This week’s anniversary of the 1947 UN Partition Plan, which led to the creation of Israel as an independent state in 1948, is a good opportunity to look at a key point in the history of Palestinian rejectionism. Unless, like Internet magazine Salon, you subscribe to the media narrative of the pristine and innocent Palestinians,…
The Daily Mail’s sensationalist headline implies that Israelis are responsible for the shedding of Palestinian blood in the streets of Jerusalem.
A Reuters headline implies that a Palestinian car attacker was the victim of his own terror attack.
Two Palestinian teenage girls are shot while carrying out a terror attack in Jerusalem. The Daily Mail’s headline portrays them as victims of Israel.
CNN illustrates the Middle East with a map that erases Israel, instead replacing it with “Palestina,” a Spanish or Portuguese translation of Palestine.
It’s been two months since the current wave of terror began, and the media outlets are still confused about victims and terrorists. On Sunday, three Palestinian terrorists attempted to stab Israelis in unrelated attacks, killing one woman. The terrorists were killed in self-defense. The New York Times initial headline (since changed): 1 Israeli and 3 Palestinians…
The Watertown Daily Times acknowledges it should never have published an anti-Semitic letter following protest from HonestReporting subscribers.
Is a crude game, only available on obscure websites, really comparable to popular news shows in which glory is heaped on those who commit murder?
Two upstate New York newspapers refuse to acknowledge that they have published an openly anti-Semitic letter promoting conspiracy theories.
For a prominent journalist such as Rudoren to endorse language that uses the words “Palestinian assailants” and “Palestinian attackers” is a welcome change. (Although ideally, we would prefer the term “terrorist.”)