Recent Entries:
Author: rh
November 6, 2014
PLO Directive to Media: Do Not Use Term “Temple Mount”
For years now, Palestinians and Muslims have been attempting to erase the perception among the public of Jewish connection to the Temple Mount and to Jerusalem. Their latest attempt involves a directive from the PLO National Affairs Department to journalists directing all international media to desist from using the term “Temple Mount” and replace it instead with the term “Al Aqsa Compound”:
All international media representatives are advised to adhere to international law and correct any other existing terminology used. The Al-Aqsa Mosque compound is not a disputed territory and all other terms, therefore, are null and void.
It remains to be seen which international media outlets will dutifully follow these marching orders.
October 28, 2014
Compare and Contrast: A Further Look at the NYT
Several days ago, CAMERA posted “The ABC’s of Media Spin” about how New York Times coverage of a deadly Palestinian terrorist attack was manipulated to blame Israel. Just two days later, the newspaper covered the shooting death of a Palestinian teenager in clashes with Israeli security forces – providing an even clearer demonstration of the newspaper’s double standards in reporting.
Compare and contrast:
The Headline
“Driver Plows Into Group at Jerusalem Train Station, Killing Baby, Police Say”
vs.
“Israeli Troops Kill Palestinian Teenager in the West Bank, the 2nd in 8 Days”
The headline about the Palestinian attack that killed two Israeli residents conceals the nationalities of the perpetrator and victims and portrays the entire incident as a claim by police, while the headline about Palestinians killed by Israeli security forces spells out the nationalities of both the perpetrators and victims and presents it as fact.
The Article
What does the newspaper present as disputable claim? And what does the newspaper present as reliable claim? According to the Times, the reliability of any claim is correlated with the party that is being implicated. In other words, sources that incriminate Palestinians are routinely portrayed as unreliable, if not omitted entirely, while sources that implicate Israelis or that exonerate Palestinians are presented as reliable. Take for example the presentation of facts, reliable and unreliable claims in the article “Israeli Troops Kill Palestinian Teenager in the West Bank, the 2nd in 8 Days”:
Assertion:
Israeli troops on Friday shot and killed a Palestinian teenager who also held American citizenship.
Israeli source implicating the Palestinian, presented as unreliable:
The Israeli military said its forces opened fire as the teenager threw a firebomb onto a main road in the West Bank that is often used by Israeli settlers, an account that could not be verified. [emphasis added]
Assertion:
It was the second fatal shooting of a Palestinian teenager in the occupied West Bank in eight days. Soldiers shot Bahaa Sameer Mousa Bader, 13, in the chest during a confrontation on Oct. 16 near Israel’s separation barrier in Beit Liqya, another village near Ramallah.
Israeli source and information implicating Palestinian omitted entirely:
Israeli news sources have reported that an initial investigation by the IDF’s Judea and Samaria Division revealed that local Palestinians began throwing firebombs at army jeeps that were leaving the area, and the boy was shot after he threw a Molotov cocktail at soldiers from close range, during clashes.
This information was concealed from readers. Yet, even thought the army investigation is absent in the article, the article makes sure to brand army investigations unreliable in general, just in case someone might have heard about it.
Israeli source presented as unreliable:
Palestinian and Israeli critics have expressed skepticism about internal army investigations saying they rarely yield results.[emphasis added]
Of course, when a reporter omits mention of an investigation that does yield results and instead cites critics who allege that army investigation don’t yield results, a reader might legitimately suspect that the reporter is taking pains to conceal, dismiss and delegitimize any result from an army investigation that does not concur with his or her own pre-existing notion of guilt.
Palestinian source implicating Israelis presented as reliable:
Local residents said that Palestinians throwing stones clashed with Israeli soldiers in the village after Friday Prayer, but that Orwa was apparently killed hours later.
Nothing about this claim being “unverified” and nothing about anyone “expressing skepticism” about it.
Palestinian source implicating Israelis presented as reliable:
Al-Haq, a Palestinian human rights organization, said it had documented the killing of 34 Palestinians in the West Bank or East Jerusalem by Israeli forces or settlers since mid-June, six of them minors.
Nothing about this claim being “unverified” and nothing about anyone “expressing skepticism” about it.
Assertion:
On Wednesday a Palestinian resident of East Jerusalem plowed his car into an Israeli light rail station in the city, killing a 3-month-old girl, Chaya Zissel Braun, who also held American citizenship.
