One month after The New York Times was slammed for publishing an Alice Walker interview which promoted an antisemitic book, the "paper of record" cuts out the antisemitic "dual loyalty" slur from Representative Rashida Tlaib's tweet.
"Time to Break the Silence on Palestine" demands Michelle Alexander's New York Times Op-Ed, as if the very same paper has not been publishing a daily drumbeat of material focused on alleged Israeli crimes, real and imagined. The only "silence on Palestine" has been on Palestinian conduct, as the paper's own public editor noted in 2014.
In reporting on the opening of Route 4370 in the West Bank, some in the media got a little to excited about anti-Israel talking points, using them as if they are appropriate journalistic synonyms.
Reuters reported that legislation stalled in the Senate had a measure "to punish Americans who boycott Israel." The bill narrowly applied only to companies -- not private individuals -- engaged in inter-state or international boycott activity.
A recent editorial evidences the New York Times' further descent into anti-Israel advocacy: It distorts the truth about BDS, justifying and sanitizing the anti-Semitic campaign.
An online blog is but the latest example of The Washington Post's tendency to omit the true objectives of the antisemitic boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS) movement that seeks to eliminate the Jewish state.
Marc Lamont Hill's recent U.N. speech calling for the elimination of Israel should come as no surprise; despite efforts by the media to muddy the waters, both Hill and the U.N. committee he was addressing have a long history of opposing Jewish self-determination.
Marc Lamont Hill called for violent resistance. He called for a Palestine to exist instead of, and not alongside, Israel. He called for policies that would upend Israel’s demographic balance and disempower the Jews. Why are so many of his defenders gaslighting Hill's critics instead of defending the actual ideas promoted by the former CNN contributor?
Airbnb's claim that settlements are “at the core of the dispute between Israelis and Palestinians” reflects a lack of understanding of the history of the region and of the history of the conflict itself.
It is no secret that Marc Lamont Hill is a radical who hates Israel, promotes anti-Israeli violence and terrorism, and advocates the violent elimination of the Jewish state. After asking how long would he continue as a political commentator on CNN, our question has been answered. The network has finally severed its ties with him.