Note: Where available, the PDF/Word icon below is provided to view the complete and fully formatted document
Disclaimer: The Parliamentary Library does not warrant the accuracy of closed captions. These are derived automatically from the broadcaster's signal.
Cutting Edge -

View in ParlView

(generated from captions) rocked by eleven suicide bombings. MAN: March, 2002. Israel was were killed, 570 wounded. 87 Israeli men, women and children Israel responded with attacks terrorist strongholds against Palestinian in the West Bank city of Jenin. but misreported, The fighting was fierce creating a myth of a massacre. uniforms, even helmets. In war, blood clings to guns, have just been killed. 13 Israeli soldiers And just as blood sticks, of being branded a war criminal. so does the stain

on this battlefield. That charge was conceived This is the West Bank city of Jenin. It's April, 2002. are regrouping. These Israeli soldiers of suicide bombings, Following a wave at Palestinian militants in Jenin. Israeli forces struck stiff resistance. They've encountered Jonathan Van Caspel Israeli Reservist Paratrooper is returning to the front. MACHINE-GUN FIRE

His friend tapes the battle. barred entry to Jenin, With journalists visual records of the fight. this is one of the only EXPLOSION AND GUNSHOTS get killed in an ambush. They... Twelve of my very good friends Um... It's very difficult. This is war. You don't see from where they shoot. are among the Palestinian fighters Muntasser and his men who are shooting back. on videotape One of his men captured the battle from the Palestinian perspective. going to fight. INTERPRETER: We were We were united fighters. started shooting at us Whenever the soldiers we responded and shot at them. is to protect their sacrifice. Our feelings towards the martyrs To protect their blood. This is urban warfare. The fighters' videos tell the story. and European news agencies When it ended, many British described a different story. like Jonathan Van Caspel Israeli soldiers of committing massacres. were accused ..homes destroyed and many dead.

call it a massacre. The Palestinians It all proved to be wrong.

commissions concluded there was... UN and Human Rights Watch Alan Dershowitz Prominent American jurist has written 'The Case for Israel'. have become acclimated Many in the European media is a genocidal, Nazi-like, to believing that Israel horrible group of people killing innocent Palestinians. who really get pleasure out of of the battle of Jenin. This was the epicentre the hardest fighting took place. This is where the massacre myth was conceived. It's also where of peace talks collapsed. In 2000, seven years initiated a violent uprising The Palestinians and other Arab States. that was backed by Iraq It reached its peak in March, 2002. In just one month, in suicide bombings and shootings. 130 Israelis were killed A suicide bomber killed 29 people on the eve of Passover. in the Park Hotel a counter-offensive. Israel immediately launched It invaded West Bank cities. was called up to fight in Jenin. Jonathan Van Caspel and shootings emanated from Jenin. 25% of all Palestinian bombings

in the heart of the city Palestinian fighters were entrenched in what is known as the refugee camp. buildings and alleyways. It is a warren of densely packed discovering explosive booby traps. This is Jonathan

because you are stepping on a bomb. Look out, I saw hundreds of them. And he told me, this is a bomb. MACHINE-GUN FIRE was called off Johnathan claims an Air Force attack would have been killed. because too many civilians sent in armoured bulldozers. To finish the job, the military the last holdouts. They literally crushed To check out Jonathan's version, who fought in Jenin. we made contact with Palestinians of Israeli tanks were pulling out. As we approached Jenin, a column

from the Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade - They were fighting gunmen whom we hoped to meet. the same fighters We are told to follow a black car. to a hideout in the city. The vehicle takes us from the Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades. We meet Muntasser and his friends the fighting earlier in the morning. One of them is slightly wounded from entrenched in the refugee camp Muntasser confirmed his men were well

were moving in. while Jonathan and his unit We knew very well our camp, INTERPRETER: our streets, the alleyways. We had an advantage in this battle. It was difficult for the enemy air power and tanks to shell us. and that obliged them to use We fought hard. GUNSHOTS AND MACHINE-GUN FIRE bulldozers ultimately defeated them. Muntasser also confirms Israeli on the end of the seventh day, INTERPRETER: The Israelis, were able to control the area huge bulldozers after they started to use and above the citizens. to destroy houses above us

