The Israeli military has given religious settler and minister Bezalel Smotrich increased legal control over the occupied West Bank
The Israeli military has quietly handed over significant legal powers in the occupied West Bank to pro-settler civil servants working for Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich, the Guardian reported on 21 June, in a move that will help accelerate Israel’s illegal annexation of the occupied Palestinian territories.
The Israeli military announced the transfer of responsibility for dozens of bylaws at the Civil Administration on its website on 29 May. The Civil Administration governs the West Bank under the military’s direction.
Smotrich, a leader in the religious settler movement, became finance minister and a minister in the defense ministry as part of a coalition agreement that brought Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu back to power in late 2022.
Smotrich has called for the destruction of Gaza, the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians from the strip, and its annexation as well.
This article is based on a Guardian report and has some quotes. Is there something specific you find conspiratorial? Do you think for example it is unfair of them to say:
I tend to side with Wikipedia in believing The Cradle unreliable in their news coverage, and wanted to pass it along.
They are are listed in the same category as the Anti Defamation League on the topic of Israel. Something that The Cradle chose to write about without disclosing their own status.
That does not answer my question but that’s ok I suppose?
Anyways, this list does not include many Israeli lobbies, newspapers etc from what I see. Times of Israel is not there. Impressive.
I’ll add a relevant comment I did earlier so I’ll just copy-paste it:
Also, please keep in mind when using wiki links on anything (even loosely) related to Israel, that it has been edited by Zionists. This part of wiki doesn’t work like the rest. See a 2 min video below from13 years ago.
Course: Zionist Editing on Wikipedia - Israel National News - Arutz Sheva
The beauty of Wikipedia is they cite sources, keep edit history, and have a strong ethos of neutrality.
Smaller articles are more prone to being abused due to the sheer scale of Wikipedia, but are still subject to moderation if reported.
I don’t view Wikipedia articles as definitive, but generally I trust the community and don’t believe it has been overrun by right wing groups like NGO Monitor.
Further reading
The way you ignore my input is so funny.
You want to debate the specifics of an article from a source I find unreliable. I don’t want to. I wouldn’t want to if someone was posting something from Israel Hayom either.
Hahaha no, this one was addressed. I’m talking about the second comment, the one with the link of Zionist editing of wikipedia. I know, should have said “the way you keep ignoring my input is so funny”