Dear Readers:
It occurs to me that I ought to have a running commentary on the anti-Israel bias in the contemporary New York Times. It is my home town newspaper and I do read it everyday. Sharing rather than silently swallowing my frustration will be an excellent tonic, and good for my blood pressure.
In today’s edition (May 15th), here is how the Gray Lady summarizes what happened in Israel yesterday.
ATTACKS DURING BUSH VISIT
“President Bush’s trip to Israel to celebrate the country’s 60th birthday was marred by violence. Four Palestinians were killed, including two militants, and nine were wounded in a series of Israeli Army strikes and incursions into Gaza said medics and witnesses there. In Israel, a rocket that the police said was launched from northern Gaza badly wounded four people, including a two year old girl.”
Before we even get to the piece itself which was located at the very bottom of page 6, lemme vent. The first “violence” noted above was that caused by “Israeli Army strikes.” Absolutely no background or context are given in terms of why Israel would strike Gaza. Hundreds, maybe thousands of non-stop Kassam rockets launched against Israeli civilians, children, schoolhouses, hospitals? Could that be it? The Times isn’t saying. And why-oh-why does TimeSpeak keep identifying Hamas terrorists and Islamists as “militants?”
And, now that the Israeli military has been maligned and branded as evil day after day in the Paper of Record, even I tend to trust a smidgen less anything they might have to say. I am meant to; thus, if the Israeli “police” tell us the rocket was launched from Gaza–perhaps, maybe, I am meant to take that with a grain of salt. Not so the “medics and witnesses” of Gaza who have never been maligned and who appear, therefore, as neutral reporters.
Only when you get to the longer piece, do you learn that the Gaza-launched rocket hit a health clinic in Ashkelon (beyond Sderot); that the doctor who was attending to the wounded was also wounded by it; that the rocket was “Iranian made;” that “Hamas has praised the attack.”
Yes, the same Hamas that Presidential hopeful Barack Obama wants us to talk to as does the new left-Jewish group which calls itself J Street– just to make sure you understand that they are truly out of this world. (”J” street in Washington D.C. does not exist, that is their clever point). See James Kirchick’s article “What Does the New Jewish Lobby Really Represent” in The New Republic of May 28, 2008.
But back to the New York Times: In terms of this latest rocket attack upon Israeli civilians, you have to read on to the eighth paragraph to learn that sixty other people were also wounded–but only “lightly.” Not seriously, right? The fact is, that such attacks have been going on for years, the civilian population is being terrorized and traumatized, as well as murdered and maimed. And yes, “lightly wounded” as well.
The Times piece includes lots of other information having nothing to do with the Israeli murdered, maimed, or “lightly wounded.” The piece is also about President Bush’s visit and the diplomats, celebrities, theologians, and Israeli leaders who gathered to be part of it.
Folks: Just for the record let me wearily repeat: Israeli government policy may sometimes be imperfect–but as imperfect as it may be, it does not justify the horrendous, exterminationist assault upon Israeli civilians that Palestinians, Syrians, Jordanians, Egyptians, and Iranians have perpetrated over the decades. I would like you all to read how an Israeli newspaper reported this same event of yesterday.
by Ezra HaLevi
(IsraelNN.com) The Iranian-supplied Grad-type rocket fired at an Ashkelon mall Wednesday was launched from the former Gaza Jewish fishing village of Dugit, which was evacuated and destroyed by Israel in the 2005 Disengagement for the stated purpose of strengthening Israel’s security.
Hamas-affiliated Popular Resistance Committees Spokesman Muhammad Abdel-Al told World Net Daily Wednesday that the attack, which wounded dozens, including children, was launched from Dugit, located along the coast in northern Gaza.
Dugit’s residents, mostly secular Jews who made a living fishing in the Mediterranean, left reluctantly, but without a struggle in 2005, when then-Prime Minister Ariel Sharon announced his diplomatic plan to unilaterally withdraw the IDF from Gaza and destroy all the Jewish towns there. More than 9,000 residents were evicted from their homes in the operation.
At the time, residents and other opponents of the plan warned that the communities would be used as terrorist training camps and staging grounds for terrorist attacks.
Abdel-Al hailed Wednesday’s attack as a “symbolic act” that proved the effectiveness of PA Arabs’ policies of launching attacks on Jewish civilians to achieve concessions from Israel’s government. “Our launching from Dugit is a sign of success,” Abdel-Al told World Net Daily’s Aaron Klein. “Mark my words, just as we liberated Dugit, so we will liberate Ashkelon, Jaffa, Jerusalem, Tel Aviv and Haifa.”
In 2005, then Prime Minister Ariel Sharon implemented his Disengagement Plan in which Israel demolished 21 Jewish towns in Gaza and 4 in northern Samaria, forcefully expelled the Jewish residents, and handed the Gaza area over to the Palestinian Authority.
In his speech to the Herziliya Conference in 2003, Sharon explained that “the purpose of the Disengagement Plan is to reduce terror as much as possible, and grant Israeli citizens the maximum level of security… These steps will increase security for the residents of Israel and relieve the pressure on the IDF and security forces in fulfilling the difficult tasks they are faced with. The Disengagement Plan is meant to grant maximum security and minimize friction between Israelis and Palestinians.”