Who was buried under the rubble? The big question remained. SOMBRE MUSIC missing daughters, sons. I have mothers calling me, parents missing grandparents. I have husbands missing wives, The number we have been told, incursions is 500 throughout the West Bank there've been a lot of cover-ups. but I'm afraid to tell you,

the massacre story The BBC was billboarding digging deeper without journalistically what was under the destruction. to really see

accusing the Israelis of atrocities An Amnesty expert was already in Bosnia and Kosovo. similar to the thousands murdered But when the UN uncovered the truth, residents in Jenin, 26 were killed. it was clear that out of 45,000 killed in one suicide bombing It was less than the 29 Israelis a couple of weeks earlier. at the Park Hotel reached millions around the world. The massacre headlines had already has demonised Israel. The European press And I believe that they actually see because they view these events, Israel engaging in these actions the prism of a predisposition. not objectively, but through Two years after the battle for Jenin, wedding flower arrangements Jonathan designs with this girlfriend, Gali. falsely branded as a war criminal. Jonathan still suffers from being when I'm preparing a wedding JONATHAN: Many times, and I'm dressing up the table... I'm looking around myself and I see all the empty places. Then I'm counting, one, two, three, four, five... I can fill up two or three tables here with all my friends... who are not here with us any more today. Take Penina. She's 23, the mother of two little children. It's heartbreaking. She had a very loving husband, Avner. The father, we went together to a mission. He didn't came back. During the fighting, when we went to Jenin, she find out that she's pregnant from the second child. And... she called him and he was very happy about it. And he didn't make it. When they sick... I'm alone. When they happy, the birthday... Everything... I'm alone. I'm happy to see them here... Today, all my day's gonna be nice. JONATHAN: Avner, he cannot tell his story. Avner died. It's not only that he lost his life. They are portraying him as a war criminal. I can tell my story. They can't any more. The beginnings of an Israeli withdrawal. Forces pull out from Jenin, the scene of the most intense battle of Israel's current military offensive. And this is what they leave behind. A refugee camp almost turned to rubble. It makes me very angry when people from the BBC, from 'The Guardian',

well-respected news agencies, are spreading lies. The lie of the massacre of the Jenin refugee camp is spreading throughout the world. The lead editorial in 'The Guardian', on April 17 while you were in Jenin, it says "Jenin was every bit as repellant in its particulars, "no less distressing and every bit as man-made "as the attack on New York on September 11th." How does it feel to be compared to the terrorists of 9/11? It was lie after lie. And I couldn't believe it. I couldn't... I'm sitting here in disbelief looking at it. In all wars, innocent civilians die. Muntasser takes dead aim at Israeli men, women and children. In war, many civilians get killed, Palestinian and Israeli civilians.

How do you feel about that? INTERPRETER: Yesterday, five of our people were killed in Gaza and in the West Bank. They have killed mostly civilians so we are obliged to fight. We must protect our people. Soldiers like Jonathan Van Caspel go after militant targets. But if Palestinian men, women and children happen to be nearby, they often die as well. It was our moral values of our unit of the army not to hurt anyone. American, British and NATO war machines killed far more civilians than the Israelis. When Serbia expelled hundreds of thousands of Kosovars, NATO war planes launched a punishing three-month air war. Unlike the Israeli military in Jenin, NATO war planes bomb from safe, high altitudes compromising on accuracy. At least 527 Serb civilians were killed. NATO warplanes destroyed billions of dollars in bridges, factories and homes... many times more than the damage inflicted on Jenin. In the first Gulf War, American war planes deliberately targeted the al-Firdos bomb shelter with bunker-busting warheads. At least 200 Iraqi men, women and children were killed in order to get to Iraq's ruling elite. In the last Iraq war, American and British forces killed at least 8000 civilians. And when it comes to real massacres, Saddam Hussein gassed thousands of Kurds. And Syria's Hafez Assad killed tens of thousands in Hamat. No country in history faced with comparable threats - not the US, which has dropped bombs on innocent civilians in Germany, in Japan and in Vietnam, not Russia, not France, not England -