Presented as disputable claim:
The Israeli authorities treated it as a terrorist attack, and a police officer shot and killed the driver as he tried to flee, the police said. Relatives of the driver said they believed he had simply lost control of the car
Does anyone discern a pattern here?
August 13, 2014
Meet the Latest UN Arbiters of War Crimes in Gaza
The UN Human Rights Council (HRC) — not known for their fairness and objectivity toward Israel— has appointed a new panel of judges to decide whether or not human rights abuses, war crimes or violations of international law have taken place by either side in the Gaza confrontations. Of course, the last time the notoriously biased HRC did something like this , the resulting investigation and report were so biased and unreliable that the lead investigator, Richard Goldstone, ultimately reconsidered and recanted.
So who are the new arbiters appointed by the HRC?
William Schabas, a Canadian international law expert, was chosen to lead the panel. Schabas is well known for his anti-Israel comments and has decided, well in advance of any investigation that Israel’s leader is to blame. Here is a video of Mr. Schabas, publicized by UN Watch, which is demanding that Schabas recuse himself or be fired because of his pre-existing bias.
Then there is Doudou Diene, who served as United Nations Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance between 2002—2008. His 2007 report on Islamophobia was deemed “seriously flawed” by the International Humanist and Ethical Union (IHEU).
The third member of the panel, Amal Alamuddin,,a British lawyer who has achieved celebrity as George Clooney’s fiancée, has declined to participate.
August 4, 2014
UPDATE: The New York Times Changes Problematic Web Article
Original Posting
In typical New York Times fashion, an online story today spun the events of the day to hide and whitewash Palestinian terrorism and highlight Israeli hostilities, presenting the Palestinian side of a disputed version of events as fact.
The article, by Steve Erlanger, was originally headlined “Israel Suspends (later changed to “Halts”) Attack in Parts of Gaza, but Strike Kills Girll.” The reporter began the article by stating as fact:
Minutes after Israel began a unilateral and partial cease-fire in Gaza on Monday, the air force struck a house in the Shati refugee camp in Gaza City, killing a girl, 8, and wounding at least 29 others.
Yet several paragraphs later, he suggested that this version of events was disputed:
Ashraf al-Qedra, a spokesman for the Health Ministry in Gaza, said that the strike on the house in Shati took place several minutes after the announced start of the cease-fire, but one Israeli official from the army agency that controls coordination with Gaza told Israel Radio that the strike took place just before the cease-fire began.
Given that the Gazan spokesman and the Israeli official differed on the timing of the strike, it is telling that Times reporter’s inclination was to present the Palestinian version of events in the lede as undisputed factt rather than noting that “around the time that a unilateral and partial cease-fire went into effect, the Shati refugee camp in Gaza city was struck….The timing of events is disputed.”
More disturbing, however,was the way the terror attack in Jerusalem that killed a Jewish pedestrian and injured three others was hidden in the very llast paragraph of the article, not to mention its complete absence from the headline.
Of course, this is typical for the New York Times, which tends to bury and whitewash accounts of Palestinian aggression and terrorism against Israeli victims. Indeed, the brief account of the Jerusalem attack whitewashes the terrorist’s actions and reverses the sequence of events by beginning with his shooting death. Erlanger wrote:
In East Jerusalem, the police shot and killed a local Palestinian who drove a construction vehicle over a pedestrian, killing him, and then knocked over a bus, which happened to be nearly empty, slightly injuring three people.
The aggressor in this version of events is the Israeli police who “shot and killed” the “local” Palestinian who happened to run over a pedestrian and knock over an empty bus. There is no indication that this was a deliberate act of terror rather than just a case of a local Palestinian being shot dead by trigger-happy Israeli police after losing control of a vehicle. When describing a terror attack like this, it would be obviously be more intuitive to start with the death of the innocent victim before the death of the perpetrator. A more objective, journalistic version of events came from the wire services:
AP: “An Israeli-declared temporary cease-fire and troop withdrawals slowed violence in the Gaza war Monday, though an attack on an Israeli bus that killed one person in Jerusalem underscored the tensions still simmering in the region…The lull was broken by the Jerusalem assault, which saw a man ram the front end of a construction excavator into an Israeli bus. Police described the incident as a “terrorist attack,” indicating Palestinian involvement.”
Reuters: “A Palestinian killed an Israeli and overturned a bus with a construction vehicle on Monday and a gunman wounded a soldier in attacks in Jerusalem that appeared to be a backlash against Israel’s Gaza war.”
