By Eric Lichtblau
A1, A14
Wednesday, December 24, 2008
Before Israel earned American support with its stunning victory in Six Days of War, the US actually resisted Jews' efforts to secure independence in 1948, as evidenced by the conviction of Charlie Winters a quarter century ago. As Lichtblau writes, "The United States banned the sale of weapons to Israel and to other countries in the Middle East, and Israel found itself isolated militarily as it struggled to hold on to its fledgling independence."
This fact may unnerve defamers of Israel who vilify the Jewish state as an American imperial product.
One small problem with Lichtblau's writing. In the fourth to last paragraph, he writes that Mr. Winters "never said anything about...his work for the Israelis." Mr. Winters worked with the Israelis. He chose to manage a transaction of military aircraft and was remunerated for it. The use of "for" suggests subversiveness, as if Mr. Winters was on the Haganah payroll.
All in all, praise goes to W for pardoning a truly righteous dude (gentile).
By Isabel Kershner and Ethan Bronner
A6
Kershner and Bronner team up for this piece, and the trouble is doubled.
NYT is unwilling to give Israel any credit for the positive developments in Bethlehem and misses the main point of these improvements. The readily apparent conclusion - the pshat - is that when there is security and cooperation between Israel and the Palestinian Authority (PA), the Palestinians are able to prosper. The more security, the more Israel will ease restrictions, and the more possible it becomes to reach a political solution.
Instead, NYT repeats the main Palestinian talking point – end occupation now, now, now! Incremental improvements and interim agreements that lay the groundwork for a political solution are not sufficiently welcomed or applauded.
The Palestinian takeover of the Church of Nativity in Bethlehem and suicide terrorism emanating from Nablus are papered over in the second and eighteenth paragraphs, respectively.
Governor of Bethlehem, Salah Tamari, who is alloted the the all-poweful last word - lasting three paragraphs - regurgitates a now familiar and offensive psycho-analytic claim about Jewish Israelis: They are constantly insecure because they are always illogically projecting their experience with Anti-Semitism and the Holocaust upon everything else. This is despite the fact, of course, that real violence and incitement against Jews continues.
Kershner & Bronner are to be praised on two points:
1) Referring to Israeli opposition leader, Benjamin Netanyahu as "conservative," instead of the overused "hawkish."
2) Making an identification between checkpoints and prevention of suicide bombing rather than insinuating that their purpose is to "strangle the Palestinian economy" in paragraph twenty. They report, "...Israel’s removing the major checkpoints it erected in 2002, a step it said was necessary to prevent the movement of suicide bombers."
NYT is unwilling to give Israel any credit for the positive developments in Bethlehem and misses the main point of these improvements. The readily apparent conclusion - the pshat - is that when there is security and cooperation between Israel and the Palestinian Authority (PA), the Palestinians are able to prosper. The more security, the more Israel will ease restrictions, and the more possible it becomes to reach a political solution.
Instead, NYT repeats the main Palestinian talking point – end occupation now, now, now! Incremental improvements and interim agreements that lay the groundwork for a political solution are not sufficiently welcomed or applauded.
The Palestinian takeover of the Church of Nativity in Bethlehem and suicide terrorism emanating from Nablus are papered over in the second and eighteenth paragraphs, respectively.
Governor of Bethlehem, Salah Tamari, who is alloted the the all-poweful last word - lasting three paragraphs - regurgitates a now familiar and offensive psycho-analytic claim about Jewish Israelis: They are constantly insecure because they are always illogically projecting their experience with Anti-Semitism and the Holocaust upon everything else. This is despite the fact, of course, that real violence and incitement against Jews continues.
Kershner & Bronner are to be praised on two points:
1) Referring to Israeli opposition leader, Benjamin Netanyahu as "conservative," instead of the overused "hawkish."
2) Making an identification between checkpoints and prevention of suicide bombing rather than insinuating that their purpose is to "strangle the Palestinian economy" in paragraph twenty. They report, "...Israel’s removing the major checkpoints it erected in 2002, a step it said was necessary to prevent the movement of suicide bombers."
(Gratitude to ShamSham for insight and assistance.)
AP
World Brief A11
Again, NYT - via the Associated Press (AP) - refers to Hamas as "the militant group that rules Gaza" instead of as a terrorist organization.
The men killed are referred to as Palestinian militants, not Hamas members. By calling them "Palestinian," the AP unwisely indicates that these men represent the Palestinian populace. If they do, then the prospect of an agreement between Israel and Palestinians is further off than even the most optimistic predictions. The men should be called Hamas members, if the fact can be verified. If they are members of another terrorist group, then the name of that group should be mentioned.
At the end of the Brief, AP reports, "Soldiers crossed a few yards into Gaza and engaged the Palestinians..." Now, these men are not even "militants"! They are "Palestinians." The terminology conjures victimhood and invites sympathy. The act, which forced the IDF's hand - planting explosives along the border fence - is subtly neutralized.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment