RSS
Why Is the Associated Press Supporting and Praising Someone Who Urged the Murder of Jews?
The bodies of people, some of them elderly, lie on a street after they were killed during a mass-infiltration by Hamas gunmen from the Gaza Strip, in Sderot, southern Israel, Oct. 7, 2023. Photo: REUTERS/Ammar Awad
There’s more than one way to whip up hatred.
For example, someone could stand on a street corner in an Israeli city less than two weeks after the Oct. 7 massacre, and urge the crowd of hundreds to repeat the following:
Hisham’s Gaza will not bow, not to a tank and not to artillery … Gaza, Al Aqsa and Sheikh Jarrah … the nation calls for a struggle … there’s no solution and no solution … only uprooting the occupation … Raise your voice … Death is preferable to humiliation …
Greetings from Um al-Fahm to the freedom fighters (shahidim) … Greetings from Um al-Fahm to proud Gaza … Hey, people join [them], join [them] … Our nation is sacrificing its blood … Hey, join us, our people. [Original in Arabic. Translation from Hebrew to English by CAMERA.]
Someone could also conceal the contents of these words, and falsely portray them as anti-war sentiment, then depict the innocent speaker as unfairly persecuted by a repressive regime, as was done in this news article: “Israel cracks down on Palestinian citizens who speak out against the war in Gaza.”
In the first case — not a hypothetical — Ahmed Khalefa led chants at a demonstration that took place without a police permit in the northern Israeli town of Umm al-Fahm on Oct. 19, 2023, well before Israel’s ground operation in the Gaza Strip even began.
At the gathering — which was broadcast live on Facebook — the Israeli Arab lawyer expressed solidarity with the Hamas terrorists who carried out the atrocities in southern Israel, and urged his fellow citizens to join them.
In the second case — also not a hypothetical — a leading news organization, the Associated Press (which claims a daily global audience of 4 billion), covered up Khalefa’s incitement, recast him as an anti-war protester, and fostered antipathy against a supposedly repressive Israel.
In the telling of Sam McNeil’s Nov. 24, 2024 article, Israel has imposed a “yearlong crackdown against Palestinian citizens who speak out against the war in Gaza.”
McNeil presented Khalefa as the poster child representing “more than 400 Palestinian citizens of Israel who, since the start of the war in Gaza, have been investigated by police for ‘incitement to terrorism’ or ‘incitement to violence,’ according to Adalah, a legal rights group for minorities.”
“Ahmed Khalefa’s life turned upside down after he was charged with inciting terrorism for chanting in solidarity with Gaza at an anti-war protest in October 2023,” intoned McNeil.
The AP journalist repeatedly referred to Israel’s allegedly heavy-handed laws — “Just being charged with incitement to terrorism or identifying with a terrorist group can land a suspect in detention until they’re sentenced, under the terms of a 2016 law” — but never once specified what exactly it was that Khalefa said which resulted in the charges.
Instead, McNeil relied on Khalefa’s characterization — or, rather, whitewash — of the words that landed him in hot water:
[Khalefa] said Israeli prosecutors took issue with slogans that broadly praised resistance and urged Gaza to be strong, but which didn’t mention violence or any militant groups. For that, he said, the government is trying to disbar him, and he faces up to eight years in prison.
Not only did McNeil withhold from readers Khalefa’s actual words, a peculiar oversight for a news organization that insists it works according to the motto of “advancing the power of facts,” but he notably also never bothered to consult with the Israeli jurists who handled the case.
Moreover, the AP neglected to mention that Khalefa’s case was heard in Israel’s High Court, a significant fact that challenges the flimsy narrative in which Israeli authorities “see us more as enemies than as citizens,” as the defendant told McNeil.
