The extent of Israel’s support for the Ukraine and condemnation of Russia is a source of controversy and debate, both within and outside the country, but only someone bent on demonizing the Jewish state would paint it as a simple matter of Israel's inferior “morality.”
The Ramadan jihad of 2021 was a violent campaign that was planned well before Ramadan and evolved into a full Hamas war with Israel that extended beyond the period of Ramadan. That war, in turn, became a tool to demonize Israel in the latest round of a hostile propaganda campaign whose goal is the delegitimization and eradication of the Jewish State.
Since his passing, Archbishop Desmond Tutu, renowned for his fight against South African's apartheid and racism, has been widely eulogized for his accomplishments. Less mentioned was his call for a global boycott of the Jewish state. Such calls, even under the guise of human rights, hide an underlying anti-Semitism. In order to weigh both sides of the debate about anti-Jewish boycott and understand why so many seek to combat it, one must be familiar with the boycott’s history.
It is no wonder the New York Times' recent Op-Doc (op-ed documentary film) about Israel was a biased Breaking the Silence film that demonizes and delegitimizes Israel's military and Hebron’s Jewish residents. After all, the film represents the current mindset at a newspaper committed to villifying the Jewish state, its leaders and institutions.
Target's removal of two dozen Holocaust-denial and anti-Semitic conspiracy books marketed on its website, in the wake of CAMERA's exposé is commendable, as its apology for its “error in having these books available on Target.com,” but it is only once chapter of a disturbing story whose conclusion is not yet obvious.
Nowhere is NPR's skewed reporting as obvious as in its coverage of Jerusalem. Misrepresentations about Israeli policy in Jerusalem were followed by a broadcast that bolstered the Hamas pretext for rocketing population centers inside Israel – namely, the “defense” of Jerusalem and Al Aqsa.
In July so far, NPR aired at least three problematic reports, that shared a common thread – omitting context and hearing from anti-Israel activists to blame Israel for dispossessing and discriminating against Palestinians and stirring conflict. It was a throwback to the NPR of the past.
For years, readers have turned to the Jerusalem Post for context that’s often missing from one-sided, anti-Israel reports in the international media. But recent coverage of a demolition in Silwan consisted of a partisan report from Reuters.
The venerable, American popular science magazine has become the latest venue for anti-Israel defamation. Why would editors cast aside the scientific tradition of fact-based inquiry in order to present pro-terrorist propaganda and the promotion of BDS in the guise of an analytic article?
Why didn’t NY Times editors find a story about antisemitic hate crime in New York City -- that most other media outlets covered --newsworthy? Was it because the identity of the perpetrator did not support the narrative of antisemitism emanating solely from Nazis, the far-right, and white supremacists?
