ARCHIVE MAY - JUNE, 2004

Sunday, June 27, 2004

• Israel Kills Six Terrorist Leaders in Nablus and The Post's Headline Says Israel Kills Six Palestinian Leaders (Israeli Raid Kills Six Palestinian Leaders, Attack is One of Deadliest on Guerrillas, 6-27-04, A23) Well, at least the sub-headline calls them guerrillas, so we know Israel did not attack the PA's Legislative Council.
  
  

• Someone At The Post Is Asleep At The Wheel: It's bad enough that The Post didn't report this story one week ago when it happened, but someone at The Post needs to tell John Ward Anderson and his editor at The Post that the PA has now admitted that Al Aksa Martyrs Brigades is a mainstream part of Fatah, and not just "an armed faction linked to Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat's Fatah political movement" as The Post  has been reporting for years and as Anderson is still reporting today. (Israeli Raid Kills Six Palestinian Leaders, Attack is One of Deadliest on Guerrillas, 6-27-04, A23). PA Prime Minister Ahmed Qurei, on Sunday, June 20, 2004, in an interview with the London-based Asharq al-Awsat newspaper, said: " 'We have clearly declared that the Aksa Martyrs Brigades are part of Fatah ....We are committed to them and Fatah bears full responsibility for the group.' " (Fatah Committed to Aksa Martyrs, Jerusalem Post, 6-20-04). Could this be any clearer?

  ---

Saturday, June 26, 2004

The Washington Post in the Red
Are You Tired of Getting Only Half the News From Israel?
Here's The Half The Post Won't Report

• The latest media outlet to report on the success to date of the Israeli security fence in reducing terrorism is the Washington Times. "The Israeli army reports a sharp drop in fatalities from Palestinian terror attacks in the first half of this year, giving much of the credit to the partially completed West Bank security barrier." (Mideast security barrier working, 6-25-04, Front Page) The Baltimore Sun, based on a report from the New York Times News Service, recently ran an article on the same topic. (Israel Says It Has Foiled a Series of Attacks, Baltimore Sun, 6-20-04) But The Post only gives its readers half the news from the Middle East, so this story didn't make the cut.

  ---

Friday, June 25, 2004

The Washington Post in the Red
Are You Tired of Getting Only Half the News From Israel?
Here's The Half The Post Won't Report

• The Washington Post failed to report the 407 to 9 vote of the US House of Representatives strongly endorsing President Bush's April 14 letter to Prime Minister Sharon repudiating the Palestinian claim to a so-called right of return and affirming that the US considers a return to pre-1967 borders unrealistic. One can be sure that if the vote had gone the other way, The Post would have given it front page coverage. Click Here for Story.
  
  

• Statistics The Post Refuses to Cite, Even Though Called To Their Attention:
  
  The latest figures and breakdowns from the International Policy Institute for Counter-Terrorism provide the following picture of Palestinian fatalities since the start of the intifada. All figures are from Sept. 27, 2000, to May 1, 2004:
  
  TOTAL FIGURES (The only statistics ever mentioned by The Post)
  
  PALESTINIAN fatalities 2,806. ISRAELI fatalities 921.
  
  WHAT THE POST NEVER REPORTS:
  
  PALESTINIAN NON-COMBATANTS KILLED BY ISRAELI FORCES: 985 or 35 percent of the Palestinian fatality total.
  
  ISRAELI NON-COMBATANTS KILLED BY PALESTINIANS: 715 or 78 percent of the Israeli fatality total.
  
  In other words, on the Israeli side, 4 out of every 5 fatalities are non-combatants. On the Palestinian side, it's 1 out of every 3. This great disparity of a far greater Israeli casualty rate among innocent civilians is of course a direct result of the effects of Palestinian terrorism as contrasted with Israel's attempts to zero in on Palestinian gunmen, fighters and other assorted terrorists.
  
  Here are two other breakdowns that show what happens when terrorists go after civilians in buses, cafes, discos, etc. in terms of the random demographic breakdown of the ensuing carnage:
  
  PALESTINIAN FEMALE FATALITIES: 126 or 4 percent of the Palestinian total. ISRAELI FEMALE FATALITIES: 280 or 30 percent of the Israeli total. In other words, the rate of female casualties on the Israeli side is more than 7 TIMES AS HIGH as on the Palestinian side. In actual numbers, the fatality total of Israelis in this group is MORE THAN TWICE that on the Palestinian side -- 280 to 126.
  
  PALESTINIAN NON-COMBATANT FATALITIES AMONG VICTIMS AGED 45 OR OLDER: 82 or 3 percent of the Palestinian total.
  
  ISRAELI NON-COMBATANT FATALITIES AMONG VICTIMS AGED 45 OR OLDER: 226 or 24 percent of the Israeli total. In other words, the rate among older Israeli victims is 8 TIMES AS HIGH ON THE PALESTINIAN SIDE. In actual numbers, the fatality total of Israelis in this group is nearly 3 times as high as among Palestinians -- 226 to 82.
  
  by Leo Rennert

  ---

Thursday, June 24, 2004

Article About Exhibit of Photos Supposedly Showing Abuse of Palestinians by Soldiers and Settlers Grossly Exaggerates - Photos Don't Show Abuse

Post reporter Molly Moore returns from a several week absence with one of her characteristically biased anti-Israel articles about an exhibit of photographs by three IDF soldiers, allegedly showing abuse of Palestinians by Israeli troops and settlers in the West Bank. The words "abuse" and "mistreatment" are used in the headline and in the first seven paragraphs, without actually informing the reader of exactly what the photographs show. ('Breaking the Silence' on West Bank Abuse, Israeli Soldiers' Exhibit Depicts Mistreatment of Palestinians by Troops, Settlers in Hebron, 6-24-04, A17) Then, well into the article, beyond where most readers will long since have stopped reading, we learn that the photos are relatively innocuous. Here are some examples:

• a photo showing graffiti saying "Arabs to the Gas Chambers." Needless to say, the article doesn't mention Arab graffiti against Israelis, including swastikas, throughout Israel and the disputed territories. 

• soldiers lounging while what is claimed to be a 15 year old stone-throwing Palestinian who has been arrested is sitting handcuffed and blindfolded. Of course, photographs can't reveal age, and this photo doesn't show what this Palestinian did to get arrested... not to mention that stones can kill and maim.

• Palestinian children playing a game holding sticks in which they pretend to be Israeli soldiers, while a real soldier stands by smiling. Seriously folks, this one is listed among the photos supposedly showing "abuse" and "mistreatment," and Molly Moore, the author of this biased piece, calls this "one of the most arresting pictures."

But as obvious as it seems that the above photographs don't show "mistreatment" or "abuse," it isn't until the 18th paragraph that the author concedes that "[p]hotographs that appeared benign took on an ominous edge when organizers described the events preceding or following the snap of the shutter." Stated more plainly, she concedes that these photographs themselves don't reveal anything, and you have to believe what the 3 biased and politically motivated narrators tell you about the photos... and even then their biased descriptions reveal only angry or spiteful behavior and cannot be said to rise to the level of abuse and mistreatment. And lest we forget, as the author did, there is an abundance of equivalent conduct (not to mention terrorist activity) by Palestinians toward the Jewish residents of Hebron, where the photos were taken, and it wasn't mentioned anywhere in this article. This is the type of shoddy journalism, created solely to vilify and defame Israel, that gives The Post the well earned reputation of having an anti-Israel bias.

Wednesday, June 23, 2004

The Words "Terrorist" and "Terrorism" are Fine When Needed to Criticize Bush Administration for Underreporting 2003 Terrorism Rate, But Off Limits In Articles Reporting Same Acts In Israel

We know that The Post, in articles reporting on Palestinian terrorism in Israel, has a policy of refusal to call the terrorists as such. We've previously shown that The Post's unhesitating use of the terms "terrorist" and "terrorism" when referring to Saudi terrorists, Spanish terrorists, Turkish terrorists and Indonesian terrorists creates a double standard when reporting on Israel. Evidence of this double standard continues to mount. Add to it the front page article today reporting on the recent Bush administration mistake in tabulating the 2003 rate of world terrorism. The Post didn't hesitate to repeatedly use the words "terrorist" and "terrorism" in both the headline and body of the article in referring to an increase in terrorist attacks throughout the world in 2003, including a specific reference to Israel. (New 2003 Data: 625 Terrorism Deaths, Not 307, 6-23-04, A1). But anyone who read The Post's news reports about those same terrorist attacks in Israel throughout the year 2003 would not have seen them referred to as terrorism.

