Today's Top Islamic News (DAILY)

[Shades]

CAIRO — Taliban leader Mullah Omar has reportedly gave his blessings for peace talks with the West-backed government of President Hamid Karzai to end eight years of military conflict that tore the Asian Muslim state to shreds. "Mullah Omar has given the green light to talks," Abdullah Anas, a key mediator in the talks, told the Sunday Times March 15.

Anas, a former Algerian militant who fought in Afghanistan against the Soviet occupation forces, said Omar has sent his representatives to secret talks which the Kabul regime.

He said Saudi Arabia, which has voiced readiness to help bring the two warring parties together, is leading the mediation efforts.

Taliban was ousted by the US shortly after the 9/11 attacks.

It has ever since been engaged in protracted guerrilla warfare against US-led foreign forces and the Kabul government.

The Karzai government confirmed the dialogue reports.

"It’s extremely sensitive but we have been in contact both with Mullah Omar’s direct representatives and commanders from the front line," said Qayum Karzai, the president's brother and one of the government negotiators.

President Karzai has been pushing for talks with Taliban and he has offered a safe passage for Mullah Omar if he accepted his calls for dialogue.

The UN, Pakistan and several Western countries have signaled support for engaging Taliban to restore stability in war-ravaged Afghanistan.

US President Barack Obama last week joined this camp, calling for talks with moderate Taliban. "I can tell you Obama’s words have created enormous optimism," said Qayum.

Realistic

Anas says the secret talks have been making inroads.

"A big, big step has happened…For the first time there is a language of talk and a language of peace on both sides."

Qayum said both the government and Taliban has come to the realization that they could not achieve their goals through war only.

"There is no other way left but talks," he contends.

"Frankly, for both sides war has exhausted its options to reach their desired results."

Anas stressed that though Taliban has achieve some success, they could not retake power again by war.

"Taliban are in a strong position now but that doesn’t mean they can control the state," he added.

"They are well aware that it’s a different situation to 1996 when they swept to power because Afghans saw them as bringing peace."

A recent report by the Senlis Council think-tank said Taliban has permanent presence in more than half of Afghanistan.

Qayum, the government negotiator, says Taliban has eased its opposition to talks.

"The Taliban realize that war will not achieve their ideological or political aims.

"I find them quite realistic. "

Source: IslamOnline

[Shades]

By Kim Ghattas
BBC News, Washington

Charles Freeman (Picture: Middle East Policy Council)
Mr Freeman accused pro-Israel groups of waging a campaign against him

The undoing of Charles Freeman, who had been nominated as the next chairman of the US National Intelligence Council, is continuing to draw a barrage of reactions from a surprisingly diverse range of corners.

Chinese dissidents, former American ambassadors and intelligence officials have all weighed in, as the debate continues over whether Mr Freeman was brought down by his views on Israel.

An outspoken former ambassador to Riyadh, Mr Freeman found himself at the centre of a growing controversy about his views on Israel, China and Tibet while the campaign against him, first online and then on Capitol Hill kept growing.

On Tuesday, 10 March, his soon-to-be boss, Dennis Blair, defended his choice in Congress. Later that afternoon, Mr Blair's office sent out a note announcing that Mr Freeman was withdrawing his nomination.

Mr Freeman sent out an acerbic letter, accusing the "Israel Lobby" of "plumbing the depths of dishonour and indecency", using "character assassination" and controlling policy by vetoing people who disagreed with them.

'Deeply insulted'

In an interview with the BBC, Mr Freeman then said he regretted the use of the words "Israel Lobby" saying the campaign had been waged by specific groups aligned with rightwing factions in Israel which he described as the "Likud or (Avigdor) Lieberman lobby".

Mr Freeman's letter was pounced on by his critics, and others, who said it proved their point

Israel row derails Obama nominee

But he stood by his accusations about a campaign waged against him, saying it was a transparent one for which the Zionist Organisation of America had openly claimed credit.

ZOA's president Morton Klein told the BBC it was "nonsense, rubbish to say all the pro-Israel organisations were making an issue about him".

"We were the only ones on Capitol Hill raising concerns about him," he said.

Mr Freeman added he felt "deeply insulted having been attacked for representing foreign interests by someone who is himself under indictment for espionage for a foreign government".