In his decision to release Khalefa to house arrest last February, Israeli Supreme Court Justice Ofer Grosskopf ruled (translation by CAMERA):
In times of peace, as well as in times of war, there are statements that are not protected by the freedom of expression, and there are forbidden exhortations which do not fall under the right to protest. From a theoretical standpoint, the line is very clear. Even during wartime, the expression of stances regarding the war is legitimate: one may call for its end; it’s permitted to express support for its continuation. It’s permitted to support a ceasefire arrangement which will bring back the hostages; one may call to continue fighting until Hamas is eradicated. One may express horror at the consequences of war;
It’s permissible to point out the dangers of stopping it before its goals are achieved. These are all positions which are worthy of being heard, which are permitted to express, even when the mortars are noisy and the guns are thundering. In contrast, expressions of support for the enemy and calls for carrying out war crimes are harmful and dangerous, and their use is unacceptable and forbidden. The freedom of expression does not protect, and the freedom to demonstrate does not legitimize, voicing views supporting atrocities carried out by Hamas on Oct. 7, or cheering our enemies’ position, or calling for their victory in the military campaign in Gaza. They do not enable the voicing of support for genocide, or calls for mass expulsion.
He continued:
These are stances forbidden from public discourse during times of peace, and in times of war they pose a special danger. Indeed, voicing treason and hatred is not a freedom held by anyone; it poses a danger to our ability to coexist during times of peace, and is liable to turn into a viable threat to our very existence in times of war.
The distinction that Justice Grosskopf clearly delineates is completely lost on the AP’s McNeil, who cannot consider anything aside from a double standard. He wrote:
Over the summer, around two dozen anti-war protestors in the port city of Haifa were only allowed to finish three chants before police forcefully scattered the gathering into the night. Yet Jewish Israelis demanding a hostage release deal protest regularly – and the largest drew hundreds of thousands into the streets.
It also seems to have eluded McNeil that Israeli laws banning incitement and glorification of terror organizations resemble those in other Western democracies, including the United Kingdom.
Concerning the specifics of Khalefa’s case, Justice Grosskopf ruled:
Both the magistrate court and the district court determined that the defendant’s statements at the demonstration overstep the boundary between permitted and forbidden. I accept these positions. The statements which the defendant and Jabareen made at the protest, according to their plain meaning, possess expressions of praise for the enemy, and words of backing for their deeds.
The aforementioned Jabareen, as in Muhammad Jabareen, also made an appearance in McNeil’s article, which stated:
“Anyone who tries to speak out about the war will be imprisoned and harassed in his work and education,” said Oumaya Jabareen, whose son was jailed for eight months after an anti-war protest. “People here are all afraid, afraid to say no to this war.”
Far from saying “no to this war,” Jabareen led the crowd in these chants:
Blessings from Um al-Fahm to proud Gaza … resist, resist, resist … do not bargain with your rights … raise, raise, raise the voice … death is preferable to humiliation, Hisham’s Gaza will not bow … not from a tank and not from artillery. Resist, resist, resist … and do not compromise on Gaza. Resist, resist, resist … do not compromise on your lands. There is no other. The shahidim are beloved to God. [Translation from Hebrew to English by CAMERA.]
McNeil also used rhetorical tricks to demonize Israel as an undemocratic oppressor of minorities.
“Israel says its Palestinian citizens enjoy equal rights, including the right to vote, and they are well-represented in many professions,” he wrote, qualifying the easily verifiable reality of strong professional representation and full rights for Israel’s Arab citizens (whom he misleadingly terms “Palestinians”).[Emphasis added.]
In reality, not only can Israeli Arab citizens petition Israel’s High Court, but they may also serve on the bench, as does High Court Justice Khaled Kabub, a Muslim.
On the other hand, McNeil stated as fact the following questionable claim with zero qualification: “However, Palestinians are widely discriminated against in areas like housing and the job market.”
Applying McNeil’s methodology, the conclusion is damning: The Associated Press says it advances the power of facts. However, the wire service widely discriminates against Israel, concealing facts that don’t serve its predetermined anti-Israel narrative.
Tamar Sternthal is the director of CAMERA’s Israel Office.
The post Why Is the Associated Press Supporting and Praising Someone Who Urged the Murder of Jews? first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Hamas Says No Interim Hostage Deal Possible Without Work Toward Permanent Ceasefire
Explosions send smoke into the air in Gaza, as seen from the Israeli side of the border, July 17, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Amir Cohen
The spokesperson for Hamas’s armed wing said on Friday that while the Palestinian terrorist group favors reaching an interim truce in the Gaza war, if such an agreement is not reached in current negotiations it could revert to insisting on a full package deal to end the conflict.
Hamas has previously offered to release all the hostages held in Gaza and conclude a permanent ceasefire agreement, and Israel has refused, Abu Ubaida added in a televised speech.
