Economist editorial, filled with lies, says Israel releasing ONLY 26 murderers is an insult

This Economist editorial is completely bat-sh*t crazy anti-Israel.

AS A measure of the seriousness of negotiations between Israelis and Palestinians, the number of Palestinian prisoners released on the eve of talks, say pessimists, is a gloomy barometer. When the two sides sat down to negotiate two decades ago, after signing the Oslo accords in 1993, Israel freed 2,000 Palestinians in a single year. For the next couple of years it released, on average, around 1,000 a year. In later years that number slumped to a few hundred. Now, to coincide with the fresh round of talks that started in Jerusalem on August 14th, Israel’s prime minister, Binyamin Netanyahu, has freed just 26.

26 murderers! 

By the way, I am not certain about these numbers. In the wake of Oslo, Israel released many prisoners, but Israel also released 900  in 2005, 400 in 2007,  and several hundred more in 2008 to entice Abbas to make peace; nothing positive resulted from those "goodwill" prisoner releases.

Why doesn't the Economist mention those more recent gestures - and their lack of response?

Even this has provoked an outcry in Israel. Many of the 26 were convicted of crimes of violence, including murder, against Israeli civilians. Relations of the victims have carried black banners, accusing Mr Netanyahu of truckling to terrorists.

No. Every single one was found guilty of either murdering someone or was complicit in murdering someone. Every single one.

Mahmoud Abbas, the Palestinian president who is leading negotiations for his side, has had an even rougher time trying to persuade his people that the Israelis earnestly seek a peace deal.

The Economist couldn't be bothered to mention that Abbas has been the one torpedoing peace talks for the past five years. Despite previous releases of thousands of prisoners to help him burnish his image.

Indeed, many Palestinians deride Mr Abbas for winning freedom for so tiny a share of the 5,071 Palestinians said to be behind bars for politically motivated acts of violence or subversion.

I haven't seen any such criticism in the Arab press. Not saying it doesn't exist, but from the tone of the article, this seems to be The Economist's opinion, not the average Palestinian Arab's.

Few issues stir Palestinian emotions as fiercely as the fate of prisoners. Almost every Palestinian has a relative in jail—or has been there himself. Human-rights groups estimate that 750,000 Palestinians have passed through Israeli prisons since the West Bank and Gaza were conquered in 1967.

This 750,000 statistic is a risible lie, obvious to anyone who knows basic arithmetic. The Economist believes these ridiculous statistics (from Addameer and others).

But as we have seen, fact checking doesn't exist when the writer is predisposed to believe the lies.

Some 2,300 Palestinians were detained in the first six months of this year alone.

I have no idea where this statistic comes from. I can say that PCHR tracks every arrest and lists the names of those arrested. The average has been about 40 arrests a week from some quick sampling, less than a thousand arrests in 7 1/2 months. And most of those do not go to prison, as B'Tselem's statistics on prisoners this year have been holding steady at about 4700 almost every month through June.

But catching The Economist lying- despite its pretense of objectivity above all - is old news here.

What Palestinians want as a sign of good intent, is the release of thousands, not scores, of their compatriots. The Israelis hint that they will see how the talks proceed—and let more prisoners trickle out if things go well.

Israel has said (against all logic) that they will release 104 prisoners, and these 26 were just phase 1. The Economist is implying here that Israel is not going to release them if the talks go nowhere. I would be happy if that was the case, but it isn't - they are as good as released, their names have been published, the US has put the pressure on, and the cabinet voted on it. The Economist knows this and pretends otherwise.

So this is just another heavily biased, chockful of lies, anti-Israel tirade in The Economist.

(h/t Elliott)