Tuesday, June 22, 2004

The Washington Post in the Red
Are You Tired of Getting Only Half the News From Israel?
Here's The Half The Post Won't Report

• After years of media reports describing only a loose association between the PA, Fatah and Al Aksa Martyr's Brigades, the PA has now announced that Al Aksa Martyrs Brigades are part of Fatah and that they accept full responsibility for them. It will be interesting to see how The Post describes Al Aksa Martyrs Brigades in future reports. Click Here for Story.

• A senior Tanzim terrorist official and two other terrorists were arrested Monday night at an Israeli checkpoint riding in an ambulance, clearly illustrating why Israel must stop and search ambulances. Click Here for Story.

• Palestinian terrorist groups in Gaza, including Arafat's Fatah, tell Egypt to butt out, exposing breach between the PA and Egypt. Click Here for Story.

• The United Nations held its first ever seminar on worldwide anti-Semitism, and Koffi Annan, acknowledging an "alarming resurgence," called on U.N. bodies to adopt resolutions and investigate the ancient scourge. What's most egregious about The Post's failure to report this news is that their own web site published a Reuters report on the event, but the paper edition was silent. Click Here for Story.

Monday, June 21, 2004

Post Fails to Report Anti-Semitic Incitement by Saudi Leadership

Another savage, terrorist beheading, this time in Saudi Arabia, and the Saudi leadership, rather than openly address and confront the true cause of the terrorism, chooses instead to feed the flames of the hatred responsible for that terrorism by claiming Zionists are behind it. Crown Prince Abdullah went on Saudi television on the 19th, and told his people the following:

"Zionism is behind it. It has become clear now. It has become clear to us. I don't say, I mean... It is not 100 percent, but 95 percent that the Zionist hands are behind what happened." 

The Post failed to report this statement. It echoes similar statements by the Saudi leadership within the past two weeks.  There is only one way the Saudi leadership will ever stop its support of Islamic extremism and its incitement of Arab hatred toward Israel, and that is if world opinion refuses to tolerate and accept it. This cannot happen if The Post continues to fail to report on the Saudi incitement.

Sunday, June 20, 2004

Israel Targets Terrorist Rocket Factories for Destruction and The Washington Post Calls Them "Empty Metal Workshops" 

On Friday and Saturday, June 19 and 20, 2004 Israel  launched helicopter attacks on buildings in Gaza housing Kassam rocket factories, firing missiles into the buildings. This occurred after Hamas on Friday launched what the Israeli press calls an "advanced" Kassam rocket into the backyard of a home in the Israeli town of Sderot, doing some damage to the home and sending a family member to the hospital for treatment for shock. 

How does the Post report the Israeli effort to destroy these factories? It reports that Israel is firing missiles into "empty metal workshops." While The Post does note as an afterthought that Israel contends the "empty metal workshops" are being used to make weapons... not rockets, but merely "weapons," at the same time it fails to report the Hamas rocket strike Friday on Sderot, which would have placed the Israeli strikes in context.. (World in Brief, 6-20-04, A22)

Question 1: What makes an empty metal workshop "empty?" Does it become "empty" when the terrorists go home from work for the day or night)?

Question 2: Why would Israel waste time and resources shooting missiles into nothing more than "empty metal workshops?"

