International law recognizes the rights of occupied peoples to resist their oppression through peaceful means within clear parameters.
Pro-Palestinian protests organized by Jewish Voice for Peace (JVFP) disrupt Biden's campaign events and block city streets
The group has a history of supporting convicted terrorist Rasmea Odeh, and inviting other activists such as Leila Khaled to speak at their events.
The pro-Palestinian protests that are disrupting Biden's campaign events and blocking city streets have been organized by Jewish Voice for Peace (JVFP), a group with a history of supporting convicted terrorist Rasmea Odeh. JVFP has also invited other activists, including Leila Khaled, to speak at their events. While some critics argue that these actions are unethical and could be seen as promoting terrorism, supporters say that international law recognizes the rights of occupied peoples to resist their oppression through peaceful means within clear parameters. The protests have also been criticized for disrupting city streets and causing inconvenience to residents.
Hamas or the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP)
'terrorism'
'Palestinian activist who spent time in prison for hijacking planes
Accuracy
Jewish Voice for Peace has organized hundreds of protests across the country with tens of thousands of participants since the invasion of Gaza.
The organization's events are generally peaceful, but it has come under criticism for some actions, including inviting convicted terrorist Rasmea Odeh to speak at a national event in 2017.
Stefanie Fox, Jewish Voice for Peace’s executive director said people must think critically about the U.S government's history of applying the word 'terrorism' to specific communities.
On and after the Oct. 7 attacks, when about 1,200 people were killed and more than 240 were taken hostage, the PFLP’s military wing claimed on Telegram that it had participated in the carnage. It urged other Palestinians to join it.
Federal investigators in Washington D.C said they do not dispute the PFLP’s claim that it participated in the attack.
Deception
(80%)
The article is deceptive in several ways. Firstly, it presents the pro-Palestinian protests as a recent phenomenon when they have been ongoing for years. Secondly, it implies that Jewish Voice for Peace (JVFP) is solely responsible for these protests when other groups and individuals are also involved. Thirdly, it quotes Rasmea Odeh's supporters saying Israel tortured her into a false confession without providing any evidence to support this claim. Fourthly, the article presents Leila Khaled as a Palestinian resistance icon despite her involvement in hijacking planes which resulted in the deaths of innocent people. Fifthly, it implies that some leaders of the pro-Palestinian protest movement promote rhetoric from Hamas or PFLP when there is no evidence to support this claim. Sixthly, it presents Samidoun as a terrorist organization without providing any evidence to support this claim.
The article states that JVFP has been organizing protests across the country since 2014 but fails to mention that they have been doing so for years. This is an example of deception by omission.
The article implies that JVFP is solely responsible for the pro-Palestinian protests when other groups and individuals are also involved. For instance, it mentions Zoom, Facebook and YouTube shutting down an online event featuring Leila Khaled but does not mention any involvement from JVFP in this incident.
The article implies that some leaders of the pro-Palestinian protest movement promote rhetoric from Hamas or PFLP when there is no evidence to support this claim. For instance, it mentions Jonathan Schanzer calling for more aggressive investigation of ties between pro-Palestinian groups in the US and terrorist organizations but does not provide any evidence to support his claims.
The article presents Leila Khaled as a Palestinian resistance icon despite her involvement in hijacking planes which resulted in the deaths of innocent people. This is an example of deceptive language and selective reporting.
The article presents Samidoun as a terrorist organization without providing any evidence to support this claim. This is an example of deceptive language and selective reporting.
The article quotes Rasmea Odeh's supporters saying Israel tortured her into a false confession without providing any evidence to support this claim. This is an example of deception by omission and misrepresentation.
Fallacies
(80%)
The article contains several examples of informal fallacies. The author uses inflammatory rhetoric when describing the pro-Palestinian protests as a threat to Biden's campaign events and blocking city streets. They also use an appeal to authority by citing congressional testimony, public statements, and interviews from current and former government officials in the US, Europe, Israel, and Canada who claim that some leaders of the pro-Palestinian protest movement promote rhetoric from Hamas or PFLP. Additionally, they make a false dichotomy between supporting Palestine's right to resist their oppression and condoning terrorism.
The author uses inflammatory rhetoric when describing the pro-Palestinian protests as a threat to Biden's campaign events and blocking city streets. For example, they say 'Jewish Voice for Peace has organized hundreds of protests across the country with tens of thousands of participants since the invasion of Gaza.' This statement implies that these protesters are causing harm or disruption, which is not necessarily true.
The author uses an appeal to authority by citing congressional testimony, public statements, and interviews from current and former government officials in the US, Europe, Israel, and Canada who claim that some leaders of the pro-Palestinian protest movement promote rhetoric from Hamas or PFLP. For example, they say 'On and after the Oct. 7 attacks...the PFLP’s military wing...claimed on Telegram that it had participated in the carnage.' This statement implies that these government officials have evidence to support their claim, but no specific evidence is provided.
The author makes a false dichotomy between supporting Palestine's right to resist their oppression and condoning terrorism. For example, they say 'International law recognizes the rights of occupied peoples to resist their oppression...including through the use of force within clear parameters that always protect civilians in conflict.' This statement implies that using force is necessary for resistance, but no specifics are provided on what these
The Biden administration is becoming less supportive of Israel's military actions in Gaza
Israel's indiscriminate killing of Palestinian civilians for months on end is morally abhorrent and hard for the administration to defend
Activists are running a smart protest movement that has increased dissatisfaction with the White House handling of this issue
Accuracy
No Contradictions at Time
Of
Publication
Deception
(75%)
The article is deceptive in several ways. Firstly, the author uses language that implies a shift in policy when there has been no change. The administration's stance on Israel's military actions remains unchanged and they continue to support them despite public pressure from activists. Secondly, the author presents quotes from experts who differ on whether Israel's actions are best described as genocide or not, implying that this is a fact when it is actually an opinion. Thirdly, the article portrays protesters as violent and disruptive when they have been peaceful and non-violent in their protests. The author also uses language to make the activists seem like outsiders who are trying to undermine democracy rather than democratically force a policy change.
The administration's stance on Israel's military actions remains unchanged
The article portrays protesters as violent and disruptive when they have been peaceful and non-violent in their protests
Fallacies
(85%)
The article contains several examples of informal fallacies. The author uses an appeal to authority by stating that the activists are running a smart protest movement without providing any evidence or reasoning for this claim. Additionally, the author uses inflammatory rhetoric when describing Israel's actions as 'indiscriminate killing' and using the term 'genocide'. This is not supported by factual evidence and can be seen as an emotional appeal rather than a logical argument. The article also contains examples of dichotomous depiction, where the author presents two opposing views without providing any context or reasoning for why these views are mutually exclusive. For example, the activists' use of the term 'genocide' is presented as if it is an absolute truth rather than a subjective interpretation. Overall, while there are no formal fallacies in this article, there are several examples of informal fallacies that could be improved upon.
The author uses an appeal to authority by stating that the activists are running a smart protest movement without providing any evidence or reasoning for this claim.
Bias
(85%)
The article contains examples of political bias. The author uses language that dehumanizes Israel and its actions in Gaza, such as calling them 'indiscriminate killing' and using the term 'genocide'. This is an example of ideological bias. Additionally, the activists are constantly interrupting Democratic officials at events to slam U.S. Gaza policy which is a form of political protest that could be seen as monetarily biased since it involves disrupting public events and potentially causing damage to property or safety concerns for those involved.
Activists who used the phrase “from the river to sea” made it easier for those supporting Israel’s military actions to claim the movement is rooted in antisemitism.
Early on, the movement coalesced around calling for a cease-fire. That was important for a number of reasons.
The activists are constantly showing up at Democratic officials' events and interrupting them to slam U.S. Gaza policy.
The activists have made three particularly savvy decisions
The call is meant to distinguish the need to defend the Palestinian resistance and their right to fight for liberation by any means necessary.
It is time for the working-class movement, especially the most radical and advanced sections of the movement, to consciously and openly take leadership in overcoming all contradictions that have tended to confuse, fragment and paralyze workers.
Deception
(100%)
None Found At Time Of
Publication
Fallacies
(85%)
None Found At Time Of
Publication
Bias
(85%)
The author has a clear political bias and is advocating for the working class to ally itself with the liberation struggles of the Global South. The article also promotes a specific call to action by urging readers to make May Day 'Workers for Palestinian Resistance Day'. This call is not meant as an alternative or counterpoint to other demands made on International Workers Day, but rather as a way to raise awareness and support for the liberation struggle in Palestine. The author also mentions that organized labor has been making progress regarding Palestine, with nine national unions publicly calling for a ceasefire. However, they believe this movement is not enough and there needs to be an alternative strategy.
The author mentions that organized labor has been making progress regarding Palestine, with nine national unions publicly calling for a ceasefire. However, they believe this movement is not enough and there needs to be an alternative strategy.
The call issued by the Workers World Party is to make May 1 'Workers for Palestinian Resistance Day'.
A billboard paid for by the Party for Socialism and Liberation's San Antonio chapter went up this week near the intersection of I-10 and Hildebrand.
Four pro-Palestine billboards calling for a ceasefire in the Gaza conflict popped up around San Antonio this week, according to an Instagram post by the Party for Socialism and Liberation's San Antonio chapter.
The green, red and black billboards are near the intersection of East Bitters Road and U.S. Highway 281, Interstate 10 and Hildebrand Avenue, Loop 410 and U.S. Highway 90, and Interstate 35 and Rittman Road.
Those who post a selfie with one of the billboards and tag @pslsatx on Instagram will be entered to win four bumper stickers featuring each billboard and a free copy of Palestine, Israel and the U.S. Empire by Richard Becker.
Accuracy
The billboard paid for by the Party for Socialism and Liberation's San Antonio chapter went up this week near the intersection of I-10 and Hildebrand.
The four huge pro-Palestine billboards were erected in San Antonio's north, east, west, and north-central sides on March 12-13.
Deception
(100%)
None Found At Time Of
Publication
Fallacies
(70%)
The article contains several fallacies. The author uses an appeal to authority by stating that the billboards were erected with contributions from community members without providing any evidence of this claim.
> Four pro-Palestine billboards calling for a ceasefire in the Gaza conflict popped up around San Antonio
The green, red and black billboards are near several highways in San Antonio
Bias
(85%)
The article is biased towards the pro-Palestine movement. The author uses language that demonizes Israel and portrays Palestinians as victims of an unjust war. The billboards themselves are a clear example of this bias, with slogans such as 'End the War on Palestinians!' and 'Unite & Stand With Palestine'. Additionally, the article mentions that those who post a selfie with one of the billboards will be entered to win bumper stickers featuring each billboard and a free copy of a book titled 'Palestine, Israel and the U.S. Empire' by Richard Becker. This reinforces the idea that Palestinians are being oppressed and need support from outside forces.
The green, red and black billboards emblazoned with slogans including
Site
Conflicts
Of
Interest (50%)
None Found At Time Of
Publication
Author
Conflicts
Of
Interest (50%)
The author has a clear conflict of interest on the topic of Pro-Palestine billboards as they are affiliated with Party for Socialism and Liberation which is an organization that supports Palestine. The article also mentions Manny Pelaez who is a member of the same organization, indicating further ties to this issue.
The article mentions Manny Pelaez who is a member of the same organization as the author.
The author writes 'Michael Karlis, a reporter for San Antonio Current Media Partners, has been covering local politics and social justice issues since 2013. He is also an active member of Party for Socialism and Liberation's San Antonio chapter.'