AFP: ” One Israeli was killed and five others injured Monday when an excavator rammed into a Jerusalem bus, turning it over before the driver was shot dead by police, officials said. “
Let’s hope that the print edition of the newspaper tomorrow will present a more accurate and objective version of today’s news events.
Update:
The New York Times updated the online article. The originally problematic sections now more accurately reflect the day’s events. The disputed time of the strike on the al Shati refugee camp is now described as follows:
Israel’s desired outcome could unravel if Hamas continues to attack Israel — at least 53 rockets were fired on Monday, while Israel had decreed a seven-hour unilateral and partial cease-fire. And Palestinians accused Israel of violating its own cease-fire when the air force struck a house in the Shati refugee camp in Gaza City, killing a girl, 8, and wounding at least 29.
Palestinians said the attack came minutes after the cease-fire, while one Israeli official, Yoav Poli Mordechai from Cogat, the army agency that controls coordination with Gaza, told Israel Radio that the attack was several minutes before. The Israeli military, for its part, said the strike, aimed at “a senior Hamas operative,” was at “approximately 10 a.m.,” when the cease-fire began.
And the Jerusalem terror attack is now described in this way:
In an ultra-Orthodox neighborhood of Jerusalem on Monday, a Palestinian drove a heavy construction vehicle over a pedestrian, killing him, and overturned a nearly empty bus, injuring three people, before the police shot the driver to death.
July 31, 2014
CNN’s Martin Savidge Supports Hamas Claims on Tunnels
On July 29, CNN Tonight broadcast a segment showing a film clip of Hamas terrorists emerging from a tunnel inside Israel. This footage was put out by Hamas, aired on Al Aqsa TV, and showed the terrorists attacking Israeli soldiers. Host Don Lemon asks correspondent Martin Savidge about the tunnels:
Does this make Israel’s point about the danger it faces?
Savidge replies, “To a point,” before devoting the rest of his time to supporting Hamas’ claim that these tunnels into Israeli territory are legitimate tools of war. Savidge asserts:
The other thing that is interesting by this video, Israel has maintained that these are terror tunnels, in other words, tunnels being used to go after the population of Israel. Yet in this attack, it’s against a military target. And we know last week, the IDF reported that its soldiers were struck from a tunnel before and that in Gaza they say they’re being struck from tunnels.
In each of those cases what I’m pointing out here is that the attacks were on soldiers, which could be considered legitimate targets. So in some ways, this is very compelling in supporting Hamas’ argument that, no, these tunnels are being used to wage a war, not to go after civilians. And the video wouldn’t seem to dispute that.
The correspondent’s understanding of Hamas is shallow and illogical if he truly believes that the video provides “compelling” evidence that Hamas’ tunnels are legitimate war tactics.
Hamas has consistently targeted civilians inside Israel with suicide bombings and other terror attacks as part and parcel of its mission to kill Jews, destroy the Jewish State and wage jihad against civilians. Any claim that Hamas is fighting Israel’s “occupation” is belied by the continued targeting of Jews well within Israel’s pre-67 borders.
Hamas’ charter proclaims that its ultimate mission–”no matter how long it takes”– is to “fight the Jews and kill them” and to replace the Jewish state with an Islamic caliphate.
Hamas rocket and mortar attacks target– not IDF army posts, but –civilian population centers.
Hamas tunnels have been found to emerge near kibbutzim and in other civilian areas.
The Israeli Shin Bet recently exposed a Hamas plot for a massive attack on civilians via the Gaza tunnels to be carried out on the Jewish New Year.
Hamas leaders have repeatedly declared all Israelis to be legitimate targets.
So why does the CNN correspondent parrot a Hamas propaganda line? Can he actually believe that just because some attacks target soldiers, the terror group which is committed to Israel’s destruction would avoid using the tunnels they laboriously dug into Israeli territory to attack civilians?
July 17, 2014
Anti-Israel Political Cartoonists Pounce on Israel
No sooner does Israel forcefully defend itself from attacks on its civilians coming from Gaza, than the Israel haters crawl out of the woodwork to spew their condemnation. Witness some of the recent political cartoons that have appeared in various media outlets.
As CAMERA’s sister organization CIF-Watch pointed out:
Though the evocation of the ‘shooting fish in a barrel’ meme is the most obvious element of the narrative, even more telling is the more focused depiction of the Israeli soldier’s deranged war lust (note the soldier’s face) in contrast with the helpless Palestinians (fish and other small creatures). The latter can be seen in the drop of water spit by the fish, representing it seems the benign, harmless nature of Hamas attacks.
Israel, according Turner, isn’t merely the aggressor in the war (note the ceasefire agreement in the soldier’s hand which he presumably has ignored), but is represented as bloodthirsty, vengeful, and merciless.
In the US, the Cleveland Plain Dealer too published vitriolic cartoons against Israel. Editorial cartoonist Mike Luckovich portrayed a Israel driving a car over a cliff, with Uncle Sam sitting helplessly in the back seat. The driver labeled “Israel” says, “Just because you provide the car and gas doesn’t mean you get to be a backseat driver!”
The implication that the US completely supports Israel and therefore should call the shots, that Israel is driving off a cliff and plunging the region into turmoil, that Israel is defying U.S. orders, belongs squarely in the realm of anti-Israel activists who advocate stopping all US aid and blame Israel for everything wrong in the region. These Israel haters do not see the country as an ally of the U.S., do not value the strong, historical bilateral relations between the two countries and their shared strategic goals in the region. They discount the vigorous domestic U.S. support for Israel and its security. Thus the facts do not matter to them, only the feeling that Israel should be blamed.
It is immaterial to them that 3.1 billion dollars of US aid, which is almost all military assistance accounts for only 23-25% of Israel’s military funding. Nor does it matter that much of this aid benefits the U.S.. The fact that every country has the right to protect itself from attacks on its civilians, that Hamas has been raining rockets and missiles down on Israeli cities, that Israel is the lone democratic, moral nation in a region that is unravelling in violence is of no matter.
What is disturbing is that a newspaper like the Plain Dealer willingly publishes such tripe. Perhaps even more disturbing, however, is the other political cartoon, penned by Andy Marlette, that was published by the Plain Dealer on the same day, July 16, 2014.
In this cartoon, Moses labeled “Israel” holds the tablets in his hand with the commandments “Thou Shalt Not Kill… …Kidnap & Torture Children.” The cartoon seems to suggest that “kidnapping and torturing children” is a regular action by the Israelites. Never mind that condemnation, excoriation, revulsion and unprecendented calls to severely punish the Jewish perpetrators of the abductors and murderers of an Arab child have poured in from Israeli politicians across the political spectrum, from rabbis of all stripe, representing all sectors of the Jewish community in Israel and from every segment of Israeli society. Never mind that Palestinian media, broadcasts are filled with invocations to murder Jews and Israelis wherever they may be. The singling out of Israel with the false implication that Israeli society as a whole promotes and tolerates the abduction and torture of children reeks not only of anti-Israel bias but, with the inclusion of Moses and the tablets given to the Jews, of anti-Jewish bias as well .
May 27, 2014
Zochrot Veers Into Realm of Anti-Semitic Comedy
The radical anti-Israel organization Zochrot, which promotes the abolition of the Jewish State, has recently garnered attention in major newspapers regarding its GPS app advertising the Palestinian narrative of Nakba (catastrophe). Some of these media reports resemble promos for Zochrot’s app and downplay the group’s radicalism by describing it simply as an Israeli group “advocating the right of return for millions of Palestinian refugees and their descendants.” What receives little to no attention is the extreme, anti-Jewish agenda of those Israelis involved in the organization.
NGO-Monitor points to a grotesque YouTube clip, made with the involvement of several Zochrot officials, that mocks the Holocaust by attempting to turn anti-Israel and anti-Jewish hatred into comedy.On April 23, 2014, a highly disturbing video was posted on YouTube, “The Holocaust’s Visit to Yad Vashem,” featuring radical activist Natali Cohen Vaxberg. In it, she visits the Yad Vashem Holocaust memorial and adopts the persona of the “Holocaust,” claiming to be “the best thing that ever happened” to the Jewish people.
Paul Leslie in The Algemeiner draws a comparison between this “comedy” and that of the anti-Jewish agitator and French comedian Dieudonné who was banned from entering the UK after his hateful performances were cancelled in France. Leslie demonstrates how anti-Semitism is rendered acceptable in certain circles by parading as anti-Israelism:
The growing influence in certain intellectual, journalistic, and cultural circles exerted by even the most extreme detractors of Israel has contributed to a significant increase in anti-Jewish prejudice – either expressed openly or manifested in the guise of “anti-Zionism.” One consequence of this mounting anti-Israelism is that the kind of mockery and lampooning of Jews that would cause outrage if directed at other ethnic or religious groups has become respectable among those who would like to think of themselves as “progressive” or “liberal.”