Wednesday, June 16, 2004

Post Tries to Smear Israel With Front Page Article Tying Israel's Treatment of Palestinian Prisoners To Abu Ghraib

There is much that is malicious and misleading about The Post's front page article on what The Post wants its readers to believe is Israeli torture of Palestinian prisoners. (Prison Tactics A Longtime Dilemma For Israel, Nation Faced Issues Similar to Abu Ghraib, June 16, 2004, A1)

Front page placement itself was inappropriate. Israel has not been faced with a torture scandal, and although this piece is disguised as a feature article discussing Israeli handling of the issue of treatment of prisoners, it is a fairly blatant effort by The Post to smear Israel by tying it to Abu Ghraib. The Post has been criticized heavily for excessive and sensationalistic coverage of the Abu Ghraib issue, and now, rather than let that issue move off the front page, The Post kills two birds with one stone by tying Israel to it and at the same time keeping the issue front and center. 

The selection of interior photos with misleading captions was improper. The use of a large photo of a Palestinian paraplegic in a wheelchair with a caption saying "Palestinian Anan Labadeh, 31, a paraplegic, says he was abused in prison," implied that he was put in the wheelchair as a result of prison abuse by Israelis. In fact, as the article reveals to the careful reader, he became a paraplegic 15-20 years ago when he fell off a balcony during a chase. The article further reveals that his imprisonment last year in Israel involved terrorist activities in which he was believed to have helped set up bomb factories in Nablus, and the extent of his abuse allegations against Israel in connection with that imprisonment is that they deprived him of food and sleep. But the Post knows that the photo will, unfortunately, have by far the greatest effect on most of its readers.

The little Palestinian girl brandishing symbolic chains is, in the caption of the photo, said to be protesting Israeli detentions, but in reality, it would be a good bet that this is a file photo of a little girl at a more general protest of what Palestinians call the Israeli occupation.

Finally, it was a bit too pat that the first two sentences of the article, relying on the word of a terrorist without other substantiating evidence, attempted to draw a direct parallel to all of the features of the US-Abu Ghraib scandal, complete with a claim of "casual beatings ... humiliations ... [and] trophy photos taken by both male and female guards." The same informant, however, in the very next breath, backs off those exaggerated claims by noting that what the Israelis did to him was distinguishable from what the Americans did at Abu Ghraib, was much more sophisticated and consisted of "three days without food and without sleep." By contradicting himself, this informant bore the indicia of his own unreliability as a source, and it was irresponsible for The Post's reporter to knowingly quote exaggerations and unsubstantiated allegations from an unreliable source.

This is one more example of The Washington Post engaging in unethical and unfair reporting in a deliberate effort to taint Israel in the minds of its readers.

Sunday, June 13, 2004

Post's Glen Frankel Ignores 55 Year History of Arab Attacks Against Israel as a Contributing Cause of Israel's State of Perpetual Emergency 

Dear Mr. Frankel:

I must tell you that I was very disappointed in your article in Outlook on 6-13-04. [The Crisis Without End, Israel's Perpetual Emergency Has Become a Political Tool, 6-13-04, Outlook, B1] Some have said that your reporting is an improvement in terms of fairness and insight over the other Post reporters stationed in Israel. One would never know it from this article. It was disappointing for a number of reasons. 

First, I think both the headline and thesis expressed by you in the opening three paragraphs to the effect that some politicians in Israel are thriving on perpetuating a crisis or emergency situation were designed to give the impression to the reader that Israel and Israeli politicians are, in large part, responsible for the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Although there is no doubt that there are hard liners on the Israeli side, your article ignores the historic role that Arab conventional and terrorist attacks have played in keeping Israel in a war like or emergency stance. Granted, you give lip service to an Arab contribution to this ongoing emergency posture of Israel when you say: "But a number of historical factors -- including the enduring hostility of Arabs to the idea of a Jewish homeland in their midst, five wars and the fevered messianic dreams of an influential minority of Israelis -- marred that original vision and transformed Israel into a besieged garrison state." Arabs have repeatedly declared war on Israel, yet you don't say so. Arab terrorists continue to attack Israeli civilians over and over again, yet you don't say so. "Enduring hostility" certainly doesn't say the Arab nations surrounding Israel attacked Israel, and it certainly doesn't note many years of terrorism directed not only at its civilian population in Israel, but all over the world. "Five wars" certainly doesn't say those wars were fought due to Arab aggression designed to destroy Israel. You soft-pedal Arab aggression and its contribution to the perpetual Israeli emergency mode ... indeed you don't even mention Arab aggression or violence. Yet in the same sentence you talk of the "fevered messianic dreams of an influential minority of Israelis." It's obvious you're referring to the settlers, but since you're discussing an emergency state that you explicitly note goes back to 1948, please tell us, your readers, where the "fevered messianic dreams" contributed to that emergency mode prior to 1967.