Digg This
del.icio.us

PJM Home
The Death of Feminism: What’s Next in the Struggle for Women’s Freedom
Women and Madness
The New Anti-Semitism: The Current Crisis and What We Must Do About It
Woman’s Inhumanity to Woman
Women of the Wall: Claiming Sacred Ground at Judaism’s Holy Site
Letters to a Young Feminist
With Child: A Diary of Motherhood
Feminist Foremothers in Women’s Studies, Psychology, and Mental Health
Patriarchy: Notes of an Expert Witness
>Sacred Bond: The Legacy of Baby M
Mothers on Trial: The Battle for Children and Custody
About Men
Women, Money & Power


4 Comments
George Jochnowitz:For reasons nobody will ever understand, Israel is the most hated country on earth. In 1972 or some such year, when Israel was not in the news as much as it is today, members of the Japanese Red Army chose to give up their own lives in order to kill random passengers at Lod Airport. It turned out that many of those they killed were Puerto Rican Christian pilgrims, but I’m sure that had they known what would happen,they would have been willing to kill innocent Puerto Ricans so that they could kill innocent Jews. What they did made no sense, but then, the ferocity of anti-Zionism makes no sense.
May 15, 2008 - 1:43 pm Norman Simms:Phyllis
It is a good idea to do the running commentary on The New York Times. I back you completely, but at the same time fear that you thus put yourself forward for even more hatred–and there should be a way that the rest of us can share that public burden and show our solidarity with you so that you are not perceived as the Lone Voice of Reason against all the madness in the world today.
It is not just the NY Times or the BBC or any other single news medium that shouts its hatred of Israel day after day, relentlessly, sometimes quite openly and sometimes with the false mantle of equivalence or objectivity, but virtually every news agency in the world.
Norman
May 15, 2008 - 3:42 pm carolyn ammenheuser:Dear Phyllis,
Thank you for writing what needs to be written. I do read your articles faithfully.
Yes, I agree the NYT has lost its moral compass, if not its moral courage, which are so needed in this time of ennui, but I would like to ask about another New York icon.
I would be very interested in your opinion and response to the current installation at The Guggenheim by Cia Guo-Qiang. The installation simulates, and glorifies a car bombing “that the violence has a beauty and harmony.”
Also, it seems to me, that the Guggenheim embraces the artist’s vision of art that includes his fascination with ‘unstable environments’, old kilns, and military bunkers.
Has anyone spoken out against this acceptance of ‘ violent harmony’?
Thank you for your work.
May 20, 2008 - 9:21 am Dr S McCosker:You can always do what I do with such things - amuse yourself by rewriting the article for greater clarity. For example, let’s see what happens to that first paragraph you quoted.
“Gazan Arab medics and others claimed that four ‘palestinian’ Arab Muslims, two of them jihadis, were killed, and nine wounded, when the Israeli army attacked jihad fortress Gaza in response to the jihadis’ ongoing rocket barrage against southern Israel. Inside Israel in Ashkelon, an Iranian-made rocket fired by Hamas’ jihadis from within northern Gaza wounded sixty Jewish civilians; a two year old girl and her mother suffered life-threatening injuries”.
There. Better? I wrote ‘claimed’ re. the Palestinian Arab Muslim casualties, because Mohammed said ‘war is deceit’ and I have reached the point where I am not prepared to give automatic credit to anything an Arab Muslim spokesperson says, without independent third-party corroboration.
May 20, 2008 - 5:47 pm