Ha’aretz Finds Another False Pretext for ‘Apartheid’ Smear

Franklin Lamb, right, poses with child murderer Samir Kuntar. Lamb’s bogus intelligence report is the basis of Ha’aretz‘s heading “U.S. intel cries ‘apartheid'”

Last week we described how Ha’aretz‘s Akiva Eldar manipulated an erroneous, unsubstantiated figure and falsely attributed it to the Israeli government in order to make the charge that even the government has acknowledged that – in the words of the online subheadline – “apartheid is here.” As we wrote:

Why did Eldar invest so much effort into manipulating this data? The answer appears in the online subheadline, which posits that even the Israeli government acknowledges that “apartheid is here.” Appealing to the most rabid anti-Israel activists, Ha’aretz pulls the “apartheid” genie out of the bottle, all by relying on an incorrect, unsubstantiated figure falsely attributed to the government. Ha’aretz knows precisely for whom they are writing overseas, and Eldar knows how to deliver.

We now realize that Ha’aretz pulled the same trick – accusing Israel of apartheid based on a falsely attributed source – twice in that single item! About half-way through the article, under the heading “U.S. intel cries ‘apartheid,'” Eldar shifts gears somewhat, referring now to a different report (as opposed to the Finance Ministry memorandum he earlier cited). He writes:

The term “apartheid” features prominently in an article in the on-line magazine Foreign Policy Journal on a new “confidential report” prepared by 16 American intelligence agencies. Franklin Lamb reported from Beirut to the Foreign Policy Journal on the “confidential report, which he claims compares Israel to the apartheid regime in South Africa. The document, he says, warns that the Arab Spring and the Muslim awakening will encourage 1.2 billion Muslims to fight against what they refer to as “the immoral European occupation of Palestine.” Lamb argues that the report accuses Israel of intervening in internal American affairs via 60 organizations and some 7,500 administration officials. The report, Lamb says, advises the United States to leave Israel alone as its existence sabotages the American interest in moving closer to the Arab world and the Iranian people.

Eldar, to his credit, then goes on to raise interesting details about Lamb’s credibility:

A quick Google search reveals interesting details about Lamb; you can find him in friendly pose with the arch-terrorist Samir Kuntar. His profile states that he is a board member of the Sabra-Shatila Foundation, a volunteer with the Palestinian Civil Rights Campaign, a regular guest on talk shows of Hezbollah’s Al-Manar station and a contributing writer to the Electronic Intifada site.

An article by Eldar’s colleague Amir Oren in today’s paper goes even further, calling the alleged intelligence report a fabrication. He states:

Not only was Lamb’s secret study never conducted, it could not possibly exist. . .

If Eldar knew the “intelligence report” was bogus, why didn’t he say so instead of dancing around the issue with interesting details about Lamb’s background? Eldar was clever enough to be cautious; he used scare quotes referring to the “confidential report” and identified Lamb’s claims as just that. But if Eldar had questions about Lamb’s credibility, but didn’t actually know that the so-called intelligence report was bogus, then why did he report it, instead of sitting on the story until he could verify it?

And why did Ha’aretz editors choose the following false heading when, in fact, no such intel exists?

Because, as we said, Ha’aretz seeks to appeal to the most rabid anti-Israel activists, and using the “apartheid” smear is a sure way to do that. No matter that the charges are based on falsely attributed reports (1) the Finanance Ministry and 2) a bogus intelligence report).

In his take-down of the Franklin Lamb article about the non-existent intelligence report, Ha’aretz‘s Amir Oren notes:

The story of the fall of mighty serious people (and others) into Lamb’s snare exemplifies the difference between professional and amateur media, between those who are committed to verifying, checking and cross-checking information before publishing it and those who are content to recycle. If this difference is not enough to save traditional journalism, the kind that is liable no longer to exist a decade from now, it could serve as a draft for its eulogy.

Oren’s condemnation of “mighty serious people (and others)” who fell “into Lamb’s snare” might have been directed at his colleague Eldar as well as the Ha’aretz employee who wrote the false heading. Even if it wasn’t, Eldar, a veteran Ha’aretz journalist, would do well to listen closely.

Update: Elder of Ziyon reveals Franklin Lamb’s history of fabrication and crime.