Showing posts with label media bias. Show all posts
Showing posts with label media bias. Show all posts

Tuesday, June 16, 2015

  • Tuesday, June 16, 2015
  • Elder of Ziyon
Last month, CNN - under the headline "Israeli settlers reportedly chop down 800 Palestinian olive trees" - parroted absurd Palestinian allegations without bothering to do a modicum of fact checking. (The story also quoted another false story that 175 "right wing Jewish extremists" went to the Al Aqsa Mosque.)

Under a firestorm of criticism, the author of the article Don Melvin insisted that there was nothing wrong with the story, saying that he was clear what the source of the reports were. Even yesterday on Twitter he kept at it:


This is incredibly disingenuous. Generations of news consumers are conditioned to believe official sources that are quoted by the media if there is no indication that the source itself is suspect, and CNN did no exert any effort to uncover the actual facts of the report, leaving the readers with no context that could indicate that the story in the official PA news agency was false. On the contrary, they continued to quote Wafa quoting B'Tselem that indeed settlers do terrible things, confirming the false story in the minds of the readers.

CNN endowed the Wafa news agency with the same gravitas it would give a think tank or a human rights organization issuing a report.

CNN did not say a word to indicate that the reports were false, and Melvin knows very well how the stories would be understood by his audience. I would bet that Melvin, who is based in London, believed the stories himself so much that he did not think they were worth checking, and now he is spinning his gullibility behind his quoting a known lying source as if the audience would know that the source is trash beforehand.

Today, there is another story in the official PA news agency Wafa. It is similar to stories they have run dozens of times before, claiming that Jewish settlers are raising and releasing thousands of wild boars annually in order to destroy Palestinian crops. In this case, the article says that Jews in Ariel are jealous of the beautiful lands that their Arab neighbors in Salfit are using to plant figs, grapes, berries, olives.

The article says that the Jews come with truckfuls of wild boars at night and release them in the Arab fields.

If CNN is to be consistent, they should report this story from the official PA news agency accusing settlers of crimes as well. They won't. Because if they report it as straight as they reported the lies about the olive trees, even people who were raised on a diet of anti-Israel propaganda would think it is absurd that Jews would be raising vicious, wild (and unkosher) animals and somehow place them into trucks (!) for no reason except to terrorize Arabs.

The olive tree/"Jewish extremist" story, on the other hand, seemed plausible to causal readers. This is exactly why CNN's defense of the story is indefensible.

From a pure question of newsworthiness, the wild boar story is far more relevant - because Mahmoud Abbas himself has publicly made the same accusations. A real news organization would hold a politician to higher standards and go after him for saying such absurd lies. But Abbas is untouchable in the mainstream media, and no one at CNN will ever ask him a single difficult question.(I have a long list of such questions that not a single reporter ever asked Abbas.)

This, ladies and gentlemen, is media bias. The choice of stories that are left unreported are just as important as those that are reported. Treating one national leader with kid gloves while mercilessly attacking others is clear proof of bias.

Deep down, Don Melvin (and any real journalist) knows that everything I am writing is true. His reporting on the olive trees and "storming Jews" may have been technically true in that is attributed the source but its style was highly irresponsible because readers would not know the source is suspect. CNN's lack of reporting over the years of the other absurd accusations against Jewish settlers is a clear indication that, to CNN and the other mainstream media, the only news formula that matters is "West Bank Arabs are good. Jewish settlers are evil."

Anything that can challenge that meme is simply to be ignored, because the meme is the story at CNN, and "reporting" is only meant to support the meme, not to uncover the truth.

Yesterday I tweeted Melvin with an article I wrote last September, showing a litany of news stories in a single week that I covered but that were ignored by the media, asking "Is This Newsworthy?" and asking him to answer. Of course, he didn't respond. And neither did any other reporter I asked at the time. Because they know that the bias is there and they can[t admit it without making themselves look bad.

There are plenty of stories that fit any definition of newsworthiness that are ignored, while others that adhere to pre-existing biases are trumpeted, because the narrative the media wants to push is more important than facts.

Sunday, May 17, 2015

From CNN:
The official Palestianian news agency is reporting that Israeli settlers have chopped down and seized about 800 Palestinian-owned olive trees near the town of Shuyukh, east of Hebron.

The report, by WAFA, the Palestine News & Information Agency, cited "a local source," whom it did not identify. Israel has yet to comment on the report.

The source, described by WAFA as "a local activist," told the agency that residents of the Israeli settlements of Bani Kadim and Asfar broke into an olive orchard near the town and chopped down the trees, which belonged to people who lived in the area.
Really? CNN has sunk so low as to parrot Wafa's lies without doing a modicum of fact checking?

OK, how can we tell that this is garbage? By looking at the wording in Wafa. It says "Israeli settlers Sunday chopped down and seized about 800 olive trees belonging to Palestinians near the town of Shuyukh, east of Hebron, according to a local source."

What does "chopped down and seized" mean? 400 chopped down and 400 seized? Or did they chop down 800 olive trees and then put them onto a convoy of trucks to cart them away?

It takes a long time to chop down a mature olive tree. New saplings, which are often planted by Palestinians in order to steal public land, are relatively easy to uproot, but this says "chopped down and seized."

No photos. No videos. No named sources. No corroboration. WAFA reports a story that matches none of the normal standards of journalism- and CNN parrots it under the guise of only reporting what anti-Israel Arab media is saying.

But it doesn't stop there.

Also Sunday, more than 175 right-wing Jewish extremists entered the Aqsa Mosque compound in Jerusalem, escorted by Israel police and security personnel, according to sources inside the mosque. The sources cannot be named for security reasons.
175 is a much larger crowd than the usual 30 or so, and one would think that other media would have photos or video of such an event.

But there is no such video on the Waqf website, or at Hona Al Quds, or QPress YouTube page, which jealously show any video they can find of Jews walking peacefully on their holiest site, usually to aggressive screams by the Muslims.

The best video I could find from Sunday was a couple of dozen Jews who may or may not have exited from the Temple Mount, singing.

