Thursday, July 2 2009

Posted at 12:58 PM
Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Australian columnist Greg Sheridan wonders about the left's silent on Iranian repression. This particular snippet's tie-in with Israel blew me away:

Where are you on Iran, Louise Adler, happy to accuse Israel of war crimes without the slightest evidence, but apparently unstirred by the murder of hundreds of innocent civilians in Iran?

What have you got to say, Antony Loewenstein, stupidly and inaccurately labelling Israel an apartheid state and approvingly quoted in the Iranian official media, but listless on your blog in the face of the Iranian repression?

What about The Age's cartoonist Michael Leunig, who once drew a cartoon so morally obtuse, stupid and offensive that it was happily accepted by an Iranian newspaper in a competition for cartoons that would offend Jews (the cartoon was submitted without Leunig's knowledge), but who is apparently unmoved to draw an image in sympathy with young Iranian democrats?

Read the whole thing.

Posted at 12:10 PM
Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0)

Amnesty International released its report on the Gaza war and I'm scratching my head at a fascinating disparity of coverage. The Irish Times writes of Amnesty:

The organisation contrasts the Israeli attitude with that of Hamas, which rules Gaza and freely permits human rights organisations to conduct investigations into Israeli and Palestinian abuses.

But according to Financial Times:

While Hamas has said it would help the mission, the fact that its officials have often accompanied the investigators in Gaza has drawn scepticism about the ability of witnesses to freely describe the militant group’s actions.

Are the Times and the FT talking about the same Gaza? I don't understand how any journalist as reasonably knowledgable about Gaza as Jansen can write that with a straight face.

The Amnesty and UN investigations are further examples of the tear-jerker journalism phenomenon.

UPDATE: Is the dueling spin more of a reflection on Amnesty's lead researcher, Donatella Rovera, than on the MSM? AP writes:

She said investigators were able to operate freely in Gaza, without any intervention by Hamas security forces . . . .

The U.N. is examining the conduct of both sides to the conflict. Hamas allowed veteran war crimes investigator Richard Goldstone and his team into Gaza last month, but Hamas security often accompanied them, raising questions about the ability of witnesses to freely describe the militant group's actions.

Posted at 09:31 AM
Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Wednesday, July 1 2009

Palestinian journalist Khaled Abu Toameh wonders why the MSM isn’t interested in media repression and torture when the perpetrators are the Palestinian Authority.

In June, an Al-Jazeera crew investigating the death of a Palestinian prisoner apparently tortured was stopped at a PA checkpoint where a videotape was confiscated and erased. Toameh explains why you didn't hear about this:

One can only imagine the international media's reaction had the TV crew been detained by Israeli security forces. Anti-Israel groups and individuals would have cited the incident as further proof of the "occupation's brutal measures" against the freedom of the media . . . .

Yet foreign journalists and human rights activists working in Israel and the Palestinian territories either chose to ignore the story or never heard about it simply because it was lacking in an anti-Israel angle.

One can also imagine how the media and human rights organizations would have reacted had a Palestinian died in Israeli prison after allegedly being tortured.

At least Reporters Without Borders condemned the incident.

Posted at 03:48 PM
Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Huffington Post falsely equates Israel with Neda's murderers. See HonestReporting's latest communique: "Israel as Brutal as Iran"

Posted at 01:38 PM
Permalink | Comments (47) | TrackBack (0)

The Times of London reports that presenter Nick Ferrari quit his job at Press TV to protest the Iranian station's biased coverage of the post-election violence:

Ferrari, who hosts LBC’s weekday breakfast show, told The Times that Press TV’s news coverage had been “reasonably fair” until the election — but not any longer. “I imagine they’ve been told what to do, and I can’t reconcile that with working there,” he said.

The Times also reports that Ofcom is investigating Press TV:

Ofcom, the broadcast regulator, is investigating a complaint that Press TV has breached its duty to be accurate and impartial, and many Iranians living in Britain are appalled that it can operate so freely.

Although Reporters Without Borders calls Iran the "world’s biggest prison for journalists," Booth dug in her heels about being on the Iranian payroll:

Booth told The Times that her weekly programme, Remember the Children of Palestine, was “too important for me not to make it”.

George Galloway, Yvonne Ridley and Andrew Gilligan -- also employed by Press TV -- insisted that there's no political interference in their shows. Of course, parroting the party line doesn't require that.

Posted at 01:02 PM
Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Israeli navy towed Free Gaza boat to Ashdod. The 21 activists competing for headlines with Iran and Michael Jackson will be deported.

Posted at 12:23 PM
Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Tuesday, June 30 2009

Memo to Tim McGirk and your editors at Time:

The Times of London, Reuters and the Globe & Mail have already documented that a lot of Palestinian kids look forward to being sent to an Israeli prison and deliberately get themselves arrested. Israeli prisons give Palestinian kids three square meals a day, an education, and street cred.

Much of McGirk's coverage is based on a non-governmental organization called Defence for Children International. Here's why to be wary of this NGO.

Posted at 04:19 PM
Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0)

Till now, Israel’s treaties with Egypt, and Jordan and its peace efforts under the Oslo rubric were based on the simple recognition of Israel’s right to exist. Throughout the years of negotiations, Israelis presumed that the concept of Israel as an acknowledged Jewish state was self-evident.

But Oslo’s collapse lays bare the Palestinian state of denial over recognizing Israel as a Jewish state. As former consul-general Alon Pinkas explains:

The Arab world has de-facto recognised Israel’s existence, but not its right to exist. The Arabs recognise Israel as a strategic fact of life, a military power that currently is invincible. Israel, according to this paradigm is not a permanent feature in the Middle East.

Give or take 200 years and they will be driven out. So goes the Arab argument.

Now, Netanyahu -- who signed the Wye River and Hebron accords without demanding a higher level of acknowledgement -- is pointing out that it’s a waste of time to engage in peace talks with people who can’t recognize Israel as a Jewish state.

Recently, the Washington Post talked to Israeli officials about this new demand, not only focusing on the question of why, but – more importantly – why now?

"If there is no recognition that the Jewish people exist, that the Jewish people emerged from this land, then you have no end of conflict," said Michael B. Oren, Netanyahu's incoming ambassador to Washington. "During Oslo, the thinking was: We don't need recognition. We are strong. We are the winners. Give them a chance. Give them an opportunity to acclimate to peace. This was wrong." . . . .

In the intervening years, Arab Israelis -- about 20 percent of the country's population -- became more assertive about their national identity and pushed for Israel to become "a state of all its citizens," said Jamal Zahalka, an Israeli lawmaker. The intifada that erupted in 2000 and the rise in popularity of the Islamist Hamas movement, advocating Israel's elimination, reinforced the sense that a purely diplomatic accord would not leave Israel secure, said Yoram Hazony, who helped research Netanyahu's 1993 book, "A Place Among the Nations."

So What?

• Jews have legitimate national aspirations for self-determination.

• A state that is merely the “sum of its citizens” has no soul. Such a polity only reflects the character of the people living there at that time.

• A two state solution that also allows for Palestinian right of return will undermine the stability of Israeli society. Arabs have no track record for successful multi-ethnic states; the social tensions stoked by internal and foreign rejectionists will make Lebanon’s civil war look like a walk in the park.

• Nobody demands that a Palestinian state be “a state of its citizens.” It’s taken for granted that the state of Palestine will have no room or rights for Jews as equal citizens. The Arab states that expelled 850,000 Jews from their lands, have no right to demand that Israel simply be a state of its citizens.

• Should this recognition be a precondition for talks, or is it an issue that can be worked out in the course of peace talks? That’s a fair question. (The knee-jerk Palestinian reaction to Netanyahu’s speech didn’t encourage me.)

• Is Israeli consensus lacking on the question of what it means to be a Jewish state? Yes. But that’s an internal matter for Israeli society to decide. It’s not for outsiders to define another nation’s character, whether we’re talking about Israel, Turkey, Iran. or any other country.

I’ll give the final word to Pinkas:

So Arab recognition of Israel as the state of the Jews is a monumental educational process that is a prerequisite to lasting peace.

Once Israel is “The state of the Jews” in Arab eyes, it has a right to exist. Once it has a right to exist (this in fact is a silly debate: What “right” to exist do Belgium or Uruguay have?) durable coexistence is attainable.

UPDATE June 30: According to deputy foreign minister Danny Ayalon, Israel doesn't need this level of recognition from the Palestinians; rather, the Palestinian leaders must educate their people that Israel is a Jewish state. This video was posted on YouTube just today.

Posted at 10:27 AM
Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Monday, June 29 2009

Thank goodness Press TV clears away the hype and misinformation surrounding the death of Neda Soltan. According to Iranian state-run news channel:

The man who drove her to hospital said in an interview that her death looked “highly suspicious”, claiming there were no security forces or Basij members nearby . . . .

Her death first became suspicious after revelations that she was killed by a small caliber pistol -- a weapon that is not used by Iranian security forces.

Iranian security forces have dismissed the reports out of hand, asserting that they did not open fire on protestors during the sporadic unrest.

“Policemen are not authorized to use weapons against people,” Tehran Police Chief Azizallah Rajabzadeh said on the morrow of Neda's death.

How long till Press TV "proves" that the caliber is used by the Mossad, CIA, and Michael Jackson's doctors? CNN picked up on the so-called scoop with a big grain of salt:

Press TV did not name the man, who spoke Farsi and was subtitled in English on the broadcast.

CNN has not identified him and cannot confirm his account.

As the NY Times aptly points out, the lines between journalism and social media are blurring in Iran thanks to the government's media clampdown and the tech-savvy protesters.

But if there's any doubt on where Press TV's sympathies lie, check out this video of George Galloway heaping praise on the mullahs and Iranian democracy.

Posted at 01:39 PM
Permalink | Comments (4) | TrackBack (0)

Sunday, June 28 2009

Michael Jackson's unexpected death is certainly good news for Iran's ruling mullahs. Globe & Mail cartoonist Brian Gable points out an unfortunate exception to the media maxim: If it bleeds, it leads.

Posted at 01:44 PM
Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Behind the scenes efforts secured an important on-air apology from the CBC after it incorporated misleading footage into a report about Hamas. See HonestReporting Canada's special report: CBC Issues On-Air Clarification

Posted at 07:20 AM
Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Thursday, June 25 2009

While Israelis mark the third anniversary of Gilad Shalit's capture, YNet News finds that a B'Tselem ad calling for the reservist's freedom has been banned in Gaza:

The group spokeswoman said the ad was published on Thursday by the Palestinian newspaper Al-Quds, which is circulated in the West Bank, but the Gaza-based daily 'Palestine' refused to print it . . .

"They ('Palestine' newspaper staff) did not give us a reason for the refusal, but we assume it's because the issue is a complex one (in the Hamas-ruled territory). The press in Gaza is apparently not so free. The ad was published in Al-Quds, and we hope the residents of Gaza will read it there."

Meanwhile, solidarity for Shalit is building on Twitter. As I write, #Gilad is now the no. 4 trending topic according to the #Hashtags website. Have you shown your support yet?

Posted at 02:17 PM
Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0)