You continue to soft-pedal the contribution of Arab aggression to the Israeli crisis mentality by not mentioning in your brief historical account of the history of Oslo Arafat's rejection of a peace agreement that would have created a Palestinian state and his return to violence following Camp David in 2000. You note, almost casually, the breakdown of Oslo by stating: "...when it all went wrong, both sides were sucked back into the whirlpool." When it all went wrong?!! Is that a quaint way of saying "when Arafat rejected Israel's offer of a genuine peace, started another intifada, released terrorists from Palestinian jails and launched a barrage of terror attacks against Israel?" 

Oh, excuse me. I forgot we must not use the word "terrorist" or any of its derivatives. I note your lengthy article doesn't use any of those words even one time, though it's hard to understand how any in depth treatment of the subject you sought to evaluate, Israel's perpetual emergency mode and what or who is responsible for it, could possibly avoid mentioning terrorism. While we're at it, you didn't use the words "bomb," "bombing," "suicide," "shooting," "killing," or even "violence." I guess that's because you're not willing to concede that Arab hostility and violence toward Israel historically have kept Israel in this emergency mode. And it's not as though your article doesn't deal with the subject of violence at all, because we do find in your discussion of the "dispirited" IDF the phrase "muscle-bound riot cop meting out rubber bullets and beatings to rebellious Palestinian youths." "Rebellious youths" was a nice touch too. The rebellious youth that I have living here in my house ignores curfew and pretends not to hear me when I tell him to clean up his room. He doesn't throw fire bombs. But I guess things are different over there.

You use buzz words and phrases in asserting that the state of emergency has "ground down" the Israeli political system and that Likud and Labor are "crumbling," all to give the reader the impression of decay, dissent and disfunction in Israel, but all you can offer in support is an analysis of political changes in the parties and in the personalities representing those parties, and one could certainly just as well point to those changes as reflecting the vitality, flexibility and fluidity of Israel's political system as anything else.

Finally, and perhaps most disturbing, is that after the one-sided headline and theme are set forth asserting that Israelis are using the perpetual state of emergency as a political tool and somehow profiting, you seemingly abandon your thesis and never tell us who they are or how they're benefiting. Who are they? You seem to concede that Ariel Sharon is not among them, because you note that he is fighting with his cabinet in seeking to remove Israelis from Gaza. Peres is an advocate of peace, so I doubt you would contend he's seeking to perpetuate an emergency mode. Who are you talking about? The settlers and the politicians who support them? If that's what you mean, why not just say so? Is it because the backdrop of your thesis is that Israel has been on this war footing since the War of Independence, and the West Bank settlers have only been influential in more modern times? That would leave at least the first 20 years of the perpetual emergency state unexplained. Then you might have to place the blame squarely where it belongs, on Arab aggression designed to destroy Israel. 

Think about this for a moment. How could anyone write a credible article about Israel's perpetual emergency posture without once mentioning 55 years of constant Arab declarations of an intention to drive Israel into the sea, without once mentioning four wars started against Israel by Arab countries surrounding it in its first 25 years of existence and without once mentioning a constant stream of terrorism directed against its civilian population? How could you?

