The Reuters article “Israel applies lethal response to wave of Palestinian attacks,” puts the onus on Israel for not peacefully subduing violent attackers stabbing, shooting, and running down Israelis in the streets, drawing a comparison to last week’s attack in the London underground in which police stopped a man during a stabbing attack using a Taser gun. Author Luke Baker flippantly reports that suggestions of adopting this approach in Israel “are dismissed out of hand” by Israel’s defenders, then tries to argue the wrongfulness of the Israeli response by laying out “statistics” writing, “the numbers show a high percentage of people who carry out attacks are killed rather than detained.” Baker downplays the fact that, when arrest is possible, the Israeli authorities make every effort to detain the terrorist. His report shares the Swedish Foreign Minister’s perspective that the Israelis’ handling of terror is a form of “extrajudicial execution.”

Baker writes:

The disparity in the number killed on each side — and the fact more than 13,500 Palestinians have been injured, including many in demonstrations, according to the Palestinian Health Ministry — has led to accusations by rights groups and others that Israel is using excessive force to quell the unrest.

Here appears the popular tactic employed by media to purportedly demonstrate Israel’s moral culpability through the fact that more Palestinians have died than Israelis — as a result of the violence perpetrated by the Palestinian attackers themselves. In his argument, Baker cites the questionable figures provided by the Palestinian Health Ministry, and gives no time frame or criteria of what “13,500 Palestinians have been injured, including many in demonstrations” includes. He inaccurately represents the extent of the violence against Jews by not beginning his tally from the true start date of the wave of violence in September and completely ignoring the many injured. Though Baker cites researcher Nehemia Gershuni Aylho, he does not include the researcher’s statistics:

Innocent Israelis killed by Arabs: 21
Innocent Arabs Killed by Civilians: 0

Innocent Israelis wounded by Arabs: 427
Innocent Arabs wounded by Civilians: 13

No doubt Palestinians dispute these numbers, just as Israeli researchers have disputed Palestinian Health Ministry numbers in the past.

Baker makes much of U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry’s warning against vigilantism, linking it to Jerusalem Mayor Nir Barkat’s call for authorized citizens to carry their guns to protect themselves and others, and therefore framing it as a rebuke despite the fact that Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu and other Israeli leaders have also condemned vigilantism. There is a difference between vigilantism and self-defense, the latter of which Kerry has explicitly supported saying, “Israel has every right in the world to protect its citizens, as it has been, from random acts of violence.” [Emphasis added.] This part of Kerry’s statement was not quoted.

Rather than concluding his report with facts, Baker leaves the reader with the Palestinian perspective that “there is no question that Israel, which has occupied the West Bank and East Jerusalem since 1967 and limits Palestinians’ movement throughout areas they want for a state, is carrying out extrajudicial killings.” He finishes with a quote from Palestinian legislator and long-time anti-Israel activist, Hanan Ashrawi, “The majority of Palestinians are being shot and killed on the spot, whether they represent a threat or not,” a categorically false statement that Baker leaves unquestioned. The last word goes to Ashrawi, who states that Israelis “are carrying out on-the-spot executions. They are extrajudicial and a crime.”

– Rachel Frommer, CAMERA Intern

On December 2, The Wall Street Journal published an Op-Ed by law school professors Eugene Kontorovich and Steven Davidoff Solomon, “Those Israel Boycotts Are Illegal.” In it, the professors take on the increasingly frequent boycott resolutions under consideration at –and approved by many– academic associations such as the American Anthropological Association and the American Studies Association. They note:

The moral myopia and academic perversity of these boycotts have been widely discussed. Less well understood is that in many cases they also are illegal. Under corporate law, an organization, including a nonprofit, can do only what is permitted under the purposes specified in its charter.

Boycott resolutions that are beyond the powers of an organization are void, and individual members can sue to have a court declare them invalid. The individuals serving on the boards of these organizations may be liable for damages.

[…]

Saying that organizations cannot act beyond the purposes specified in their charters is no mere legal nitpicking. The charter is an explicit contract with members, declaring that their money will be dedicated to agreed-upon goals and that their group will not turn into a motorcycle club or a political party.

On its face, an academic boycott undermines academic freedom, a broad-based education and the exchange of ideas. That’s stupid. Holding only Israel to some imaginary standard and holding Israeli academics responsible for Israeli policy, whatever one thinks of it, is clearly immoral. Academic associations don’t seem to care about this. A couple of well-prosecuted lawsuits might, however, make them take notice.

An Op-Ed published in the official Palestinian Authority (PA) daily, Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, Nov. 15, 2015, blames the Israeli intelligence service Mossad for the terrorist attacks in Paris that killed at least 129 people and injured hundreds more as well as the bombings in Beirut that preceded them by a day. As translated by Palestinian Media Watch (PMW), the Op-Ed claims:

The wise and correct thing is to look for who benefits. In short: They need to search the last place reached by the octopus arms of the Mossad… It is clear that its ‘Mossad’ will burn Beirut and Paris in order to achieve [Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin] Netanyahu’s goals. He, who challenged the master of the White House, hides in his soul enough evil to burn the world.

It must be noted that the PA press is not a free media operation, printing a wide variety of opinion and viewpoints. It is an official arm of the Palestinian regime, disseminating the narrative of Palestinian leadership. Indeed, PA Security Forces spokesman Adnan Al-Damiri posted a similar claim on his Facebook page:

From Beirut to Paris, terror and explosions, two beautiful and advanced cities, two cities that arouse admiration with their positions regarding Palestine… What is this hatred which attacks beauty and principles, and declares terror against them? … Does the terror in Beirut and Paris wear masks like those who were in the Al-Ahli hospital in Hebron yesterday [Nov. 12, 2015]?

When Al-Damiri aks if the Beirut and Paris terrorists “wear masks like those who were in the Al-Ahli hospital in Hebron”, he is referring to a raid where Israeli agents in disguise arrested a terror suspect. The allegation is clear: the Beirut and Paris terrorists were also Israelis in disguise.

The Islamic State terrorist group has claimed responsibility for the Paris attacks and French and other European and international investigations corroborate this. Naturally, this has not stopped the Palestinian conspiracy theory machine which perpetually operates in overdrive. Prior to blaming Israel for the Beirut and Paris terror attacks, another Op-Ed in Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, Nov. 11, 2015, blamed Israel and the West for downing the Russian airliner over Sinai:

The explosion of the Russian plane 23 minutes after its takeoff from Sharm el-Sheikh airport in the end of October, was not an ISIS operation but a terror operation orchestrated by international and regional security services…. If the rational estimations point to [the presence of] fingerprints of Western and Israeli security services, that leaves much room for questions…

PMW has long documented the conspiracy theories promoted by Palestinian leadership. However, the media refuse to acknowledge the shameful shifting of blame from the actual perpetrators of terrorism to their favored targets, Israelis and Jews. Here is a blatant and eminently newsworthy item completely ignored by the popular press. Not only should the world be made aware that the PA blames Israel for these deviant attacks, the world should be outraged. And yet… Where’s the coverage?

As violent attacks are perpetrated upon Israelis daily, the Huffington Post thought the timing was right for yet another “apartheid” slam on Israel, posting blogger Zack Sabella’s piece, “The US Must Accept that Israeli Leadership Wants Apartheid Not Peace.”

Sabella makes inflammatory, broad and unsubstantiated statements, such as:

“Israeli politics and society have regressed to their lowest point in history, with racism flourishing at unprecedented levels.”

“The Israeli government of today is the most racist, most aggressive and most destructive government in Israel’s history.”

“Israel has chosen occupation over peace and has normalized the brutal domination of the Palestinian people rather than liberate itself from becoming a modern-day apartheid state.”

Sabella ignores the fact that Israeli Arabs enjoy more rights in Israel than Arabs living anywhere else in the Middle East. Apartheid? Hardly. As South African member of parliament Kenneth Rasalabe Joseph Meshoe has said, “Those who know what real apartheid is, as I know, know that there is nothing in Israel that looks like apartheid.” Meshoe continued, “There is a widespread allegation, really a slander, that Israel is an apartheid state. That notion is simply wrong. It is inaccurate and it is malicious.”

Sabella calls on Presidents Obama and Bill Clinton to follow Jimmy Carter’s lead in condemning Israel. As has been well-documented by CAMERA, Carter has been actively engaged in pro-Hamas, anti-Israel dialogue since finishing his last term in office (see here and here). Sabella demands that the US “wield a stick” in dealing with Israel, or “history will judge it for not forcing Israel to change its course of action.”

All this as old women and children are being stabbed in the streets of Israel, civilians are being rammed with cars and Palestinian leaders are encouraging this bloodbath.

Sabella also writes regularly on a personal blog. There, he has covered the last month of terror with a vehemently anti-Zionist, pro-terrorism perspective, rejecting that the Palestinians shot are being stopped mid-attack and embracing the false narrative that children are being killed in cold blood. In an October 2 blog post, “A day in the life of a Palestinian,” Sabella wrote, “The killing of Palestinians has become as routine as drinking water in Israeli society.” Yet, the Huffington Post gives this individual an international platform.