no country in history has ever been more solicitous of civilians, in a comparable conflict. When the best is called the worst, you have to look at the accusers. The accusers, in the case of Jenin, were Palestinian leaders, editorialists and some on-scene reporters in the Euro-British media. Two years after the massacre myth was laid to rest by the UN, the accusations live on, especially on the Internet. JONATHAN: "The camp that became a slaughterhouse." It's outrageous. JONATHAN READS: BBC, on April 18 is already... after the fighting. Unbelievable. The BBC reaches hundreds of millions of viewers

and listeners throughout the world. When it stated evidence of a massacre is growing, those words are taken seriously. said this, so it must be right." And like everybody, we make mistakes and we try to remember to own up to them. But the truth races away and the correction lags behind. We never catch up. That's true of everybody else as well as us. Is there a way to solve that problem? I really don't think there is. The BBC defends its position, saying it quoted and attributed both sides in the massacre controversy.

The Palestinians call it a massacre... I think I speak for all in the UN delegation that we are shocked. This is horrifying beyond belief. But Israel insists it did nothing wrong. One must understand that we came there in order to eliminate terror.

The civilians were hostage by the terrorists there. The problem with the first impression...

what comes out first, sticks. Do you think that's a difficult problem in covering wars like Jenin? The first impression is vital in this, and going round the world at the moment, if one was to ask anyone who watched the news a bit, what do they think of Jenin, they'd think "Jenin. Massacre." Those two words are linked. But, as you say, first impressions are very, very important. And, perhaps despite all the other reporting at the end, they are never rubbed out. The importance of the press now and for some time - maybe forever in the future - is to provide knowledge, not just information. Information is everywhere. Information is from every point of view. If we leave our reports simply to providing information - he said-she said, and what you can visually see - we're wasting our time, you can get that anywhere. The American media was more sceptical of the massacre accusations. .. chief Palestinian negotiator, Saeb Erakat. Earlier this week, you said 500 Palestinians were killed. Do you still stand behind those numbers in the refugee camp? I said 523 were killed, actually, since the incursions began throughout the West Bank. I ask you a question, Bill... But, you said specifically, and others said, 500 in Jenin. Where are you getting evidence that 500 people were killed there? I don't have evidence, I really cannot be verified I said that. Back to my question, though. Israelis say the number of dead is less than 100, closer to 70. The Defence Minister said that on Sunday morning. If their numbers are right and your numbers are wrong,

will you come back on our network and retract what you said? Absolutely, Bill. And I hope the numbers will be nothing, zero. We make mistakes. And that day, that particular day about Jenin...

