The Palestinian Authority is likely covering up evidence of its complicity in supporting terrorist attacks against Israelis. Yet, many major U.S. media outlets are ignoring the PA's suspicious decision to shred papers—and the history that suggests what the Authority is up to, and why.
In a nearly 1,000-word op-ed railing against 'annexation,' the Washington Post's Ishaan Tharoor omits key facts and history about Israel, international law and the so-called 'peace process.'
NPR's Daniel Estrin falsely casts Palestinians as having turned every stone in a fruitless effort to establish a state while Israel has been the intransigent party, allegedly refusing to negotiate.
Palestinian leaders are never responsible for the inflammatory actions they take. That’s the overarching New York Times narrative about the Arab-Israeli conflict, and that’s the message again of today’s story, by reporters David M. Halbfinger, Adam Rasgon and Mohammed Najib, about Palestinian threats to cut off security cooperation with Israel.
The Associated Press, which in 2018 falsely reported that "Iran has never threatened to attack Israel," again today erases anti-Israel threats, fabricating: Palestinian President Mahmoud "Abbas has always been opposed to violence."
Freedom of the press and freedom of expression exist only superficially in the Palestinian Authority, where the government has adopted the principle of "journalism in the service of the revolution," observes veteran Israeli journalist Yoni Ben-Menachem, targeted for reporting stories unfavorable to Palestinian officials.
A March 30, 2020 Foreign Policy op-ed holds Israel responsible for the threat that the COVID-19 pandemic poses to Palestinians. In order to do so, the commentary omits crucial facts and context, while depriving Palestinian leaders of responsibility.
Demanding that 6 million Palestinian “refugees” have a “right” to "return" to a place where most of them never lived runs counter to Palestinian claims that they want to have their own independent state. Yet, as CAMERA tells The Washington Examiner, many in the media fail to tell the truth about what a "right of return" really means.
Foreign Policy magazine claims “one reason the Palestinians swiftly rejected the flawed U.S. peace plan was that it does nothing to address their claims for water rights.” But there's no evidence to suggest that this is the case, and plenty of evidence to suggest otherwise.
NPR's Michele Kelemen reverses chronology when telling listeners that Palestinian-Israeli peace talks failed in 2008 because Israel’s prime minster was indicted for bribery. What is NPR concealing?
