Reporting of "al-Nakba Day" usually fails to note to what extent the Arabs' 1948 "catastrophe" was self-imposed. A new mobile phone application, "iNakba," promises to let users take anti-Israel revisionism with them.
Just before Israel's Memorial Day, when the country mourns its fallen soldiers and victims of terrorism, The New York Times featured a prominent article about Islamic Jihad, the terrorist organization responsible for hundreds of Israeli victims. A timely choice, were it not for the fact that the article included no mention of Islamic Jihad's terror attacks or anything about its victims.
The New York Times' current post-mortem on the US-brokered Israeli-Palestinian peace negotiations, demonstrate yet again the abandonment of journalistic objectivity in order to blame Israel. This overtly partisan article could more aptly have been entitled "How Israel Undermined the Peace Process."
By implying that Israelis are unreasonable or unjustified in viewing the self-confessed Palestinian murderer of a Holocaust survivor as a terrorist, The Times' Jodi Rudoren demonizes the Israeli people.
After the New York Times described Atarot, a neighborhood in northern Jerusalem owned by Jews before being taken over by Jordan in 1948, as "occupied Palestinian territory," the newspaper commendably published a correction.
The New York Times isn’t waiting for negotiations to sort out complex questions about Jerusalem. It already has all the answers — for example, that Atarot in northern Jerusalem must belong to the Palestinians. (Updated: NY Times corrects.)
The New York Times twice relayed misinformation by Palestinian leaders about the meaning of last-minute edits to President Truman's letter recognizing Israel. The second time it did so, it left readers in the dark.
Whether discussing Palestinian demands or Israeli demands, Palestinian rejection of Israeli positions or Israeli rejection of Palestinian positions, the newspaper identifies the same party as the obstacle to successful peace talks — Israel. Compare how the newspaper reports both sides’ positions.
Whether discussing Palestinian demands or Israeli demands, Palestinian rejection of Israeli positions or Israeli rejection of Palestinian positions, the newspaper identifies the same party as the obstacle to successful peace talks — Israel. Compare ;how the newspaper reports the positions of each side.
After a press conference by Israeli officials highlighted continued Palestinian incitement, The New York Times covered the important story. CAMERA, which recently published an ad urging the newspaper to report on Palestinian hate rhetoric, considers this a step in the right direction.