the Red Cross was prevented to go to Jenin. Foreign journalists were kicked out of Jenin, so there were reports. When something is said, it sticks. As someone who advocates the Palestinian side, isn't there an urge to come out as strong as possible before there are facts on the ground, etc? Martin, we've known each other for 25 years. This is the only time I said I made a mistake in all my interviews. Our most potent weapon as Palestinians is credibility. Honestly, we can't afford... you see, the one mistake in Jenin, what happened. Make a statement. First of all, make a statement. Whether something will follow after that is irrelevant. It's one of the important tool or weapon that is being used, and sometimes misused, I would say, by both sides. And no doubt this creates a very critical dilemma for the reporters on the ground because he cannot exonerate himself and say "I'm just taking pictures of what I see." What you see is not what is really happening. There were just not enough visible bodies in Jenin to support the massacre claim. According to the Israelis, there were manufactured funerals to generate the illusion of more casualties. The Israelis claim a spy drone captured one such fake funeral on April 20 during the height of the massacre hysteria. You clearly see a live body about to be wrapped in a funeral shroud, hidden in the orchards outside Jenin. They are to be displayed to the world media. Skulls and bones were suddenly discovered in the ruins. But you don't have to be an expert to know bodies take months to decompose - not a few days. Still, the cameras recorded the event. The world press is heard everywhere, how did this affect you? My cousin gets married. I went to the wedding in Amsterdam. I'm sitting on the table with very educated people and they ask me "Oh, you're the guy from Israel? "Ah, you was in Jenin. Tell me, what happened there? "It's really true about all those massacres? "The moral standards of the Israeli Army, it's getting very low. "What's going on there?" The damage is done. How much energy I need... to go and to set things right in the world press? What sparked Jonathan's anger was a documentary 'Jenin, Jenin'. Jonathan and his four friends have sued the director for labelling them as war criminals. The director is a prominent Israeli Arab actor, Mohammed Bakri. The movie describes the Battle of Jenin as an Israeli atrocity. While discussing their court case, Jonathan passes out copies of Phil Reeve's articles from Jenin. Writing for the British 'Independent' newspaper, Reeves described the Jenin invasion as "the grisly evidence of a war crime". It made front-page headlines around the world, including in the South African daily, 'The Star'. Attorney Joel Shoot had contacted Jonathan Van Caspel to join him in a petition against 'The Star'. 'The Star' printed the massacre headlines during the Jenin fighting. When it was clear there was no massacre Reeves wrote a retraction in 'The Independent'. 'The Star' refused to print Reeve's retraction. The only massacre in the article was the massacre of truth. One could see that the only lies and propaganda involved in the media's reporting on the events in Jenin were actually forthcoming from the media. 'The Star' told Shoot its policy was none of his business. 'The Star' refused to give us any comments. The powerful British press doesn't know Jonathan Van Caspel. So we decided to take him to London. We had arranged interviews with journalists who wrote about Jenin and we hoped they would agree to talk to Jonathan as well. The first stop was 'The Independent'. It's part of the media group which owns the South African 'Star'. I think... 'The Independent' should do a little more in order to bring out the truth, not only in England as you did, but also in South Africa and Australia because this Jenin lie is still going around. It's a very fair point... and I think you're absolutely right to feel annoyed that, you know... certain things which were not right, have not been corrected. The other papers have their own editors, and although they take our material, they're not obliged to use it. From 'The Independent' we made our way to the 'Daily Telegraph', one of Britain's most respected newspapers. David Blair had reported from Jenin. He wrote... I was reporting what I saw... in front of my own eyes. And that is the key to it. The Jenin refugee camp, a very large section of it, had not only been destroyed, it had been pulverised, flattened. I hope I conveyed the enormity of it. I think if there was a fault with my reporting it was that I wasn't able to convey just how terrible a scene it was. What Blair did not report was the proportion of the destruction. This is Jenin from the air. A teaming city of 45,000 people. This is the area destroyed in the refugee camp. About 7% of the city. The destruction was focused strictly where there was heavy fighting. What you actually did in the beginning, reporting the rumours that you hear... put a lot of oil on this fire. And today this lie is still going on. My articles never used the words 'massacre' or 'war crimes'. They never used the word 'atrocities', anywhere. Blair did employ those words in this manner... You were reporting what eyewitnesses saw during fighting. That's not rumour. A firsthand account is not a rumour. We did what we're paid to do, which is report what we saw. A firsthand account talking about mass graves... About hundreds getting killed... It didn't talk about hundreds. Not only did Blair report Palestinian claims of hundreds killed he also suggested it was a much more accurate assessment than Israel's significantly lower casualty claims. People lost it, didn't they? Martin Sieff is a media critic for United Press International. He did an in-depth report on the coverage from Jenin. I don't believe people were consciously lying in Jenin. They thought they were seeing what they said they were seeing. But what they described... there was no basis for fact. I stress, not just from the Israeli records, but from the Palestinian official records and statements as well. 13 of my best friends got killed. We did everything in order not to hurt innocent people. And in all your articles, I didn't read one word about it. And I'm a little disappointed.

You make a very good point.

But at the time, when I was writing those articles, and others were, the Israelis weren't telling us anything. They made the camp a closed military zone and wouldn't let us in. When we tried to go in, they shot at us. They gave no information. If you had told us this at the time, I would have reported it.

Blair could have reported it. While reporting on alleged massacres that proved to be incorrect, the Israeli military was taking pool journalists into the refugee camp. The Israeli Defence Force took us into the Jenin refugee camp with the intention of disproving the Palestinian claim that 500 people were massacred here.

Very few Palestinian bodies have been removed from this area. The camp is loaded with booby traps - some using professional military ordnance, some using homemade chemicals, even propane tanks. It was booby traps that killed 13 Israeli soldiers here last week.

This woman beckoned us to see what the soldiers did to her home. Many homes were ripped open by Israeli bulldozers. Inside, posters glorifying militant martyrs, homicide bombers... 23 came from the Jenin camp. From 'The Telegraph' we turned to 'The Guardian'. 26 Palestinian civilians died in Jenin, yet 'The Guardian' compared Israel's offensive to the terrorists that killed nearly 3000 civilians in the twin towers in New York. It added... We repeatedly asked for an interview with 'The Guardian' editorial writer who made these comparisons. But they ignored our numerous requests. Can we count on somebody from 'The Guardian' or not? When it came to Jenin, human rights groups also accused Israel's military of war crimes. Human Rights Watch confirmed there was no massacre in Jenin. But it accused Israeli soldiers of committing summary executions. When it came to suicide bombers, however, Human Rights Watch said those attacks against civilians were a violation of international humanitarian law, which is a far less serious crime. What is the difference between a violation of international humanitarian law and a war crime? One of the key factors in deciding whether a violation amounts to a war crime is whether it was intentionally done so.

A clear example from the situation in Jenin refugee camp would be the shooting of a Palestinian civilian who was under direct control of Israeli forces. That is a summary execution. That is a war crime. I suppose intentionality is a key issue. So, if an Israeli is suspected of executing a Palestinian and that's a war crime, why is a suicide bomber who intends to kill civilians not responsible for a war crime?

Well, one of the other things is, it's militant groups. It's not a state force... in the case of Palestinians. Aren't militias or militants held at the same accountability as military organisations? Sure. But unfortunately, there is a difference between, er... a state sanctioned, if you like, or state controlled... Individuals who are groups and militant groups are not... The Palestinian authorities are not able to control them. That sparked allegations, substantiated and unsubstantiated. Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International are having their credibility absolutely destroyed. Amnesty International has reported that Israeli soldiers deliberately aim at Palestinian children. Asked to document it, they couldn't come up with one case. Human Rights Watch has made up stories that have had no corroboration whatsoever. that human rights suffers. The tragedy is that the United Nations suffers and that the credibility of what could be wonderful organisations, which I have long supported, is lost in the process. While various media outlets were echoing the massacre accusations, anti-Semitism was re-emerging in a new equation. Israel was the new Nazi power of the 21st century. We will never forget this massacre. This is similar to the Holocaust practised or carried out by the Nazis against the Germans.

We will teach our generation not to forget this. Throughout the world, but especially in Europe, the swastika was equated to the religious emblem of the victims of the Nazis, the Star of David. With Israel portrayed as a criminal State, it was no surprise that an EU poll indicated 60% of all Europeans

believed Israel is the greatest threat to world peace. It is in that atmosphere that this cartoon was conceived.

It portrays Israel's prime minister at the time, Ariel Sharon, eating a Palestinian baby. The cartoon appeared in the British 'Independent' newspaper. It's the same paper that blatantly accused Israel of covering up war crimes in Jenin - but later retracted. This work was selected as the Cartoon of the Year in Britain. Many Jews were horrified. They said it echoed the traditional anti-Semitic charge of 'blood libel', the charge of Jews devouring the blood of a non-Jewish child. Blood libel was shown to millions of viewers on Al-Manar. It is the TV station of the radical Islamic Hezbollah movement. Jews kidnap a non-Jewish boy during the Feast of Passover. They slit his throat to drink his blood. For centuries, Europeans murdered Jews during Passover

because of blood libel fabrications. Many Jews accuse the cartoonist, Dave Brown, of spreading blood libel. Brown refused to give us an interview, so we turned to Dr Tim Benson, the director of the Cartoon Society, the society which awarded Brown the best cartoon of the year. This will go down in history as one of the famous cartoons. Here we have a cartoon. It's certainly anti-Sharon, but in no way is it anti-Israel or anti-Jewish. Well, this cartoon is an example of a blood libel.

The cartoonist would probably say "This isn't anti-Israel, it's anti-Sharon." Physically, he is easier to make into a cartoon character, but the message, clearly, of this cartoon is anti-Semitic. I don't think anybody could deny that this goes over the line from being anti-Israel to stereotyping Jews by reference to old canards that form a very important part of the collective memory of Europe. I believe it was chosen by our members, mainly because of the impact it had, above all the other cartoons in the competition. Because the impact it initially had in January... We have had a hysterical response from all around the world.

Our website, the day after the awards, got 73,000 hits. We've been receiving over 400 hate mails a day. Talking about impact, here we have Sharon eating Palestinian babies.

Here's an impact, too, that's out of reality. This is a dead Israeli girl, one of five children from the same family who was blown up by a suicide bomber. And this is a soon-to-be-dead Israeli boy who was blown up by a suicide bomber. Obviously these pictures have impact. And my question to you is... Why, in all these paintings, don't we see Sharon and Arafat eating babies? Maybe Jews don't issue fatwas. What do you mean by that? Well, if you upset an Islamic or Muslim group

as you know, fatwas can be issued by ayatollahs and suchlike. And maybe it's at the back of each cartoonist's mind that they could be in trouble if they do so. If they do what? If they depict... say, an Arab leader in the same manner. Then they could suffer? They could suffer death. Which is rather different. Later we took Jonathan to meet Janine di Giovanni. She's a 'London Times' Senior Foreign Correspondent. Giovanni blasted Israel's offensive into Jenin. We weren't sure how she would relate to Jonathan. Ah, Jonathan was in Jenin. He was in Jenin as a soldier. I thought it was very... An Israeli soldier? Oh, I don't want to battle someone. I'm not in the mood for that. In her Jenin reports, Giovanni wrote... What you said was that what you saw in Jenin was worse than you saw in Chechnya and Bosnia. Doesn't it seem disproportionate? First of all, I stand by everything I wrote. I never said it was a massacre, personally because I've... I've spent years working in war zones. What happened in Jenin was an outrage and a violation of all human rights

and the Israeli Army acted, I think, out of control. However, they did not commit a massacre. Um, having said that... I still was shocked by what I saw. And I've seen a lot. You were in Chechnya? Yes, for a lot of two years I was in and out of Chechnya. Olivia Ward is a correspondent with 'The Toronto Star'. Like Giovanni, Ward reported from Chechnya and Jenin. I've never seen anything worse than Chechnya. Grozny is a city that, of course,

looks as though it has suffered a nuclear attack. I mean, all the areas of Grozny are completely destroyed. It's devastated. I mean, there is no water, no electricity, there's no place to hide. The people that survived were living in basements which were often corpse-infested. And it was a much, much bigger place. It accommodated some 500,000 people. Jenin was a very different situation. We went to the refugee camp, which was, of course, a mess. I'd heard a report the previous day, with the Terje Larsen thing, talking about the terrible stench of death that was overwhelming over the town of Jenin. And evidently lots of other corpses and the stench is telling its own story around here. Three of us who had been in a lot of wars and been to a lot of mass graves and mass killing sites said... we sniffed the air and we said "Well, I wouldn't say that it smells like roses, "but it really doesn't... you know,

"this is not an overwhelming stench of death." I talked to people and I said "Well, did you fight?"

