Connect with us

RSS

Hamas Counted on Biased Western Journalism — and They Got It

Hamas Official in Lebanon (Photo: Screenshot)

CNN’s International Diplomatic Editor, Nic Robertson, recently authored an analysis (“Hamas gambled on the suffering of civilians in Gaza. Netanyahu played right into it,” Jun. 11) castigating Israelis for foolishly falling for Hamas’ tricks.

Instead, Robertson’s piece ironically illustrates the failure of CNN’s journalism. Rather than successfully depicting Israelis as fools caught in Hamas’ trap, the analysis instead exemplifies how Western journalists have become Hamas’ “useful idiots.”

The gist of Robertson’s analysis is that Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar has masterfully manipulated Israelis. “Netanyahu has played right into” Sinwar’s trap by waging a “brutal” war against Hamas, thus turning public opinion against Israel.

But in crafting his argument, Robertson unwittingly demonstrates how it is himself, and the media at large, that have played into Hamas’ hands. In doing so, he shows that it’s not the conduct of the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) that has turned public opinion against Israel — but rather, the media’s portrayal of the IDF’s conduct.

That portrayal involves spreading propaganda and narratives crafted by Hamas, which are entirely detached from reality.

Perhaps the most glaring example of this is when Robertson declares, without qualification or attribution, that the number of Palestinians killed so far in the war is more than 36,000. This number comes straight from Hamas’ media office, and has been widely discredited, to the point that even the United Nations quietly backtracked on repeating the media office’s figures.

It is publicly known that Hamas has a cynical strategy to deliberately exploit global sympathy for civilian casualties. That is why Hamas doesn’t just engage in the most sophisticated and systematic exploitation of human shielding, but also regularly inflates the casualty figures for media consumption, which CNN falls for — hook, line, and sinker.

And CNN is known to not just uncritically repeat these propaganda figures, but to deceptively obscure the source in a transparent attempt to give the figures a false appearance of credibility. The network has repeatedly laundered these Hamas figures by falsely attributing them to the Palestinian Authority, the United Nations, and even foreign aid agencies, who themselves acknowledge they’re just using Hamas’ figures.

The network has also worked overtime to portray the IDF’s conduct in the worst light possible, omitting and obscuring important, contradictory context. It has repeatedly made a big deal about the large blast radius of Israel’s 2,000-pound bombs — in order to portray the IDF as indiscriminate — all while omitting that these bombs are intentionally detonated underground, thereby substantially reducing the blast radius.

When Robertson then goes on to write that the “devastating effectiveness” of Israeli weapons “is becoming a liability” in terms of international opinion, he’s omitting that the reason they’re controversial is because his own network has distorted how these weapons are actually being used. Worse, CNN journalists have used their platform to engage in activism in favor of an arms embargo on Israel.

But what Robertson’s analysis shows best is just how skewed the network’s overall coverage has been.

Israel is placed under a microscope in a way that Hamas and the Palestinians are not, as if this isn’t an armed conflict between two sides, but a story of “oppression,” of one side imposing its will on the other. With every new event in the conflict, CNN spills much ink casting responsibility, real or imagined, onto Israel, while the role the Palestinians played is often entirely absent.

This isn’t just an anecdotal observation. If one searches CNN articles between October 7, 2023, and March 31, 2024, for articles on the conflict, the data bears out this disparity.

Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu is mentioned 9-times as often as Palestinian Authority leader Mahmoud Abbas and an obscene 31-times as often as both Hamas leaders Yahya Sinwar and Ismail Haniyeh.

As with CNN’s overall coverage of the conflict, Robertson also avoids truly tangling with the actions and agency of Palestinians, in order to cast responsibility solely on the Jewish state. His analysis was prompted by a Wall Street Journal report about several messages sent by Yahya Sinwar in which the terrorist leader made clear the organization sees Gazan civilians not as subjects to be protected, but as pawns to be sacrificed. The goal: to elicit international outrage and pressure against Israel.

Sinwar knows that trying to use Gaza civilian casualties for Hamas’ benefit will work because media figures like Robertson can’t, or won’t, entertain the moral and legal distinction between a military that does its best to avoid civilian casualties, and the terrorist organization that deliberately exploits the civilians as cannon fodder to feed to Western cable news audiences. (Of course, Hamas — which controls Gaza — also directly targets women and children, and states that its goal is to eradicate all of Israel).

Yet instead of taking this opportunity to give CNN’s audience a straightforward explanation of how Palestinian terrorists have intentionally and cynically exacerbated the war’s effect on civilians, Robertson turns the story on its head and instead makes it once again about Israeli actions. Think about that. A Hamas leader admitted to deliberately engaging in war crimes as a matter of strategy, and CNN’s Robertson still made it instead about Israel being bad.

The refusal to seriously consider Palestinian agency is how we end up with a headline like “Hamas gambled on the suffering of civilians in Gaza. Netanyahu played right into it.”

It might as well read: “Hamas put civilians in harms way. Here’s why harm to civilians is still Netanyahu’s fault.”

Sinwar couldn’t have asked for a more useful journalist.

In a similar vein, Robertson also repeats the “you can’t kill an ideology” argument, a yawn-inducing platitude associated with Western armchair strategists sitting thousands of miles away on the other side of an ocean from any real threat. Strangely, while the international coalition didn’t kill the Islamic State’s ideology, no one seems to talk about the threat from that organization much since its “caliphate” was obliterated and its military power degraded into insignificance.

You can’t kill an ideology, but you can kill its ability to wreak havoc and commit wide-scale atrocities, even if western media analysts seem intent on advocating for the preservation of terroristic military power.

Furthermore, a recent opinion poll showed that while West Bank Palestinians still support Hamas’ Oct. 7 massacre at a rate of 73%, Gazans only support it by 57%. So maybe the war has undermined Hamas’ support in Gaza (or at least support for terrorism).

This is all, of course, to say nothing of the typical inaccuracies and spin found in CNN articles. Robertson claims, for example: “Earlier this year, university campuses across the United States and Europe combusted in spontaneous protest over the toll of Israel’s war on civilians in Gaza…”

This isn’t “Israel’s war,” the war is not “on civilians in Gaza” (at best, atrocious writing), the protests did not start “earlier this year,” they were not “spontaneous,” and they were not “over the toll of Israel’s war.”

Israel was attacked — it is Hamas’ war. The pro-Hamas demonstrations were already being organized on October 7, before Hamas had even finished butchering its way through southern Israel and before Israel even had a chance to begin any organized campaign in Gaza. Within hours of the attack, malicious anti-Israel organizations were already sending out “toolkits” not just glorifying the terrorist massacre, but also giving instructions to the demonstrators.

Robertson also claims that Ireland, Spain, Norway, and Portugal recognized “Palestine” because they are “frustrated Netanyahu won’t agree to a peace deal,” suggesting the problem is “Israeli intransigence.” It’s an astonishing inversion of reality, given that it was Palestinian leadership that has repeatedly said no to offers on the table since even before the State of Israel was born, including three major offers in the 2000s.

But why get into the history of Palestinian rejectionism when CNN can instead just blame some unspecified “Israeli intransigence” for the lack of a Palestinian state that the Palestinians keep saying no to?

And why tell the truth when the network can get away with a bald-faced lie like, “None of this means Sinwar will be winning a popular vote in Gaza during his lifetime…?” Except Hamas, an internationally designated terrorist organization, did win the popular vote in Gaza in 2006, and the pro-Hamas sentiment hasn’t changed. Palestinian surveys consistently show that Palestinians widely approve of Hamas’s October 7 massacre and that a large majority (61%) prefer Hamas in control of Gaza over Fatah, the party of Palestinian Authority leader Mahmoud Abbas.

Of course, misleading audiences about polling data, and even outright fabricating polling data to avoid acknowledging Palestinian responsibility for the conflict, is a regular occurrence at the network.

Robertson is free to armchair strategize from his comfortable perch in the United States, where he need not fear multiple terrorist armies just a few hundred yards from his family. But before accusing others of playing into Hamas’ game, it would be wise of Robertson, and indeed the entire CNN network, to consider the wind they’ve blown beneath Hamas’ wings with their slanted, inaccurate, and lazy coverage.

David M. Litman is a Research Analyst at the Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting and Analysis (CAMERA).

The post Hamas Counted on Biased Western Journalism — and They Got It first appeared on Algemeiner.com.

Continue Reading

RSS

Syria’s Sharaa Says Talks With Israel Could Yield Results ‘In Coming Days’

Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa speaks at the opening ceremony of the 62nd Damascus International Fair, the first edition held since the fall of Bashar al-Assad’s regime, in Damascus, Syria, Aug. 27, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Khalil Ashawi

Syria’s President Ahmed al-Sharaa said on Wednesday that ongoing negotiations with Israel to reach a security pact could lead to results “in the coming days.”