Robert G. Samet
Potomac, Maryland

Friday, June 11, 2004

Post's Continuing Refusal to Call Terrorist Groups "Terrorists" and Its Selective Sanitization of Terrorist Groups in Articles Mentioning Israel

We noted and gave examples in an earlier "Media Alert" of how The Post will not, in the context of any mention of Israel, call Hamas a terrorist organization. When Israel isn't mentioned, The Post enthusiastically calls Hamas a terrorist organization. Yesterday, in a front page article about the prosecution of an American Moslem, Abdurahman Alamoudi, for smuggling cash, The Post reports that when Alamoudi was first arrested,  authorities thought the cash was destined for Hamas, who The Post then gently describes as "the Palestinian group ... that sponsors suicide bombings against Israelis." (Alleged Plot to Kill Saudi Ruler Detailed, Libyan Leader Behind It, Detainee Says, 6-11-04, A1) 

Sponsors? Hamas doesn't just "sponsor" suicide bombings or even terrorism. A sponsor is defined as "one that finances a project or an event carried out by another person or group" or "one who assumes responsibility for another person or a group during a period of instruction, apprenticeship, or probation." Hamas directly conducts terrorism through its own terrorist operatives. Furthermore, Hamas' terrorist activities are not limited to just suicide bombings, but include shootings, missile attacks and any other means available for killing innocent civilians. The Post's selective sanitization of Hamas only when Israel is mentioned is a shameful example of The Post's continuing double standard applied to Israel.

Wednesday, June 9, 2004

Slanted News Report Expresses Post Criticism of Israel for 
The Decision to Withdraw From Erez Industrial Zone in Gaza

There are numerous unethical journalistic techniques for expressing a publication's opinion in a news report without directly calling it an editorial. One of the ways is for the author to find and liberally quote others expressing the publication's opinion throughout the news article. The Post frequently engages in that type of unethical, opinionated and agenda driven reporting. In the article today entitled "Israelis to Quit Gaza Industrial Zone, Many Palestinians Will Lose Jobs at Border Site," 6-9-04, A17 The Post, after years of cheering the Palestinian effort to drive Israel out of Gaza,  does an about face and editorializes against Israel's decision to evacuate the Erez industrial zone. It does this by first highlighting in the headline and opening paragraph the loss of Palestinian jobs and by then going on to liberally sprinkle throughout the article quotes from Palestinians and Israelis willing to assert that the decision was precipitous, unwise, or not well thought out. The article even contains an unsupported opinion that Israel's decision was motivated by a desire to punish the Palestinians. Despite noting that Israel cites as its reason security concerns and failing businesses in the zone, and even after noting that 11 Israelis have been killed since November, 2001 and that "Palestinians and Israelis alike have said the security situation was intolerable in the Erez zone," the article then provides a flood of criticism of Israel. Here are some of the comments of the author of the article and some of the quotes in the article used to express The Post's opinion.

• "Israeli analysts and Palestinian workers expressed surprise at the sudden decision"   

• " ' We were all shocked by this hasty decision,' said Sami Abu Zarifa, an economic adviser to the Palestinian Authority"

• "It is too easy to give up so quickly on such a huge project," said Yossi Beilin, a member of parliament [This is an error. Yossi Beilin is no longer in the Knesset] who heads the Economic Cooperation Foundation, through which he helped initiate the 1993 Oslo peace accords. "Who's going to pay for this?" Beilin said. "These people who become unemployed. These people will become our enemies in no time. And we will pay, too."

• "Palestinian workers... said the closure of the nearly 100 Israeli companies there would mean disaster for them"

• " ' They are going to destroy thousands of Palestinian families,' said Abu Musa, who owns a clothing factory. ' This is an unwise decision.' "

• " ' There was supposed to have been continuity after the withdrawal,' said Zarifa, the Palestinian Authority adviser. 'A special mechanism was going to be established to maintain the rights of workers and the rights of businesses for the benefit of all parties.' "

• "But Yosef Alpher, an Israeli strategic analyst, said the government's decision appeared to be motivated by something other than despair. 'At a certain level, it is punitive,' He added, "There is an attempt to release Israel of responsibility for the Palestinian population, which is nonsense, because as long as you control all the entries and exit points -- the land and air and sea -- even if there's no Israeli inside, you bear a certain responsibility for the welfare of people in there." 

