But Haaretz has a history.
Remember Zev Sternell? Hebrew University professor.
In Haaretz on May 11, 2001, during the 2nd Intifada, he wrote:
"Many in Israel, perhaps even the majority of the voters, do not doubt the legitimacy of the armed resistance in the territories themselves. The Palestinians would be wise to concentrate their struggle against the settlements...."
The paper is a platform for terror, anti-Jewish terror.
P.S.
The story is going mainstream.
And Amira was found guilty in court of libel for presenting a false account of Hebron Jews kicking, spitting on and dancing around the corpse of a Palestinian shot by border police. Unfortunately for Hass, closed circuit television footage and a police investigation exposed her story as a lie, and she was ordered to pay 250,000 NIS in damages to the Jewish community.
^
Posts
3 comments:
Did she pay up?
I have often wanted to ask someone from Haaretz management. Given that the newspaper is the media of choice for Israel Haters doesn't that give it an extra duty of care for accuracy? Doesn't that give an extra duty to publicly and promptly correct 'mistakes' when they are discovered?
actually, I don't know. maybe David Wilder does.
and as for accuracy, their anti-occupation pose actually permits them the freedom to be sloppy since all that counts is their political stance, i.e., their heart is in the right place.
It was Haaretz that was sued not Hass herself and they paid 250,000 shekels plus 20,000 for legal expenses to the Hebron community.
Their sloppiness can be an asset for their views. Yesterday I saw someone quoting the Gideon Levy article about how an opinion poll showed Israelis support apartheid with no mention of the next day's apology and correction about how he blatantly misinterpreted/misrepresented the poll results
Post a Comment