Yesterday, we posted about an article titled: ‘The Economist Explains: The status of Arabic speakers in Israel‘, included the bizarre claim that “Arabic songs were banned from Israeli radio for several decades.” We contacted the editor responsible for the article, who promptly responded to inform us that they upheld our complaint and removed the sentence in question.
A Nov. 27th article in The Economist titled ‘The Economist Explains: The status of Arabic speakers in Israel’, included the claim that “Arabic songs were banned from Israeli radio for several decades.” However, evidence suggests there couldn’t possibly have been such a ban (“for several decades”) on Arabic songs.
Our point isn’t to debate the merits of the Knesset’s muezzin bill, but to question why Fraser highlighted only Israeli efforts to limit noise from mosque loudspeakers – in a column focused on noise from a British airport – when he could have used similar examples from anywhere in the world.
Arab leaders have always treated Palestinian refugees as a political, rather than a humanitarian issue, and have placed political attacks against Israel above the welfare of the Palestinian people.
As the Jerusalem Post noted, the most recent FBI hate crime stats for 2015 showed that a shocking 53.3 percent of the religiously motivated hate crimes (or 664 incidents) were directed at Jews, who make up less than 2 percent of the population.
By uncritically repeating such toxic canards, and fail to make a serious effort to separate facts from anti-Zionist fiction, the Indy may increasingly be viewed by many within the British Jewish community as something akin to a purveyor of fake news about the Jewish state.
Though the PSC (whose Patrons include Jenny Tonge and Caryl Churchill) has every right to spread this kind of propaganda, the New Statesman – which, despite it’s hostility to Israel, fancies itself a serious news magazine guided by “scepticism” and “free thinking” – owes its readers more than to amplify, license and legitimise such one-sided, intellectually unserious hyperbole.
Cross posted from the blog of the Zionist Federation Prolific anti-Israel campaigner Ben White has announced the publication of his latest book: “The 2014 Gaza War: 21 Questions And Answers.” Given that […]
At times we take our collective memory of Guardian coverage of Israel for granted, so we’ve decided to provide a list of some egregious examples of bias and over the years – information helpful in contextualizing our ongoing analysis of the ‘liberal’ British newspaper.
The goal of journalism is to report the facts and inform the reader. When the Independent chose to mislead with a photo of Netanyahu, they were not engaging in journalism, but were involved in polemic and slander.
The spread of anti-Semitism – from university campuses to the heart of Westminster – is pernicious. Many may think of anti-Semitism as being a disease of another time. I, too, shared that belief. Yet the troubling truth is that this is wrong: anti-Semitism is alive and well. It’s time to kill it off before it’s too late.
In the Guardian mentality, you cannot carry a story of an ex-muslim persecuted for his apostasy for fear of inspiring hate against muslims. Thus a genuine case of hate crime is ignored on the grounds it could lead to other, imagined hate crimes.
The British do need to “reflect on a painful legacy”. Balfour was written in 1917. By 1922 the Mandate was in place. If the British had swiftly finished the job they had been given international license to carry out, just how many Jewish lives could have been saved?
At present there is no approval process for booking rooms in Parliament. This is clearly unsatisfactory. I hope people will write to their MPs to support the implementation of such a process — so that extremist meetings like that hosted by Tonge will never again be held in Parliament.
Indy readers interested in learning about the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict are informed that Israel destroys Muslim graves, shoots innocent Palestinian children, breaches Palestinian rights to development and violates the academic freedom of pro-Palestinian Britons.
“When you look at the events at UCL…the intention of the protestors was the same as in the 1970s when Jewish Societies were banned: to declare Zionism outside the boundaries of the democratic community of a Students’ Union. This inevitably places most Jewish students outside that boundary and restricts their rights and activities in comparison to other students on campus.”
On Friday, we spotted the following error in an Independent article written by Matt Broomfield titled “Israel: Prayer protesters in violent Western Wall clash with ultra-conservative Orthodox Jews”. False claim @Independent. No, the […]
What the Indy sold to readers as the wanton destruction by Israeli officials, who “stormed” a historic cemetery to destroy Muslim “graves”, can more accurately be characterized as a cynical public relations stunt within a long pattern of Palestinian efforts to destroy Temple Mount antiquities and erase Jewish history.
There are many reasonable criticisms of British and French involvement in the war, but to characterize the military action to end an illegal blockade of Israeli ships as an “unprovoked” attack is just absurd.
Mazzig and Jewish attendees were repeatedly intimidated and harassed and eventually had to be evacuated by police. The incident prompted a chorus of criticism from MPs and Jewish organizations, which led to an announcement by the university that an official investigation would be launched. UK news outlets reporting the incident include the Times of London, the Telegraph, the Daily Mail, the Independent, the Express, the Evening Standard, Channel 4 News and LBC. Yet, the ‘anti-racism’ campaigners at the Guardian have thus far completely ignored the story.
Recent Comments