This is but one extraordinarily misleading sentence within the cacophony of sensational, biased and misleading headlines, photos and articles published in the British media since late March. Yet, it aptly demonstrates how language is often chosen by reporters not with painstaking attention to the veracity of the information being conveyed but in order to serve the broader narrative of Israeli villainy and Palestinian victimhood.
If you defend Israel's actions in Gaza, your ethical impulses are, according to the Guardian columnist, not those of an ordinary human being. It would be difficult to find a better illustration of why so many Jews believe that media coverage of Israel incites antisemitism than a column suggesting that they, by virtue of their pro-Israeli political views, are morally deranged, even sub-human.
Last week, following communication with UK Media Watch, Times of London editors corrected a false claim, in an article by David Aaronovitch, that the first Hamas suicide bombing was an act of retaliation in response to Baruch Goldstein's massacre of 29 Muslim worshipers in 1994.
Contrary to the Guardian Jerusalem correspondent's claim, Hamas has not "softened" its founding charter's rejection of Israel's existence, nor has it abandoned its promotion of violence to achieve this end.
There hasn't been a shortage of inflammatory, misleading and inaccurate media claims during coverage of recent Gaza riots, but the insinuation of Israeli malevolence in this Indy editorial is among the worst we've reviewed.
Guardian accuses Israel of "war crimes" in shooting "protesters" who "posed no credible threat".However, in what world do thousands of rioters attempting the breach the border of a sovereign democratic state, at the behest of a proscribed terror group, not represent a “credible threat”?
The claim that it's "totally forbidden" to carry or display a Palestinian flag in Jerusalem is simply false. We confirmed this during a conversation with Israeli Police Foreign Press Spokesperson Mickey Rosenfeld. Further, as we tweeted yesterday, the photographer himself has published photos depicting Palestinians with Palestinian flags.
the Channel 4 News presenter wasn't interested in providing relevant context, nor investigating the real cause of poverty, suicide and child abuse in Gaza - or the wider issue of Hamas's role in Gaza's isolation and misery. His sole objective was to produce a segment consistent with the desired media narrative of cruel Israelis inflicting suffering upon innocent Palestinians.
Here is the basic question: Why is the Guardian more concerned about the possible future instability caused by Washington's pullout from the Iran Deal than the actual death and destruction that Tehran is causing today in the Middle East?
In February, following our communication with Guardian editors, an article focusing on a row between Israel and church leaders was corrected. The article originally claimed that proposed Israeli legislation (currently on hold) would allow the state to confiscate church land in Jerusalem, when the bill actually targeted land which the church had already sold to private (Jewish) developers. However, on May 1st, the Guardian made the same error, which, after we lodged a new complaint, was corrected.