This is par for the course for The Post. Israel is damned if it does and damned if it doesn't. The last quote by the so-called "strategic analyst" is the most noxious of all, because it is a virtual announcement that Palestinians, with The Post cheering them on through unethical, agenda-drive reporting, will hold Israel responsible for the fate of the Palestinians no matter what Israel does. That's the anti-Israel bias that so permeates all of The Post's reporting.

Tuesday, June 8, 2004

Washington Post Hypocrisy Continues In Its Refusal to Refer to Terrorists 
as "Terrorists" Only In Articles About Israel

In today's paper several articles refer to Saudi terrorists as "terrorists," and there is even an article referring to Hezbollah and Hamas as "terrorist" organizations, but only in an article devoid of any reference to Israel. 

In "For Saudi Arabia, Al Qaeda Threat Is Now Hitting Home," 6-8-04, A18, the word "terrorist" is mentioned 3 times, and the word "terrorism" is mentioned once in referring to the terrorists in Saudi Arabia who are shooting and bombing innocent civilians. Why are they not referred to as such in articles about Israel?

In "Pressure Builds on Key Pillar of Saudi Rule," 6-8-04, A18, there is at least one reference to fighting the "terrorists" in Saudi Arabia. Why are they not referred to as such in articles about Israel?

Finally, on the front page in "Cigarette Smuggling Linked to Terrorism", 6-8-04, A1, we find a grand total of 11 references to "terrorist" and "terrorists" and 4 references to "terrorism." And who exactly are the "terrorist" groups this Washington Post report says are being funded by cigarette smuggling? The article itself says they are Hamas and Hezbollah. Why are Hamas and Hezbollah not referred to as "terrorist" groups in articles about Israel? 

This refusal of the Post to call these exact same groups "terrorist" groups when referring to them in articles about Israel, while at the same time unhesitatingly referring to them as such in articles not directly involving events in Israel, is one of the clearest examples of the differing treatment The Post gives to Israel in all of its reporting. This is rank hypocrisy, plain and simple. It is evidence of The Post's anti-Israel bias.

Sunday, June 6, 2004

Washington Post Hides the Fact that Anti-Semitic Attack in Paris on
Yeshiva Student Was Probably Perpetrated by A Moslem

On Friday, June 4, in northern Paris a 17 year old Jewish student attending a local Jewish school was attacked by a man who eye witnesses said  yelled "Allahu Akbar!" before stabbing the victim. Today The Post reported the incident but deliberately attempted to sanitize the report of any suggestion that the perpetrator was an Arab by changing the Arabic "Allahu Akbar" to its English translation. The Post's report stated: "A Jewish teenager was stabbed in the chest by a man crying, 'God is great,' officials said." (World in Brief, Paris, 6-6-04, A23)

The truth was reported elsewhere, (Chirac Condemns Stabbing Of Yeshiva Student In Apparent Anti-Semitic Attack, Haaretz, 6-6-04)(Jewish Teen Stabbed by Muslim in Paris, Maariv, 6-7-04)(Yeshiva Student Stabbed In Paris, Arutz Sheva, 6-6-04).

Does this not clearly demonstrate The Post's willingness to twist the truth and hide facts in pursuit of its agenda?

Another Story Not Reported by The Post About Palestinian Efforts to
Shed Their Corrupt Leadership

More than 100 lower level Palestinian security officers went on strike in Gaza to protest what they said was rampant corruption among senior Palestinian security officers. Some of these senior officers were alleged to have placed their wives and children on the payroll of the security services, already short on cash for vehicles and weapons. (Palestinian Security Officers on Strike in Gaza, Reuters, 6-3-04) The ability of the PA's security services to take over upon an Israeli pullout from Gaza is crucial to the future of peace efforts in the region.  The Post has often blamed Israel for weakening the PA's security forces, but has never adequately reported the PA leadership's own self-inflicted damage. It is clear that nascent movements within the Palestinian rank and file protesting corruption that is seriously weakening the PA's security services should be encouraged and should be reported, but it may be that The Post is loath to report any stories that might draw the ire of Arafat and his high level PA cronies.

Friday, June 4, 2004