Arab mediators Qatar and Egypt, backed by the United States, have hosted more than 10 days of talks on a US-backed proposal for a 60-day truce in the war.
Israeli officials were not immediately available for comment on the eve of the Jewish Sabbath.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s office said in a statement on a call he had with Pope Leo on Friday that Israel‘s efforts to secure a hostage release deal and 60-day ceasefire “have so far not been reciprocated by Hamas.”
As part of the potential deal, 10 hostages held in Gaza would be returned along with the bodies of 18 others, spread out over 60 days. In exchange, Israel would release a number of detained Palestinians.
“If the enemy remains obstinate and evades this round as it has done every time before, we cannot guarantee a return to partial deals or the proposal of the 10 captives,” said Abu Ubaida.
Disputes remain over maps of Israeli army withdrawals, aid delivery mechanisms into Gaza, and guarantees that any eventual truce would lead to ending the war, said two Hamas officials who spoke to Reuters on Friday.
The officials said the talks have not reached a breakthrough on the issues under discussion.
Hamas says any agreement must lead to ending the war, while Netanyahu says the war will only end once Hamas is disarmed and its leaders expelled from Gaza.
Almost 1,650 Israelis and foreign nationals have been killed as a result of the conflict, including 1,200 killed in the Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas attack on southern Israel, according to Israeli tallies. Over 250 hostages were kidnapped during Hamas’s Oct. 7 onslaught.
Israel responded with an ongoing military campaign aimed at freeing the hostages and dismantling Hamas’s military and governing capabilities in neighboring Gaza.
The post Hamas Says No Interim Hostage Deal Possible Without Work Toward Permanent Ceasefire first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Iran Marks 31st Anniversary of AMIA Bombing by Slamming Argentina’s ‘Baseless’ Accusations, Blaming Israel
People hold images of the victims of the 1994 bombing attack on the Argentine Israeli Mutual Association (AMIA) community center, marking the 30th anniversary of the attack, in Buenos Aires, Argentina, July 18, 2024. Photo: REUTERS/Irina Dambrauskas
Iran on Friday marked the 31st anniversary of the 1994 bombing of the Argentine Israelite Mutual Association (AMIA) Jewish community center in Buenos Aires by slamming Argentina for what it called “baseless” accusations over Tehran’s alleged role in the terrorist attack and accusing Israel of politicizing the atrocity to influence the investigation and judicial process.
The Iranian Foreign Ministry issued a statement on the anniversary of Argentina’s deadliest terrorist attack, which killed 85 people and wounded more than 300.
“While completely rejecting the accusations against Iranian citizens, the Islamic Republic of Iran condemns attempts by certain Argentine factions to pressure the judiciary into issuing baseless charges and politically motivated rulings,” the statement read.
“Reaffirming that the charges against its citizens are unfounded, the Islamic Republic of Iran insists on restoring their reputation and calls for an end to this staged legal proceeding,” it continued.
Last month, a federal judge in Argentina ordered the trial in absentia of 10 Iranian and Lebanese nationals suspected of orchestrating the attack in Buenos Aires.
The ten suspects set to stand trial include former Iranian and Lebanese ministers and diplomats, all of whom are subject to international arrest warrants issued by Argentina for their alleged roles in the terrorist attack.
In its statement on Friday, Iran also accused Israel of influencing the investigation to advance a political campaign against the Islamist regime in Tehran, claiming the case has been used to serve Israeli interests and hinder efforts to uncover the truth.
“From the outset, elements and entities linked to the Zionist regime [Israel] exploited this suspicious explosion, pushing the investigation down a false and misleading path, among whose consequences was to disrupt the long‑standing relations between the people of Iran and Argentina,” the Iranian Foreign Ministry said.
“Clear, undeniable evidence now shows the Zionist regime and its affiliates exerting influence on the Argentine judiciary to frame Iranian nationals,” the statement continued.
In April, lead prosecutor Sebastián Basso — who took over the case after the 2015 murder of his predecessor, Alberto Nisman — requested that federal Judge Daniel Rafecas issue national and international arrest warrants for Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei over his alleged involvement in the attack.
Since 2006, Argentine authorities have sought the arrest of eight Iranians — including former president Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, who died in 2017 — yet more than three decades after the deadly bombing, all suspects remain still at large.
In a post on X, the Delegation of Argentine Israelite Associations (DAIA), the country’s Jewish umbrella organization, released a statement commemorating the 31st anniversary of the bombing.
“It was a brutal attack on Argentina, its democracy, and its rule of law,” the group said. “At DAIA, we continue to demand truth and justice — because impunity is painful, and memory is a commitment to both the present and the future.”
31 años del atentado a la AMIA – DAIA. 31 años sin justicia.
El 18 de julio de 1994, un atentado terrorista dejó 85 personas muertas y más de 300 heridas. Fue un ataque brutal contra la Argentina, su democracia y su Estado de derecho.
Desde la DAIA, seguimos exigiendo verdad y… pic.twitter.com/kV2ReGNTIk
— DAIA (@DAIAArgentina) July 18, 2025
Despite Argentina’s longstanding belief that Lebanon’s Shiite Hezbollah terrorist group carried out the devastating attack at Iran’s request, the 1994 bombing has never been claimed or officially solved.
Meanwhile, Tehran has consistently denied any involvement and refused to arrest or extradite any suspects.
To this day, the decades-long investigation into the terrorist attack has been plagued by allegations of witness tampering, evidence manipulation, cover-ups, and annulled trials.
In 2006, former prosecutor Nisman formally charged Iran for orchestrating the attack and Hezbollah for carrying it out.
Nine years later, he accused former Argentine President Cristina Fernández de Kirchner — currently under house arrest on corruption charges — of attempting to cover up the crime and block efforts to extradite the suspects behind the AMIA atrocity in return for Iranian oil.
Nisman was killed later that year, and to this day, both his case and murder remain unresolved and under ongoing investigation.
The alleged cover-up was reportedly formalized through the memorandum of understanding signed in 2013 between Kirchner’s government and Iranian authorities, with the stated goal of cooperating to investigate the AMIA bombing.
The post Iran Marks 31st Anniversary of AMIA Bombing by Slamming Argentina’s ‘Baseless’ Accusations, Blaming Israel first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Jordan Reveals Muslim Brotherhood Operating Vast Illegal Funding Network Tied to Gaza Donations, Political Campaigns
Murad Adailah, the head of Jordan’s Muslim Brotherhood, attends an interview with Reuters in Amman, Jordan, Sept. 7, 2024. Photo: REUTERS/Jehad Shelbak
The Muslim Brotherhood, one of the Arab world’s oldest and most influential Islamist movements, has been implicated in a wide-ranging network of illegal financial activities in Jordan and abroad, according to a new investigative report.
Investigations conducted by Jordanian authorities — along with evidence gathered from seized materials — revealed that the Muslim Brotherhood raised tens of millions of Jordanian dinars through various illegal activities, the Jordan news agency (Petra) reported this week.
With operations intensifying over the past eight years, the report showed that the group’s complex financial network was funded through various sources, including illegal donations, profits from investments in Jordan and abroad, and monthly fees paid by members inside and outside the country.
The report also indicated that the Muslim Brotherhood has taken advantage of the war in Gaza to raise donations illegally.
Out of all donations meant for Gaza, the group provided no information on where the funds came from, how much was collected, or how they were distributed, and failed to work with any international or relief organizations to manage the transfers properly.
Rather, the investigations revealed that the Islamist network used illicit financial mechanisms to transfer funds abroad.
According to Jordanian authorities, the group gathered more than JD 30 million (around $42 million) over recent years.
With funds transferred to several Arab, regional, and foreign countries, part of the money was allegedly used to finance domestic political campaigns in 2024, as well as illegal activities and cells.
In April, Jordan outlawed the Muslim Brotherhood, the country’s most vocal opposition group, and confiscated its assets after members of the Islamist movement were found to be linked to a sabotage plot.
The movement’s political arm in Jordan, the Islamic Action Front, became the largest political grouping in parliament after elections last September, although most seats are still held by supporters of the government.
Opponents of the group, which is banned in most Arab countries, label it a terrorist organization. However, the movement claims it renounced violence decades ago and now promotes its Islamist agenda through peaceful means.
The post Jordan Reveals Muslim Brotherhood Operating Vast Illegal Funding Network Tied to Gaza Donations, Political Campaigns first appeared on Algemeiner.com.