RSS
Media Distort Israeli Rejection of ‘Over the Top’ and Unacceptable Hamas Demands
Hamas leader and Oct. 7 pogrom mastermind Yahya Sinwar addressing a rally in Gaza. Photo: Reuters/braheem Abu Mustafa
On February 8, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu announced that he had rejected the deal proposed by Hamas for a ceasefire to the current war between the Jewish state and the Gaza-based terror group.
Hamas’ proposal was in response to a long-term truce framework that had been crafted in late January by the United States, Qatar, Egypt, and Israel.
Although Hamas’ ceasefire demands have not been officially published, both Reuters and the Lebanese newspaper Al-Akhbar have reported on its key elements, which ultimately include:
The return of Israeli hostages in exchange for thousands of Palestinian prisoners (including those serving life sentences for violent crimes involving blood on their hands).
The withdrawal of Israeli troops from populated areas of the Gaza Strip and ultimately the Strip itself.
An increase in aid to Gaza and the return of Palestinians to all parts of the Strip.
While the core principles of Hamas’ far-reaching ceasefire demands (leaving it in control of the Gaza Strip and the release of hundreds of dangerous Palestinian terrorists from prison) are anathema to many Israelis and have been deemed “non-starters” and “over the top” by US Secretary of State Antony Blinken and President Joe Biden, several media outlets presented a skewed picture of Israel’s response to Hamas’ demands.
Several headlines portrayed Israel as the sole obstacle to a cessation of hostilities in the region, while some reports even went so far as to diminish Israel’s acceptance of the original negotiating framework.
“Netanyahu Rejects Ceasefire”: Headlines Skew Israel’s Response to Hamas’ Demands
Headlines set the context of a story.
In the case of Israel’s response to Hamas’ ceasefire proposal, the most vital information is that it was a Hamas proposal and that Hamas’ demands were in response to a proposal that Israel had agreed to.
For example, The Wall Street Journal’s headline neatly summarized these points, reading “Israel’s Netanyahu Rejects Hamas’s Response to Cease-Fire Proposal.”
However, several mainstream news outlets failed to properly convey these points, leaving their readers misinformed and with a poor understanding of Israel’s ceasefire stance.
The Washington Post, Newsweek, The Times of London, and The Guardian‘s headlines all failed to mention that Israel was responding to a ceasefire proposal presented by Hamas. Thus, the takeaway appears to be that Israel is a belligerent party that is opposed in principle to any ceasefire.
The Washington Post:
Newsweek:
The Times of London:
The Guardian:
For their part, The New York Times (first below) and NPR (second) did include the fact that it was a Hamas proposal that Israel rejected. Yet, the tone conveyed by their headlines still made Israel appear to be the uncooperative and belligerent party in this conflict.
In addition, the titles of several news organizations’ video reports portrayed Israel as an uncooperative and belligerent state while simultaneously presenting Hamas in a sympathetic light.
For example, ABC News (Australia) gave the false impression that Hamas was negotiating in good faith with its headline “Israeli PM Netanyahu rejects Hamas’s offer of a ceasefire and hostage release.”
The title of American outlet ABC News’s video short omitted the fact that it was a Hamas proposal that Israel had rejected, making it appear as if Israel was against a good faith hostage deal.
This false portrayal of Israel as uncompromising and belligerent was also conveyed by the title of Channel 4’s video report, “Israel-Gaza: Netanyahu says no ceasefire and pledges ‘total victory’ over Hamas.”
Similarly, South African SABC News’ video title omitted the necessary facts, simply stating “Netanyahu rejects ceasefire proposal.”
Media Miss Context on Hamas’ Ceasefire Demands
For some media organizations, it wasn’t only the headlines that presented a false impression of Israel’s ceasefire stance and Hamas’ demands.
Several news outlets either diminished or completely ignored the fact that Hamas’ proposal was a response to a negotiating framework that had already been accepted by Israel a week earlier.
For example, in The New York Times’ report, the opening paragraph accuses Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of “dashing hopes” that a ceasefire might be close, seemingly placing the onus for continued hostilities on Israel. It’s only 24 paragraphs later that it mentions the fact that Hamas was responding to a framework agreed upon by Israel, the United States, Qatar, and Egypt.
Similarly, in its report, The Guardian opened with a condemnation of Israel’s rejection, writing that “Benjamin Netanyahu has rejected the terms of a ceasefire in Gaza proposed by Hamas and rebuffed US pressure to move more quickly towards a mediated settlement to the war…”
Any reader would immediately be left with the impression that Israel is being uncompromising and not interested in a cessation of hostilities. They would have to read through 13 more paragraphs before discovering that Hamas’ demands were in response “to a proposal drawn up by the US, Israel, Qatar and Egypt.”
