web analytics
February 13, 2016 / 4 Adar I, 5776

Posts Tagged ‘Said Arikat’

US ‘Aware’ Anti-Israel UN Protector for ‘Palestine’ Quit, Hopes he is Not Replaced

Tuesday, January 5th, 2016

And everyone thought it couldn’t be worse than having Richard Falk as the official tattletale to the United Nations about Israel’s treatment of the Palestinian Arabs.

But Falk’s replacement is quitting after he completes only two years of his six year term. The reason he gave for quitting is Israel’s refusal to grant him access to the “occupied Palestinian Territory.”

Not realizing the irony of his resignation statement, the latest UN special tattletale explained that “my efforts to help improve the lives of Palestinian victims of violations under the Israeli occupation have been frustrated every step of the way.” Sound impartial?

Falk served for six years in the position officially known as the “UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Palestinian territories occupied since 1967.” No joke. That is the full title.

There are no other such “special rapporteurs” who are appointed permanent positions to look into the dire human rights conditions in which a particular people live anywhere else in the world. Not in Saudi Arabia, not in South Sudan, not in China, not in Eritrea. The position was created to catalogue abuses described by the Palestinian Arabs to demonize Israel. Falk was the fifth such Special Rapporteur.

Falk fulfilled his job perfectly – never missing an opportunity to disparage Israel, whether or not the facts fit the situation. Falk, a Princteon professor, favored a boycott of Israelis living and breathing in the disputed territories, claimed Israel had “genocidal tendencies” towards the Paelstinians, and embraced 9/11 conspiracy theories.

In May of 2014, Makarim Wibisono, a diplomat from Indonesia with a long public history of anti-Israel animus, replaced Falk.

Indonesia has no diplomatic relations with Israel.

Wibisono has spent nearly all of his professional life working for the U.N., in various positions.

How biased is the UN Special (and Permanent) Tattletale on Israel?

This past fall there were nearly daily rammings, stabbings and shootings of Israelis by Palestinian- or Israeli-Arabs. So how did the special UN snoop report this? An 11 paragraph report issued on Nov. 16 treated the several months period of virtual open warfare on Israeli Jews as a completely equal uptick in “continuing violence.”

It pointed out that in the preceding six weeks, “over 80 Palestinians and around 15 Israelis have reportedly been killed. In addition, thousands of Palestinians and more than 100 Israelis have been injured.”

So far, it sounds like the Arabs had the worst of it. But then the report focuses in on a specific case. Ah, but it’s the case of an Arab killed by Israeli forces “during an undercover arrest operation in a Hebron hospital on Thursday last week. Further fatalities, Israeli and Palestinian, were reported last Friday and over the weekend.” Now it is clear which side the Special Rapporteur sees as the clear victim.

No mention of drug-addled Arabs deliberately ramming their cars into groups of Israeli civilians, then jumping out of their cars and knifing old men to death with machetes. That happened, but that didn’t make it into the report. Nor did any of the other Arab-on-Israeli attacks.

Instead, what Wibisono did include in his report was a focus on cases of “excessive use of force by Israeli forces against Palestinians, including some which appear to amount to summary executions.” Yes, summary executions is U.N. speak for killing a terrorist who refuses to stop trying to stab or shoot or use their cars to ram Israelis to death.

THIS SPECIAL RAPPORTEUR WAS A LAST-MINUTE REPLACEMENT FOR AN IMPARTIAL NOMINEE

Wibisono was a last minute and surprise successor to Falk. The original choice, an American lawyer from Georgetown who received a unanimous recommendation from the UN Human Rights Council’s vetting committee, Christina Cerna, was nixed at the last minute by a show of force from the Arab League.

How an Arab Reporter Pushes State Dept. to Deliver His Message

Friday, December 11th, 2015

Few people understand the echo chamber of the mainstream media. How is it that so many of the major media outlets share a particular understanding or take on certain controversial issues? In particular, how is the narrative of the poor, oppressed Palestinian Arabs suffering under the Israeli occupation so wide-spread and so entrenched?  Some reporting on the reporting will help you understand.

One laboratory to examine is the daily press briefing offered by the United States State Department. Just about every weekday either the department’s spokesperson, currently John Kirby – or one of his assistants – enters a small room, set up like a college classroom. The spokesperson strides to the podium, gives a brief overview of travel or other State Department news which has taken place since the previous briefing, and then takes questions from the reporters seated in the room.

