Tactic 3: Mention the existence of a video that supports allegations made by the selected party and that rebuts the other party’s version of events, even if there is no such film.

Case Studies: “The Dueling Narratives of the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict”
“Leaderless Palestinian Youth, Inspired by Social Media, Drive Rise in Violence in Israel“

Important Note: This tactic can be used even if
a) you’ve never seen this film
b) the film is not available
c)) the film does not show what it is alleged to show
d) the film does not actually exist and has never existed
or any combination of the above.

Tactic 4: If you or your newspaper are challenged on any of the above, claim space limitations did not allow you to give a “full accounting of the events.”

Case Study: “Updated: New York Times: Journalism of Few Facts”

This example quotes a typical response to an organization that challenged these tactics.

It can’t be said that the media ignores the war in Syria. New elements in the conflict are reported and certainly the flow of refugees has become a visible issue. But connecting these different strands into a more coherent discussion of the evolution of the conflict is helpful.

Over this past year, there has been a noticeable trend toward the internationalization of the civil war.

Outside powers driven by ambition and ideology are increasingly injecting themselves into the conflict. Meanwhile the continual violence has set in motion population flight, creating new problems that reach far beyond the borders of the war-torn land. Some have drawn analogies to the Spanish civil war in the 1930s, which was a prelude to a much greater conflagration.

This past week, several articles from varied non-mainstream news sites provided updated information on the conflict.

Several Arab sources recently claimed a figure of 1263 hezbollah dead. While it is wise to be wary of precise casualty figures, there is little doubt that Hezbollah continues to experience the drip-drip of losses in Syria. Whether Hezbollah’s involvement in this war will enhance or diminish the organization remains an open question. That will depend at least in part on the depth of allegiance to it felt by the Shiite population in Lebanon.

Iran is expanding its role in the conflict. This past week saw reports of several senior Iranian Revolutionary Guard [IRGC] commanders killed in the fighting and a tally of 20 IRGC fatalities. While the numbers are still quite small, they do suggest that Iranians are playing a more direct role in the fighting. New funds that will flow to Iran from the nuclear agreement are likely to lead to increased Iranian involvement.

The Russian intervention represents a major step in the internationalization of the war. It is unclear at this point where the direct Russian involvement will lead. Is this the beginning of a large scale intervention or will Russian activity be limited?

An area of interest, especially for those concerned about Israel, is whether Russian or Iranian influence is felt most strongly in whatever Syrian regime emerges from the war. The Alawite-dominated Syrian regime has aligned itself with Iran in opposition to the regional Sunni majority. It would be interesting to learn more about the compatibility of Alawites with Shiite fundamentalism.

This past week also saw reports of Jordanian cooperation with Russia. Jordan has traditionally been exclusively aligned with the United States.

Turkey is another potential intervener with a long history of confrontation with Russia. Its domestic stability is threatened by the consolidation of power by its Islamist president, an increasingly vocal Kurdish minority and economic mismanagement. Turkey is a NATO member and a major transit point for the emigration of Middle Easterners into Europe.

In sum, this is a combustible mixture, that could lead to a more expansive war.

Nov. 11 update: CAMERA has prompted a New York Times correction. See details here.

There are many things wrong with this New York Times passage:

Jodi Rudoren outrageously decided not to inform readers that, in fact, there is video footage, captured by an MSNBC cameraman, of the man holding his knife in the air while running toward Israelis. Instead, working within the boundaries of conspiracy theory, she mentions only that Israeli police, after the fact, shared a photo of a knife next to the boy. We discuss that journalistic whitewash here.

But the reporter goes even further. Note the highlighted portion of the text above. The way the newspaper frames it, even if the photo wasn’t a nefarious setup by the Israeli police, the “slain teenager” — and it’s worth mentioning that The New York Times refers to 19-year-old “men” overwhelming more often than 19-year-old “teenagers” (see update below) — was merely holding a “Boy Scout” knife.

No, it was very much not a Boy Scout knife. This, to the right, is the image of the knife released by Israeli police.

That’s a butterfly (or balisong) knife, not the Swiss-army type knife generally associated with Boy Scouts.

On the contrary, butterfly knives are associated either with martial arts …

… thugs in 80s movies …

… or knife-play by “Boy Scouts” like this:

What line of thinking would inspire a reporter to insert into the story language about this being a “pocketknife, the kind Boy Scouts use”?

It is how The New York Times transforms a fact — a Palestinian man caught on video wielding a knife while charging at Israelis — into a story of a Palestinian boy scout, a teen who may or may not have had a knife slain by Israel which may or may not have planted evidence near his body.

Update: According to Ma’an, a Palestinian media outlet, and PCHR, a Palestinian monitoring group, the man was 20 years old, not 19, and thus not a “teenager.”

