Connect with us

RSS

Al Jazeera Documentary Absurdly Attacks CNN & BBC’s ‘Pro-Israel Bias’

The Al Jazeera Media Network logo is seen on its headquarters building in Doha, Qatar, June 8, 2017. Photo: REUTERS/Naseem Zeitoon

Qatari-funded Al Jazeera claims to have the scoop. While HonestReporting has spent the past year (and many years before that) exposing anti-Israel media bias, we’ve apparently had it all wrong. A

ccording to Al Jazeera:

Ten journalists who have covered the war on Gaza for two of the world’s leading news networks, CNN and the BBC, have revealed the inner workings of those outlets’ newsrooms from October 7 onward, alleging pro-Israel bias in coverage, systematic double standards and frequent violations of journalistic principles.

We’ve certainly found systematic double standards and frequent violations of journalistic principles during the past year. That includes Al Jazeera, which has acted as a mouthpiece for Hamas, spreading false propaganda and misinformation, and inciting hatred and violence against Israel and its citizens. So much so that Israel has taken the media outlet off the local airwaves and withdrawn press accreditation for its employees.

But pro-Israel bias in CNN and BBC coverage? Not likely.

So who does Al Jazeera rely on for its half-hour documentary? Three characters whose backgrounds make their views crystal clear:

Craig Mokhiber

Interviewee Craig Mokhiber is a former UN official who has accused Israel of war crimes, has spread the work of BDS activists, and has denied Israel’s right to exist. S

hortly after he exited the UN, it was uncovered that he fraudulently turned his anti-Israel views into a means by which to distract from the real reasons behind his departure — his open antisemitism. (See the tweet below.)

SHAMEFUL: How did some media outlets allow themselves to be manipulated by an antisemitic UN official looking to use his hatred of Israel as a false cover for his own indiscretions?

Must-read : https://t.co/UD0WomS4r0

— HonestReporting (@HonestReporting) November 1, 2023

 

Ghassan Abu-Sitta

Ghassan Abu-Sitta is a British physician who has a pathological need to get in front of TV cameras in order to accuse Israel of every crime imaginable. This is hardly surprising, since a Jewish Chronicle investigation revealed that Abu Sittah has “praised a terrorist murderer in a newspaper article, sat beside a notorious terrorist hijacker at a memorial and delivered a tearful eulogy to the founder of a terror group that was later involved in the October 7 atrocities.”

Jeremy Scahill

Jeremy Scahill’s byline was on a rape denial article in alternative news outlet The Intercept.

The article set about attempting to debunk The New York Times piece, “‘Screams Without Words’: How Hamas Weaponized Sexual Violence on Oct. 7.” In doing so, The Intercept sought to cover up the extent of Hamas’ sexual crimes on October 7. It instead accused the Israeli government and Israel’s supporters of concocting the charges.

There’s nothing new in the charges made against Israel by the interviewees and nothing that hasn’t already been debunked elsewhere. What is new are the claims that Western media are complicit in Israel’s “genocide” and “war crimes.”

Al Jazeera charges the Western media with platforming Israeli “propaganda.” There is no examination of the all too many times the media got it wrong at Israel’s expense. Instead, the media are accused of enabling Israel to disseminate a false narrative. Where genuine errors may have occurred in the fog of war or due to miscommunication, Israel is portrayed as a conspirator in a plot to promote disinformation to a compliant media.

To back up its thesis, Al Jazeera claims to have spoken with 10 journalists from CNN and the BBC. Only two anonymous figures, however, one from each network, are interviewees in the documentary — hardly a substantial number.

And it’s worth asking, why would any journalists who value objectivity and impartiality shoot their mouths off to Al Jazeera of all media outlets?

The same Al Jazeera whose senior anchorman Jamal Rayyan, one of the network’s most prominent figureheads, celebrated the first anniversary of the October 7 Hamas attack on Israel with a series of posts hailing the “resistance” and calling on Arab countries to support it, even if “secretly.”

The same Al Jazeera that mocked the October 7 massacre by airing a tasteless comedy sketch:

Al Jazeera’s new comedy sketch about October 7th, now with AI-generated English subtitles https://t.co/ABRiP1mIcr pic.twitter.com/sFDmzcKjcO

— Eitan Fischberger (@EFischberger) October 3, 2024

No fair-minded journalist would complain about journalistic ethics to Al Jazeera. But they would if they had a bone to pick with Israel that goes beyond concern for the well-being of the Fourth Estate.

