David M. Litman is the U.S. Media Research Manager at the Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting and Analysis (CAMERA), where he covers anti-Israel bias in the media. Previously, David worked at an independent watchdog organization focused on anti-Israel bias, international law, and human rights issues in the United Nations and international courts. David graduated magna cum laude from Case Western Reserve School of Law and holds a BA in International Studies.
Merriam-Webster defines the term “kangaroo court” as “a mock court in which the principles of law and justice are disregarded or perverted.” There is no more apt term for the United Nations’s Commission of Inquiry (COI) against Israel, which has long dispensed with any pretense of being fair, impartial, or objective. So why did CNN’s Niamh Kennedy and Muhammad Darwish treat the COI as if its conclusions carried any respectability?
As Iran and its terrorist proxies wage war against the Jewish state, CNN owes its audience the truth about Iran’s goal: the destruction of the Jewish state. This is especially so when Iran itself states it publicly.
Until CNN is honest about the genocidal crusade of Iran and its proxy terrorist groups, the network’s audience will fail to comprehend the motivations of the parties to the conflict. One side seeks to erase the Jewish state from existence, while the other side refuses to lie down and die.
Developing the ability to engage in vigorous debate and oppositional advocacy is central to legal education. So why is the American Branch of the International Law Association (ABILA) so averse to a diversity of opinions on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict?
CAMERA joined with several Brown University alumni to put together a submission in opposition to divestment. The submission, delivered on August 30, identifies a total of 45 false claims made in BDC’s proposal, debunking each in turn.
CNN clearly understands that bad journalism not only does a disservice to its audience, but it also puts innocent civilians in danger. So, what are we to make of the fact that these reporters are knowingly repeating the same mistakes?
CNN’s coverage portrays three separate standards in the law of armed conflict: a unique, higher standard applied to the Jewish state; the standard applied to the rest of the world; and no standard to Palestinian terrorists who seek to wipe the Jewish state from the face of the earth.
“We find Harvard’s relationship with Birzeit University…to be extremely concerning,” reads a July 15 letter sent by nearly thirty members of Congress to Harvard University’s Interim President Alan Garber. Wait until Congress hears about Birzeit’s relationship with another Ivy League institution, Brown University.
The Board’s questionable handling of the public engagement process over moderating the term "shaheed" does not inspire confidence that these issues are being fairly or fully considered. With upcoming Board recommendations on moderating the phrase “from the river to the sea” and how to handle the use of the term “Zionists” when compared to criminality, it is clear that the Board seeks to have an enormous influence on online expression relating to Israel and antisemitism. As antisemitism and anti-Israel extremism surge, this should be concerning to all.
