The Media Accountability Project  

"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.

"Simply put, there were no rocket launches fired from Gaza. The last rocket launches from Gaza happened on May 2, which Israel had already responded to, as reported by the Associated Press. Consequently, on May 3 following the exchange of violence, a ceasefire went into effect that was agreed to by both sides."

Your headline “Israeli strikes in Gaza kills 3 senior militants, 10 others” is gravely misleading as it fails to mention that the “10 others” were Palestinian civilians. 4 of the victims were children and another 4 were women. A well-known dentist and Chairman of the Board of Al-Wafaa Hospital, Dr. Jamal Khaswan, along with his family, were also killed in the attack.

The status of East Jerusalem as occupied Palestinian territory is not an opinion but a settled consensus at the international level, as confirmed by the United Nations Security Council and other international legal bodies. It is also the long-standing position of the Canadian government.

Your headline, “Violence at holy Jerusalem site raises tensions over holidays” uses extremely passive language. It is important to make clear the perpetrators and the victims of this “violence.” In this case, Israeli forces stormed the Al-Aqsa mosque (perpetrators) and beat Palestinian civilian worshippers (victims).

Your article omits a widely reported, key fact in Netanyahu’s decision to pause its legislative agenda. The reason that the far-right National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir agreed to this legislative pause was in return for a commitment from Netanyahu to establish a “national guard” under Ben-Gvir’s control. Without this context, your readers are missing key information that explains how this postponement came to be.

"Historically, the Israeli judiciary and supreme court have given their stamp of approval to racist laws like the Jewish Nation State Law, Jewish settlement activities, and forced expulsions. Thus, Palestinian citizens of Israel fail to see how these protests will address the discriminatory and racist laws that they face."

"What is completely absent from the article is any reference to the significant numbers of anti-apartheid and anti-occupation protesters, largely organized by the Palestinian Solidarity Campaign (PSC) in the UK. One Twitter post calling for a protest by PSC was seen by over 39,000 people and was shared over 300 times. Photos show protesters with signs reading 'The occupation is a moral crisis' and 'no democracy with occupation,' largely from the 'Na’amod: British Jews Against Occupation' contingent."

This important context is lost in the paragraph in the current article, making it sound like there are only two notable sides of this issue. Whereas, there is a significant third perspective on judicial reforms.