He told reporters in Damascus the security pact was a “necessity” and that it would need to respect Syria’s airspace and territorial unity and be monitored by the United Nations.

Syria and Israel are in talks to reach an agreement that Damascus hopes will secure a halt to Israeli airstrikes and the withdrawal of Israeli troops who have pushed into southern Syria.

Reuters reported this week that Washington was pressuring Syria to reach a deal before world leaders gather next week for the UN General Assembly in New York.

But Sharaa, in a briefing with journalists including Reuters ahead of his expected trip to New York to attend the meeting, denied the US was putting any pressure on Syria and said instead that it was playing a mediating role.

He said Israel had carried out more than 1,000 strikes on Syria and conducted more than 400 ground incursions since Dec. 8, when the rebel offensive he led toppled former Syrian leader Bashar al-Assad.

Sharaa said Israel’s actions were contradicting the stated American policy of a stable and unified Syria, which he said was “very dangerous.”

He said Damascus was seeking a deal similar to a 1974 disengagement agreement between Israel and Syria that created a demilitarized zone between the two countries.

He said Syria sought the withdrawal of Israeli troops but that Israel wanted to remain at strategic locations it seized after Dec. 8, including Mount Hermon. Israeli ministers have publicly said Israel intends to keep control of the sites.

He said if the security pact succeeds, other agreements could be reached. He did not provide details, but said a peace agreement or normalization deal like the US-mediated Abraham Accords, under which several Muslim-majority countries agreed to normalize diplomatic ties with Israel, was not currently on the table.

He also said it was too early to discuss the fate of the Golan Heights because it was “a big deal.”

Reuters reported this week that Israel had ruled out handing back the zone, which Donald Trump unilaterally recognized as Israeli during his first term as US president.

“It’s a difficult case – you have negotiations between a Damascene and a Jew,” Sharaa told reporters, smiling.

SECURITY PACT DERAILED IN JULY

Sharaa also said Syria and Israel had been just “four to five days” away from reaching the basis of a security pact in July, but that developments in the southern province of Sweida had derailed those discussions.

Syrian troops were deployed to Sweida in July to quell fighting between Druze armed factions and Bedouin fighters. But the violence worsened, with Syrian forces accused of execution-style killings and Israel striking southern Syria, the defense ministry in Damascus and near the presidential palace.

Sharaa on Wednesday described the strikes near the presidential palace as “not a message, but a declaration of war,” and said Syria had still refrained from responding militarily to preserve the negotiations.

Continue Reading

RSS

Anti-Israel Activists Gear Up to ‘Flood’ UN General Assembly

US Capitol Police and NYPD officers clash with anti-Israel demonstrators, on the day Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu addresses a joint meeting of Congress, on Capitol Hill, in Washington, DC, July 24, 2024. Photo: REUTERS/Umit Bektas

Anti-Israel groups are planning a wave of raucous protests in New York City during the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) over the next several days, prompting concerns that the demonstrations could descend into antisemitic rhetoric and intimidation.

A coalition of anti-Israel activists is organizing the protests in and around UN headquarters to coincide with speeches from Middle Eastern leaders and appearances by US President Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. The demonstrations are expected to draw large crowds and feature prominent pro-Palestinian voices, some of whom have been criticized for trafficking in antisemitic tropes, in addition to calling for the destruction of Israe.

Organizers of the demonstrations have promoted the coordinated events on social media as an opportunity to pressure world leaders to hold Israel accountable for its military campaign against Hamas in Gaza, with some messaging framed in sharply hostile terms.

On Sunday, for example, activists shouted at Israel’s Ambassador to the UN Danny Danon.

“Zionism is terrorism. All you guys are terrorists committing ethnic cleansing and genocide in Gaza and Palestine. Shame on you, Zionist animals,” they shouted.

The Combat Antisemitism Movement (CAM), warned on its website that the scale and tone of the planned demonstrations risk crossing the line from political protest into hate speech, arguing that anti-Israel activists are attempting to hijack the UN gathering to spread antisemitism and delegitimize the Jewish state’s right to exist.

Outside the UN last week, masked protesters belonging to the activist group INDECLINE kicked a realistic replica of Netanyahu’s decapitated head as though it were a soccer ball.

Within Our Lifetime (WOL), a radical anti-Israel activist group, has vowed to “flood” the UNGA on behalf of the pro-Palestine movement.

WOL, one of the most prolific anti-Israel activist groups, came under immense fire after it organized a protest against an exhibition to honor the victims of the Oct. 7 massacre at the Nova Music Festival in southern Israel. During the event, the group chanted “resistance is justified when people are occupied!” and “Israel, go to hell!”

“We will be there to confront them with the truth: Their silence and inaction enable genocide. The world cannot continue as if Gaza does not exist,” WOL said of its planned demonstrations in New York. “This is the time to make our voices impossible to ignore. Come to New York by any means necessary, to stand, to march, to demand the UN act and end the siege.”

Jewish Voice for Peace (JVP) and Palestinian Youth Movement (PYM), two other anti-Israel organizations that have helped organize widespread demonstrations against the Jewish state during the war in Gaza, also announced they are planning a march from Times Square to the UN headquarters on Friday.

“The time is now for each and every UN member state to uphold their duty under international law: sanction Israel and end the genocide,” the groups said in a statement.

JVP, an organization that purports to fight for “Palestinian liberation,” has positioned itself as a staunch adversary of the Jewish state. The group argued in a 2021 booklet that Jews should not write Hebrew liturgy because hearing the language would be “deeply traumatizing” to Palestinians. JVP has repeatedly defended the Oct. 7 massacre of roughly 1,200 people in southern Israel by Hamas as a justified “resistance.” Chapters of the organization have urged other self-described “progressives” to throw their support behind Hamas and other terrorist groups against Israel

Similarly, PYM, another radical anti-Israel group, has repeatedly defended terrorism and violence against the Jewish state. PYM has organized many anti-Israel protests in the two years following the Oct. 7 attacks in the Jewish state. Recently, Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AK) called for a federal investigation into the organization after Aisha Nizar, one of the group’s leaders, urged supporters to sabotage the US supply chain for the F-35 fighter jet, one of the most advanced US military assets and a critical component of Israel’s defense.

The UN General Assembly has historically been a flashpoint for heated debate over the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Previous gatherings have seen dueling demonstrations outside the Manhattan venue, with pro-Israel and pro-Palestinian groups both seeking to influence the international spotlight.

While warning about the demonstrations, CAM noted it recently launched a new mobile app, Report It, that allows users worldwide to quickly and securely report antisemitic incidents in real time.

Continue Reading

RSS

Nina Davidson Presses Universities to Back Words With Action as Jewish Students Return to Campus Amid Antisemitism Crisis

Nina Davidson on The Algemeiner’s ‘J100’ podcast. Photo: Screenshot

Philanthropist Nina Davidson, who served on the board of Barnard College, has called on universities to pair tough rhetoric on combatting antisemitism with enforcement as Jewish students returned to campuses for the new academic year.

“Years ago, The Algemeiner had published a list ranking the most antisemitic colleges in the country. And number one was Columbia,” Davidson recalled on a recent episode of The Algemeiner‘s “J100” podcast. “As a board member and as someone who was representing the institution, it really upset me … At the board meeting, I brought it up and I said, ‘What are we going to do about this?’”

Host David Cohen, chief executive officer of The Algemeiner, explained he had revisited Davidson’s remarks while she was being honored for her work at The Algemeiner‘s 8th annual J100 gala, held in October 2021, noting their continued relevance.

“It could have been the same speech in 2025,” he said, underscoring how longstanding concerns about campus antisemitism, while having intensified in the aftermath of Hamas’s Oct. 7, 2023, massacre across southern Israel, are not new.

Davidson argued that universities already possess the tools to protect students – codes of conduct, time-place-manner rules, and consequences for threats or targeted harassment – but too often fail to apply them evenly. “Statements are not enough,” she said, arguing that institutions need to enforce their rules and set a precedent that there will be consequences for individuals who refuse to follow them.

She also said that stakeholders – alumni, parents, and donors – are reassessing their relationships with schools that, in their view, have not safeguarded Jewish students. While supportive of open debate, Davidson distinguished between protest and intimidation, calling for leadership that protects expression while ensuring campus safety.

The episode surveyed specific pressure points that administrators will face this fall: repeat anti-Israel encampments, disruptions of Jewish programming, and the challenge of distinguishing political speech from conduct that violates university rules. “Unless schools draw those lines now,” Davidson warned, “they’ll be scrambling once the next crisis hits.”

Cohen closed by framing the discussion as a test of institutional credibility, asking whether universities will “turn policy into protection” in real time. Davidson agreed, pointing to students who “need to know the rules aren’t just on paper.”

The full conversation is available on The Algemeiner’s “J100” podcast.

Continue Reading

Copyright © 2017 - 2023 Jewish Post & News