The reporters ask about their outlet’s particular areas of interest, usually with respect to some late breaking news, in which the vast State Department plays a role. The  role of State’s spokesperson is to ensure that there is a unified and official “take” on whatever is happening.

National and international media outlets, such as the Associated Press, Reuters, NBC, Fox News and several dozen others, are eligible to be in the room. Somewhere between 10 and 50 reporters attend each briefing.

U.S. State Dept. Press Briefing Room.

U.S. State Dept. Press Briefing Room.

Typical questions of late have been about tensions between Syria and Turkey, or the conflict between Russia and Ukraine. Not surprisingly, many questions over the past months have had to do with the ongoing war in Syria, the rise of ISIS and the west’s coalition to end that conflict.

But there is always one reporter in the room who raises differing versions of the same questions about the same topic. That reporter is Said Arikat, the D.C.-based reporter for the Palestinian Arab news outlet, Al-Quds. The JewishPress.com has reported on Arikat before.

Not surprisingly, Arikat is focused on the Arab-Israeli conflict. But what is surprising — what is, in fact, shocking — is that Arikat raises the question many different ways until he gets the very specific response he’s looking for from the State Department spokesperson. Some times they disappoint him.  Much of the time, they play right into his hands.

The responses Arikat fishes for are ones condemning Israel for any number of incidents – some real, but most exaggerated or entirely misrepresented. Sometimes Arikat is unsuccessful at evoking the response he so obviously desires.

Nonetheless, just asking his long-winded and convoluted questions provides him with the forum to present his version of the plight of the aggrieved Palestinian Arabs. And he does that day in and day out, in a room full of Washington, D.C. based national and international journalists.

Arikat is the Arab lobbyist in the briefing room. His audience is the State Department spokesperson, the elite journalists in the briefing room, and the readers and viewers who consume the news produced by those news outlets.

While Arikat is not always successful,  he is dogged enough, and is successful frequently enough, that he has been singularly responsible for headlines in major national and international media.  Watch how the sausage is actually made:

Here is the exchange between Arikat and State Dept. Spokesperson Kirby, on Wednesday, Dec. 9:

STATE DEPT. SPOKESPERSON KIRBY: Yeah, Said.

SAID ARIKAT: Can I have a couple questions about the Palestinian-Israeli issue? Today there was an article written by Israeli President Rivlin in The Washington Post talking about what Israel must do to sort of to pave the road towards peace and so on. I wonder if you saw it. He talks about the exchange of teachers and so on, maybe alleviating some of the hardships on the Palestinians, maybe look after the neglect of the Arab part of Jerusalem and so on. But he also ends by saying – basically expressing sorrow that he cannot bequeath the coming generations a peace that will endure, but he – they can bequeath some accomplishments and so on. Is that a – sort of – are you disappointed that we talk about coming generations, maybe – could you – another, like, 10, 20, 30 years and so on – is that your reading of what he is saying? Arikat is referring to the editorial discussed in Wednesday’s JewishPress.com. Arikat is laying the groundwork for pushing the Palestinian Arab demand for a Palestinian State.

KIRBY: What I would say is – I mean, even we’ve talked about the need for peace and security for coming generations and for the young children of the area right now that are seeing this violence. That’s no way for these youngsters to grow up. So I think we would share the president’s view that we want peace and security in coming generations. But also – and as the Secretary made very clear on Saturday – just – we talk about coming years, but even over the past several months, we’ve been encouraging all parties to take affirmative steps to reduce the tensions and to demonstrate a genuine commitment to a two-state solution. And again, as the Secretary said over the weekend, we hope both sides are going to make the choices that will advance the prospects for a lasting peace. We recognize how hard this is, but that’s our goal and that hasn’t changed. Kirby’s response is the U.S. mantra of seeking to “encourage” the Israelis and the Palestinian Arabs to move forward, reduce tensions, and express their commitment to a two-state “solution” to the conflict.

ARIKAT: Because today marks the 27th anniversary of the first Palestinian intifada, and basically here we are, like third intifada later and so on, and they still endure under occupation and so on. There seems to be no end in sight for that occupation. So 22 years after negotiations began and so on, you as the broker of these negotiations really have not offered the Palestinians anything tangible in terms of ending the occupation, have they? The poor Palestinian Arabs are languishing, nearly thirty years after the first “intifada.” As if the intifada represents something that the Arabs did which should have entitled them to their own state, and yet, here they are, still, without one. The intifadas, of course, have been concentrated periods of rampant Jew-murdering by Palestinian Arabs. They have included the intentional shootings, homicide bombings, stabbings and mutilation of Jewish Israelis. This, Arikat seeks to convey, should entitle them to a state of their own, and an end to what he calls “the Occupation.”

MR KIRBY: Well, I think I’d rebut a little bit the idea that we’re the broker of negotiations. But what we want is – what we want is for both sides to work this out, to reduce the violence, and to take positive, affirmative steps to get to a two-state solution. That’s what both of them have said they want to see, and so what we want to see is them take the steps necessary to get there. Kirby pushes back, but not on the idea that the Palestinian Arabs are entitled to a state, or that they are under an occupation, or that the intifadas have been something that should merit a reward. No, Kirby doesn’t like the U.S. being referred to as the “broker of negotiations.” That, according to Kirby, is what was inaccurate about Arikat’s dramatic soliloquy.

ARIKAT: And one more – or maybe two more. Yesterday an Israeli court sentenced a Palestinian legislator woman – who’s really quite been a vocal voice on behalf of women’s rights, against extremism, a very progressive person – Khalida Jarrar for 15 months in prison under some sort of really made-up kind of charges of incitement and so on because she refused to leave her home in Ramallah and so on. Is that something that bothers you or disturbs you, that Israel can go and maybe in the middle of the night take someone and put them in prison for sort of trumped-up charges? Really? This is something that a reporter raises in a U.S. State Dept. press briefing?

State Dept Press Pool Suggest Israeli Security Move is ‘Ethnic Cleansing’ and Wrong

Wednesday, October 28th, 2015

In the wake of a wave of vicious brutality unleashed on innocent Israelis by Arab Palestinian terrorists drunk on the lies told them by their political and religious leaders, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu raised the possibility of a serious punishment for the stabbings, shootings and car rammings. The response from some quarters suggest Israelis have no right to self-defense, and should perhaps just turn the other cheek. Wrong religion.

Netanyahu suggested that perhaps it was time to strip Arabs living in eastern Jerusalem of their Israeli identity cards.  Most of the terrorists responsible for the recent violence come from almost exclusively Arab neighborhoods in eastern Jerusalem, such as Shuafat and Jabal Mukaber.

What Netanyahu said when he raised the topic two weeks ago during a cabinet meeting was: “We need to examine the possibility of canceling their residency. There needs to be a discussion about it.”  Such a discussion was necessary, he said, because it is a lawless area, with “no enforcement.”

The cabinet members decided to hold a special session to further discuss the matter.

Meanwhile, in the wake of the public discussion of residency restrictions, some Israelis say the violence has already begun to diminish.

But having raised the issue of the potential restrictive measure at the height of the violence, the story took on a life of its own. Some Arab outlets already announced that the decision was made and Israel decided to withdraw the identity cards of 80,000 Arab residents of eastern Jerusalem.

In the State Department press briefing discussion about this matter on Monday, of course, the message was distorted as well.

Ever-ready to paint Israel as the evil wrongdoer, Al Quds’ journalist Said Arikat asked State Dept. Spokesperson John Kirby about the security measure at Monday’s briefing.

Said Arikat. State Dept. Press Briefing, Oct. 26, 2015.

Said Arikat. State Dept. Press Briefing, Oct. 26, 2015.

Arikat said of the proposed security measure, “stripping 80,000 Palestinian Jerusalemites from their identity card, basically cutting them off outside of the wall,” and Arikat sought a response. “Do you have a comment on that?

That’s fine, Arikat is entitled to ask for a comment.

But then he went one step further: “Does that amount to some sort of ethnic cleansing from Jerusalem?”

This is what Arikat does. He introduces a poisonous phrase into the briefing room, a phrase likely to linger in the ears of those so inclined, a phrase that may very well appear in the reports filed by others in the room. It also spurs others to respond to that image, and to ask questions, and give answers, in light of that phrase permeating the atmosphere.

To his credit, initially the spokesperson declined to respond, uttering those magic talking points of the “expectations of all sides that they’ll avoid provocative actions and rhetoric and being to work cooperatively to restore calm.”

But the press group just couldn’t let it go.

Soon, Brad Klapper of the Associated Press stepped in, taking his cue from Arikat. Klapper, sitting in his elder sidekick Matt Lee’s seat, assumed a mien of incredulity, and asked a question as if he were in a session on Applied Ethics instead of a government briefing room.

Klapper intoned:”But rhetoric aside, just the idea of stripping tens of thousands of people of the right to move about where they currently move about, work where they may currently work, travel where they may currently travel – is that something that – provocative or not, is that something you just oppose because you think it’s wrong?”

Brad Klapper of the Associated Press

Brad Klapper of the Associated Press

Terror, Shmerror, State Dept Only Cares About Two State Holy Grail

Thursday, October 15th, 2015

Several things became clear during Wednesday’s U.S. State Dept. press briefing, the first half of which focused exclusively on the wave of terrorism in Israel.

First, the overriding goal for the United States of America is the creation of a Two State Solution and anything that gets in the way of that is a problem. The Two State Solution is the Holy Grail (as it were) regardless of whether that fixed goal will dramatically increase violence and further destabilize the region or not.

Second, the U.S. State Department despises the fact that increasing numbers of Jews are living beyond the “Green Line,” in Judea and Samaria. The U.S. hates this so much that official policy is to condemn Jews living and breathing in that area at least as much, if not more, than brutal murders of innocent Jewish civilians by Arab terrorists.

Third, the U.S. has so embraced the idea that the Temple Mount “belongs” to the Palestinian Arabs that it casts unarmed, non-hostile Jewish tourists or Israelis who peacefully ascend the Mount as the legitimate cause of savage murders of any Jews, anywhere. The U.S. has jettisoned the fact that Israel re-acquired control of the Temple Mount in a defensive war and simply handed over control of that area to the Arabs, in the hope and belief that members of all religions would have equal access to that site.

Throughout the first half of the Oct. 15 State Dept. press briefing, reporters sought to pin down State Department Spokesperson John Kirby on who and what the U.S. believes is responsible for the recent tsunami of terror in which Jews were shot, stabbed with kitchen knives, hunting knives, butcher knives and rammed with cars by Arab Palestinians.

The violence is condemned by the U.S., although this government refuses to assign primary blame to either party. Young Arab men and women are brutally stabbing Israeli Jews standing at bus stops, boarding buses, walking on Israeli streets? That’s bad, but, as Kirby quoted Secretary of State John Kerry, “there’s disenfranchisement, there’s disgruntlement, there is – there’s frustration on both sides that have led to this [increase in violence].”

Why this reluctance to assign blame? It is because, apparently, anything that diplomats aching for a Two State Solution see as an impediment to their goal is equally bad. This becomes apparent from watching and reading the transcripts of the endless State Dept. briefings in which the issue of terrorism or violence in Israel is raised.

More than a dozen Israeli Jews going about their lives in Israel were stabbed, shot or run over by Arab terrorists in the past few weeks alone. One 17-year old Israeli Jew stabbed four Beduoins in Dimona, Israel. That act was condemned across the spectrum in the Israeli government, including by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

“Israel is a country of law and order. Those who use violence and break the law – from whatever side – will be dealt with to the fullest extent of the law,” said Netanyahu. He added that he “strongly condemns the attack against innocent Arabs.”

When Matt Lee of the Associated Press asked Kirby why it was so important that Secretary Kerry refused to assign blame, the response was:

I think he’s been very clear that he wants both sides to take affirmative actions, both in rhetoric and in action, to de-escalate the tension, to restore calm, and to try to move forward towards a two-state solution. He also recognizes, as a public servant with a long career associated with foreign affairs and the diplomatic relations of this country, that many of these issues are ages old. And when there’s a specific attack such as we’ve seen, we are not shy about calling it out. And as I said last week on – if we believe it’s terrorism, to say it’s terrorism. We’re not shy about that in terms of affixing responsibility for it. But in terms of the general scope of the violence that we’re seeing and the unrest, he’s been very clear that rather than to affix blame specifically on all of that, to try to focus on moving forward and restoring calm.

In other words, specific acts don’t matter, the only thing that matters is the Holy Grail in the distance and the desire to continue moving towards it.

More PA Lobbying from the State Dept Briefing Room

Sunday, April 19th, 2015

Can you imagine if some Jewish reporter for, say, JewishPress.com, repeatedly prodded the State Department spokesperson to provide additional funding to Israel during the daily State Department Press Briefings?

How long do you think something like that would go on before someone, whether from the State Department, one of the other media outlets, or one of the reporter’s employers told the Jewish reporter to stop being so unprofessional or they would be removed from the State Department press briefings?

So what is the deal with Said Arikat?

Why does no one raise an eyebrow when when, month after month, Arikat acts as a lobbyist for the Palestinian Authority instead of a professional journalist? Why is Arikat permitted to whine over the reduction in funding to the PA, and to beg the State Department to intervene?

It happened yet again at the Daily Briefing on Friday, April 17.

This is how the exchange went between the acting State Department Spokesperson, Marie Harf, and Said Arikat (with emphasis added):

ARIKAT: Can I ask you a quick question on the Palestinian issue?

MS HARF: You can.

ARIKAT: Okay. There was a meeting today between the European and American consul generals with the Palestinian prime minister to discuss the financial situation. The Israelis are holding 1.7 billion shekels, or $500 million. But they’re saying that the American consul general suggested that there may be a resolution in the next 24 hours. Are you aware of anything like this?

MS HARF: I’m not going to get into our private conversations. We want there to be a resolution as soon as possible, Said.

ARIKAT: In the event that the funds are not released and they continue to be frozen and more funds are frozen, is there any sort of – like the old days, when you guys used to have a waiver with the government —

MS HARF: “The old days.”

ARIKAT: I mean before, let’s say, a year ago or so —

MS HARF: Okay.

ARIKAT: — when the President had a waiver of some sort to infuse some funds into the PA and save it from collapse as has happened in the past. Is there anything of the sort this time around?

MS HARF: I haven’t heard anything, Said. We think this just needs to be resolved.

So, for at least the sixth time in less than a year, Arikat has transformed the State Department daily press briefings into a lobbying session in which a Palestinian Arab reporter working for a Palestinian Arab media outlet attempts to wheedle money out of the State Department for the Palestinian Authority, and/or uses the opportunity to present a one-sided version of facts about the Middle East to the State Department press corps.

Try to imagine what would happen if someone who was perceived as pro-Israel acted the way Arikat consistently does.

But no one ever calls Arikat on his gross non-professionalism. It is not only grossly unfair because it creates an unbalanced theater in which truth is expected to prevail.

It is also unfair because failing to demand professional behavior from Arikat is a shining example of the soft bigotry of low expectations – something that takes place on a regular basis in the U.S. State Department Daily Press Briefings.

Obama: Netanyahu has to Prove He Supports Two State Solution

Thursday, March 26th, 2015

Once again at the U.S. State Department briefing on Wednesday, March 25, the issue of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s statement regarding the feasibility of creating a Palestinian State during the current period of extreme unrest in the region was a topic.

The issue was raised by Bradley Klapper, of the Associated Press. Klapper asked it of Jen Psaki, whose last day it was as the current State Department Spokesperson.

Bradley Klapper of the Associated Press

Bradley Klapper of the Associated Press

Psaki is leaving the State Department. On April 1 she will begin her new position as the White House communications director. Psaki formerly served as a press secretary to then-senator Barack Obama during his first presidential campaign, and worked in the White House as a deputy communications director.

Klapper was piggy-backing on the briefing room lobbyist for the Palestinian Authority, Said Arikat, who writes for Al Quds newspaper.

Arikat said that during President Obama’s press conference on Tuesday with Afghan President Ashraf Ghani, Obama mentioned “the importance of having a process, a framework, that will lead, ultimately to a two-state solution.”

Arikat.jpgArikat then, as he does so often, prodded for a timetable for a return to the “negotiating table” to impose a Palestinian State on the region.

Psaki, however, demurred, pointing out that Israel had just gone through elections and was in the process of forming its new government. Arikat halfheartedly pushed a bit more, raised several other points ostensibly posed as questions, but barely masking his perpetual attempt to create policy sound bites by repeating words he likes strung together.

At the end of this little soft-shoe duet, AP’s Klapper chooses to pursue Arikat’s point (no doubt to the great delight of Arikat). Klapper referred back to Obama’s Tuesday press conference with Afghanistan’s Ghani. Klapper claimed that the president said he supports the two-state solution, “but that the prime minister thinks otherwise.”

Klapper asked Psaki to explain the government’s understanding regarding Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu’s position on a two-state solution.

The State Department spokesperson, as if she were already speaking for President Obama, ticked off that Netanyahu made some statements before the election and some after, obviously suggesting that Netanyahu had become inconsistent regarding his support for the creation of a Palestinian State.

Psaki said: “We have to see if there is actually a path to make the hard choices towards negotiations, and we don’t know the answer to that yet. So we’ll be looking for actions and policies that demonstrate genuine commitment.”

Klapper, seeking to clarify Psaki’s diplospeak, suggested that what the president was saying, was that the U.S. government no longer is sure whether Israel’s Netanyahu supports a two-state solution.

And then comes the kicker, with Klapper suggesting what Obama is really saying about Netanyahu’s support for a two-state solution: “He has to prove that, essentially.”

To which Psaki responds: “Correct.”

In a room in which there is rarely, and even then, only briefly, any challenges made to the Palestinian Authority’s commitment to living side by side with Israel in peace and security, or any calls for there to be a cessation of the glorification of terrorism and murder of Israeli citizens, the State Department briefing room instead doubles as a star chamber for the Jewish State.

Your tax dollars at work.

Said Says (Falsely): ‘Israel flooding Gaza with Waste Water’

Friday, February 27th, 2015

Once again Said Arikat of the al Quds newspaper used the bully pulpit of the U.S. State Department briefing room to lobby for aid for the Palestinian Authority. But this time he also slandered Israel with an outright lie, stated as fact. And no one corrected him. Where is the voice of truth in the State Department press corps, let alone the State Department?

On Thursday, Feb. 26, Arikat artfully built on a lie that Israel intentionally flooded Gaza by opening dams in the region. That lie has been conclusively disproven – there are no such dams in southern Israel that could be opened to flood Gaza, even if Israel wanted to to that.

Perhaps sensing that some journalists or even the State Dept. Spokesperson herself might have learned that major media outlets such as AFP, MailOnLine and Yahoo! News had to pull their Israeli dam stories because they were proven false, Arikat reached into his bag of tricks and pulled out another (false and disproven, but older so maybe not so fresh in people’s minds) slander against Israel.

Arikat claimed that Israel was intentionally flooding Gaza “farmland” with waste water.

ARIKAT: Okay. And lastly, the Israelis have flooded the areas – farm areas of Gaza with some waste water and so on. Do you have any comment on that? Are you aware —

MS. PSAKI: With some waste?

Arikat: Yeah, waste water, whatever, I don’t know what they call it.

MS. PSAKI: I can check into those reports.

ARIKAT: Could you check? Yes.

MS. PSAKI: I don’t have any confirmation of those.

During the huge rains of 2013, Gazan public officials claimed that Israel was flooding Gaza with waste water. Those were disproven decisively as well.
Over the past month there have been record-breaking rain and snow storms throughout the Middle East, resulting in flooding throughout large swathes of  Lebanon, Jordan, Syria, Turkey, Israel and the disputed territories, as well as Gaza.

If Arikat wants to blame someone for flooding in Gaza, no doubt farmers throughout the region will readily join in, but they won’t find a human to blame.

This latest slander of Israel followed yet another plea by Arikat for more funding to the Palestinian Authority. As if that is something a “journalist” should be ever do at all, and certainly not repeatedly as Arikat does, and most certainly not in a State Department press briefing.

ARIKAT: Very quickly. The Secretary called Mahmoud Abbas yesterday. Could you —

MS. PSAKI: He did. I don’t have a readout of that, Said. I’m happy to – we can get you one after the briefing.

ARIKAT: Okay. Are they taking any measures, because of the – the PA is really on the verge of collapse completely?

MS. PSAKI: As we’ve discussed quite a bit in here.

Maybe Arikat has forgotten he is not supposed to be an advocate.

Arikat used to be a United Nations spokesperson for Iraq. Now he is supposed to be a journalist, one who asks questions during the state department press briefings, not one who pleas for more money for the Palestinian Authority or dresses up mendacious claims as mere questions.

Perhaps some official needs to forcefully remind Arikat he is a journalist or else see that he no longer is allowed to claim to be one.

Printed from: http://www.jewishpress.com/news/breaking-news/said-says-falsely-israel-flooding-gaza-with-waste-water/2015/02/27/

Scan this QR code to visit this page online: