On Nov. 11, the European Commissioner formally called on all EU countries to label the”origin of goods from the territories occupied by Israel since June 1967.”

Israel condemned the EU’s guidelines as discriminatory, pointing out that it amounts to a call for boycott, and halted diplomatic contacts with EU representatives about the peace process.

All this was widely reported in the mainstream media. But far less attention was given to the fact that Hungary’s Foreign Minister Péter Szijjártó criticized the EU’s labelling call, calling it an “inefficient instrument” that is “irrational” and does not promote a solution to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. And aside from the Jewish and Israeli press, few reported that Greece too indicated that it would defy the settlement labelling guidelines. Read more about it here.

Where is the mainstream media’s coverage?

Throughout the wave of Palestinian terrorism that began two months ago, the mainstream media has frequently turned truth on its head by reversing the roles of perpetrator and victim, of assailant and defender. Reuters joins the crowd with a recent headline about a Palestinian from Ramallah who attempted to kill IDF soldiers at a bus stop before being halted by a fatal bullet.

The headline: “Palestinian Dies in Ramming Attack” provides no clue that the Palestinian was the perpetrator of the “ramming” attack, and instead turns him into the victim. Other more objective sources reported that the perpetrator, Fadi Hasib — whose brother had, just days ago, used the same ram and stab tactic – – had plowed into a group of Israeli soldiers waiting for a bus, hurling one over the guard rail and wounding two. The perpetrator then exited his car presumably to stab the soldiers, much like his brother had tried to do. But as he ran toward his victims, he was shot and killed by a volunteer officer.

And that is how the wire service Reuters joins those in the mainstream media who skew the news.

UPDATE: Following written complaints about the skewed headline, it was changed to the following: “Palestinian rams car into Israeli soldiers, is shot dead”.

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.

According to the Ttoronto Star blurb on a Sept. 25th article by Joshua Mitnick, the “Mourabitat” are Palestinian women who are “defending the holy site [Temple Mount] from Jewish settlers who would like to rebuild their ancient temple in place of the mosques.” The headline similarly takes them at their word, heroizing them and asserting that they “show solidarity” by “defending access to the Al Aqsa mosque” while author Mitnick credulously quotes one “activist” claiming that the mourabitat are “defending the holy site from Jewish settlers who would like to rebuild their ancient temple in place of the mosques.”

Perhaps the newspaper’s journalists should watch the mourabitat in action in this video filmed and posted on You Tube by one of their supporters. The victims here are neither “settlers” nor are they trying to enter the Al Aqsa mosque.on the Temple Mount. They are a Hassidic father and his young sons trying to make their way to the Western Wall on the first day of the Jewish festival of Sukkot. :According to a subsequent interview with the father about his ordeal, he was not only yelled at, but spat at and physically assaulted.

So much for the bogus claims of defending Muslim holy sites from marauding Jews.

The New York Times’ opinion page has become a forum for those who like to vent their bile against Israel. Some are pro-Palestinian activists who welcome an international platform from which to air their grievances against the Jewish state, while others are far-left Israelis who prefer to condemn their leaders and society before a global audience. The New York Times eagerly obliges both.

There is no one, apparently, who is considered too unreliable for the NYT’s opinion pages, as long as they are criticizing Israel. Most recently, the NYT website and international edition carried an-Op-Ed by Mohammed Omer, a Palestinian propagandist whose dishonesty has been repeatedly exposed. (See ““New Statesman Publishes Falsehoods by Palestinian Propagandist” and “Mohammed Omer Levels Unsubstantiated and Contradictory Allegations Against Israel.” )

Describing Omer as an “independent journalist in Gaza,” the NYT avoids mentioning that his articles find placement in such publications as the Palestine Chronicle, New Statesman, the Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, and other radical or fringe publications that do not much care about the accuracy of his claims.

In his NYT online Op-Ed, “ Gaza, Gulag on the Mediterranean” which also appeared under the headline “Gaza One Year On, Still in Ruins” in the International New York Times on Aug. 25, Omer trots out the same old tired and refuted clichés that are so popular among anti-Israel propagandists: “Israel continues to block sufficient reconstruction materials from entering Gaza,” “The Israeli military, despite its withdrawal in 2005, remains the de facto occupying power in Gaza,” Palestinians in Gaza are “locked in an open-air prison”, and so on. Of course, nothing is mentioned about Hamas’ reconstruction of its arsenals and infrastructure in Gaza, and of course, nothing about the rockets lobbed into Israel from Gaza.

Omer also adds some head-scratching new ones: Palestinian society is “diverse,” “Christians have always been integral to it. And Palestinians embrace interaction with people from other cultures.”

In direct refutation to Omer’s claim, a 2012 article by Palestinian reporter Khaled Abu Toameh describes how Christians in the Gaza Strip are being kidnapped and forced to convert to Islam.

Another questionable new assertion by Omer is that the numbers of Palestinians in Gaza who are “attracted to the Jihadist ideology” are “extremely low”.

Elder of Ziyon has demonstrated how disingenuous Omer’s claim is by “pretending that Hamas and Islamic Jihad are not jihadist groups.” As Elder points out:

No matter that Hamas’ Al Qassam Brigades attracted 26,000 youths to its summer camps this summer to learn – jihad. The head of military training in these camps calls himself “Abu Jihad.” Press releases from the Qassam Brigades end off with “JIhad victory or martyrdom.”

Not to mention that the idea that Islamic Jihad isn’t a jihadist group would be funny if it wasn’t for the fact that the NYT accepts this propaganda as legitimate.

The New York Times has reached a new low. In its quest for more anti-Israel material for their Op-Ed pages, its editors have stooped to publish a Palestinian propagandist who is known as much for his dishonesty as for his anti-Israel activism.