– Rachel Frommer, CAMERA Intern

Schizophrenia is defined as “a state characterized by the coexistence of contradictory or incompatible elements.” This certainly applies to CNN headlines for articles about two separate but similar events.

An armed man attacks school children and is killed by security forces.

CNN headlined the story, “Sword-wielding man kills 2 in Swedish school attack.”

You see, the emphasis is on the attacker’s actions. That is the genesis of the story. The headline does not even mention that the killer was himself killed. But, that was in Sweden, with Swedish school children and Swedish security forces.

In Israel, two armed men tried to board a school bus full of children, were prevented from doing so by people on the bus, then stabbed a man waiting at a bus stop. They were shot and wounded by security forces and were taken to a hospital, along with their victim. One of the terrorists later died of his wounds.

Does the CNN headline read, “Knife-wielding attackers stab civilian after trying to board school bus full of children”?

No. The original headline does not even mention the victim. Instead, it makes the Palestinian terrorists into the victims, reading “Armed Palestinians shot after trying to board bus with children on board”.

These are similar incidents but CNN handles them in contradictory and incompatible ways.

A revised, slightly better but still inadequate, headline reads, as of this writing, “Knife-wielding Palestinians shot after stabbing Israeli man”. While mentioning the victim of the stabbing, though now ignoring the terrorized children, the headline also presents the Palestinian assailants as victims.

Since most readers simply scan headlines and never read the accompanying articles, they never get the full story – even if the article is accurate, which it frequently is not. Extra care must be used by editors when writing these important phrases. In this case, CNN could use some therapy.

The Executive Council of the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) is expected to take up a draft resolution prepared by the Palestinian Authority that would designate the Western Wall, or Kotel HaMa’aravi, as part of al-Aqsa Mosque, the tomb of Rachel as the burial place of Bilal Ibn Rabah, a companion of Islam’s prophet, Mohammed, and declare the Cave of the Patriarchs as a Muslim shrine and part of “Palestine.” This matter may go to the full UNESCO plenum, where “Palestine,” which has no established boundaries, no government in control of its population or other attributes of a sovereign country, is a recognized member state. As in all matters before committees at the United Nations, the overwhelming pro-Arab — or, more to the point, anti-Israel — majority guarantees passage of proposals that are utterly without merit and often, as in this case, simultaneously ludicrous and outrageous.

For years, Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas and other Palestinian leaders have denied the existence of the First and Second Temples and attempted to expunge any Jewish — and therefore key Christian — connections to Jerusalem’s holy sites. Last month, Abbas declared that the Temple Mount and the Church of the Holy Sepulchre “are ours”. This historical revisionism and attempted religious suppression is an affront to Jews and Christians alike as these sites are central to both religions. Furthermore, rather than protecting holy sites, Palestinian groups have been desecrating and destroying them, including Rachel’s Tomb, Joseph’s Tomb and the Church of the Nativity.

Some Arab and Muslim representatives long have decried non-existent attempts to “Judaize” Jerusalem. The archaeological evidence of Judaism’s deep connection to the holy city are everywhere and the Hebrew Bible mentions Jerusalem or its synonym, Zion, hundreds of times, the Koran not at all. But this very real and sinister movement to de-Judaize Jerusalem, and thereby implicitly deny Christianity’s attachment to some of its holy places, should not be promoted by any nation or international body. Rather, it should be condemned. Passage of such a proclamation would only legitimize the bloodthirsty incitement perpetuated by Palestinian leaders through public statements, media reports, sermons and television shows. This incitement is the cause of the surge in violence against Jews sweeping Israel and the resultant self-defense measures being undertaken there. Any nation or group that claims to promote peace and understanding must reject this resolution.

For more information on the history of Jerusalem and its connection to the three monotheistic religions, please click here.

Update: According to Times of Israel:

Israel’s ambassador to UNESCO, Carmel Shama Hacohen, confirmed to Israel Radio Wednesday that the Palestinian delegation had proposed a new version of the controversial resolution, removing the clause that would have declared the Western Wall a Muslim site.

[…]

The resolution… still contains a request to recognize Rachel’s Tomb in Bethlehem and the Tomb of the Patriarchs in Hebron as Muslim sites. Israeli diplomats said they would continue to fight the resolution, and try to get allied states to reject it.

Update #2: Arutz Sheva reports the revised resolution has passed:

UNESCO (the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization) passed a resolution Wednesday listing the Cave of the Patriarchs in Hevron and Rachel’s Tomb in Bethlehem as Muslim sites.

Last month, UN Watch reported that Saudi Arabia will chair an important panel of the United Nations Human Rights Council. First of all, yes, Saudi Arabia –one of the world’s worst human rights violators– is ON the UN Human Rights Council. And, yes, now it will CHAIR a panel that selects top officials who shape international human rights standards and report on violations worldwide.

UN Watch executive director Hillel Neuer said, “It is scandalous that the UN chose a country that has beheaded more people this year than ISIS to be head of a key human rights panel.”

And though this development is indeed scandalous, judging by the dearth of media coverage of this matter, it is seemingly not newsworthy.

Other than blog posts on The Washington Post site and in Real Clear Politics and an opinion piece on The Daily Beast, there has been media silence. None of the major news outlets felt their readers and viewers should be made aware.

Just to put this in context, Saudi Arabia will be a powerful leader of the UN Human Rights Council, the same body that regularly condemns the democratic state of Israel, while the theocratic kingdom is set to behead and then crucify the body of a pro-democracy activist arrested at the age of seventeen.

Perhaps it would be too much to expect global condemnation and outrage. But at the very least, one must ask… Where’s the coverage?

In coverage of new policies in response an upsurge in Palestinian violence, Reuters quoted Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, “The Security Cabinet unanimously adopted a series of measures within the framework of our fight against stone throwers, petrol bombs and flares.”

The article goes on to say:

The Israeli human rights group B’Tselem lists 12 Palestinian minors who were shot and killed by Israeli forces during protests and clashes in the West Bank in 2014. In at least four of those incidents, Israel said the youngsters had been throwing rocks or petrol bombs, according to B’Tselem.

Beyond the well-documented mischaracterization of B’Tselem as a “human rights group,” media coverage of this particular issue positions the violence as little more than children acting out, grossly underestimating the danger inherent in these violent attacks, which often include Molotov cocktails and explosive devices. While sometimes the perpetrators are the “youngsters” Reuters considers them, they are regularly teenagers and adults who are the same age, if not older, than the IDF forces attempting to stop them.

On numerous occasions, CAMERA has documented the true life-threatening nature of these attacks. Recently, one man died after he crashed his car in a desperate attempt to escape a rock-flinging crowd, a couple described the terror of being encircled by Palestinians wielding stones with the intention to kill them and their five-month old daughter, and a recently posted video reveals just one instance of Palestinian “youngsters” converging on a car and pummeling it with rocks.

One can imagine oneself in that car, watching as people approach and attack, knowing their goal is stoning those inside to death. Yet, the media seems to simply accept these acts as an element of Palestinian “resistance” culture.

–Rachel Frommer, CAMERA Intern

Conservative political pundit Ann Coulter tweeted shocking anti-Semitic comments during Wednesday night’s GOP presidential debate. “How many f—ing Jews do these people think there are in the United States?” Coulter wrote, before calling out candidates who dared to mention Israel in answer to the question, “What will America look like after you are president.” Her tweets echo the age-old libelous claim of surreptitious Jewish control behind the seats of government. As the debate continued, and the Republican candidates repeatedly mentioned support of Israel as a top priority of their respective platforms, Coulter tweeted that the candidates were “pandering” to their Jewish constituency and Israel.

The irony is not lost that the tweet of a regular Fox News commentator reflects the same sentiment as the Ayatollah Khamenei’s, posted on his English-language Twitter handle:

Coulter’s vitriolic anti-Semitic stream inspired a new hashtag #IStandWithAnn, which has been enthusiastically used by anti-Jewish, anti-Israel social media users of both high and low profile.

Though Coulter continues to attempt to explain her comments, as of this writing, she has not issued any apologies or removed the offensive tweets from her account.

–Rachel Frommer, CAMERA Intern

In an Op-Ed in the Miami Herald, Gen. Hugh Shelton, former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, expresses his opposition to the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), the proposed “Iran deal” negotiated between the U.S., Great Britain, France, Germany, Russia, China and Iran.

Gen. Shelton writes:

The main opposition, the National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI), and its many supporters in Western countries — myself included —understand that a regime that can’t be trusted with the lives of its own people can’t be trusted with a weak nuclear deal. The deadly consequences of such an agreement will not come 10 years from now when Iran has the acknowledged ability to launch a nuclear weapon; they will come as soon as the current regime is granted legitimacy on the international stage and gains economic or political leverage over democratic nations, which will happen as soon as their coffers are filled with unfrozen assets and the oil flows unfettered.

If the administration can’t be bothered with the voice of the over 75 million Iranians, there is no shortage of American former officials, military officers, and academics who can attest to the power and legitimacy of the Iranian people and opposition working towards democracy. Former CIA Director James Woolsey, former FBI Director Louis Freeh, former Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge, former Attorney General Michael Mukasey and retired General George Casey are among them. All are men of unimpeachable integrity.

President Obama would do well to heed the serious, thoughtful and constructive criticisms about the nuclear deal.