Former BBC journalist “Sara” claims that “overwhelmingly, guests on the Palestinian side of things were being looked into” in an internal BBC group chat in which producers could vet potential interviewees based on their social media footprint.

Yet this is exactly what the BBC should be doing. Because BBC interviewees from the Israeli side don’t generally have a history of libels, demonization, or outright racism against the other. The same, sadly, cannot be said about the Palestinian side.

“Sara” says that even some non-governmental organizations, including Human Rights Watch, were vetted. It’s entirely proper that this should be the case. Too many NGOs are not neutral actors in the conflict, but instead promote a politicized anti-Israel agenda under the guise of human rights.

The examples of newsroom rebellions over “pro-Israel” coverage highlighted by Al Jazeera are less supportive of their case than it first appears.

Al Jazeera says it has obtained an email complaint sent by more than 20 BBC journalists to senior management:

The BBC employs over 5,000 journalists. That Al Jazeera is only able to quote an email sent by “over 20” speaks volumes.

And it must have been a terrible shock for those small number of BBC journalists when a former International Court of Justice (ICJ) president, in a BBC interview of all places, contradicted their claim in the email that the ICJ ruling “found it ‘plausible’ that Israel is violating the Genocide Convention in Gaza.”

Joan Donoghue, former President of the International Court of Justice, clarified on air with @BBCNews that the court did *not* decide that Israel’s war against Hamas in Gaza could plausibly be considered genocide. pic.twitter.com/oz1lOCUMD6

— HonestReporting (@HonestReporting) April 26, 2024

In another example of journalists in revolt, Al Jazeera references what it calls “the now notorious report” in The New York Times on Hamas rapes that Jeremy Scahill did so much to attack. Al Jazeera claims that the Hamas weaponization of rape was “an allegation that was exposed as baseless.”

As HonestReporting pointed out when addressing the attempt to discredit the sexual assault claims, this is not a mere search for the truth but is part of a concerted effort to invalidate Israel’s military campaign against Hamas and to rehabilitate Hamas’ image in the West.

And Al Jazeera is an integral part of that effort.

The second anonymous interviewee, CNN journalist “Adam” complains that “there was a period of time when we couldn’t call airstrikes in Gaza airstrikes unless we had confirmation from the Israelis.”

Given the media’s collective failure when Israel stood falsely accused of an airstrike on the al-Ahli hospital in October 2023, and the fact that numerous Hamas rockets have fallen on their own people in Gaza, it doesn’t sound so unreasonable that CNN would do due diligence before reporting airstrikes as facts.

“Adam” complains about double standards. But should a terrorist organization be treated with the same level of respect given to the army of a liberal democracy? Especially as that terrorist organization sees little wrong in lying to achieve its own ends.

“Adam” even says that he had a problem with CNN editors telling journalists to “hold Hamas accountable” when Gazan casualty figures were announced.

“Sara” complains of an “unwillingness among the [BBC] executives to accept evidence.” This is somewhat ironic given the BBC’s reaction to the evidence presented to them of anti-Israel bias, most recently in Trevor Asserson’s report that found the BBC had breached its own editorial guidelines more than 1,500 times during the first four months of the Israel-Hamas war alone.

She also complains that the BBC has an aversion to its guests or its journalists using the word “genocide” to refer to Israel’s actions in Gaza. Actually, given both the gravity of the charge and the fact that Israel has not been found guilty of such a crime under international law, the BBC is absolutely correct to avoid giving the impression that genocide is taking place.

Of course, there are no such restrictions on Al Jazeera, which can in no way be considered impartial.

It would be remiss not to mention the token voice representing the other side in the debate. Al Jazeera interviewed former New York Times Jerusalem bureau chief Jodi Rudoren, who pushed back against some of the charges leveled against her profession. But hers is a lonely voice in a documentary that has already framed an argument based on a simple and simplistic assumption — Israel is in the wrong and deserves to be portrayed as a criminal while the Western media are its accomplices.

Unfortunately for Al Jazeera, even though Israel comes in for plenty of criticism and unfair treatment in the international media, the Qatari-sponsored network’s definition of journalism isn’t what most mainstream media consider to be the norm.

The author is the Editorial Director of HonestReporting, a Jerusalem-based media watchdog with a focus on antisemitism and anti-Israel bias — where a version of this article first appeared.

The post Al Jazeera Documentary Absurdly Attacks CNN & BBC’s ‘Pro-Israel Bias’ first appeared on Algemeiner.com.

Continue Reading

RSS

A Purim Guide for the Perplexed, 2025

A Hamentashen pastry commonly served during the Jewish holiday of Purim. Photo: Rebecca Siegel via Flickr.

Ahead of this year’s Purim celebrations on Thursday night, here are seven facts you should know about the holiday:

1. Purim is a Jewish national liberation holiday — just like Passover and Hanukkah — which highlights the transition of the Jewish people from subjugation to liberty. It is celebrated seven days following the birth and death date of Moses — a role model of liberty, leadership, and humility.

2. Here is some information on Purim’s historical background:

A Jewish exile to Babylon and Persia was triggered by the 586 BCE destruction of the First Jewish Temple and the expulsion of Jews from Jerusalem, Judea, and Samaria by the Babylonian Emperor, Nebuchadnezzar. Persia then replaced Babylon as the leading regional power.

In 538 BCE, Xerxes the Great, proclaimed his support for the reconstruction of the Jewish Temple in Jerusalem, the resurrection of national Jewish life in the Land of Israel, and the recognition of Jerusalem as the exclusive capital of the Jewish people. In 499-449 BCE, King Ahasuerus established a coalition of countries — from India to Ethiopia — which launched the Greco-Persian Wars, aiming to expand the Persian Empire westward. Persia was resoundingly defeated (e.g., the 490 BCE and 480 BCE battles of Marathon and Salamis), and Ahasuerus’ authority in Persia was gravely eroded.

3. “Purimfest 1946” yelled Julius Streicher, the Nazi propaganda chief, as he approached the hanging gallows in Nuremberg. On October 16, 1946, ten convicted Nazi war criminals were hanged, similar to Haman’s ten sons, who were hanged in ancient Persia. An 11th Nazi criminal, Hermann Goering, committed suicide in his cell, similar to Haman’s 11th child, who committed suicide following her father’s demise (according to the Talmud’s Megillah tractate 16a).

Julius Streicher’s ranch served as a camp for young Jewish Holocaust survivors on their way to Israel following World War II.

4. Remembrance is at the core of the Purim holiday. The Scroll of Esther — which narrates the Purim saga — is also named The Book of Remembrance. The pre-Purim Sabbath is called The Sabbath of Remembrance (Zachor in Hebrew), commemorating the deadly threat of the Amalekites (the ancestors of Haman), who aimed to annihilate the Jewish people following their deliverance from Egyptian bondage.

Deuteronomy 25:17-19 commands the remembrance of the Amalekite’s attempt to annihilate the Jewish people following the Exodus from Egypt, on the way to the Land of Israel. These verses are read in synagogues/temples on the Sabbath preceding Purim.

5. Queen Esther is Purim’s heroine. The Scroll of Esther is one of the five Biblical scrolls, which are highlighted on Jewish holidays: Song of Songs (Passover), Scroll of Ruth (Pentecost), Lamentations (the 9th day of Av – destruction of the Jewish Temple), Ecclesiastes (Feast of Tabernacles), and The Scroll of Esther (Purim).

Esther symbolized the centrality of women in Judaism, as did Sarah, Rebecca, Rachel, and Leah (the Matriarchs), Miriam (Moses’ older sister), Batyah (who saved Moses’ life), Deborah (the Prophetess, Judge and military leader), Hannah (Samuel’s mother) and Yael (who killed Sisera, the Canaanite General).

Esther was one of the seven Biblical Jewish Prophetesses: Sarah, Miriam, Deborah, Hannah, Abigail, Huldah, and Esther. Sarah lived 127 years and Esther was the Queen of 127 countries. The Hebrew name of Esther was Hadassah, whose root is Hadass, which is the Hebrew word for the myrtle tree. The myrtle tree features prominently during the Feast of Tabernacles. It is known for its pleasant scent and humble features, including leaves in the shape of the human eye. Greek mythology identifies the myrtle tree with Aphrodite, the Greek goddess of love.

6. Mordechai, the hero of Purim and one of the deputies of Ezra the Scribe, was a role model of principle-driven optimism in defiance of colossal odds.

The first three Hebrew letters of Mordechai (מרדכי) spell the Hebrew word “rebellion” (מרד).  Mordechai did not bow to Haman, when the latter was the second most powerful person in the Persian Empire. Mordechai was a member of the tribe of Benjamin, the only son of Jacob who did not bow to Esau.

Mordechai was a descendant of King Saul, who defied a clear commandment to eradicate the Amalekites, sparing the life of Agag, the Amalekite king, thus precipitating further calamities upon the Jewish People. Mordechai learned from Saul’s crucial error and eliminated Haman, a descendant of Agag the Amalekite, thus sparing the Jewish people from a major disaster.

7. Purim’s (פורים) Hebrew root is “fate” as well as “casting lots” (פור), commemorating Haman’s lottery, which determined a designated day for the annihilation of the Jewish People. It also means “to frustrate,” “to annul” (הפר), “to crumble,” and “to shutter” (פורר), reflecting the demise of Haman.

The author is a commentator and former Israeli ambassador. 

The post A Purim Guide for the Perplexed, 2025 first appeared on Algemeiner.com.

Continue Reading

RSS

Palestinian Authority Used International Women’s Day to Celebrate Terrorists and Their Mothers

Students at the Dalal Mughrabi Elementary Mixed School, which was built with funds from the Belgian government. (Photo: Facebook)

As in previous years, the Palestinian Authority (PA) used International Women’s Day to glorify the memory of female terrorists and the value of mothers who knowingly send their sons to die as “Martyrs.”

Senior Fatah leader Abbas Zaki sang the praises of the mothers who publicly celebrate their sons’ deaths. He also lauded the mothers who give their sons the stones to throw at Israelis with the full knowledge that their children will die.

However, sending their sons to their death is not in vain, according to Zaki: “She [the mother] begins to feel that she has gained respect and high status in society when her son dies as a Martyr.”

Fatah Central Committee member Abbas Zaki: “Allah is witness to the fact that there is no woman in the world like the Palestinian woman. The woman who makes sounds of joy for the Martyr and sings songs of the revolution for the groom [i.e., a Martyr’s funeral is considered his wedding to the 72 Virgins in Paradise in Islam].

This woman is the one who gives up her son as he goes to fight with a rock, and she gives him the rock while knowing what her son’s fate will be. However, this woman is placed on a pedestal because she gave oxygen to this homeland, and she begins to feel that she has gained respect and high status in society when her son dies as a Martyr.”

[Fatah Central Committee member Abbas Zaki, Facebook page, March 10, 2025]

The PA also chose International Women’s Day to specifically glorify mass murderer Dalal Mughrabi, who led the Coastal Road Massacre, which was the most lethal attack in Israel’s history prior to October 7, 2023. Mughrabi, along with other Fatah terrorists, hijacked a bus, murdered 37 people, of which 12 were children, and wounded 70.

PA Ramallah Governor Laila Ghannam wrote on Facebook that “on this day … we pray for our female Martyrs and leaders whose blood paved the path of freedom, from Dalal Mughrabi to … the rest of the icons of the struggle.”

In the PA’s official daily, the Ramallah governor continued to extol the role of all Palestinian women as terrorists — the “Martyr, prisoner, and wounded” — and terrorist supporters — “the Martyr’s mother, the prisoner’s mother, his wife, his sister, and his daughter” [Official PA daily Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, March 9, 2025].

When someone is referred to as a “Martyr,” or Shahid in Arabic, it means that the person died while carrying out an idyllic act for Allah, such as the way Dalal Mughrabi murdered children in cold blood.

In yet another article, the official PA daily honored other female terrorists as “icons”: Zakiya Shammout — who planted a bomb in the Afula market in 1969, murdering one and injuring dozens; Shadia Abu Ghazaleh — who prepared bombs for many attacks as a member of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP); and Intisar Al-Wazir — the wife of Abu Jihad. Abu Jihad planned numerous lethal terror attacks from the 1960s to the 1980s, in which a total of 125 Israelis were murdered:

In addition to regularly broadcasting that dying for the sake of Allah is the greatest of acts, the PA exploits International Women’s Day year in and year out to focus on women linked to terror. It does this in order to reiterate that the highest form of feminine hero is the terrorist Martyr, or the mother of the terrorist Martyr.

Ephraim D. Tepler is a contributor to Palestinian Media Watch (PMW). Itamar Marcus is PMW’s Founder and Director. A version of this article originally appeared at PMW.

The post Palestinian Authority Used International Women’s Day to Celebrate Terrorists and Their Mothers first appeared on Algemeiner.com.

Continue Reading

RSS

A Fascinating Look Into the Rise of Campus Hatred and Antisemitism

Pro-Hamas protesters at Columbia University on April 19, 2024. Photo: Melissa Bender via Reuters Connect

The latest offering from Jewish Quarterly provides a timely and thorough exploration of the state of antisemitism in contemporary universities. It particularly focuses on the rise of campus activism and its implications for academic freedom.