Dieudonné, the French comedian, failed politician, anti-Jewish agitator, and frequent mocker of victims of the Shoah, has often taken advantage of the hypocrisy mentioned above. He has continued to exploit the anti-establishment and libertarian attitudes that have emerged in the milieu of stand-up comedy and among its supporters in order to bash Jews and the Jewish State of Israel.
When it is “Zionists” and Jewish supporters of Israel who the comedians and satirists choose to attack, there is good reason to see this as being motivated consciously or unconsciously by anti-Semitic feelings,…
That Zochrot officials participate in similar anti-Jewish mockery is appalling. That countries and NGO’s supposedly friendly to Israel continue to fund this organization and those involved is a disgrace, as Leslie points out. That the media continues to portray Zochrot as a legitimate organization even while condemning Dieudonné’s Jew-baiting and hate-mongering is simply hypocritical.
March 11, 2014
AFP Forced to Correct False Story Based on PA Security Sources
AFP ran with a story citing Palestinian security forces who claimed a Palestinian from the Tulkarem area died after Israeli troops shot at his car. The media outlet, however, was forced to pull the story when PA security forces acknowledged the information was incorrect:
KILL our URGENT story Israel-Palestinians-conflict-toll,urgent “Palestinian dies after Israel troops fire on his car: Palestinians”. Palestinian security sources say their information on army gunfire was incorrect.
The Palestinian Ma’an news agency, basing its report of the car crash in part on the AFP article, included more information but still blamed Israel for the fatal car accident. near Tulkarem . According to Ma’an, the Palestinian died in car wreck due to an ‘Israeli police chase’. The Palestinian news agency did not correct.
March 10, 2014
The Tripod: CAMERA Links in 3 Languages Feb. 26 – March 10
Spanish Posts
ABC: ¿Por qué fue Merkel a Israel?
El diario español ABC se encarga de que los palestinos estén en el titular de la noticia sobre la visita de Merkel a Israel, que era relevante por otros motivos. (ReVista de Medio Oriente)¿Dónde está la cobertura?
La prensa en español suele recoger y reproducir noticias provenientes de periódicos israelíes, siempre y cuando los hechos que relate esa noticia sirvan para reforzar la imagen de Israel que se pretenden instalar entre el público lector. (ReVista de Medio Oriente)La agencia EFE: acusación particular contra Israel
La agencia gubernamental española presenta los argumentos de la acusación, pero en ningún momento nos permite conocer qué alega el acusado en su defensa. (ReVista de Medio Oriente)Un elefante rosa
Es grande, ruidoso, muy visible en un lugar pequeño y, aún así, nadie quiere verlo. Lo mismo sucede con Hamas, y con los grupos terroristas que operan desde Gaza, en el marco de las conversaciones de paz entre Israel y la AP. (ReVista de Medio Oriente)Pincelada propia
La agencia española de noticias Europa Press, tomaba el material deReuters y no podría evitar darle un giro muy propio. (ReVista de Medio Oriente)Hamás condena la enseñanza de los DDHH en Gaza
La organización terrorista condena el curricula de la UNWRA por incluir asignaturas sobre derechos humanos. (ReVista de Medio Oriente)5 razones que alejan a los palestinos de la paz
Utilizar los medios de comunicación para difamar a Israel y difundir odio gratuito desde la cúpula de la Autoridad Palestina, son razones de peso que alejan a los palestinos de la paz y que usan como plataforma de difusión los medios de comunicación masiva. (ReVista de Medio Oriente)English Posts
Al-Jazeera America TV News Aims Against Israel
Twisted coverage of Israel is consistent with the network’s indirect connection through its owner to the creation of the Palestinian Hamas terrorist entity sworn to Israel’s destruction. The CEO, aiming at the opinion makers, admits to unconcern about profits and viewer ratings. (CAMERA)Where’s the Coverage? The Truth about “Israel Apartheid Week”
The latest untold story. (CAMERA Snapshots)Ha’aretz Veers Off Course with Ports Story
In the latest false media account of a supposed anti-Israel BDS victory, Ha’aretz incorrectly reports that two foreign companies withdrew from a ports tender due to boycott fears. (CAMERA)When Media Cover for Palestinian Terror Groups
Martin Kramer has excellently exposed how The New York Times covers for Rashid Khalidi. (In case it’s not clear, the job of a serious newspaper is to cover the PLO spokesman-cum-professor, not cover for him.). (Snapshots)Just the Facts: Stripping Down Ha’aretz Coverage on Airport Search
A Ha’aretz news article describes a “he said/she said” dispute about the alleged strip search of an Israeli Arab teacher. Ha’aretz headlines and opinion pieces upgrade the disputed claim to fact. (CAMERA)Ha’aretz Lost in Translation on Strip Search
Today, in an apparent case of “lost in translation,” the Ha’aretz English edition continues to report as fact the disputed claim that Israeli Arab teacher Ezies Elias Shehada was subjected to a strip search. (Snapshots)Mitnick, the U.S., and “Illegal” Settlements
American policy on the legality of the settlements has been consistent for decades. And Joshua Mitnick’s coverage of that policy has also been consistent. Consistently wrong, that is. (Snapshots)Did Mahmoud Abbas outrage Syria’s Palestinian refugees by waiving their right to live?
