On May 2nd, 2006, the New York Times published a detailed, emotive human interest story on a Palestinian family whose northern Gaza house was hit by an Israeli artillery shell fired in response to Kassam rockets launched from the area. While Israelis have been terrorized by daily Palestinian rocket and mortar attacks, Israeli suffering is generally presented only by dry facts and figures.The Times puts a human face primarily on Palestinian suffering. The result? Skewed emphasis on the Palestinian toll in the conflict.
The Washington Post s May 2 editorial about Sami al-Arian deserves not only praise but wider notice. In five paragraphs it accurately and informatively comments on an important terrorism case, one that lasted for years.
An April 3rd interview with former Mossad chief Efraim Halevy by BBC's "Hardtalk" host David Jessel is emblematic of the BBC's infamous anti-Israel bent. The host's questions are breathtaking in their hostility toward Israel and their one-sided, prejudicial nature.
A CAMERA letter in USA Today points out flawed logic in an earlier editorial that suggesting that "fresh violence" by Hamas would be the result of Israeli actions. The letter also asks why that newpaper cautions Israel not to target terrorists, but instead improve their cash flow.
Hamas (Islamic Resistance Movement) is considered a terrorist organization by much of the non-Arab international community including Israel, the U.S. and the European Union. But following the group's overwhelming victory in Palestinian elections, some journalists and politicians like former U.S. President Jimmy Carter now insist Hamas deserves to be recognized and legitimized. Given such trends, it is important to recall key facts about Hamas.
An excerpt from Robert Fisk's book, published on the Independent online edition, provides example after example of why the British journalist's work is seen as "warped" and uninformed.
While European Union and American officials are aghast at the electoral victory of the terrorist organization Hamas, London's Guardian newspaper wasted no time in burnishing the image of the group sworn to Israel's destruction and treating its victory as a positive development.
Rami Khouri, editor-at-large of Lebanon's Daily Star, and a frequent NPR guest, today on the network actually blamed Ariel Sharon for the rise of Islamism in the Middle East. Perhaps Khouri has never heard of the Wahhabis, or the Saudis and their vast oil wealth, or the Taliban, or Sudan under al-Turabi. That being the case, it's too bad for NPR listeners that the network has heard of Khouri, and invites him on so often.
Robert Fisk, the notoriously anti-Israel journalist, wrote a column charging that Israel's friends have successfully influenced the semantics of Middle East coverage by American journalists, supposedly leading to "journalistic obfuscation" to the detriment of the Palestinians. Underlying Fisk's ire about American coverage is the reality that from his perspective as an extreme pro-Palestinian partisan, reporting by U.S. media is insufficiently tilted in the direction he prefers.
On December 13th, the Boston Globe reported that Saudi Arabian prince Alwaleed bin Talal is giving $20 million to Harvard University to establish a university-wide program in Islamic studies. He is also donating another $20 million gift to Georgetown University for a similar program. What the Globe failed to mention, however, is that the prince had previously pledged $27 million during a 2002 telethon for the Support of the al-Quds Intifada.