But there is one video that was taken from the Temple Mount today. It shows hundreds of Arabs screaming anti-Israel slogans!



Wow, I found more evidence for Arab hate against Jews in two minutes of searching than CNNs' scores of reporters found of Jewish hate for Arabs.

A Palestinian woman looks from a window of her house in the Al-Shati refugee camp in Gaza City on Thursday ahead of the commemorations for the 67th anniversary of the “Nakba” 
(Mohammed Abed/AFP)

I'm sure that the photographer had nothing to do with staging this photo. He has ethics!

Why does her home look so bad? After all, it doesn't look like it was bombed. The Shati camp is fully under Palestinian Arab rule. There is no shortage of Western or Arab funds that could build fix this this poor woman's house. The amount of time it took to stage this photo could have been used to repair the shutter. So why is the window in such bad shape?

These are the questions that are not asked when Nakba Day rolls around. No, at that time, photographers need to illustrate the Nakba, and an old woman, looking forlornly towards her real home somewhere in Israel, living in a dilapidated house that could be easily fixed in a week, fills the bill.

It will be recalled that as far back as 1979, Israel tried to build real houses for people like this - and the UN condemned them for wanting to get rid of these dilapidated "refugee" camps which are so useful for photo ops of how bad Palestinian Arabs have it.

UPDATE: Another angle. Her fingers are in the exact same position, but our photographer asked her to move her head a little bit further in the house but to her left so it wouldn't be in the shadow:(h/t Bob Knot)


From Ma'an:
Amateur photographer Ahmad Nazzal captured Israeli forces spraying 'skunk water' at a Palestinian child during the Kafr Qaddum weekly march in the occupied West Bank on Friday.

Five-year-old Muhammad Riyad appears standing in front of Israeli forces wearing a Palestinian Keffiyeh before the forces begin chasing him with skunk water, the boy eventually falling to the ground.

The foul-smelling liquid has been used by the Israeli military as a form of non-lethal crowd control since at least 2008 and can leave individuals and homes smelling like feces and garbage for weeks.



The poor kid is just standing there, minding his own business!

Too bad the photographer didn't show what else the little boy and his friends were doing for quite a bit of time while the soldiers did nothing. The boy in blue in this first clip looks like he isn't out of diapers yet.





And also that the skunk water was not aimed at the kid, but at the older stone throwers (The kid can be seen running on the left side while the water is clearly aimed at adult stone throwers on the right,  Another video shows where he tripped):




Where are the parents? Obviously letting their little boys go out and throw stones at soldiers.

Don't expect Ma'an to issue a correction, but it might be fun to tell them just to see them remove the comments.


(h/t Bob Knot)

UPDATE: I posted a comment:
The full video of the event shows not only that the child was throwing rocks from close range, but the police did nothing. The video also shows that the skunk water was shot at adult rioters on the right, unseen here. Video at Palmedia YT page.
Ma'an owes its readers a correction and apology.
We'll see if it gets published along with the hate.

Thursday, April 30, 2015

  • Thursday, April 30, 2015
  • Elder of Ziyon
Now that police beatings are in the headlines again, it is fashionable for so-called progressives to equate the police with Israeli soldiers - as if Israeli police and soldiers are the quintessential example of police brutality.

From The Guardian:
David Simon, the creator of The Wire, has again weighed in on unrest in his adopted city of Baltimore, turning his frustration from the protesters to the “army of occupation” of the city’s police.

“They were collecting bodies, treating corner folk and citizens alike as an Israeli patrol would treat Gaza, or as the Afrikaners would have treated Soweto back in the day. They’re an army of occupation. And once it’s that, then everybody’s the enemy.
I will bet anything that the lowest private in the IDF in Gaza last summer would act with more restraint towards those trying to kill him than David Simon would. I would also bet that the same private knows more about international law and the laws of armed conflict in protecting civilians than David Simon does.

To use Israel as the standard of brutality is not only an obscene slander, but it shows how successful anti-Israel propaganda is, and how open and susceptible otherwise intelligent people are to being manipulated by the haters.

Even more absurd is that the standard for treating Gazan civilians like subhumans comes not from Israel - but from those Israel was fighting..

This AFP report from yesterday will get about 1/10th of one percent of the coverage that stories about Israel do:

Police in the Hamas-run Gaza Strip beat and arrested protesters on Wednesday at a youth rally in the north of the besieged coastal territory, an AFP correspondent said.

More than 400 demonstrators gathered in Shujaiyeh, a neighborhood in eastern Gaza City that was razed during a July-August war between Hamas and Israel, urging reconstruction and calling for an end to intra-Palestinian division.
This undated video shows how much restraint Hamas shows towards civilians in Gaza.



It is not easy to find videos like this on YouTube in English. And coverage of daily Hamas brutality is minuscule compared to the much exaggerated, out of context and often fictional stories of Israeli law enforcement brutality.

Meanwhile, videos showing Israeli police helping Arabs  - videos that completely destroy the lazy assumptions that journalists and writers like Simon make - are even more rare: This is not a coincidence. Journalists are lazy in accepting the fiction of widespread Israeli brutality, and anything that shows that to be false is naturally going to be buried because it is too hard to explain the reality to readers compared to reporting-by-meme.

This video shows an army patrol reviving an Arab in Hebron whose heart stopped after he was electrocuted.



Clearly, these soldiers are frantically trying to save the life of someone that David Simon thinks they passionately loathe.

People like Simon are well meaning -  and are literally clueless that they are being brainwashed every day by an army of anti-Israel activists and a complicit media that discards even the appearance of objectivity while willing to accept and repeat the narrative of hate without question.

But when David Simon writes his own analysis for the public, he has the same responsibility as any journalist to get his facts right. His being exposed to lies for decades is not an excuse to skip fact-checking.

The irony is that much of the audience for these lazy reporters want to know the truth, even if Simon doesn't. There is a reason that the most popular video I've ever uploaded, with 400,000 views, shows IDF soldiers acting kindly towards Arab children.

(h/t Alexi, Ian)

UPDATE: Simon changed the text in his original article from Gaza to the West Bank. I suppose I could link to more videos of Israeli patrols playing soccer with Palestinian youths, but clearly he stands by his account of how Israel treats Arabs like dirt, and that turns him from someone who one could assume was duped by the media into someone who is doing the duping.

Monday, April 13, 2015

  • Monday, April 13, 2015
  • Elder of Ziyon
AFP, reporting on the latest NGO attempt to slam Israel, writes:

Six months after donors pledged billions of dollars for devastated Gaza, most of the money remains blocked, and reconstruction efforts are painfully slow, a coalition of aid groups said Monday.

The report also condemned the international community for failing to help open the blockaded Palestinian territories up to each other, to broker a lasting ceasefire with Israel and to hold the two sides accountable.
AFP is now claiming (beyond the biased report) that the West Bank and Gaza are both "blockaded."

The word "blockade" has a specific legal meaning, and it routinely used incorrectly in referring to Gaza although Israel does enforce a legal naval blockade of Gaza.






Good Pope. Evil Israel.

Sheesh:
Since becoming pope in March 2013, Francis has made a habit of inserting himself into delicate foreign policy issues, usually in the role of broker. Last June, after visiting the Holy Land, he played host to the Israeli and Palestinian presidents at a “prayer summit” at the Vatican. However, that failed to produce a diplomatic breakthrough, and soon afterward, Israeli troops began an assault against the Hamas militant group in the Gaza Strip.
Even sooner afterwards, Palestinian Arabs in the West Bank kidnapped and murdered three Israeli teenagers. And Hamas shot scores of rockets towards Israeli civilians.

But the New York Times just can't help itself in portraying Israel as an aggressor, spitting in the face of Pope Francis with its violent response to his efforts to bring peace to the region.

(h/t Ronald G)

Tuesday, March 31, 2015

Here is how Human Rights Watch reported on the beginning of Israel's airstrikes in Gaza last summer:

Israel/Palestine: Unlawful Israeli Airstrikes Kill Civilians
Bombings of Civilian Structures Suggest Illegal Policy

Israeli air attacks in Gaza investigated by Human Rights Watch have been targeting apparent civilian structures and killing civilians in violation of the laws of war. Israel should end unlawful attacks that do not target military objectives and may be intended as collective punishment or broadly to destroy civilian property. Deliberate or reckless attacks violating the laws of war are war crimes, Human Rights Watch said.
Prosecutor, judge and jury. Without any relevant information as to what Israel's targets were, HRW flatly said that Israel was violating international law and said that Israel was targeting homes simply to kill Gazan civilians, apparently for kicks.

Now compare that with how HRW reports on Saudi airstrikes in urban areas that are killing scores of civilians:

Yemen: Saudi-Led Airstrikes Take Civilian Toll

The Saudi Arabia-led coalition of Arab countries that conducted airstrikes in Yemen on March 26 and 27, 2015, killed at least 11 and possibly as many as 34 civilians during the first day of bombings in Sanaa, the capital, Human Rights Watch said today. The 11 dead included 2 children and 2 women. Saudi and other warplanes also carried out strikes on apparent targets in the cities of Saada, Hodaida, Taiz, and Aden.

The airstrikes targeted Ansar Allah, the armed wing of the Zaidi Shia group known as the Houthis, that has controlled much of northern Yemen since September 2014.

...“Both the Saudi-led forces and the Houthis need to do everything they can to protect civilians from attack,” said Joe Stork, deputy Middle East and North Africa director. “Reports of air strikes and anti-aircraft weapons in heavily populated areas raise serious concerns that not enough is being done to ensure their safety.”

...Human Rights Watch has not been able to determine whether specific attacks complied with the laws of war, which apply to the armed conflict in Yemen. The laws of war prohibit attacks that target civilians or civilian property, or that do not or cannot discriminate between civilians and fighters.
Look at that! The mind-reading skills that HRW "researchers" have in Gaza are suddenly malfunctioning in Yemen! They know that Saudi Arabia is targeting terrorists, and they are simply not sure if the bombs that killed 34 civilians were simple mistakes, or maybe there was a legitimate target there.

All that certainty that HRW has in declaring Israel to be criminal is nowhere to be found when Saudis are dropping their bombs on houses and children.

I can't wait to see how HRW reports on yesterday's news:
An air strike killed dozens of people at a camp for displaced people in northwest Yemen on Monday, aid workers said, as Arab warplanes bombard rebels around the country.

The International Organization for Migration said at least 40 people had been killed and 200 wounded at the Al-Mazrak camp in Hajja province where it has staff on the ground, revising an initial toll of 45 dead.

IOM spokesman Joel Millman said 25 of the wounded were in severe condition.

"It was an air strike," said Pablo Marco of Doctors Without Borders (MSF), which has a presence at the hospital.
Another thing: I haven't yet found a scorecard showing how many Yemenis have been killed compared with how many Saudis.The score is probably about 250-0 at this point, which in other contexts would be considered by ignorant pundits as proof of "disporportionate force."

Scorecards are particular to cases when the winning side's name begins with ISR and ends in AEL.

Sunday, March 15, 2015

Recently, Richard Behar and Gary Weiss wrote a masterly destruction of an AP investigation showing how many mistakes and violations of journalistic ethics could be found in an article.

"The New York-based news agency examined 247 airstrikes on homes—interviewing witnesses, visiting attack sites and compiling a detailed casualty count. Its probe determined that out of 844 dead from those strikes, 508 (or just over 60 percent) were children, women and older men, 'all presumed to be civilians.'"

This is very similar to an Amnesty report on Israeli airstrikes of houses that I addressed here.

The organization that decided to do this type of analysis originally is B'Tselem, which even during the war started compiling lists of houses that had been hit by Israel and their casualties.

There is an additional problem with all of these "investigations" - they consciously exclude airstrikes on homes that the NGOs know were being used to shield fighters.

If you only count houses that used women and children as human shields, yes, it will appear that Israel showed disregard for the lives women and children (which is not by itself proof of violations of international law, as I have shown in my Amnesty piece.)

B'Tselem has the most comprehensive list of family homes hit by Israel published (AP did not expose its full list.) Yet one obvious family house is not listed: the home of the Al Skafi family of Shujaiyya.

I already mentioned that two of the al-Skafis were 17 or 18-year old twins who were proud members of Islamic Jihad.





But most of the other victims of that airstrike were also terrorists.

Abdel Skafi:

Ahmed Skafi, in front of the Hamas flag:

Mujahid al Skafi, in his martyrdom video:






Now, it is true that their 63-year old father Akram was killed along with this jihadist family. Presumably he was not an active militant.

But AP, B'Tselem and Amnesty did not bother to list the al-Skafi family house as one of those that were targeted by Israel, because counting that house - and who knows how many others - would reduce their ratio of civilians to terrorists killed by Israel.

In other words, these organizations cooked the books to make Israel look bad.

It is inconceivable that all three are not aware of the al-Skafi home - it was prominently mentioned in "Humanize Palestine" and other sites that list the dead.

Yet since it was obvious to these organizations that the al-Skafi family home was mostly inhabited by fighters, that house is excluded from these supposedly objective analyses.

How many other such houses filled with jihadists from the same family were excluded?

All of the other criticisms of these reports still apply, of course, Without these organizations knowing what the targets were, they cannot know whether the IDF commanders who ordered the strikes violated the primciples of distinction and proportionality, and any assumptions of those violations based on the proportion of civilians killed are inherently flawed.

But the Al Skafi home proves that the entire purpose of this "research" is not to calculate how effective the IDF was, but rather to cherry-pick the examples that they believe prove their point.

It is lying with statistics, and it is reprehensible.

(h/t Thomas Wictor)


Thursday, February 26, 2015

  • Thursday, February 26, 2015
  • Elder of Ziyon
From The Guardian, reporting about a secret cable from the South African spy agency:
Israel has been trying for decades, the report says, to undermine Egypt’s vital Nile water source so that it becomes preoccupied with water shortages rather than the Arab-Israeli conflict. “Towards this end Israel’s Ministry of Science and Technology conducted extensive experiments, and eventually created a type of plant that flourishes on the surface or the banks of the Nile and that absorbs such large quantities of water as to significantly reduce the volume of water that reaches Egypt.”

The Guardian then adds its own color to try to make this absurd claim seem more realistic:
Intelligence agencies such as Mossad have a long history of conducting sabotage operations. There are shrubs, such as the tamarisk, that absorb vast amounts of water and can exacerbate drought. Advocates of removing the tamarisk claim that a full-grown tamarisk can consume more than 200 gallons of water a day. The tamarisk, though originally from Asia and the Middle East, can now be found in the American west.
It then concludes:
The allegation against Mossad could be true or preposterous. Either way it offers an insight into the thinking of intelligence agencies. If true, then Mossad is guilty of reprehensible tactics. If untrue, the South Africans are guilty of naivety in presenting this as fact.
It's 50/50! Could be preposterous! Could be true! After all, doesn't Israel regularly open up dams to flood Gazans?

The rest of the article shows pretty conclusively that the South African spy agency would report completely unfounded rumors as fact:
But in the world of espionage, today as in the past, spies peppering reports with half-truths, rumours, the outlandish and the downright ridiculous is par for the course, the secret cables show – and not that remote from the lucrative fantasies and inventions of Graham Greene’s fictional MI6 agent in Our Man In Havana.

Many of the reports, in spite of being marked “confidential”, “secret” and “top secret”, contain information openly available elsewhere, often written by journalists. One South African intelligence report on Israel’s Mossad quotes Chris McGreal, the Guardian’s former correspondent in Johannesburg and Jerusalem, who is now based in the US. “Chris McGREAL has claimed that ‘Israel provided expertise and technology that was central to South Africa’s development of its nuclear bomb’,” the report says.
Yet The Guardian reserves judgment about the Mossad Nile plot, giving credence to the idea that somehow South Africa's intelligence services infiltrated the secret Israeli program to dry up the Nile rather than assume that the rumor is just as absurd as the other ones it reports.

(h/t Jim)

Sunday, February 15, 2015

  • Sunday, February 15, 2015
  • Elder of Ziyon
Reuters has an article about how many countries, particularly Muslim countries but also China, are not allowing "Fifty Shades of Grey" to be screened.

It then includes this:
It is unclear whether "Fifty Shades" will be shown in India or throughout the Middle East. Only Lebanon is scheduled to show it.
According to IMDB, the movie opened in Israel along with most of the rest of the world.

As is often the case, Reuters is saying that Israel is not part of the Middle East.

This subtly feeds into the myth that Israel doesn't belong where it is, that it is an anomaly that needs to be removed.

Just some more every day anti-Israel media bias.

Friday, February 13, 2015

  • Friday, February 13, 2015
  • Elder of Ziyon
Yesterday, the Central Elections Committee voted to disqualify two candidates for Knesset, Arab MK Hanin Zoabi and former right-wing MK Baruch Marzel.

Here is the entire AP article about it:
Israel's elections committee on Thursday voted to disqualify a contentious Arab lawmaker from running in the country's March 17 parliamentary elections.

Lawmaker Hanin Zoabi is known for her feisty and abrasive style in parliament. She has sided with the Palestinians in their conflict with Israel, prompting some Israelis to brand her a traitor.

Israeli media say Thursday's committee vote passed by a majority. The decision could still be overturned by the Supreme Court, which has happened in the past.

Zoabi said she wasn't surprised by the vote which she called "unjust" and "racist" and said she plans to appeal the decision.

Zoabi has a long history of angering mainstream Israelis. She boycotted the playing of the national anthem when she was sworn into Israel's parliament and often refers to the country as "racist."

She is active in Palestinian causes and participated in a pro-Palestinian flotilla that tried to break Israel's naval blockade of Gaza in 2010. Activists clashed with Israeli soldiers who boarded the ship, and nine activists were killed.

After Thursday's vote, Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman said in a statement that Zoabi belongs with "the Hamas terrorists in Gaza."

The same committee later disqualified a hawkish Israeli activist, Baruch Marzel, from running on grounds of incitement, Israeli media reported.
The article is 210 words long. 191 words are dedicated to making Israel sound undemocratic and racist for disqualifying an Arab from running for Knesset, and 19 words at the very end they mention without elaboration that someone else with a Jewish name was also disqualified for vague reasons.

Zoabi is a merely being banned for being "feisty and abrasive" and "pro-Palestinian," with no examples of how she actively campaigns against the nation whose parliament she serves in. Nothing about how she said that the kidnappers of three Israeli teens who were later found to have murdered them were not terrorists. Nothing about how she openly identified with Hamas in a "victory rally" after the summer war in Gaza. Nothing about how she declared her country to be worse than ISIS.

AP doesn't bother to find out why every other Arab candidate is still free to run for election if Israel is as racist as Zoabi claims. It doesn't bother to mention that the Supreme Court head who criticized both decisions is an Arab.

Banning a Jew from running is just an inconvenient distraction from the main focus of the article of branding Israel as racist.

(h/t Nephew of Ziyon)


Tuesday, October 28, 2014



The New York Times published yet another overwrought, emotional anti-Israel op-ed. This one is by Rula Jebreal, an award-winning journalist. And as is so often the case, it is filled with things that just ain't true - which calls into question all of her journalistic credentials.

Here are a few examples:
According to Nurit Peled-Elhanan, a Hebrew University professor of sociology who has produced the most comprehensive survey of Israeli public school curriculums, not one positive reference to Palestinians exists in Israeli high school textbooks. Palestinians are described as either “Arab farmers with no nationality” or fearsome “terrorists,” as Professor Peled-Elhanan documented in her book “Palestine in Israeli School Books: Ideology and Propaganda in Education.”
As I reported in 2011, Peled-Elchanan is simply a liar. Textbooks that she claimed didn't show a single Arab showed plenty of Arabs with no prejudice. Her claims that Arabs were never shown sympathetically were shown to be out and out lies.

Avigdor Lieberman, has championed a call to boycott the businesses of Palestinian citizens of Israel and, ominously, has even sought to make the “transfer” of Palestinians legal.
Another lie. Lieberman called to boycott businesses taking part in a general strike condemning Operation Protective Edge, not all Arab businesses.

And the Lieberman Plan did not call for "transfer," meaning moving Palestinian Arabs out of their homes. He called to redraw the borders to include more Arabs in a Palestinian state.

Israel is increasingly becoming a project of ethno-religious purity and exclusion. Religious Zionist and ultra-Orthodox parties occupy 30 of the 120 seats in the Knesset.
There is not a single ultra-Orthodox party in Israel's governing coalition (the NYT since corrected that.)

[M]ore than 50 discriminatory Israeli laws documented by Adalah, the Haifa-based Legal Center for Arab Minority Rights in Israel...
Not true.

Historically, ultra-Orthodox Jews did not serve in the armed forces. Today, they do — and serve in every capacity, including in the most important elite Israeli army units, such as the Sayeret Matkal special forces and Unit 8200, whose responsibilities include gathering intelligence on any Palestinian they deem a “security threat.”
Unit 8200 has recently added some haredim, but as far as I can tell Sayeret Matkal does not have any "ultra-Orthodox" Jews.

There is, regrettably, still some discrimination in Israel against minorities (including Jewish minorities.) There is also  discrimination in every other nation on the planet against their minorities. But if Jerbreal wants to fix the nation that she is a citizen of, lying in the New York Times to incite clueless Americans against Israel is not the way to do it. On the contrary - her methods seem to indicate that she wants to damage Israel, not improve it.

And the New York Times is eager to help her do so.

Additionally, for someone who pretends to be against bigotry, Ms. Jebreal sure seems biased against religious Jews:
Unlike every former head of Shin Bet, Israel’s equivalent of the F.B.I., Yoram Cohen, who today heads the agency, is a religious Jew. That change is typical of Israeli society. The greater integration of ultra-Orthodox Jews clearly offers benefits to Jewish Israelis, but for Palestinian Israeli citizens, it has meant a new, religiously inspired racism, on top of the old secular discrimination.
Jebreal does not bring a shred of evidence that Yoram Cohen is bigoted against Arabs - except that he is religious (he is not ultra-Orthodox.)

Who's the bigot?

(h/t Ibn Boutros, Yair Rosenberg)



Tuesday, October 07, 2014

Roger Cohen's latest New York Times op-ed reveals that when it comes to treating Israel with a double standard, he has no equal:

Every human instinct recoils from the killing of children. It recoils even as Israel’s right to defend itself from rockets is clear; and the excruciating difficulty of waging war against an enemy deployed among civilians is acknowledged; and the readiness of Israel’s foes to kill any Jew is confronted. However framed, the death of a single child to an Israeli bullet seems to betoken some failure in the longed-for Jewish state, to say nothing of several hundred. The slaughter elsewhere in the Middle East cannot be an alibi for Jews to avoid this self-scrutiny.
Cohen throws in the perfunctory disclaimers, yeah, sure, I know that Hamas hides among civilians, sure I know they target civilians, yeah they aren't wonderful people. But the death of a single Gaza child is a failure in the Zionist project altogether!

If Cohen truly believed his blah-blah disclaimers, he would lay the blame on children's deaths in Gaza squarely where they belong: with Hamas. But he doesn't; the disclaimers are meant as a shield for Cohen against criticism that he is too one-sided, and not as an honest appraisal of the situation Israel faces.

To put it bluntly: waging war in an urban area without killing children is nearly impossible. Waging war in an area where the enemy knowingly places its military targets among children is literally impossible. And waging war in an area where the heavily armed enemy instructs its citizens not to evacuate when they are warned that the battle is coming to their homes - and where the enemy purposefully places major command centers inside civilian houses - is absolutely, 100% impossible.

To Cohen, Israel's failure to do the impossible is an indication of the failure of the Jewish state. Which means that to Cohen, after 66 years, Israel among all nations is still in a trial period to see if it is good enough to join the family of nations, and if it ever falls short of an impossible standard, it fails.

Never in a million years would Cohen say the same thing about the children being killed, today, in Syria and Iraq by his own country. He would never dream of asking whether children killed in recent wars by French or British or even Syrian warplanes indicates that they are failures as nations. Spain or Italy or Russia cannot be failures. Only Israel can be a failure, when it fails to pass a test that is rigged against it.

But Cohen's piece gets even more perverse, as he engages in the popular pastime of "Palestinians are the new Jews":

Of course, sermons are only part of the story. The High Holy Days are days to look inward, to be still. I found my eyes straying to a passage from Stefan Zweig’s “The World of Yesterday” reprinted in the prayer book. It read:

“Only now, since they were swept up like dirt in the streets and heaped together, the bankers from their Berlin palaces and sextons from the synagogues of Orthodox congregations, the philosophy professors from Paris, and Romanian cabbies, the undertaker’s helpers and Nobel prize winners, the concert singers, and hired mourners, the authors and distillers, the haves and the have-nots, the great and the small, the devout and the liberals, the usurers and the sages, the Zionists and the assimilated, the Ashkenazim and the Sephardim, the just and the unjust besides which the confused horde who thought that they had long since eluded the curse, the baptized and the semi-Jews — only now, for the first time in hundreds of years, the Jews were forced into a community of interest to which they had long ceased to be sensitive, the ever-recurring — since Egypt — community of expulsion. But why this fate for them and always for them alone? What was the reason, the sense, the aim of this senseless persecution? They were driven out of lands but without a land to go to.”

Two phrases leapt out: “community of expulsion,” and “driven out of lands but without a land to go to.” The second embodied the necessity of the Jewish state of Israel. But it was inconceivable, at least to me, without awareness of the first. Palestinians have joined the ever-recurring “community of expulsion.”
There is indeed something in common between the Jewish experience and the Palestinian Arab experience of diaspora - but it isn't what Cohen thinks.

Jews have been driven out of many lands over many centuries because of Jew-hatred. Whether it is because of jealousy or scapegoating or some other reason is not important for our purposes - antisemitism has been a fixture on the world stage forever.

The reason that several hundred thousand Palestinian Arabs found themselves without a place to live in 1948 is also because of Jew-hatred. Arab states made the conscious decision to not allow the Palestinians to become citizens because they wanted to ensure that they could be used as political pawns. The Arab nations, and indeed the current Palestinian leadership, have invested effort into maintaining the homelessness of millions of people because one day, they hope, these people kept in perpetual misery will be the vanguard in the effort to destroy the Jewish state. Every photo of child in a refugee camp is as valuable as every photo of a dead child in Gaza - they serve the exact same purpose, to use the innocent in order to turn world opinion against Israel (and, often, against Jews.)

Cohen shows here that he is quite susceptible to this nakedly cynical use of people's lives as propaganda.

Why has every single refugee community in the aftermath of World War II managed to disappear, while the Palestinian Arab "refugees" have increased more than tenfold? More importantly, why doesn't Cohen know the answer to this basic question?

To compare the suffering of Jews across millennia with the suffering of an artificial refugee population that is being cynically used for political purposes is outrageous. The Palestinian Arab "refugee" issue could be solved tomorrow if only the very people who pretend to care about them would treat them the way they treat all other Arabs. It isn't because they hate Palestinians, it is because they hate Jews.

This was a masterful propaganda initiative, the conscious use and maintenance of Palestinian suffering in order to make moral midgets like Cohen blame Israel for their plight instead of the Arab countries and Palestinian leaders who knowingly and explicitly perpetuated it for decades. (I'm not even talking about the reasons for their flight in 1948 to begin with; Even if Israel was 100% responsible - which it clearly wasn't - the responsibility for their welfare for the past six decades rests with the Arab countries they fled to. Just like every other refugee population in history.)

There we have it .To Roger Cohen, Israel doesn't deserve to exist unless it reaches impossible levels of perfection, and Israel is responsible for a community whose hosts will keep them stateless until Israel ceases to exist.

And, hey, Cohen can play the Jewish card, so these ridiculous ramblings have an aura of respectability!

The New York Times has published another fsact-free anti-Israel op-ed. Which means this must be Tuesday.

Today's absurdity comes from Ali Jarbawi, political scientist at Birzeit University and a former minister of the Palestinian Authority.

The latest speech by Mahmoud Abbas, the Palestinian president, before the United Nations General Assembly represented a significant departure in his thinking. Until last week, Mr. Abbas had been the firmest believer in and most loyal champion of direct negotiations with Israel under the exclusive sponsorship of the United States. He insisted constantly that these negotiations were the only way to reach a political settlement to the conflict.
For the past six years, Abbas has been doing everything possible to avoid direct negotiations with Israel.

Over the years, he was extremely conciliatory toward Israel, and offered up one concession after another on several key issues, presuming that that would enable him to appease Israel and convince it to end its occupation and work with him to achieve a political settlement, which would finally allow for the creation of the long-awaited Palestinian state.
Abbas has not made a single public concession to Israel - and he has bragged about his intransigence on multiple occasions.

None of Mr. Abbas’s conciliations or concessions to Israel ever bore fruit. In fact, over time, the country tilted increasingly rightward and its stubbornness and intractability toward the Palestinians grew.
Leftist hero Yitzchak Rabin was far more hawkish at the time of his murder than Bibi is today. The only rightward tilt in Israel were as responses to the Palestinian Arab decision to support terrorists in 2001 and in 2014.

Mr. Abbas’s speech before the United Nations was one of his best since he became Palestinian president nine years ago.
This is the speech where he said Israel was guilty of "genocide."

Really, the New York Times should at least pretend to publish op-eds that aren't so ridiculously easy to prove insane. Give me a little bit of a challenge, OK?


Friday, October 03, 2014

From yesterday's NYT:

In what has become a depressingly familiar routine, Israel has given final approval for construction of 2,610 housing units in geographically sensitive parts of East Jerusalem that will make it harder, maybe impossible, to reach a two-state solution with the Palestinians.

The timing of the decision, which came shortly before a meeting on Wednesday between President Obama and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel, also seems familiar: another in a string of calculated embarrassments that over the years have undermined American efforts to broker an Israeli-Palestinian peace deal. These decisions inevitably raise tensions between Israel and its main ally, and did so again this week.
Funny: Peace Now, who the New York Times relies on for its information, characterized the decision in December 2012 as "final approval." How many "final approvals" does Peace Now count for every plan? Hard to day, but they pretend that every single stage in the process - sometimes as many as 8 - is a dire emergency.

As far as the New York Times' description of the ad about the development as being deliberately timed to happen right before Netanyahu's trip to the US, the ad was placed on September 24, as can be seen in the photo, in a relatively low-circulation newspaper. The timing and method was clearly not meant to discomfort the White House.

On the other hand, Peace Now didn't say a word about this until October. In other words, it sat on the information in order to embarrass the head of the state that it is supposedly loves so much.

The New York Times is ascribing malice to Israel, when in fact it is Peace Now that is acting maliciously.

Building those units in the East Jerusalem neighborhood of Givat Hamatos would create a continuum of Jewish settlements, blocking Palestinian neighborhoods in South Jerusalem from Bethlehem and the rest of the West Bank where Palestinians hope to establish a state.
Again, the Times is relying on Peace Now's assertions without checking the facts.

Here is their map:


Wow, Givat Hamatos goes right next to Gilo!

Now look at Honest Reporting's map:


Hold on - there is a significant chunk of Arab neighborhood Beit Safafa in the way, which ensures no contiguity between Givat Hamatos and Gilo. How can that be?

For one thing, Peace Now is discounting the fact that about one third of the housing in this plan is being given to residents of Beit Safafa - earmarked for Arabs! I'm not sure which portion, but clearly Peace Now does not want the world to know that 900 or so of these "settlement units" under this plan - and illustrated by them - are in fact Arab.

For another, the Peace Now map includes all phases of the Givat Hamatos plan, including those that were not approved yet.

It is clear that Peace Now is engaging in large scale deception, all in order to get people like clueless NYT editors to swallow their lies.
When a nine-month, American-led effort on an Israeli-Palestinian peace deal collapsed in April, American officials put a lot of the blame on Israel for barging ahead with settlements that undermine trust and shrink the land available for a Palestinian state.
One more time: Jewish settlements have taken up virtually no new land since 1990They still take up less than 1.5% of the land across the Green Line - just as they did before Oslo.

This is again a basic fact that has been turned on its head by crusaders like Peace Now and believed completely by the supposedly fact-based media like the New York Times. (Israel shares the blame for not calling out these lies more forcefully.)

Wednesday, October 01, 2014

I wrote in my last post about Mairav Zonszein's insulting and inaccurate NYT op-ed last week.

At Tablet, Liel Leibovitz wrote a response that demolished Zonszein's examples that she claimed proved that Israeli society suppresses (leftist) dissent.

As I noted, the Zonszein op-ed wasn't a criticism as much as an insult. Leibovitz's response definitely reflects that he was insulted, and it insults the New York Times (and Zonszein) in turn for publishing an argument that can be so easily dismantled with simple facts and many provable counter-examples. But Leibovitz at least backs up his angry reaction with facts.

The Twitter thread that followed between leftist writer Lisa Goldman, Zonszein and the New York Times' Robert Mackey is a truly great example of echo chamber thinking.


OK, let's go through the logic.

Lisa Goldman and Robert Mackey are idiots. And I just proved it with that very statement.

You see, if Goldman and Mackey respond to that statement with "dismissive contempt," that is actually validation. If they contemptuously dismiss it by ignoring it, that is actually validation. If they try to prove me wrong, then it shows that I "touched a nerve" - which is actually validation.

So according to the brilliant Goldman and Mackey, there is no possible response to a baseless insult that can disprove it.

Of course, that logic doesn't make sense - unless you are Lisa Goldman and Robert Mackey, which just goes to prove that they are idiots! 

QED.

The irony, of course, is that this entire thread is one of "dismissive contempt" for an emotional but devastating rebuttal of Zonszein's article - which again, according to the participants own appalling "logic", proves Leibovitz is correct!

In the real world, proof is based on facts. Zonszein's facts were shown to be quite wrong. Not one of her pals in this thread could manage to disprove a single one of Leibovitz' points.  Mackey concludes that "there is nothing of substance in these partisan ramblings."

Projection much?

Goldman at least gets something right. There is a pattern that emerges, and that pattern brings clarity - from the side that doesn't bother to answer real criticism.

It should be troubling to the New York Times management that Mackey so cavalierly dismissed well-documented criticism of the piece. It shows, yet again, that the New York Times is as biased as possible, truth be damned.

(h/t Brightside)


Sunday, September 28, 2014

All the news that's fit to print?

The New York Times has a single article about Mahmoud Abbas' speech to the UN, and the entire article centers on whether he will try to bring a case against Israel to the International Criminal Court.

It doesn't say a word about his sickening characterization of an Israeli war against rockets as "genocide" - which was in the very first paragraph of his speech.

In this year, proclaimed by the United Nations General Assembly as the International Year of Solidarity with the Palestinian People, Israel has chosen to make it a year of a new war of genocide perpetrated against the Palestinian people.
Other news services highlighted it, but the NYT doesn't want to make Abbas look like anything but statesmanlike.

Moreover, the Times didn't say anything about the State Department's denunciation of the speech. (Although it does not appear to be on the State Department website either.)

Thursday, August 14, 2014

  • Thursday, August 14, 2014
  • Elder of Ziyon
Al Qassam Mosque with a conveniently placed child
From AP:

Only the minaret still stands after an Israeli airstrike reduced Gaza's Al-Qassam Mosque to a heap of concrete, iron rods and dust. Hours after the pre-dawn attack, rescue workers searched in the rubble, residents gathered — and plainclothes Hamas security agents mingled among them.

Also known as the Grand Mosque, it was one of 63 that Israel has destroyed in its monthlong war with Hamas, according to Palestinian officials. The reason, Israel says, is that Hamas is using mosques to stockpile weapons and rocket launchers, and to hide tunnels used to infiltrate into Israel and carry out attacks.

Gaza's Hamas rulers deny the accusation, saying Israel is waging a war against Islam. On the ground, many Gazans react the same, saying Israel is attacking their faith.

In its determination to go after what it says are militant arsenals, Israel is throwing aside any reluctance it had in the past to hit religious sites for fear of a diplomatic backlash. In Israel's week-long 2012 air campaign in Gaza, not a single mosque was hit. In the three-week 2008-2009 war with Hamas, Israel shelled 17 mosques and toppled 20 minarets, saying they were used as Hamas military antennas.

During recent visits by The Associated Press to a half-dozen Gaza mosques destroyed by Israeli strikes, residents categorically denied they were used by Hamas as hideouts for its fighters or as storage places for its hardware.

"None, absolutely none," or "I never saw members of the resistance anywhere here" were the most common responses to queries about whether the militants used them for military purposes.

And, indeed, most of the targeted mosques did double as social, education and health centers for residents, offering them medical care, classes to memorize the Quran and eradicate illiteracy, as well as sports events like soccer and table tennis tournaments.

...Standing atop the ruins of the Al-Qassam Mosque in the Nuseirat Refugee Camp, Abu Bilal Darwish, the director of Islamic Endowments for central Gaza, echoed the same argument.

"This is aggression against Islam," he declared. "The occupiers realize that our mosques raise men and people who desire martyrdom for the sake of God."

Then, in paragraph 18, after the reader was exposed to information of how mosques are important to gaza's social fabric as well as perfunctorily mentioning that Israel says they are often used for terror, AP actually reports some facts - the only paragraph in the entire article that indicates the slightest deviation from the theme of Israel attacking mosques to hurt Gazans:

Of the mosques visited by the AP, Al-Qassam stood out as the most suspicious given that three senior Hamas officials perished in the pre-dawn airstrike Saturday and judging by the heavy security presence in the aftermath of the attack. Underlining the tension, an AP reporter was briefly detained by plainclothes Hamas security men after he took down the names of two religious books recovered from the rubble.
The strike was at 3:30 AM, according to PCHR.

Not too many table tennis tournaments happening then.

But instead of a story about how it proved that Hamas indeed uses mosques for military means - why else would Hamas security be detaining the reporter - AP buried that fact and highlighted how Israel seems to be targeting them for no reason, or as an attack on Islam itself.



Wednesday, August 06, 2014

  • Wednesday, August 06, 2014
  • Elder of Ziyon
The New York Times has an article about the looming war over statistics of what percentage of the Gaza casualties were civilian and terrorist.

It pretends to be even-handed, although it falls very short.

The article downplayed the fact that Hamas killed collaborators and counts them as civiiians killed by Israel, and the possibility that many of the victims were killed by Hamas rockets and bullets and mortars. It didn't mention that Hamas took steps to ensure that terrorist casualties were not reported or named - something that the PCHR, a group mentioned, adhered to. It didn't mention that PCHR goes out of its way to minimize the number of terrorists counted. It didn't mention the flawed methodology of the information gatherers that the UN relies on, at Israel's expense. It gives credence to  the uninformed guesses of a volunteer from New Zealand - a volunteer for Hamas. It didn't mention that at the end of Operation Cast Lead, Hamas had claimed only a few dozen killed; only much later did they admit that Israel's statistics of 709 terrorist deaths were largely correct. It didn't mention comparable statistics of civilian dead in other wars in urban areas, including wars fought by Western powers that killed orders of magnitude more people. It didn't look up the latest statistics from the Meir Amit ITIC published on their website, only saying that their much earlier statistics before the ground war were impressive. It didn't mention that on Sunday, the day of the casualties outside the Rafah UNRWA school, even according to the Hamas-obedient PCHR more than 60% of those killed were terrorists.

But even if Jodi Rudoren's team had done all of that, it wouldn't have made a difference. Because accompanying the article was a large, poignant photo of a dead child.


There is no such thing as objectivity when there the subconscious message is that Israel is murdering babies. The message from the photo overwhelms the article, no matter what it says. 

Of course it is newsworthy to mention civilian casualties. But anti-Zionists and antisemites are using the photos of dead children as their most potent weapons. Even though this article notes that the proportion of children and women killed were far smaller than their percentage of the Gaza population, all of that is meaningless when there is a dead child's hand hovering over the article. 

The Israel-haters are repeating over and over, implicitly and explicitly, that the rules of war do not allow a single civilian to be killed, and every violation is a war crime.  This is nonsense, but you wouldn't know that from reading the NYT. On the contrary, the newspaper is playing up that lie, without explicitly saying it. 

Did the New York Times ever a similar number of photos of dead children killed by Western armies in Afghanistan or Iraq or Pakistan? Did the newspaper ever investigate the number of civilians being killed in Egypt's similar battles against Islamists - that are being covered up

The photos may be accurate, but they poison any accuracy that may have been in that article. No amount of IDF videos showing Hamas shooting rockets from civilian areas and the IDF avoiding innocent civilians can counteract those images.

And the haters of Israel and Jews couldn't be happier at this coverage.

(h/t EBoZ)

AddToAny

Printfriendly

EoZTV Podcast

Podcast URL

Subscribe in podnovaSubscribe with FeedlyAdd to netvibes
addtomyyahoo4Subscribe with SubToMe

search eoz

comments

Speaking

translate

E-Book

For $18 donation








Sample Text

EoZ's Most Popular Posts in recent years

Search2

Hasbys!

Elder of Ziyon - حـكـيـم صـهـيـون



This blog may be a labor of love for me, but it takes a lot of effort, time and money. For 20 years and 40,000 articles I have been providing accurate, original news that would have remained unnoticed. I've written hundreds of scoops and sometimes my reporting ends up making a real difference. I appreciate any donations you can give to keep this blog going.

Donate!

Donate to fight for Israel!

Monthly subscription:
Payment options


One time donation:

Follow EoZ on Twitter!

Interesting Blogs

Blog Archive