New York Times Says Abbas ‘Vilified’ for Challenging Number of Holocaust Victims
In an article today about Abbas’ statement condemning the Holocaust, Jerusalem bureau chief Jodi Rudoren writes: “Mr. Abbas has been vilified as a Holocaust denier because in his doctoral dissertation, published as a book in 1983, he challenged the number of Jewish victims and argued that Zionists had collaborated with Nazis to propel more people to what would become Israel.”How did the BBC frame Mahmoud Abbas’ remarks on the Holocaust?
This passage is characteristic Times treatment of Israel and the Palestinians. Palestinian claims, no matter how specious or unfounded, are treated with neutrality at best, and afforded credibility, at worst. Abbas had written in his dissertation: “it is possible that the number of Jewish victims reached 6 million, but at the same time it is possible that the figure is much smaller – below one million.”
In stating that Abbas “challenged” the fact that six million Jews were killed in the Holocaust, The Times journalist falsely implies that there may actually have been substance to his claim.
Although it once again downplays Hamas’ terror designation by numerous countries, the BBC article notes correctly that:PMW: Abbas' and other PA officials' acknowledgement of the Holocaust
“Hamas officials have made statements denying the Holocaust, and in 2009 objected to a UN proposal to teach children about it in UN-run schools in Gaza.”
It goes on to state:
“Mr Abbas’s comments were the strongest that he has made publicly on the Holocaust and appear to be an attempt to reach out to a mistrustful Israeli public, the BBC’s Yolande Knell reports from Jerusalem.”
In fact, Abbas has made numerous public remarks in the past regarding the Holocaust, which Knell’s adjective “strongest” might also be used to describe – though in a decidedly different sense. The Israeli public is of course aware of the fact that Mahmoud Abbas’ PhD dissertation was based on a form of Holocaust denial.
Mahmoud Abbas' recent acknowledgement that "what happened to the Jews in the Holocaust is the most heinous crime to have occurred against humanity in the modern era" [Wafa (the official PA news agency), April 27, 2014] is a very rare example of official PA acknowledgement of the Holocaust and that its crimes were directed principally at Jews.Juan Cole… Definitely Uninformed and Often Wrong
Studying Palestinian Authority officials' statements and PA events publicized in the official PA media, Palestinian Media Watch has found very few other examples of explicit official PA acknowledgement of the Holocaust and its crimes against the Jews and others.
Juan Cole of “Ahmadinejhad really didn’t say he wanted to wipe Israel off the map” fame is at it once again. When it comes to Israel, Cole spends so much time twisting himself and distorting positions that it seems that the man would have to screw his pants on (h/t to Hunter S. Thompson) to get dressed in the morning. On his page “Informed Consent” (a misnomer if there ever was one) Cole writes: John Kerry admits Israeli Apartheid; and 5 Ways he is Understating It. In this article Cole gives us an fact free screed as to how Israel is an “Apartheid State” beginning with his inaccurate headline.
Unless one has the reading comprehension of a small child, it is clear that Secretary Kerry is saying that should there be One State solution (which there is not); Israel would run the risk of becoming an Apartheid type state. What he did not say was “Israel is an Apartheid State”. So, from the very headline this article fails.
From here it simply gets more ridiculous. The entire premise of the article states that there is already a One State solution in place and that Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza are in fact Israeli Citizens who are treated as “second class citizens”. NOW, if Israel did annex the West Bank and Gaza and did not offer the right of franchise amongst other civil rights to all of its citizens one could make that argument but the Israelis have not done this. AND even if they wanted to ignore all of the security concerns and everything else exactly to whom would they be handing this land over too (but never mind that I guess)? So with that the entire analogy of conflating Israel to South Africa fails miserably.