On Monday night, a Palestinian terrorist attack targeted four young Israeli men in a car fired on while travelling from a basketball game in the Binyamin region of the West Bank. Three men were seriously wounded, while the fourth, Malachi Moshe Rosenfeld, died of his wounds. The attack is believed to have been carried out by a Palestinian terror cell. It is the latest of several terrorist attacks, some deadly, that have taken place in the region since the beginning of the Muslim Ramadan, when Israeli security forces ease restrictions on Palestinian travel between the West Bank and Jerusalem.
A June 30th AFP article, “Shooting wounds four Israelis near West Bank settlement” includes the following “explanation” for the terrorist attacks:

A shooting near a Jewish settlement in the occupied West Bank wounded four Israelis ..

…West Bank settlements are considered illegal under international law and Israelis have been attacked previously in and around them, as well as in annexed east Jerusalem.

This comes across disturbingly as AFP’s attempt to legitimize/justify Palestinian terrorism and blame the victims.

The Israel bashers are again cycling through their tired repertoire of long-discredited lies, aided by notorious anti-israel activist/University of Exeter professor, Ilan [“The struggle is about ideology, NOT about facts“]Pappé.

Yet again, the lie claiming that Israelis perpetrated a massacre of Arab residents of Tantura in 1948 is dredged up. Never mind that the originator of the lie was sued for libel. Never mind that he retracted his claims. Never mind that his sources denied his lies. It is a good enough lie for the famously dishonest Israel-bashing website Electronic Intifada and its frequent contributor Jonathan Cook to promote, resorting to a conspiracy theory of a cover-up by Israel and a vast network of its supporters , including CAMERA.

Let us re-examine the facts:
(more…)

Amidst the political storm surrounding Bibi’s rousing address to the U.S. Congress yesterday, support for Prime Minister Netanyahu’s remarks has come from unexpected circles.

In an Op-Ed entitled “President Obama, listen to Netanyahu on Iran,” Al-Arabiya’s English-language website editor, Faisal J. Abbas expressed support for Netanyahu’s address to Congress:

In just a few words, Mr. Netanyahu managed to accurately summarize a clear and present danger, not just to Israel (which obviously is his concern), but to other U.S. allies in the region. What is absurd, however, is that despite this being perhaps the only thing that brings together Arabs and Israelis (as it threatens them all), the only stakeholder that seems not to realize the danger of the situation is President Obama, who is now infamous for being the latest pen-pal of the Supreme Leader of the World’s biggest terrorist regime: Ayottallah Ali Khamenei (Although, the latter never seems to write back!)

Abbas is not the only Arab journalist applauding Netanyahu. A day earlier, Saudi columnist Ahmad Al-Faraj expressed similar sentiments in the Saudi daily Al-Jazirah. The column, translated by MEMRI, informed readers:

…President Obama and his administration are clearly furious. Not because Netanyahu is intervening in an important matter that Obama hopes will bring him personal glory, but because House Speaker [John Boehner] did not consult with Obama before inviting Netanyahu, and Obama considers this a breach of established protocol….the tension has never before reached this level, as reflected in statements by National Security Advisor Susan Rice, who said that Netanyahu’s conduct was unacceptable and even destructive…

…Since Obama is the godfather of the prefabricated revolutions in the Arab world, and since he is the ally of political Islam, [which is] the caring mother of [all] the terrorist organizations, and since he is working to sign an agreement with Iran that will come at the expense of the U.S.’s longtime allies in the Gulf, I am very glad of Netanyahu’s firm stance and [his decision] to speak against the nuclear agreement at the American Congress despite the Obama administration’s anger and fury. I believe that Netanyahu’s conduct will serve our interests, the people of the Gulf, much more than the foolish behavior of one of the worst American presidents.

The Palestinian draft resolution was voted down at the UN Security Council, but PA President Mahmoud Abbas continues to plough forward with efforts to bypass Israeli input. Dore Gold explains why Abbas’ UN bid was unacceptable to Israel, while the Algemeiner discusses the potential impact of President Abbas’ proposed bid for membership in the International Criminal Court (ICC).

Gold explains:

….the draft resolution that was rejected exposes the strategy adopted by Mahmoud Abbas, the Palestinian Authority president. He does not want to negotiate with Israel. Instead, he seeks to use international institutions in order to impose a solution on Israel. That is a course of action that no Israeli government can accept and the international community should not give it any support if it wants to see the Israeli-Palestinian conflict resolved.

Abbas’ proposed next step is equally disturbing. The Algemeiner discusses its potentially negative impact — both for Israel and for Abbas himself.

A tweet posted by Reuters correspondent Noah Browning in the aftermath of the synagogue bloodbath revealed an appalling callousness to the loss of Jewish lives, as well as a shocking obtuseness in his understanding of events.

This was posted just hours after the savage butchery that left four Jewish worshipers and a young police officer dead and others blind, comatose or severely injured.

Perhaps Browning believed he was revealing an unconventional but clever insight by comparing a damaged Quran, whose burning he unquestioningly attributed to Jews, with a prayer book soaked in blood shed by Palestinian terrorists. But what his outrageous moral equation actually revealed was his own cold-hearted disdain both for Jewish lives and for journalistic integrity.

In fact, the circumstances of the fire at the mosque where the Quran was found were uncertain and debated. While Palestinians blamed the fire on a “Price Tag” arson attack by Jewish extremists, an investigative reporter raised questions about the cause of the fire when he discovered a burnt fuse box and nearby space heater at the site — commonly evidence of an electrical fire.

Perhaps Reuters should reconsider entrusting its coverage of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict to a reporter with such lack of judgement and understanding.