"Yeah, we fought, everybody fought. It was a big fight." And one of the fighters said... "Well, we really wanted to draw the Israelis into this area. "And we were amazed that they were actually drawn in." So it was a very, very different scene from a kind of innocent enclave in Djakovica where people were having dinner and the stormtroopers came in and massacred them.

Djakovica is in Kosovo. Serbs committed massacres and atrocities. In some areas, whole villages, one after the other, were levelled. It was far more than the 400-metre square of destruction in Jenin.

Janine di Giovanni wrote about the horrors of war in her latest book. Serbs and Hutus murdered and displaced millions, yet Giovanni places Israel on the same footing. The worst part of it, I think, was that the Serbs got condemned. The Hutus got condemned. You know, they were both vilified, but the Israelis never are.

People killed in Chechnya and Bosnia are in the hundreds of thousands. When you compare it to 26 fighters, 26 civilians dead in Jenin, doesn't it seem disproportionate? No. I was in all those places. Were you in Jenin? No, so you should talk to him. I don't want to. I actually don't want him in the room when I'm talking. Can I ask you something? Are you Israeli? No. Are you Jewish? What does it matter?

After she asked me to leave the room, I left the room, and I heard her asking the crew and also you, if you are Jewish.

So I, you know... I didn't feel comfortable to stay in the house. And I left the house, a place like that,

where they ask if you are Jewish or not Jewish. I don't feel comfortable and I choose to leave the house. Time and time again, Sharon is excused for massive human rights violations. I could go on and on. It's just, I think... the fact that it's not just that they're excused from it but they're allowed to get away with it, and it's very rarely reported accurately, I think, in America... in North America. Americans look at the war in the Middle East very differently than what Europeans look at the war. I think America has a very strong Zionist lobby, first of all. Much stronger than in Europe. So I think that affects some newspapers. It affects their editorial policy. These journalists say the reason the American media is "easier on Israel" is because of the powerful Zionist Jewish lobby. What's your view? When anti-Zionism begins to move to anti-Semitism it's when the anti-Zionists talk about the pushy Jews in America as having too much influence on American foreign policy. Never talks about pushy French Muslims or pushy oil interests in France or in Europe. In a democracy, everyone's entitled to say what they think is best for America. I believe support for the only democracy in the Middle East is good for America. Most Americans share that view. That's good, not bad. We should continue to press our government to do the right thing. And people from Europe

should not be stepping over the line to anti-Semitism by talking about Jewish influence and Jewish power over the media. It's just not accurate. Thousands of journalists in the last decade alone have done infinitely better covering far worse conflict situations than that. So far, the war is not an adequate excuse or description for what happened in the coverage of Jenin and the European media. Jonathan returns to Israel. He visits Penina, Avner's widow and her children. Jonathan tells Penina it's hard if not impossible to remove the stain of being branded a war criminal. I think, in general... the media, the press,

what they did is outrageous with those allegations, those lies about Jenin. We paid the price already when you accuse someone about committing some kinds of crimes. By accusing him, you put him in a very difficult situation. Reputation of my unit, of myself, of my friends, of the people who got killed, of the families of my friends. Yes, the reputation is very damaged. Yes. No doubt about it. In this case, the truth is on our side. It's only a question of time when it will come out. It can be tomorrow, it can be the day after tomorrow, but in the end of the story, the truth will come out. Captions (c) SBS Australia 2005