The Guardian failed to report news that Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas had rejected an Israeli offer to allow thousands of Palestinian refugees, caught in war-torn Syria, safe travel into the West Bank and Gaza – citing his fear that they may be forced to forfeit their “right of return”. (CiF Watch)Hebrew Posts
Yossi Sarid’s Boycott
What are the aims of the BDS Movement?. (Presspectiva)The Media is a little too fast in reporting BDS successes
Did Dutch and Italian companies really withdraw tender application to build new ports in Israel, due to political reasons?. (Presspectiva)Abu-Mazen’s True Position
What Abu Mazen says in English is not always identical to what he says in Arabic . (Presspectiva)Ha’aretz No Longer a Newspaper
Has Ha’aretz decided to come out of the closet, shrugging off any pretense of being a news organization? What other explanation is there for publication of the full text of a petition by Rashid Khalidi and Judith Butler without any comment or context? (Presspectiva)Portraying Israel as if it was North Korea
A Ha’aretz Op-ed is too happy to grossly mischarecterize and declare as a fact, incidents which are very much in dispute. (Presspectiva)Ma’ariv Finally Corrects!
Days before an ethics committee hearing on Presspectiva’s complaint, Ma’ariv finally corrects a six month old story. (Presspectiva)March 4, 2014
The New York Times Persists in Emphasizing IDF Defensive Strikes While Downplaying Palestinian Terrorism
CAMERA’s monograph, Indicting Israel: New York Times’ Coverage of the Palestinian-Israeli Conflict, noted the newspaper’s consistent emphasis on Israel’s defensive military strikes while downplaying Palestinian violence. During our 6-month study, Palestinian attacks –including those that killed Israelis – were never featured prominently, but the newspaper repeatedly highlighted Israeli military actions or vandalism by radical Israelis. While 12 headlines implicated Israel for killing Palestinians none referred to Palestinians killing Israelis even though 14 Israelis were killed by Palestinians during that time. (See: Indicting Israel, Chapter 4 “Violence Double Standards”, page 57)
Well, it seems this pattern of coverage is endemic to The New York Times. Correspondent Jodi Rudoren, recently back from a speaking jaunt in the U.S., just published an item about an IDF air strike on an Islamic Jihad rocket squad about to fire missiles into southern Israel. The problem is, the article was headlined “Israeli Airstrike Kills 2 in Gaza” and introduced as follows:
An Israeli airstrike killed two Palestinian men in the Gaza Strip and wounded two children on Monday evening, according to the Israeli military and Palestinian health officials, continuing the increased violence between Israel and Gaza this year.
“Continuing the increased violence between Israel and Gaza this year?” Who is the party “continuing” the violence, the terrorists trying to launch another attack or the soldiers preventing the attack? The paragraph suggests it is the latter. And how is there any equivalence between the two? Rudoren falsely implies tit-for-tat, morally equivalent violence on both sides. The correspondent further adds to this impression by declaring:
Despite a 15-month cease-fire between Israel and Hamas, the militant Islamic movement that rules the Gaza Strip, the past two months have seen a steady simmer of strikes on both sides.
Surely a defensive air strike to thwart an imminent attack on Israeli territory cannot be considered equivalent in any way to terrorists targeting civilians, and the IDF’s protection of its civilians is certainly not the same as the Islamic Jihad terrorist group trying to inflict as many deaths and as much damage as possible on Israelis.
But with its emphasis on Israeli actions–both in the headline and lede paragraph– and by equating the terrorist attacks with Israeli defensive actions, the newspaper distorts the story of Palestinian aggression and Israeli defense.
Search:
Search this site: