To demonstrate this, here is the headline from the Israel section (it did not even make the World section):
The cartoon itself is not offensive, it merely exists while Jewish leaders condemn it. And here is the inside:
According to these headlines, the cartoon is just a cartoon of Netanyahu. There is nothing else to say about it. We might say fine, a little bit of objectivity from the HP, the headline isn't anti-Israel the way it usually is.
But when you hold up this headline in comparison to a certain other headline from the HP, the bias becomes apparent:
When the Huffington Post covers the news of Pamela Gellar's subway ads, suddenly it's editors have no problem describing what kind of ads they are in the headline. The Huffington Post tells its readers that Gellar's ads are "Islamophobic" and "anti-Muslim," but leaves them to draw their own conclusions about a cartoon of Netanyahu.
Note also that the Huffington Post shows its readership the Gellar ads, but provides no picture of the Netanyahu cartoon or a link to view the cartoon elsewhere so that the readership can decide for itself whether the cartoon is offensive or not. Here's a link to the cartoon, courtesy of Elder of Ziyon.
It is just another example of how anything that can make Muslims look like victims and Jews look less so is manipulated for that exact purpose. This kind of bias is blatant and ridiculous for an allegedly mainstream news source.