All the “News” That’s Fit to Print

In this morning’s New York Times, Steven Erlanger and Ian Fisher write about an agreement between Hamas and Fatah that supposedly contains an “implicit recognition” of Israel that moves Hamas “closer to recognition” of Israel and would “amount to a two-state solution:”

The draft agreement between the Fatah faction of Mahmoud Abbas, the Palestinian leader, and the Hamas faction of Prime Minister Ismail Haniya is based on a document outlined by Palestinian prisoners. It is described as containing an implicit recognition of Israel’s right to exist, because it calls for the creation of a Palestinian state within pre-1967 borders, presumably next to Israel.

Such an accord would move Hamas closer to recognition of Israel — a significant change — and would raise the possibility of renewed Western aid to the Palestinians, which was severely curtailed after the Hamas victory in January.

If the accord backing what would amount to a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is completed, it will represent a victory for Mr. Abbas, who had threatened to put the issue to a referendum next month.

Would it be too much to ask the Times’ crack investigative reporters to at least read Aljazeera before reporting an “implicit” recognition that “presumably” would “move closer” to something that — contrary to the Times “news” report — is not the “significant change” it supposedly “amount[s]” to? 

Here is Aljazeera’s story posted yesterday on its website, headlined “Hamas Denies Recognizing Israel” (the bolding in the first paragraph is by Aljazerra itself):

Hamas says it has not agreed to recognize Israel despite a political deal reached with Mahmoud Abbas on Tuesday.

Hamas — whose charter calls for the destruction of the Jewish state — rejected any suggestion the deal to end its damaging power struggle with rival Fatah could imply it now accepts Israel’s existence. . . .

Hamas accepted it only after amendments it insisted would allow it to stick to its "agenda of resistance" to Israel.
   
"The document included a clear clause referring to the non-recognition of the legitimacy of the Occupation," said Sami Abu Zuhri, the Hamas spokesman, using the group’s term for Israel.

Of course, not even the crack White House reporters read it either. 

And even Fatah’s author of the "Prisoners’ Document" says it has "nothing to do with" recognizing Israel.