'Grotesque libel'

One of those leading the campaign against Mr Freeman online had been Steve Rosen, a former official from the powerful pro-Israel lobby Aipac who was indicted in the US in 2005, along with a colleague, for violating the Espionage Act by "giving national security information to persons not entitled to receive it".

Lone students stops tanks in Tiannamen Square 1989
Mr Freeman sent a controversial email about the Chinese government's suppression of protests

Mr Freeman's letter was pounced on by his critics, and others, who said it proved their point. In its editorial following his withdrawal, the Washington Post described it as "grotesque libel".

Republican congressman Frank Wolfe also wrote in the Post on Saturday that "while the reports of Freeman's public statements first raised my concern about his suitability to be chairman of the National Intelligence Council, his words after his withdrawal crystallised exactly why Freeman was the wrong choice for the job".

Few people dispute that pro-Israel lobbyists were the driving force in the campaign against Mr Freeman, but some observers believe that if his views on Israel had been the only controversial thing about him, it would not have been enough to bring him down.

Mr Wolfe wrote that he had not been contacted by any pro-Israel lobby group and that his concerns were mainly about Mr Freeman's views on China and Tibet and his ties to foreign governments.

'Tiananmen Square' email

Mr Freeman served on the advisory board of the state-owned China National Offshore Oil Corp (CNOOC) for which he was paid $10,000 a year.

He was also the president of the Middle East Policy Council, which received funding from Saudi Arabia. He resigned from the positions before accepting the nomination for the NIC job and says there was nothing improper about either position.

But in an e-mail he sent a few years ago and which has become public, Mr Freeman said that he found plausible "the dominant view in China" which stated that the real mistake of the authorities was not the crackdown on protestors on Tiananmen Square in 1989 but the fact they had not nipped the demonstrations in the bud.

He goes on to say that no government would allow the heart of its capital to be occupied by dissidents and ends his mail by stating "I thus share the hope of the majority in China that no Chinese government will repeat the mistakes of Zhao Ziyang's dilatory tactics of appeasement in dealing with domestic protesters in China."

'Indefensible'

The comments are read widely as justification of the Chinese government's action but Mr Freeman insisted he was reading facts and predicting outcomes, adding that empathy is key to analysis.

Freeman belongs to the camp that's the mortal enemy of the neoconservatives: the realists. Realist ideology pays no attention to moral differences between states
Jonathan Chait
Editor, The New Republic

"I'm not justifying, I'm describing it. There's a difference between analysis and policy. Analysis is an effort to understand the facts and the motivations of those who are creating the facts, Chinese demonstrators or leaders, and then explain that to those who must make decisions about what to do about it."

His comments on Tibet also drew fire from speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, who reportedly described them as "indefensible".

In 2007, Mr Freeman had said that the American and European posturing on the issue of Tibet would lead to a long term clampdown by the Chinese. He said he didn't mean to say that the West should stay quiet but that it should expect a Chinese reaction.

The way Mr Freeman's expresses his views led to criticism that he was an ultra-realist, unconcerned about human rights.

'Blind to moral dimensions'

"Freeman belongs to the camp that's the mortal enemy of the neoconservatives: the realists. Realist ideology pays no attention to moral differences between states," wrote Jonathan Chait, editor of The New Republic.

"(They) are the mirror image of neoconservatives in that they are completely blind to the moral dimensions of international politics."

Mr Freeman said he took it as a compliment.

"It is an extraordinary accusation to accuse someone whose job is analysis of the sin of objectivity. If you already know what the answer ought to be and then voice it, why go through the pretence of analysis at all," said Mr Freeman.

"The notion that somehow analysis should bend itself to what is politically expedient is precisely the issue we need to crack."

Self-censorship

The episode has indeed raised some concern inside the intelligence community.

In an article for Foreign Policy, entitled How to Discourage the Speaking of Truth to Power, former CIA officer Paul Pillar wrote that he remained convinced that "enforcement of political orthodoxy about US policy towards Israel" was at the heart of the affair and the message to intelligence officers was clear - "their work will be acceptable only if it conforms to dominant policy views".

Mr Pillar ends by saying that the next time the intelligence community fails in its job, the way it did on Iraq's WMD's, people in Congress and elsewhere should ask themselves "how they could expect intelligence officers to show superlative courage in bucking political orthodoxy when they showed so little themselves".

In his letter, Mr Freeman also said the affair "will be seen by many to raise serious questions about whether the Obama administration will be able to make its own decisions about the Middle East and related issues".

But a DC-based advocate on Arab issues said that people like him and others working on Arab and Palestinian issues should learn from the episode and maintain a pragmatic attitude.

"Freeman was very vocal and very strident about Israel, he really identified with the Palestinians and Arabs in particular. For him it was a case of- support the Palestinians and stand against the Israelis," said the advocate who wished to remain anonymous because of the sensitivity of the issue.

"But if you approach it like that, as a zero sum game, the zero will always be for us (Arabs), we cannot win. If we want to make progress, we have to be pragmatic."

He added that people should not conclude that "they should self-censor on the issue of Israel. What matters is how you criticise and what are your other alignments and associations. It's a good lesson."

[Shades]

MUMBAI: The lone suspect captured by police during militants’ attacks on Mumbai in November expressed remorse and wept while being questioned soon after his arrest, a newspaper reported yesterday.

Pakistani national Mohammed Ajmal Amir Iman, also known as Qasab, said his father forced him to join a hard-line commando unit to earn money for the family, the Mumbai Mirror newspaper reported, quoting a police transcript.

The newspaper, which gave no details about how it obtained the transcript, said it was a verbatim account of Qasab’s questioning for about an hour after his arrest.

“My father told me we will get lots of money. We would be able to live like other rich people,” Qasab allegedly said in the transcript translated from Hindi and Urdu.

Qasab, 21, is in Indian police custody and faces trial for murder and “waging war against India.” Mumbai police declined comment on the report, in which one policeman was quoted as telling Qasab that, “Crying like this will not help. The people who lost their lives, they were poor and innocent, like you.” Qasab, accused of being part of a 10-man group that killed 165 people in a 60-hour killing spree in Mumbai, allegedly belonged to the banned Pakistan-based group Lashkar-e-Taiba. Nine gunmen were killed by Indian commandos during the attacks.

Qasab wept several times during the police interrogation, saying he did not know the meaning of jihad (holy war), according to the newspaper.

“What jihad? I do not know what it means. How do I explain? God will not forgive me,” he was reported to have said when asked about the deadly mission.

According to the newspaper’s account of the police transcript, Qasab, along with a group of 25 people, had been trained in Pakistani militant camps since December 2007.

“We were told as long as you are alive, 'Kill as many people as you can,’” Qasab was quoted as saying, adding those being trained for the mission were promised hundreds of thousands of rupees. “They used to praise us, give us lavish lunches. They told us the job would send us to heaven, people would respect us,” he said, adding that his father introduced him to the militant group and “told us our poverty would disappear.” Qasab was arrested on Nov. 26. His case has been adjourned until March 23.

Both Lashkar-e-Taiba and Pakistan have denied any involvement in the attacks but Islamabad did admit recently that the strikes were partly planned on its soil. ¬
Source: Arab News

[Shades]

Iraqi jailed for Bush shoe attack
Muntadar al-Zaidi (file image)
Mr Zaidi's lawyers say he was making a legitimate protest

An Iraqi journalist hailed as a hero in the Arab world for throwing his shoes at the then US President George W Bush has been jailed for three years.

Muntadar al-Zaidi had told the court his actions in December were "natural, just like any Iraqi" against a leader whose forces had occupied his country.

Shoe hurling is a grave insult in Arab culture, but Mr Bush - on a farewell trip to Iraq - shrugged off the attack.

Defence lawyers described the sentence as "harsh" and said they would appeal.

The head of Zaidi's team Dhiaa al-Saadi said the sentence was "not in harmony with the law" because his client had not meant to cause injury, but rather to express contempt for Mr Bush.

There has been no statement about the verdict from the Iraqi government of Prime Minister Nouri Maliki, which correspondents say suffered acute embarrassment over the incident.

'Response to occupation'

The BBC's Mike Sergeant who was at Thursday's court hearing says relatives and supporters of the defendant came to court expecting him to be released.

Asked by presiding judge Abdul-Amir al-Rubaie if he was innocent or guilty, Zaidi replied: "I am innocent. What I did was a natural response to the occupation."

After the final arguments by the defence lawyers, everyone was told to leave the room. The judges deliberated for a further 15 minutes, and an increasingly frustrated crowd gathered outside.

When news of the sentence filtered through, some relatives began to cry and scream insults at the judges.

They shouted "It's an American court", "He's a hero", "Down with President Bush" and "God is great".

Footage of the shoe hurling incident

One report says Zaidi shouted "long live Iraq" as the verdict against him was read out.

In mid-December 2008, a news conference with Mr Bush and Mr Maliki was drawing to a close when Zaidi, of al-Baghdadiya TV, called Mr Bush "a dog" and threw his shoes as "a farewell kiss" from Iraqis who had been killed, orphaned or widowed since the US-led invasion.

He was overpowered and arrested. His actions were condemned by the Iraqi government as "shameful".

But the shoe attack, at a the globally televised news conference, were celebrated across the world by critics of the the outgoing US president who ordered the 2003 invasion of the Iraq.

In an opinion poll carried out for the BBC and ABC - the full results of which appear next Monday - 62% of Iraqis considered Zaidi a "hero".

Twenty-four percent of the sample viewed him as "criminal", while 10% agreed he was a hero and criminal equally.

Lesser charge

Since his arrest, his lawyers say Zaidi has been beaten and tortured, although he appeared in good shape at court hearings.

Defence lawyers had argued that since the shoes did not hit Mr Bush, Zaidi should not be charged with assault against a foreign head of state on an official visit, under article of 223 of Iraq's penal code.


I had the feeling that the blood of innocent people was dropping on my feet during the time that he was smiling and coming to say bye-bye to Iraq with a dinner
Muntadar al-Zaidi

Bush shoe-ing worst Arab insult
Profile: Shoe-throwing journalist
In pictures: 'Shoe-thrower' support
He faced five-to-15 years if jailed for that crime, but would only have risked one-to-five years if charged with attempted assault of a foreign leader.

There has been no confirmation from the court, but it appears Zaidi was found guilty of the lesser charge.

Judges adjourned the trial on 19 February to rule on whether Mr Bush's surprise arrival in Baghdad in December had constituted an official visit.

Judge Abdulamir Hassan al-Rubaie told the court that government ministers had declared the visit official.

Lawyers had unsuccessfully argued that Zaidi should be tried under article 227 of the penal code, covering public humiliation of a representative of a foreign country, which carries a two-year jail term.

At the earlier court hearing, Zaidi said he had been unable to control his emotions when Mr Bush had said in Arabic "thank you very much" to the assembled journalists.

"I had the feeling that the blood of innocent people was dropping on my feet during the time that he was smiling and coming to say bye-bye to Iraq with a dinner," he said.

In an interview afterwards, Mr Bush described the incident as "interesting", "weird" and "unusual", but he insisted he didn't harbour any ill feeling about it.

"It was amusing - I've seen a lot of weird things during my presidency, and this may rank up there as one of the weirdest," Mr Bush said.

[Shades]

The Bush administration's treatment of al Qaeda prisoners 'constituted torture' in violation of international law, a Red Cross secret report says.

The Washington Post reported on Monday that the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) revealed the case from the long-concealed 2007 document.

The report, an account alleging physical and psychological brutality inside CIA "black site" prisons, also states that some US practices amounted to "cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment," said the paper.

Such maltreatment of detainees is expressly prohibited by the Geneva Conventions, according to the newspaper.

The findings were based on an investigation by ICRC officials, who were granted exclusive access to the CIA's "high-value" detainees after they were transferred in 2006 to the US detention camp at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

The 14 detainees, who had been kept in isolation in CIA prisons overseas, gave remarkably uniform accounts of abuse that included beatings, sleep deprivation, extreme temperatures and, in some cases, waterboarding, or simulating drowning.

The newspaper said a copy of the report was obtained by Mark Danner, a journalism professor who published extensive excerpts in the April 9 edition of the New York Review of Books, released on Sunday.

"The ill-treatment to which they were subjected while held in the CIA program, either singly or in combination, constituted torture," Danner quoted the report as saying.

The article said Danner did not say how he obtained the report.

The CIA declined to comment. A US official familiar with the report said, "It is important to bear in mind that the report lays out claims made by the terrorists themselves."

Former US president George W. Bush acknowledged the use of coercive interrogation tactics on top al-Qaeda captives detained by the CIA in the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks. In 2007, Bush certified that the CIA's interrogation program complied with the Geneva Conventions.

The anti-terrorism policies of the Bush administration faced global condemnation for violations of human rights and international law.

AGB/DT

[Shades]

Students protest France anti-hijab law
Mon, 16 Mar 2009 11:34:01 GMT
Muslim students have held demonstrations in Paris on the fifth anniversary of the banning of the Muslim headscarf in French schools.

The protesters, mostly Muslim girls with hijab, described the "French law on secularity and conspicuous religious symbols in schools" as racial discrimination saying people should be free to choose their dress code.

The law, which is an amendment to the French Code of Education separating state and religious activities, bans students from wearing religious symbols in schools.

France's national legislature passed the controversial bill and President Jacques Chirac signed it into law on March 15, 2004 and it came into effect on September 2, 2004, at the beginning of the new school year.

Many say the bill contradicts court decisions that had allowed students to wear religious signs, as long as they did not amount to "proselytizing".

Although the law does not mention any particular symbol, it is widely believed that it targets Muslims' headscarves.

HE/DT

[Shades]

Russian strategic bombers in Venezuela
Mon, 16 Mar 2009 06:22:46 GMT
Venezuela hosted two Russian Tu-160 bombers last September
President Hugo Chavez says Venezuela would allow Russian strategic bombers to use the nation's closest airfield to the US whenever Moscow needs it.

"I told President (Dmitry) Medvedev that any time Russia's strategic aviation needs to make a stop in Venezuela as part of its strategic plans, Venezuela is available," said Chavez.

He made the remarks during his weekly program on Sunday after a top Russian military official earlier talked about basing some Russian bombers in Latin America.

Maj. Gen. Anatoly Zhikharev, the chief of staff of Russia's long range aviation, said on Saturday that Venezuela had offered the use of a military airfield on La Orchila island as a temporary base.

The Venezuelan president ruled out permanent facilities, saying that "they keep on saying that I offered La Orchila to the Russians, you know that is not true."

According to Chavez, Venezuela may expand a military base on the Caribbean island of La Orchila, about 110 miles (180 km) off the South American country's central coast.

La Orchila is already home to a small military base, including helicopter landing pads and docks, as well as a presidential residence.

Caracas and Moscow have recently been boosting their military relations. The developments, reminding the cold war area, came after Washington's decision to install a strategic missile shield in Eastern Europe, Poland and the Czech Republic.

Last year, Russia temporarily based a pair of Tu-160 bombers at an airbase in Venezuela. Each aircraft is capable of carrying 12 cruise missiles that can be fitted with nuclear warheads.

In November, Russian warships held joint maneuvers in Venezuela with the Venezuelan Navy.

[Shades]

KUALA LUMPUR — A Malaysian Islamic court upheld on Monday, March 16, a decision allowing a female convert to return to her original faith, Hinduism, on the basis that she has never been a Muslim.

"She has never followed any aspect of the Islamic teachings and has been living a non-Muslim lifestyle right from the day of her conversion," Penang state Shari`ah Appeal Court Judge Ibrahim Lembut said in a ruling cited by Reuters.

"It is clear from the evidence that she converted to Islam just for the sake of marrying an Iranian man," Ibrahim said.

Siti Fatimah Tan Abdullah, a 39-year-old ethnic Chinese woman formerly known as Tan Ean Huang, converted to Islam in 1998 in order to marry her Muslim Iranian lover.

Non-Muslims must convert before they can legally marry a Muslim in Malaysia, where Muslim Malays form about 60 percent of the 27-million population.

The couple married in 2004, but after a short period she broke up with her husband.

In 2006, she filed a request to return to her original faith, Buddhism, stressing she has never practiced Islam.

In May 2008, a Shari`ah court ruled in her favor but the Penang Islamic Religious Council (MAIPP) appealed.

But the Shari`ah Appeal Court upheld the original verdict.

"She never intended to become a Muslim in the first place," said Judge Ibrahim.

The court ordered the MAIPP to revoke Tan's registration certificate that declared her as a Muslim.

Christians make up around 9.1 percent of the population, including a Catholic population of nearly 800,000.

Buddhists and Hindus constitute 19.2 and 6.3 percent of the population respectively.

* Unique

The plaintiff expressed her satisfaction with the court ruling.

"I am very happy that this is finally over," she told reporters outside the court house.

"It has been a long struggle."

The MAIPP also endorsed the ruling, which it said confirmed the status quo in Malaysia, where religious courts operate in parallel to civil courts.

But it stressed that this ruling does not mean any change in the country's ban of Muslim conversion.

"The original decision gave the impression that one could simply convert out of Islam. So now it is clear this is not the case," MAIPP lawyer Ahmad Munawar Abdul Aziz told reporters.

"In this case, the court has made it clear that this was a unique case where her
conversion itself was invalid," he explained.

"So this removes the fear among the Muslim community that conversions may be subject to review."
Source: IslamOnline

[Shades]

Clinton asks EU to help shut Gitmo
Mon, 16 Mar 2009 22:38:30 GMT
Hillary Clinton
US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has asked European countries to assist in the closure of the notorious Guantanamo detention camp.

Clinton said on Monday that Washington's decision to close down the camp in Cuba followed transatlantic calls from European countries to end the imprisonment of inmates there.

Stressing that European officials should allow the transfer of inmates to their countries, Clinton said that the closure of Guantanamo Bay prison, "Certainly is something that Europe, from one end to the other, called upon us to do… So we would hope to have the cooperation of European governments."

"It is clear that we will need help, because many of the detainees cannot safely, for themselves or others, be sent back to the countries from which they came," DPA quoted her as saying during a press conference in Washington with Irish Foreign Minister Michael Martin.

Europe had frequently called upon former US President George W. Bush to end the violation of human rights in Guantanamo.

European states are divided over the transfer of detainees, with some saying that the prisoners should be sent back to their countries and some saying they should be sent to the US. In addition, some countries have expressed a willingness to consider US transfer requests, while others have ruled out taking prisoners.

American and European authorities are in discussion to determine the future of the 245 captives who had been arrested without charge in the Bush era.

ARQN/MMA

[Shades]

CAIRO — Sparking a new controversy over its coverage of the Middle East conflict, the BBC, the world's biggest broadcaster, has banned a play critical of Israel's deadly war in Gaza. "It is a no, I am afraid," Jeremy Howe, Radio 4's drama commissioning editor, said in an e-mail cited by the Guardian on Monday, March 16.

Howe said that the "Seven Jewish Children" play by Caryl Churchill was a "brilliant piece".

"But after discussing it with editorial policy we have decided we cannot run with it on the grounds of impartiality," he said.

"I think it would be nearly impossible to run a drama that counters Caryl Churchill's view.

"Having debated long and hard we have decided we can't do Seven Jewish Children."

The 10-minute play, which recently finished a short run at the Royal Court theater, features members of a Jewish family instructing children about how to view violence.

The seven-scene play cites seven major moments in Israel's history from the Holocaust, the first Palestinian intifada to Israel's 22-day war in Gaza.

"I wouldn't care if we wiped them out," one of the character says on the stage.

Israeli troops killed more than 1,350 people, mostly civilians, and wounded 5,450 in 22 days of air, land and sea attacks in Gaza late December.

The onslaught wrecked havoc on the infrastructure, leaving nearly 20,000 homes and thousands of other buildings damaged.

"It came out of feeling strongly about what's happening in Gaza — it's a way of helping the people there," Churchill has said of the play.

"Everyone knows about Gaza, everyone is upset about it, and this play is something they could come to. It's a political event, not just a theater event."

Controversy

The BBC defended the decision not to broadcast the play.

"This play was not commissioned and no indication was given it would be broadcast," it said in a statement.

"After due consideration, we felt it would not work for our audience."

BBC sources said the play was shunned to avoid a new controversy after the world's biggest broadcaster survived a recent onslaught of criticism for refusal to broadcast an aid appeal for Gaza.

Last month, the BBC came under fire for refusing to air an aid appeal by a coalition of charities to raise funds for the 1.6 million people of Gaza following the Israeli war.

The BBC, a publically-funded broadcaster, argued that airing the fund-raising appeal could compromise its impartiality.

The BBC's news coverage of the Middle East has repeatedly provoked controversy among commentators in Britain.

In 2006, a report by the BBC's board of governors found that the BBC's coverage of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict is "inconsistent, incomplete and misleading", failing to adequately report the hardships of Palestinians living under occupation.

Source: IslamOnline