NPR omitted entirely the fact that Hamas was responding to an Israeli framework, leaving its readers woefully in the dark as to Israel’s true intentions and portraying the Jewish state as intransigent, while simultaneously depicting the Islamic terror organization as more flexible and open.
By not accurately reporting on Israel’s rejection of Hamas’ “over the top” ceasefire demands in either their headlines or pieces, these media outlets are not only misinforming their audience but are also playing into Hamas’ propaganda tactic of falsely portraying Israel as bellicose and the terror group as a peace-seeking organization.
The post Media Distort Israeli Rejection of ‘Over the Top’ and Unacceptable Hamas Demands first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Abraham Accords Tested on 5th Anniversary as Arab Leaders Gather to Condemn Israel’s Strike on Hamas in Qatar
Qatar’s Prime Minister and Minister for Foreign Affairs Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman bin Jassim Al-Thani, attends the preparatory ministerial meeting for emergency Arab-Islamic summit in Doha, Qatar, Sept. 14, 2025. Photo: Qatar Ministry of Foreign Affairs/Handout via REUTERS
The fifth anniversary of the Abraham Accords was overshadowed on Monday as top Arab diplomats gathered in Doha for an emergency summit after Israel’s strike on Hamas leaders in Qatar last week.
Five years on, experts say that, despite war and political shocks, the US-brokered deals that normalized relations between Israel and several Araba countries have endured, though not without setbacks, and many argue that strengthening them is the most effective way to defeating the hatred and terrorism that led to Hamas’s Oct. 7, 2023, massacre across southern Israel.
Trade between Abraham Accord countries in 2025 increased from the year before, though it remained well below the levels seen before the Hamas-led attack. The UAE, Israel’s most significant new trading partner, has dominated the commerce generated by the accords, signed on the lawn of the White House on Sept. 15, 2020.
Hundreds of Israeli companies now operate in the UAE, with Emirati investors channeling capital into Israeli tech startups and sovereign funds taking stakes in gas and technology ventures, though a planned $2 billion acquisition was shelved after the outbreak of the Gaza war. Recent figures show trade between Israel and the UAE reached $293 million in July 2025, a 4 percent rise from the year before, while trade with Morocco grew 32 percent in the same month to $8.7 million, according to data published by the Washington DC-based Heritage Foundation. Over the first seven months of 2025, Israel–Morocco trade totaled $71 million, a 7 percent increase from the same period in 2024, the report said.
Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, then-US President Donald Trump, and United Arab Emirates (UAE) Foreign Minister Abdullah bin Zayed display their copies of signed agreements as they participate in the signing ceremony of the Abraham Accords, normalizing relations between Israel and some of its Middle East neighbors, in a strategic realignment of Middle Eastern countries against Iran, on the South Lawn of the White House in Washington, US, Sept. 15, 2020. Photo: REUTERS/Tom Brenner
Asher Fredman, a visiting fellow at the Heritage Foundation who also served as Israel director of the Abraham Accords Peace Institute — a nonprofit founded by former White House adviser and US President Donald Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner to promote and expand the accords — said the agreements had “proven their resilience.”
He noted that the war had exposed how Hamas, with its ties to the Muslim Brotherhood, continues to threaten the region’s stability.
“Many regional leaders appreciate Israel’s efforts to remove Hamas, a terrorist group affiliated with the Muslim Brotherhood, from power, even if they are critical of Israel’s tactics,” he told The Algemeiner.
But he went on to say that the war had resulted in diminishing many aspects of the “warm peace and people-to-people cooperation that made the accords so unique” and that restarting momentum will require “regional projects with tangible benefits,” with strong US backing, and ensuring Hamas can no longer undermine progress toward peace.
“Lasting regional integration will depend on removing Hamas as the dominant military and governing power in Gaza,” he said.
Defense trade has also expanded, with Abraham Accords countries accounting for 12 percent of Israel’s $15 billion in arms exports last year, and major defense projects, including the UAE’s co-production of Israeli drones, continuing in 2025 – though many are now under wraps.
Middle East experts Elie Podeh and Yoel Guzansky, from the Hebrew University and Tel Aviv University, respectively, noted in The Jerusalem Post that Washington’s 2021 decision to place Israel within US Central Command signaled Arab states’ readiness to work with Israel openly, not just behind closed doors. Israel had already taken part in joint drills with regional neighbors, but its integration into CENTCOM created what they described as a qualitative shift in collaboration — a shift that was evident during Iranian attacks on Israel in April and October 2024 and again in June 2025.
But the UAE’s decision to bar Israeli defense firms from a major global defense and aerospace expo in Dubai later this year – reportedly in response to Israel’s strike in Doha – highlighted the political strains now testing the accords.
Podeh and Guzansky agreed with Fredman that people-to-people ties have suffered during the war but emphasized the particular impact on younger Arabs. “The gap between elite positions and Arab public opinion – especially among younger generations – continues to widen across all countries, placing pressure on ruling elites to respond,” they said.
Earlier this month, the UAE also issued a rare public rebuke to Israel over reports of renewed annexation ambitions in the West Bank. A senior Emirati official, Lana Nusseibeh, warned that any Israeli move to apply sovereignty would constitute a “red line” for Abu Dhabi that “would severely undermine the vision and spirit of the Abraham Accords” – marking the Gulf country’s toughest criticism of Israel since the war began.
On Friday, the UAE said it had summoned Israel’s deputy ambassador over the strike on Hamas leaders in Qatar and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s subsequent “hostile and unacceptable” remarks, in another sign of strain between the two countries with close economic and defense ties. The Emirati foreign ministry said it told David Ohad Horsandi that “the continuation of such hostile and provocative rhetoric … solidifies a situation that is unacceptable and cannot be overlooked.”
A draft resolution from the Arab-Islamic summit in Doha, a day before Monday’s emergency summit, warned that Israel’s “brutal” strike in Qatar and other actions “threaten prospects of peace and coexistence in the region, and threaten everything that has been achieved on the path of normalizing ties with Israel, including current agreements and future ones.”
The text accused Israel of “genocide, ethnic cleansing, starvation, siege, and colonizing activities and expansion policies,” and said such conduct jeopardized efforts to expand normalization with Arab nations.
Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman with Emir Of Qatar Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani and GCC representatives pose for a group photo ahead of an emergency Arab-Islamic leaders’ summit convened to discuss the Sept. 9 Israeli attack on Hamas on Qatari territory, in Doha, Qatar, Sept. 15, 2025. Photo: Saudi Press Agency/Handout via REUTERS
Podeh and Guzansky noted that Saudi Arabia, once seen as the most likely next signatory to the Abraham Accords, is “treading very carefully” since the outbreak of the Gaza war. As the guardian of Islam’s holiest sites and a leading voice in the Sunni world, Riyadh is reluctant to proceed without “significant progress on the Palestinian issue” or firm American commitments on security and civilian nuclear cooperation.
Fleur Hassan-Nahoum, Israel’s special envoy for trade and innovation and co-founder of the UAE-Israel Business Council, struck a more positive note, saying that the Abraham Accords have been “game changing for Israel and the Middle East,” and stressing that even after an extensive regional war they have “stood strong.” She noted that the signatory states have consistently condemned Hamas, blocked boycott efforts against Israel at the Arab League, and made no overtures toward unilateral recognition of a Palestinian state, unlike Canada, the UK, France and Australia.
“Even with the current tensions, it is the Abraham Accords countries who are clearly calling for the end of Hamas, as European countries remain silent,” Hassan-Nahoum told The Algemeiner.
“I am extremely optimistic about the long-term viability and even expansion of the Abraham Accords in the next ten years,” she concluded.
RSS
Anti-Israel Protests Force Early End to Vuelta a Espana Cycle Race
Cycling – Vuelta a Espana – Stage 21 – Alalpardo to Madrid – Madrid, Spain – Sept. 14, 2025: Barriers are smashed by anti-Israel protesters during Stage 21. Photo: REUTERS/Ana Beltran
Anti-Israel protests forced the Vuelta a Espana cycle race to be abandoned at its finale on Sunday, with Danish cyclist Jonas Vingegaard declared winner as police sought to quell demonstrations against an Israeli team’s participation.
Protesters chanting “they will not pass” overturned metal barriers and occupied the Vuelta (Tour of Spain) route at several points in Madrid as police attempted to push them back.
Two people were arrested and 22 police officers injured, the Spanish government said.
“The race is over,” said a spokesperson for the organizers, who also canceled the podium ceremony, leaving Vingegaard celebrating in the back of his team car.
Earlier, Spain’s Socialist Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez expressed “admiration for the Spanish people mobilizing for just causes like Palestine” by protesting during the race.
Israel‘s Foreign Minister Gideon Saar posted on X that Sanchez and his government were “a disgrace to Spain.”
“Today he encouraged demonstrators to take to the streets. The pro-Palestinian mob heard the incitement messages – and wrecked the La Vuelta cycling race.”
The demonstrations have targeted the Israel-Premier Tech team over Israel‘s actions in Gaza. Some riders had threatened to quit last week as routes were blocked, causing some falls.
Israel‘s war against Palestinian terrorist group Hamas has sparked protests globally and affected several sporting events.
Seven Israeli chess players withdrew from a Spanish tournament starting on Friday after organizers told them they would not be competing under their flag, citing the Gaza conflict and expressing solidarity with the Palestinians.
On Sunday in Madrid, more than 1,000 police officers were on duty as cyclists reached the final stage of the 21-day race – the biggest deployment since the Spanish capital hosted the NATO summit three years ago.
PROTESTERS CLASH WITH RIOT POLICE
Police held back a crowd of hundreds bearing placards and waving Palestinian flags for several hours as the cyclists snaked their way through towns and villages towards Madrid.
As the riders drew closer to the capital, the demonstrators hurled plastic bottles and traffic cones, upended blue barriers and surged onto the road. Baton-wielding riot police fired smoke bombs to try to disperse them.
Sanchez has repeatedly clashed with Israel over its war in Gaza, describing it as genocide. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has accused his Spanish counterpart of antisemitism and making genocidal threats.
Madrid’s Mayor Jose Luis Martinez-Almeida blamed Sanchez.
“[It’s] violence that the prime minister is directly responsible for due to his statements today in the morning instigating the protests,” Martinez-Almeida said.
“Today is the saddest day since I became mayor of this great city.”
Santiago Abascal, leader of the far-right Vox party, posted: “The psychopath has taken his militias to the streets.”
“He doesn’t care about Gaza. He doesn’t care about Spain. He doesn’t care about anything. But he wants violence in the streets to maintain power.”
It is the first time one of cycling’s Grand Tours has been prevented from completing its final stage by political demonstrators since the Vuelta in 1978 was halted by Basque separatists in San Sebastian.
Health Minister Monica Garcia said the latest protests showed Spain was a “global beacon in the defense of human rights.”
“The people of Madrid join dozens of demonstrations across the country and peacefully bring to a halt the end of a cycling race that should never have been used to whitewash genocide,” Garcia said in a post on Bluesky.
Israel‘s nearly two-year-long campaign against Hamas in Gaza was prompted by the Palestinian terrorist group’s Oct. 7, 2023, invasion of and massacre across southern Israel. The onslaught, in which Hamas-led Palestinian terrorists murdered 1,200 people and kidnapped 251 hostages, was the deadliest single day for Jews since the Holocaust.
RSS
Iran’s Uranium-Enrichment Program Must Be Dismantled, US Energy Secretary Says
US Energy Secretary Chris Wright speaks on the opening day of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) General Conference at the agency’s headquarters in Vienna, Austria, Sept. 15, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Lisa Leutner
Iran’s uranium–enrichment program must be “completely dismantled,” US Energy Secretary Chris Wright told the UN nuclear watchdog’s annual General Conference on Monday.
The US and Israel bombed Iran’s uranium–enrichment plants in June, arguing Iran was getting too close to being able to produce a nuclear weapon, even though the International Atomic Energy Agency that inspects Iran’s nuclear facilities said it had no credible indication of a coordinated weapons program.
The IAEA has, however, said it is concerning that Iran amassed an estimated 440.9 kg (972 lbs) of uranium enriched to up to 60 percent purity, close to the roughly 90 percent of weapons-grade. That is enough, if enriched further, for 10 nuclear bombs, according to an IAEA yardstick.
Iran’s enrichment plants were seriously damaged or destroyed in the attacks. It is less clear what happened to its stock of enriched uranium. The IAEA has not been able to carry out verification inspections since the attacks.
“If it wasn’t already clear enough, I will restate the United States’ position on Iran,” Wright said in a speech to the meeting of all IAEA member states.
“Iran’s nuclear weapons pathway, including all [uranium] enrichment and [plutonium] reprocessing capabilities, must be completely dismantled.”
E3 IN PROCESS OF REIMPOSING SANCTIONS
Britain, France, and Germany, known as the E3, have initiated a one-month process to re-impose sanctions on Iran lifted under a 2015 nuclear deal that unraveled after President Donald Trump pulled the United States out in 2018.
The E3 have said they might hold off on completing that process if Iran lets IAEA inspections fully resume, accounts for its enriched uranium, and holds direct nuclear talks with the United States.
Iran reached an agreement with the IAEA last week to pave the way towards resuming inspections. It is unclear whether enough progress will be made to satisfy the Europeans.
Tehran insists, however, that it has the right to enrich uranium, as all parties to the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) do, provided they use nuclear technology solely for peaceful purposes. It denies seeking nuclear weapons.
Israel, by contrast, is not a party to the NPT and is widely believed to be the only country in the Middle East to possess nuclear weapons. Israel has a policy of not commenting on that subject.
“We hope dialogues restart, and we hope they’re successful. I think there’s a reasonable chance they will be,” Wright later told a press conference.
Asked what the United States was offering Iran, he said: “Rejoining the community of trading nations, removal of sanctions. It would be a home run for the Iranian people, and we’ve talked about other things as well, so there’s plenty of carrots for Iran to abandon their nuclear weapons program.”