The Media Accountability Project  

Your use of the word “captured” when describing Israel’s military occupation of the West Bank, “Israel captured the West Bank in the 1967 Mideast was” is also problematic as it does not use the correct terminology, mainly due to the fact that the term “capture” never applies to land appropriation under international law, among other reasons.

I am extremely surprised to see that there are no Palestinian perspectives whatsoever in your reporting. The same government which is spearheading the judicial reforms, seen as a power grab by many in Israel, has also been busy approving new settlements on occupied Palestinian land and encouraging extremist settlers to perpetrate violence against Palestinian civilians.

"First of all, I am flabbergasted at the choice of the title to the article, which it seems aims to emphasize the attack by a Palestinian individual which wounded 8 Israeli civilians, whereas at least 10 Palestinians have been killed by the Israeli military in the Jenin refugee camp."

"Hamas did not “overrun” the Gaza Strip but was voted into power by Palestinian citizens who, among various reasons, support its resistance towards Israel’s military occupation and appropriation of land."

I was especially pleased that you chose to tell the story of Huda Zaqqut, whose life feels “like a miracle” in spite of the hardships of living in Gaza.  I appreciated that you pointed out that Gaza is “like a prison”, closed “on all sides” due to Israel and Egypt’s blockade.

"Third, to describe the escalation of violence in the occupied West Bank as a “response to a spasm of Palestinian violence” that has “surged” is deeply problematic and misleading. It obscures Israel’s role as an aggressor and occupier and disregards the power imbalance between Israel and the Palestinian people, of which the former has one of the “most advanced militaries in the world.” More importantly, such language rationalizes Israeli violence against Palestinians, “equating the oppressed with the oppressors or blaming the oppressed for the actions of the oppressor."

To claim that Issam al-Salaj “crowd-surfed” and “cheered” the Israeli military’s failure to arrest him obscures Israel’s role as an aggressor and occupier. It disregards the power imbalance between Israel and the Palestinian people and the military and apartheid regime that Palestinians in the occupied territories have endured for the past 56 years. More importantly, your description of Palestinians’ “spontaneous celebrations” fails to acknowledge that Palestinians have been and are actively involved in an ongoing struggle for liberation and self-determination.

"You omit that the village of al-Mughayyir has been under a blockade by Israeli military forces for over 2 weeks. According to Wafa News Agency, the Israeli army has sealed the two entrances of al-Mughayyir for over 14 days, preventing Palestinians villagers from entering or leaving, and forcing them to take long rough roads to reach their destination. This blockade further restricts Palestinians’ freedom of movement who already face restrictions through fixed checkpoints, settler-only roads, and other physical obstructions."

"Both Israel and the Palestinians claim Jerusalem as their capital city, and East Jerusalem (which includes the Old City) is considered occupied Palestinian territory under international law. This is not an opinion but a matter of a settled consensus at the international level, as confirmed by the United Nations Security Council, the International Criminal Court, the International Court of Justice, and the High Contracting Parties to the Fourth Geneva Convention. Similarly, the Canadian government does not recognize Israel's unilateral annexation of East Jerusalem but considers the territory to be occupied."

The news segment fails to mention that the flag march, held in Jerusalem’s Old City, is considered occupied Palestinian territory according to international law. This is the central controversy surrounding the march, as Israeli nationalists are marching in protest of international law. This is not an opinion but a matter of settled consensus at the international level as confirmed by the United Nations Security Council, the International Criminal Court, the International Court of Justice, and the High Contracting Parties to the Fourth Geneva Convention.