...He's quick to point out, without being asked, that the palestinians did indeed celebrate on 9-11. Why wasn't that better publicized? Threats. The PA Minister of Information announced without nuance that he "could not be responsible for the safety" of journalists in the territories if the celebrations were broadcast. Why, then, not at least report verbally on them? Abu Toameh says that it's a pattern. The journalists want to stay in the good graces of their sources, and they don't want to make waves. Criticism of Arafat's regime is prohibited absolutely, and no one wants to pay the price. In fact, the first thing Arafat did when he "returned" to the West Bank in 1994 was to clamp down on all free expression -- close newspapers, fire reporters who wouldn't toe the line, take over the media with an iron fist.

Why is he working for a "right wing Israeli newspaper?" Abu Toameh says he's always asked. Because he's a "real journalist." In the PA, there are no real journalists, just mouthpieces for the thugocracy (my word, not his).

As for the foreign press, Abu Toameh shrugs. They see no evil and hear no evil when it comes to the behavior of the PA. He describes an incredible scene back in 2002 when he was covering an event at the mukata, Arafat's compound in Ramallah. With a crowd of international reporters standing around, two palestinian policemen brought a man out, threw him up against a wall and shot him -- right under the window of Arafat's office. When the reporters converged, the policeman seemed bewildered. It was just a simple execution, nothing to get excited about, he said. And no one did. In fact, according to Abu Toameh, no one else even mentioned it. But he did (the Jerusalem Post has now changed all its old links to paid-access pages but you can read an excerpt from the article here if you scroll about halfway down the page).

In point of fact, he says, a simple denial will usually suffice to kill any story that reflects badly on the PA.

Abu Toameh isn't gentle with many favored palestinian myths, either. Sharon's visit to the Temple Mount did not ignite the "intifada." Rather, it was the coverage of the visit in the palestinian media, in which it was made to appear that Sharon arrived with guns and tanks to invade and destroy the mosque and rebuild . . .. He left that sentence hanging. As for the palestinian devotion to the "right of return" and the re-division of Jerusalem, he lays the blame squarely on the Israeli government, which by agreeing at Oslo to open those issues for resolution in "final status talks" invited that particular foot in the door. Now, he says, it's become an indelible part of the palestinian worldview and impossible to eradicate. For the most part, they realize it's not going to happen, but you won't hear them say that. Oslo gave them the hope, the incentive to keep handing down those keys, the notion that someday . . ..

"Bush -- the savior of the Arab masses." That's a quote, and it drew an audible gasp and a few chuckles from the crowd. Not something most of us were expecting to hear. But Abu Toameh seems to believe that Bush's hard-line attitude is exactly the wake-up call the Arabs need to get their act together. He believes that the vast majority of the "Arab street" is, contrary to what we hear, strongly supportive of democracy and of America's intervention in Iraq. It's the Arab regimes (and this is nothing new) that stand to lose everything if America succeeds in Iraq and it's the regimes that must continue to promote rabid anti-American sentiments if they have any hope of survival...