All too often, mainstream media outlets whitewash the violent acts of Palestinian prisoners. Calling those incarcerated since before 1994 "political prisoners" is an egregious cover up of their brutal crimes, detailed here for the first time. 
Not for the first time, New York Times news blogger Robert Mackey distorted the views of fellow journalists by cherry-picking quotations and presenting them out of context. The latest victim (aside from Israel, of course) is The Atlantic's James Fallows. 
The New York Times provides two more examples of the double standards it uses when reporting about the Arab-Israeli conflict, in a) a headline that ignores the Jewish victim of Palestinian terrorism and b) pejorative editorializing about Israel. 
New York Times journalists know with certainty that Abbas wants to restart peace talks because they saw a Palestinian list of talking points suggesting he say as much. 
Painting a sympathetic portrait of violent demonstrators, The New York Times Magazine 8,000-word cover story asks “Is This Where the Third Intifada Will Start?” With all the cheerleading in the article, it seems the New York Times hopes so. 
In his report on the Palestinian bus controversy, New York Times blogger Robert Mackey ignores pleased Palestinian customers because, he claims, he read "no testimonies from Palestinians praising the new bus lines." So why did he manage to miss this part of the story? 
Two stories in two days reveal two standards governing New York Times coverage of violence in the Arab-Israeli conflict.