USA Today’s “1 Single Street, 2 Worlds Apart” makes several errors that could potentially misinform readers. Reporter Michele Chabin describes two east Jerusalem neighborhoods. One, Jabel Mukaber, is Arab. The other, Armon Hanatziv, is Jewish. As the headline notes, the neighborhoods are separated by a single street. So why are they described as “worlds apart?” The article omits essential details that could have gone far in explaining why this is the case.

USA Today can’t seem to make up its mind on how to describe the eastern Jerusalem neighborhoods. Beneath a large photograph depicting a young Palestinian girl running past a wall constructed to prevent Arab attacks on Israelis, a cutline describes Jabel Mukaber as a “Palestinian neighborhood.” By contrast, the Jewish neighborhood of Armon Hanatziv next door is called a “Jewish settlement.” This contradicts the article’s own description of Armon Hanatziv as a “Jewish neighborhood.” “Settlement” implies a temporary, even colonial status when contrasted with “neighborhood.”

Chabin uncritically quotes Daoud Kuttab who claims “Palestinians in East Jerusalem pay the same national and municipal taxes as Jews in West Jerusalem but receive a fraction of the services.” A visit to these neighborhoods Kuttab says, “Show clearly a huge disparity.” USA Today fails to ask Kuttab why differences exist. CAMERA previously has noted that disparities between Jewish and Arab neighborhoods in east Jerusalem or Israeli Jewish and nearby Israeli Arab towns are sometimes the result of higher rates of Arab tax avoidance or failure to pay for municipal services and/or even accepting services from the Jewish state. In eastern Jerusalem some such instances may reflect an intention not to accept the legitimacy of Israel or reluctance or refusal to have any involvement with municipal politics (“East Jerusalem: Setting the Record Straight,” Nov. 21, 2013).

The reporter writes that residents of Jabel Mukaber “do not recognize Israeli sovereignty over East Jerusalem, territory Israel captured from Jordan in the 1967 Six-Day War.” In addition to failing to connect the dots as to how this leads to the “disparities” mentioned the article fails to inform readers about the Jordanian occupation of east Jerusalem. Jordan occupied East Jerusalem after it, along with other Arab allies, attacked the Jewish state upon its creation in 1948. From 1948 until 1967, Jordan illegally occupied these areas, its sovereignty recognized only by Pakistan and Great Britain. That Arabs living in the area objected and did not wish to cooperate with the obligatory military occupation that followed Israel’s successful defense in the 1967 Six-Day War is missing context.

Had USA Today pressed Kuttab—whom it calls a “Palestinian media expert”—it’s unlikely they would have got a straight answer. CAMERA has previously documented how Kuttab has worked as an apologist for Palestinian Arab violence directed at Jews and distorted facts to support propaganda (see, for example, “Daoud Kuttab’s Delusional Mahmoud Abbas Apologia in Washington Post,” CAMERA, July 17, 2014). In a March 26, 2007 Washington Post Op-Ed (“Obstacle or Opportunity”) Kuttab asserted that a short-lived coalition in the Palestinian Authority between the corrupt Fatah movement and Hamas, a U.S.-listed terror group whose charter calls for the destruction of Israel, “offers a path to peace [with Israel].” One could be forgiven for thinking that the subsequent 2008 Hamas-initiated war with Israel may have changed Kuttab’s mind. Instead Kuttab wrote another Washington Post Op-Ed calling for the United States and others to “Extend a hand to Hamas” (June 5, 2010).

It’s not just a Palestinian propagandist and a Jewish neighborhoods that get misdescribed in the Today article: Jewish holy sites get short shrift as well. The newspaper writes that al-Aqsa mosque on the Temple Mount is “considered the third holiest site in Islam.” However, it fails to note that the Temple Mount is Judaism’s most holy site.

USA Today’s Middle East reporting often is better than this. In this instance, however the reporter—whose work has previously been praised by CAMERA—and the paper failed.

Following last week’s photo caption which whitewashed Palestinian attacks against Israelis as “Palestinians confronting Israelis,” Reuters’ graphics department has come up with new terminology for Palestinian stabbings, shootings and ramming attacks against Israeli civilians and security forces: “street violence.”

The text at the top left of the graphic reads:

At least fifty-five Palestinians and nine Israelis have died in recent street violence, which was in part triggered by Palestinians’ anger over what they see as Jewish encroachment on Jerusalem’s Al-Aqsa Mosque compound.

In fact, some 30 Palestinians were killed as they carried out, or attempted to carry out, stabbing, shooting and ramming attacks against Israelis. The rest were killed as they engaged in violent clashes with Israeli security forces. The nine Israelis were killed in Palestinian stabbing, ramming and shooting attacks.

The “street violence” euphemism does nothing to explain the nature of the “Incidents since Oct. 1” (both “incidents with fatalities” and “Ooher incidents”) mapped out in the large map in the graphic’s right side. The graphic does commendably detail the most recent attacks — “A Palestinian man was shot dead after he tried to stab a security guard,” “A Palestinian man was shot dead after he stabbed and wounded an Israeli soldier,” and “A Palestinian woman was shot dead by Israeli police when she drew a knife after being asked to identify herself” — but what are readers supposed to make of the other “incidents” dotting the map in places like Raanana, Petah Tikva, Tel Aviv, Afula, Kiryat Gat, Beersheba, and more? That Israeli and Palestinian gangs of errant teenagers were duking it out in “street violence”?

This distorted terminology earns Reuters yet another entry in the popular collection of abominable and absurd journalistic characterizations of Palestinian violence, “Wave of Palestinian Violence Accompanied By Spate of Bad Writing.”

The following letter to the editor appeared in the Richmond Times Dispatch on Oct. 26, 2015:

“Dr. Yehuda Lukacs omits key details in his Op-Ed ‘America’s bipartisan moment in the Middle East’ (October 20). Stating that Judaism’s holiest site, the Temple Mount, ‘has been the site of almost daily clashes between Palestinians and Israeli police,’ the George Mason University professor omits mention of the incitement to violence by Palestinian Arab leaders.

Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas engaged in a libel long-used, in 1929 and 2000 among other instances, to provoke anti-Jewish violence by falsely claiming that Jews hold secret designs on the al-Aqsa mosque. In his August 1 speech Abbas said Jews planned ‘to get rid of al-Aqsa and establish their so-called ‘Temple.’ On September 16, he exhorted, ‘The al-Aqsa is ours…and they [Jews] have no right to defile it with their filthy feet…We bless every drop of blood that has been spilled for Jerusalem.’

Calling for another round of U.S.-led peace talks, Lukacs briefly mentions ‘Secretary of State John Kerry’s unsuccessful peace mission in 2014.’ Yet, he omits that Abbas rejected that mission, just as PA authorities rejected Israeli and U.S. offers of statehood in exchange for peace with Israel in 2000, 2001 and 2008. The author also fails to note that Abbas—currently in the tenth-year of a four-year term—can at best, only claim to represent West Bank Palestinian Arabs. Hamas, a U.S.-listed terror group that calls for Jewish genocide and the destruction of Israel, has ruled the Gaza Strip since its sole election in 2006 and subsequent 2007 coup when they seized power. Which of these groups, Hamas or Abbas’ corrupt Fatah movement that controls the PA, is Israel supposed to make peace with?

Lukacs claims that ‘only Obama can make a difference’ and turn ‘swords into plowshares.’ By omitting key details the author misdescribes the moment—its Palestinian leaders who could make a difference, but it seems they would rather reject peace and call for Jewish blood.

Sean Durns

Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America”

The original letter to the Richmond Times Dispatch can be found here.

Snapshots has been monitoring an Algemeiner article that had been deleted from Facebook.

The Bernard-Henri Levi article that was previously blocked from being posted by Facebook (and deleted from users’ personal pages) has been restored to The Algemeiner’s Facebook page and can now be posted. The previously mentioned article about the stabbing at Kiryat Arba is still not shareable on Facebook however.

Update Oct. 26, 2015: The Algemeiner reports: “UPDATE 10/26 2:00 pm: After Jewish human-rights group the Simon Wiesenthal Center (SWC) — which communicates regularly with Facebook about online hate issues — contacted the company on The Algemeiner’s behalf, the post was returned to Facebook. A representative told SWC that the post had not been banned because of its content and that further inquiries would be made to determine why it had been removed.”

Just over an hour ago, Snapshots reported about an article by Bernard-Henry Lévy that cannot be posted on Facebook pages from The Algemeiner’s website.

It appears that this is not the only article published by The Algemeiner that cannot be posted on Facebook from the publication’s website.

Efforts to post this article about a stabbing in Kiryat Arba have failed.

Update: The article can now be shared.

In an odd inversion, Facebook, the huge social media network is allowing Shehab News Agency operated by Hamas, an antisemtic terrorist organization, to operate freely on its platform. At the same time, it appears to be blocking an article by Bernard-Henri Lévy published by The Algemeiner.

Last Wednesday, October 21, 2015, The Algemeiner published an article by Lévy, a prominent French intellectual. It was titled “Bernard-Henri Lévy: Things We Need to Stop Hearing About the ‘Stabbing Intifada’.

CAMERA staffers and a number of other people have tried to share it via the Facebook button on The Algemeiner‘s site, but have failed. This writer got the following message when he tried to post the article:

Facebook users who post the actual link on their own pages will discover that it appears as a URL, but no preview is provided.
(more…)