Mindless: What Happened to Universities? features an in-depth essay by Professor Cary Nelson, a respected scholar and former president of the American Association of University Professors. Nelson’s analysis is well-researched and candid, illuminating the ideological shifts within higher education and their consequences for open discourse.

Nelson’s essay is a critical reflection on how academic institutions have evolved in recent years, particularly in response to anti-Zionist activism, antisemitism, and the broader politicization of campus spaces. He examines how university environments, which should be spaces for debate and critical thinking, have increasingly become arenas for dogmatic activism, often at the expense of intellectual diversity. He argues that the Gaza Solidarity encampments that spread across Western campuses in 2024 were symptomatic of deeper issues in academia — specifically, the growing resistance to debate and the framing of complex geopolitical conflicts in binary terms.

Nelson does not claim that student activism itself is problematic. Rather, he critiques the extent to which some protests have crossed the line into intimidation and exclusion for Jewish students. The essay provides extensive and unsettling evidence of antisemitic rhetoric emerging in protests, alongside surveys indicating that over half of Jewish students in the US felt unsafe on campus in 2024. His argument is not that all activism is inherently harmful, but that in many cases, the principle of free inquiry has been overshadowed by ideological conformity and naked political activism in place of scholarship.

One of the strengths of Nelson’s essay is that it does not rely on alarmism; rather, he builds the case methodically. He traces the historical trajectory of academic institutions, illustrating how certain disciplines have gradually shifted toward ideological uniformity, especially in their framing of Israel and Zionism. He also emphasizes how some faculty members have actively promoted activism that extends beyond protest to include calls for exclusion and censorship.

Nelson’s essay is an important contribution for readers looking for a balanced critique. While he clearly finds much of the current campus climate troubling, he avoids sweeping generalizations. Instead, he focuses on specific examples of how anti-Zionist activism has, in some cases, led to exclusionary practices and threats to the psychological safety essential for learning. The result is an essay that invites reflection rather than simply reinforcing entrenched positions.

A particularly valuable aspect of this work is its examination of the role that faculty and administrators play in shaping campus climates. Nelson provides examples of professors who have actively celebrated extremist rhetoric, as well as administrators who have been hesitant to confront antisemitism under the guise of protecting free speech. He contrasts this with past university responses to other forms of discrimination, questioning why antisemitism is often treated differently, especially within the context of a polarizing broader debate over DEI and identity politics.

At the same time, the issue does not present a one-sided view of faculty involvement. There is an acknowledgment that many academics oppose the radicalization of campus discourse but feel unable to speak out due to professional risks. Whilst highlighting increasingly politicized humanities and social sciences departments, his nuanced approach strengthens the essay’s credibility, as it avoids portraying all faculty as complicit or all students as antagonistic.

The past year has witnessed intense debates over free speech, antisemitism, and academic freedom. Nelson’s essay provides an important perspective on how these discussions are unfolding in higher education. Although it does not purport to offer all the answers to antisemitism, it presents a well-argued assessment of the challenges facing universities and offers possible solutions.

Furthermore, the issue underscores how the internationalization of campus activism has influenced these trends. With protests erupting across North America, Europe, and Australia, Nelson places these developments within a global framework, showing that these issues are not limited to any one country or institution. Nelson’s writing is clear and persuasive, and helps frame the discussion within a broader historical and intellectual tradition.

Mindless is an important read for anyone concerned about the future of academic institutions and the principles of free inquiry. While some readers may disagree with Nelson’s conclusions, his work’s strength lies in its commitment to reasoned debate. It does not demand agreement but encourages deeper reflection, which is increasingly rare in today’s polarized discourse.

This issue is well worth reading for those who follow developments in higher education or are concerned about the growing tensions around academic freedom and antisemitism. Jewish Quarterly continues to demonstrate why it is a respected voice in Jewish intellectual and cultural discussions, and Mindless is a testament to its enduring relevance.

Andrew Fox served for 16 years in the British Army (2005-21). He was a senior lecturer at the Royal Military Academy Sandhurst, and is currently a research fellow at the Henry Jackson Society. Andrew provides regular commentary on defense and foreign policy across the media including articles in the New York Post, The Telegraph, The Spectator, and Spiked. He has amassed a large following across his digital platforms, including X (formerly Twitter) and Substack, where he writes on disinformation, defense and security.

Mindless is available at www.jewishquarterly.com 

The post A Fascinating Look Into the Rise of Campus Hatred and Antisemitism first appeared on Algemeiner.com.

Continue Reading

Copyright © 2017 - 2023 Jewish Post & News