Trending Topics:

A Jew who visited Palestine responds to ‘NYT’ assertion that Palestinians want to kill all Jews

News
on 63 Comments


Readers know that we have undertaken to confront a repulsive statement that was published in a March letter to the New York Times Book Review:

“Palestinian Arabs have avowed as their goal the killing of all Jews.”

We might have dropped this weeks ago, but the Times public editor kept the slur alive by writing last weekend that Walter Schimmerling’s letter should have been published with modification: such as putting in the word “’many’ or ‘some,’ before ‘Palestinian Arabs’ in the editing process.”

Yesterday I was at the SodaStream demonstration outside Zabar’s on the Upper West Side when I ran into Ted Auerbach, who has visited Palestine many times, including recently. Auerbach is Jewish and I asked him how often he had felt that his life was in danger from Palestinians. You will see that he gets very upset at the statement, describes it as a racist lie and piece of propaganda that thoroughly misrepresents the people whose villages and homes he’s stayed in. Also he says that the lie isn’t working…

Again we must ask how many other ethnicities in the world could be so casually slurred in the pages of the Times, and have the public editor affirm the value of publishing the slur. I repeat James North’s challenge to readers:  What is the most accurate modifier of the word Palestinians in the statement, “Palestinians have avowed as their goal the killing of all Jews.” Some Palestinians? Many Palestinians? Or: Not a single one at all.

Philip Weiss

Philip Weiss is Founder and Co-Editor of Mondoweiss.net.

Other posts by .


Posted In:

63 Responses

  1. JeffB on April 23, 2014, 11:53 am

    What is the most accurate modifier of the word Palestinians in the statement

    I’d go with the two words “infrequently and ambiguously”

    • Woody Tanaka on April 23, 2014, 12:21 pm

      “I’d go with the two words ‘infrequently and ambiguously'”

      Of course you would, because you’re a patent bigot.

      Not a single one at all.

      • Stephen Shenfield on April 23, 2014, 6:56 pm

        “Not a single one at all” means you know the mental state of every single Palestinian in the world. If it is true, Palestinians must be angels rather than normal human beings.

        The idea that masses of Palestinians have the avowed goal of killing Jews, preposterous as it may be, is an idee fixe of the more extreme kind of Zionist propaganda. It isn’t confined to a few nutters. For instance, I read on a Kahanite website that the only difference between Palestinian citizens of Israel and other Palestinians is that the former know how to chant “Death to the Jews!” in Hebrew and not just in Arabic.

      • Woody Tanaka on April 24, 2014, 1:16 am

        ““Not a single one at all” means you know the mental state of every single Palestinian in the world. ”

        No, it simply means that you have the basic human decency to not accuse someone of genocidal intent without being able to prove it.

    • justicewillprevail on April 23, 2014, 1:56 pm

      How ambiguous of you. Hoping to have your cake and eat it, by pretending to sound liberal whilst keeping the prejudicial bigotry alive. Quite the cute parser aren’t you – how does one ‘ambiguously’ avow the killing of Jews, I wonder? Not as ambiguously as you choose to patronise and smear them. Of course the answer is none. How many Jews wish the Palestinians extinguished? Quite a lot, judging by the polls.

      • JeffB on April 24, 2014, 10:05 am

        @justicewillprevail

        how does one ‘ambiguously’ avow the killing of Jews, I wonder?

        I gave 4 examples of statements that do exactly that in the previous thread.

  2. Herb Glatter on April 23, 2014, 11:57 am

    Phew thank goodness you found a “Jewish” guy at Zabar’s yesterday. Here is another example of the Zionist takeover of the world. Ellen DeGeneres recommends SodaStream on her show: Listen here it starts at 0:50 seconds in: http://www.ellentv.com/videos/0-gmkujzaq/

    • talknic on April 23, 2014, 12:46 pm

      Herb Glatter “Phew thank goodness you found a “Jewish” guy at Zabar’s yesterday”

      In the Upper West Side? At Zabars? Where they serve Kosher? You’re kidding http://www.jta.org/2013/01/22/life-religion/where-is-new-yorks-jewish-population-growing

      “Here is another example of the Zionist takeover of the world”

      If you say so Herb….

      • Herb Glatter on April 23, 2014, 12:55 pm

        Zabar’s Kosher? obviously you have never visited this place. Here’s a link to their website – maybe, just maybe you’ll learn something: http://www.zabars.com/

      • eljay on April 23, 2014, 1:09 pm

        >> talknic: At Zabars? Where they serve Kosher?
        >> Herb Glatter: Zabar’s Kosher? obviously you have never visited this place. Here’s a link to their website – maybe, just maybe you’ll learn something …

        He didn’t say they are Kosher, he said they serve Kosher. And, whaddaya know, he’s right: Zabar’s Kosher Selections

        Maybe, just maybe, you’ve learned something.

      • talknic on April 23, 2014, 1:11 pm

        Thanks for that Herb… I learned that ZABARS does Kosher http://www.zabars.com/kosher-food/ No doubt you have an endless supply of nonsense to post …

        Idiots for Israeli intransigence never seem to check. Too dangerous I guess, they’d have nothing to post

      • talknic on April 23, 2014, 8:23 pm

        Bye Herb….

  3. on April 23, 2014, 12:12 pm

    I sent this to Sullivan – she is a disgrace.

    Dear Ms Sullivan,
    As Times public editor you have been guilty of a major slur in writing that Walter Schimmerling’s letter should have been published with modification: such as putting in the word “’many’ or ‘some,’ before ‘Palestinian Arabs’ in the editing process.”

    I was reared in Northern Ireland and I am of Irish descent like yourself. Reading this forces me to evaluate these emotions in the context of the conflict between Catholics and Protestants in Northern Ireland including my own extended family. If the following sentence was published in Ireland or the UK at any time in the last 50 years it would be greeted with incredulity “Some Catholics have avowed as their goal the killing of all Protestants”. A sentence like this has never been published in Ireland or the UK because it is ridiculous. But you suggest the sentence in reference to the Palestinians and Jews as though the Palestinians are some species removed from human norms. You are in fact blindly demonizing the Palestinians as been typical and traditional in your newspaper on countless occasions over the years.

    Yours sincerely,

    • marc b. on April 23, 2014, 1:29 pm

      the times is incorrigible. Michael Gordon, who with Judith Miller helped spin the webs of lies about Iraqi weapons of mass destruction, and more specifically, was a link in the press/government circle jerk over the Iraqi nuclear weapons program, is back at it again in Ukraine. (well, Geneva at least, I believe. too much shooting going on in the Ukraine.) see link.

      http://www.historycommons.org/entity.jsp?entity=michael_gordon&printerfriendly=true

      (The Miller-Gordon Siamese bullhorn quoting anonymous government sources, with government sources subsequently approvingly quoting articles written by Miller-Gordon.)

    • JeffB on April 23, 2014, 1:34 pm

      @unverified

      Between 1968 and 2010 there were 3,568 deaths in Ireland due to religious struggles. The Second Intifada was 2x that number. That number is in the same ballpark as Operation Cast Lead alone. The level of I/P violence is much higher. It ain’t Rwanda but it ain’t the relative calm of Ireland either.

      • Woody Tanaka on April 23, 2014, 2:39 pm

        Yes, and the population of Palestine/Israel is about 6 times larger than Northern Ireland, and the P/I conflict has lasted about twice as long. When you run the numbers, the rates are about the same per person/per year. So much for “relative calm.”

      • marc b. on April 23, 2014, 4:18 pm

        woody, jeff has done the maths. don’t you see the dates and numbers? (3568/(2010-1968) X 2 = 100% of Palestinian Arabs want to kill ‘all the Jews’. I double checked. He’s right.)

      • pjdude on April 23, 2014, 5:32 pm

        Last time I checked 4504 is not twice if 3568. You see 4504<7136.

      • Ecru on April 24, 2014, 3:08 am

        @ JeffB(lindingly Ignorant)

        Between 1968 and 2010 there were 3,568 deaths in Ireland due to religious struggles.

        Please stop trying to make a point using the Troubles/Ireland as it’s SO clear that along with almost everything else you have ZERO understanding.

        The Troubles were NOT a “religious struggle” they were an inter-communal struggle about equal rights, political loyalty and national determination. Religion had as much to do with things as the colours Green and Orange did.

      • JeffB on April 24, 2014, 10:02 am

        @Ecru

        Talk to unverified about that. And of course a struggle between Protestants and Catholics is a struggle between religious communities often called a religious struggle.

      • Ecru on April 24, 2014, 12:51 pm

        @ JeffB

        You don’t learn do you?

        a struggle between Protestants and Catholics is a struggle between religious communities often called a religious struggle.

        Not if it’s not about religion moron, then it’s just a struggle.

      • James Canning on April 24, 2014, 2:21 pm

        Most Catholics in Norther Ireland supported, and continue to support, inclusion of Northern Ireland in the UK.

    • puppies on April 23, 2014, 1:38 pm

      @unverified – Modifying a reader’s letter is vile and does deserve censure, but you seem to be upset because they did not suppress the letter. Very slippery slope, that. Yes, Schimmerling is obviously as insane as our Zionist contributors (and he’s not at his first apparition) but he has every right to have his opinion published for any reason –not least, that of affording a peek into the Zionist mind.

  4. peacenotapartheid on April 23, 2014, 12:18 pm

    “some extemist” would be better than nothing, but is there evidence for even that narrow modifier?

  5. talknic on April 23, 2014, 12:23 pm

    @ 01.26 guy in blue jacket walks past.

    @ 01:55 same guy returns

    @ 01:59 by the way he is holding his phone, he appears to be recording the conversation

    @02:03 guy with pamphlets gets in the way. Guy in blue jacket tries to move to a different position

    • elephantine on April 23, 2014, 4:22 pm

      Yes! I had to watch it a second time because the bald guy at the end gave me the heebeejeebeez when I noticed him. Was curious if anyone else noticed that too or I was just paranoid. lol

  6. talknic on April 23, 2014, 12:44 pm

    Another @ 01:41 Again holding phone as though recording. Leaves @ 01:51 as the other guy takes up almost the same position http://mondoweiss.net/2014/04/palestine-assertion-palestinians.html/comment-page-1#comment-661440

  7. Baldur on April 23, 2014, 12:48 pm

    Kudos to Ted Auerbach. You’re making our Earth a better and more just place by publishing your experiences. Bit by bit, these efforts heal the world.

    • annie on April 23, 2014, 12:55 pm

      i traveled to palestine (gaza/WB) and israel with ted. he is a wonderful person.

  8. adele on April 23, 2014, 1:17 pm

    This is why I love Mondoweiss! Absolutely wonderful when dialogue is used to disseminate the truth :-)

  9. Kathleen on April 23, 2014, 2:57 pm

    I have met Ted in D.C. at a “Move over Aipac” event or some other Pro Palestinian Pro Peace gathering. What a sweetheart. “on the contrary I felt more safe in Palestinian homes than in New York”

    Great topic Phil…why is it that the NYBloodyTimes still perpetrates these falsehoods. Oh did I say bloody. Because the NYBT is just that…bloody

  10. James Canning on April 23, 2014, 7:49 pm

    No intelligent Palestinian would even think it possible to “kill all the Jews”. The notion is nonsensical.

    • JeffB on April 24, 2014, 10:11 am

      @James

      Of course it is possible. Hitler proved that quite effectively. He invaded countries, gather them up and ship them off to central disposal centers. Mostly what he found was that countries when given the option were enthusiastic about the prospect and helped immediately. The Arab backlash in the 1950s as more as more recent events like Venezuala prove that Jews can be effectively concentrated easily.

      But really because of Hitler, the Arabs backlash and immigration to Israel the Jews aren’t scattered the way they were anymore. Wipe out Israel and have the backlash in the USA that many of the MWers are always salivating about if American Jews don’t immediate join the crusade against Israel and that’s pretty much it for the Jewish population. It wouldn’t even be that hard.

      If you mean the Palestinians don’t have the power to do it, I’d agree. But they often have delusions about what they are capable of. That’s one of the reasons the I/P conflict goes on as long as it does the Palestinians won’t read the board and cut a deal.

      • eljay on April 24, 2014, 11:24 am

        >> Mostly what he found was that countries when given the option were enthusiastic about the prospect and helped immediately.

        JeffBeee makes a very compelling argument for cracking down on supremacist “Jewish State” and ensuring that it and eager Zio-supremacists do not get to finish what they started.

      • James Canning on April 24, 2014, 7:48 pm

        2014 is not 1939 or ’40

      • James Canning on April 24, 2014, 1:59 pm

        JeffB – – No country or group of countries poses a real threat to Israel, apart from the potential for a relatively small number of Jews to be killed by a few rockets from time to time.
        Jews are essentially safe in all parts of the world.

      • JeffB on April 25, 2014, 1:06 am

        @james

        – No country or group of countries poses a real threat to Israel, apart from the potential for a relatively small number of Jews to be killed by a few rockets from time to time.

        I agree with you Israel doesn’t face any real threats. But most of your compatriots here on MW however believe Israel is terribly vulnerable an artificial colony that would collapse without constant USA support and for many a belief that they lost to Hezbollah the last time they fought. Regardless however, there most certainly are countries that if they choose could destroy Israel like Russia or the USA.

        Jews are essentially safe in all parts of the world.

        Jews just got cleared out of Venezuela. They are being cleared out of South Africa especially the rural parts at a pretty good clip right now. So no, they aren’t safe everywhere. They are safe in their two largest homes the USA and Israel along with other key places like Canada. But “anti-Zionism” is popular and when it arises Jews are generally ethnically cleansed in the name of anti-Zionism.

      • pjdude on April 24, 2014, 8:17 pm

        First off your wildly distorting the history of ww2 and the holicaust. And secondly your being an entitled bigot calling the Palestinians delusional for refusing to give up their rights. The only difference between a thug and you is a thug at least as the courage to do his own dirty work

  11. on April 23, 2014, 8:44 pm

    Tonight the lamentable Rudoren and Gordon wrote that “the United States harshly condemning a new deal announced by feuding Palestinian factions, including the militant group Hamas, to repair their seven-year rift”. Then they note that Kerry’s spokeswoman, Jen Psaki, called the Palestinian move “disappointing” and the timing “troubling.” This is hardly condemnation but then almost everything Rudoren and Gordon write is an attempt to condemn the Palestinians. Such is the conflict of interest when you let Zionists report on Israel.

    • James Canning on April 24, 2014, 2:27 pm

      Regrettable stupidity in the US reaction to unity deal. Predictable, regrettable stupidity.

  12. Dutch on April 23, 2014, 9:07 pm

    Thanks Phil. Great journalism. And thanks to Ted Auerbach for speaking out so clearly.

    BTW, I think this should be brought to the attention of the editors of the Times, forcing them to readdress the matter and formally change their POV, as a guarantee this won’t happen again.

  13. Marlene P. Newesri on April 23, 2014, 9:50 pm

    While the comment that Palestinians want to kill Jews in the context of what has happened to the Palestinians since 1948, starting with their ethnic cleansing, is obviously ludicrous, now speaking strictly from my own personal experiences, that comment begs an answer to the question I have….why am I still here, and why am I still living since I’ve always had Palestinian friends who I actually first met in Israel decades ago and then I was married for many years to a Palestinian who I actually met in Haifa. . I never had issues with any Palestinians regardless of religious backgrounds. I have always been accepted for the person I am, just the same way that I accept people which has nothing to do with race, ethnicity or religion. I never had fears to walk amongst the Palestinians, but it was almost impossible for me to walk amongst Jewish citizens of Israel without being cursed and spit at simply because of my associations with Palestinian Arabs.

    It was only in Israel that I actually had a glimpse of what it might have been like in the past for someone who may have befriended a German Jew during the Nazi rise to power. I felt as though I was actually living the reverse of what it might have been. That is where I learned about racism and hatred on the most personal level possible.

    I can only say that if for any reason I was forced to seek refuge somewhere in this world because of any hatreds, …then I will seek that refuge amongst the Palestinians who have always shown nothing but generosity, tolerance and kindness, in spite of the suffering they have had to endure and still endure to this very day.

    Would the NY Times like to write my story or publish any letters? They never have thus far because I am not projecting the image that they want the public to have.

    • Citizen on April 24, 2014, 7:54 am

      @ Marlene P. Newesri

      Would the NYT publish a letter/comment claiming “Israeli Jews have avowed as their goal the killing of all Palestinians.”

      How about, “Israeli Jews have avowed as their goal the transfer/exodus of all Palestinians.”

      Whenever I see a reader’s letter/comment published practically anywhere that speaks negatively of their subject “The Jews” or “Jews; it’s always followed by a barrage of reader responses castigating the original comment as a pure example of hard core anti-semitism. This relative to the NYT editor’s response she should have published Schimmerling’s letter “with modification: such as putting in the word “’many’ or ‘some,’ before ‘Palestinian Arabs’ in the editing process.”

      • hophmi on April 24, 2014, 11:29 am

        “Would the NYT publish a letter/comment claiming “Israeli Jews have avowed as their goal the killing of all Palestinians.””

        It seems like some version of that claim pops up on MW on a daily basis.

      • The Hasbara Buster on April 24, 2014, 9:43 pm

        @Citizen

        How about, “Israeli Jews have avowed as their goal the transfer/exodus of all Palestinians.”

        Actually, that would be an accurate statement. Israelis are represented by their elected politicians, and the country’s Minister of Foreign Affairs, Avigdor Liberman, has put forward the idea of transferring Israeli Arabs, for instance by swapping Israeli Arab towns for uninhabitted Palestinian land.

        Liberman has avowed to get rid of the Arabs frequently and unambiguously. For instance, on Sunday he addressed Israeli Arab politicians in a Facebook posting, stating “I can promise these inciters that we will do everything so that in any future accord, they will find themselves in the place they belong and Umm el-Fahm [a major Israeli Arab town] shall be part of the Palestinian state and not part of the state of Israel.”

        This is not an obscure sentence in a charter, or a vague statement misrepresented by the press. It’s a repeatedly stated commitment to a policy of ethnic cleansing.

    • Citizen on April 24, 2014, 8:22 am

      Brooke Goldstein, from the Lawfare Project was on Fox News channel’s Kelly File last night, arguing that a short movie available very recently, explaining the terrorist motive of the hijackers as Islamic jihad, as part of the final touches of the 9/11 Memorial–is not misleading.

      Her opponent, a female Episcopal minister, argued the movie was misleading and should be given context, i.e., that for most Muslims the term “jihad” means daily struggle to be a good person, and to maintain daily prayer rituals, etc.

      Goldstein countered that implies most Americans are stupid, which is not the case; and so it’s asinine to say they might be led by the movie to think every Muslim they see is a closet terrorist.

      The movie on hijacker motive apparently does not mention the 9/11 commission’s generic conclusion the hijackers were motivated as blowback from US foreign policy.
      In fact the original findings and statement’s from the hijackers mentioned the US blank support of Israel’s treatment of Palestinians was a key motive.

      • JeffB on April 24, 2014, 10:15 am

        @Citizen

        In fact the original findings and statement’s from the hijackers mentioned the US blank support of Israel’s treatment of Palestinians was a key motive.

        The key motive was the US relationship with Saudi Arabia. You can list the 3 motives of Saudi Arabia, Iraq and Israel. But what you wrote above is dishonest.

      • James Canning on April 24, 2014, 2:01 pm

        JeffB – – Osama bin Laden made very clear indeed, that he attacked the US to punish it for continuing assistance to Israel in its oppression of the Palestinians. FULL STOP.

    • on April 24, 2014, 9:52 am

      Yes – good point. When I write a letter to the NYT I have the feeling that some teenage Zionist immediately sends it to the trash because, as you write, I am not projecting the image that they want the public to embrace. And it is a false image. In the case of Rudoren and Gordon, they say that the Americans and the Israelis harshly condemned the Palestinian factions for trying to make peace amongst themselves. The Israeli and UK newspapers say nothing of the sort because it is untrue. It is a simply a case of Rudoren, Gordon and the NYT condemning the Palestinians wherever possible.

  14. puppies on April 23, 2014, 10:36 pm

    This whole thing is ridiculous. A known Zionist nutcase, Walter Schimmerling, meaning really all-out paranoiac at a minimum, fantasizes in a letter to the editor in the NYT that some Ayrabs are out to kill Schimmerling and his entire tribe (purpose unspecified). Then, someone playing the editor at the NYT finds it appropriate to publish that, be it because he is as ready for the nuthouse as Schimmerling himself, be it because he rightly thinks that this very nicely exposes the Zionist mind.
    So far, so good. Deserves a smile and a shrug.
    Where it beats the late Aristophanes, though, is when MW makes a big story out of this, discussing if there could be a kernel of truth in the delirium by Schimmerling, having debates for pros and cons, collecting testimonials (personal impressions of Jewish travelers who certify that Palestinians are humans…) Say it ain’t so…

  15. wondering jew on April 23, 2014, 11:04 pm

    The letter to the NYTimes was really off kilter and irrelevant to the issues that separate Israel and the Palestinians from the possibility of an agreement. The emphasis of Mondoweiss on this issue seems a bit off kilter (1/29th as off kilter as the published letter, but still off kilter). The testimony of Ted Auerbach is irrelevant. I’m sure (23/29ths sure) that he was not staying with Hamas Palestinians. That is the demographic of the Palestinian people that might harbor attitudes formed by the Hadith that I referred to yesterday. (BTW- I would negotiate with Hamas, despite the awful rhetoric that has existed in the past and that I assume (21/29ths) still exists in the present.) The overwhelming politics of Hamas these days is desperation due to the overthrow of Morsi by the military junta in Egypt and they have more important things to worry about rather than the expression of murderous rhetoric. But the Hadith exists and it is murderous in nature.

    And this whole line of questioning, although not up to the off kilterness of the original NYTimes letter, is still off kilter.

    • puppies on April 24, 2014, 12:55 am

      @Friedman – Before you look at a Hadith that you cannot possibly digest in years, how about reading, say, about the genocide of Canaanites and Jebusites and different other ites and not leaving a single we aren’t saying human being, but even head of cattle alive? That is in a language that you pretend to understand. Or the ongoing genocide of Palestinians (and yes, it does fit the official definition of genocide, no matter your sensitivities.) That all exists and some of it happens everyday. Your Islamic scholarship will have to wait to be acknowledged… way off as yet.

      • wondering jew on April 24, 2014, 6:12 pm

        hey puppies,
        the genocidal nature of too many of the verses of the book of Numbers and Deuteronomy is an obvious counterargument to anything I write. This does not change the fact that this silliness off kilter ness by James north and Phil Weiss is best left aside, unless one does something in depth like trying to understand the Islamic religion and its attitudes as expressed about Jews. But this “I challenge you to name one Palestinian” is the stuff of sophomores and not scholars. Not as bad as the stupid letter in the times, but plenty sophomoric. And I ain’t surprised that it’s your biased voice that comes to their defense. Cuz they’re off kilter and they know it.

      • puppies on April 24, 2014, 10:12 pm

        @Friedman – Nobody said it’s easy to defend an ongoing genocide; that’s why it’s a job for seasoned propaganda operatives, not the likes of you. As shown by the non-response.

    • The Hasbara Buster on April 24, 2014, 10:14 pm

      @yonah

      The testimony of Ted Auerbach is irrelevant. I’m sure (23/29ths sure) that he was not staying with Hamas Palestinians. That is the demographic of the Palestinian people that might harbor attitudes formed by the Hadith that I referred to yesterday.

      I see what you mean: while Fatah Palestinians don’t want to kill all Jews, Hamas ones do.

      Small problem, a Jew called Norman Finkelstein has been the guest of Hamas Palestinians in Gaza, and they didn’t kill him.

      So, while this may be 32/29ths off kilter, we’re still left with not a single example of Palestinians who have avowed to kill all Jews.

      I must add I can’t fathom why you would consider that calling out a deranged editorial policy is not relevant in a blog largely devoted to media bias.

      • wondering jew on April 25, 2014, 1:05 am

        The HB- No, I am not asserting that all supporters of Hamas want to kill all Jews, I am merely asserting that Ted Auerbach’s sample was not a fair one and that if he had stayed 100 times with Hamas people then it would be a fairer sample.

      • talknic on April 25, 2014, 2:44 am

        @ yonah fredman “I am merely asserting that Ted Auerbach’s sample was not a fair one and that if he had stayed 100 times with Hamas people then it would be a fairer sample”

        I realize it’s not within a propagandists brief, but be honest for once if you can. Have m/any Jews visiting Gaza on humanitarian missions been slaughtered by Hamas?

      • RoHa on April 25, 2014, 3:10 am

        Don’t forget, talknic, that Arabs are notoriously lazy and inefficient. They want to kill all Jews, but they just can’t get around to organising it.

    • Donald on April 25, 2014, 8:25 am

      “The letter to the NYTimes was really off kilter and irrelevant to the issues that separate Israel and the Palestinians from the possibility of an agreement. The emphasis of Mondoweiss on this issue seems a bit off kilter (1/29th as off kilter ..”

      I’d be surprised if there weren’t a few Palestinians somewhere (there are millions of Palestinians, after all) who wanted to kill all Jews, as there are some Americans like the KKK guy who feel that way with no provocation whatsoever. There was a minority of Americans (according to John Dower in his book “War Without Mercy” who wanted to kill all Japanese during WWII. And presumably some Israeli Jews want to kill all Arabs or enslave them and have some Biblical passage in mind which justifies this.

      What makes the NYT and even the usually sensible Margaret Sullivan so wrong on this is that they would never dream of publishing a letter which said “Israeli Jews want to kill all Palestinians”. And if they did I doubt Sullivan would have said that the proper response was to say some or many do. The double standard here is probably unconscious–the way the conflict is portrayed in the US, it is “settlers” vs. “suicide bombers” or “terrorists”. I doubt the casual reader of the NYT (someone with no great interest in it) would realize that the majority of civilians killed in the conflict have been Palestinians killed by Israelis. The US government always condemns Palestinian violence as terrorism that must be stopped–the most it ever does with Israeli violence is to counsel “restraint”, and more often it says Israel has the right to defend itself.

      Against that backdrop of constant propaganda it’s entirely natural for people who don’t follow the issue closely to think that the Palestinians tend to be bloodthirsty, while the Israelis never kill except in self-defense. And I suspect even Margaret Sullivan has unconsciously adopted just a little bit of that thinking in her response.

      • eljay on April 25, 2014, 9:03 am

        >> Donald @ April 25, 2014 at 8:25 am

        Very well said.

  16. pabelmont on April 24, 2014, 11:38 am

    The slur was not in a news piece, as I recall, but in a letter. In a “news piece” it would have been particularly repulsive, for “news” reprots are supposed to be true (or at least truish, supportable, evidence-based, blah-blah).

    A “letter” even if actually (as this may have been — I don’t know) a propaganda piece, can claim to be an expression of opinion rather than of fact, but such a claim must be made explicitly. The letter writer has no business to make a flat-out claim of (repulsive) (hate-speech) “fact” without some basis in fact.

    Had the letter-writer said, perhaps quite honestly, “I’ve always been taught that all Palestinians want to * * *” he’d have been on sound ground. And he would not have misled any reader. Had he written “It is my opinion that all Palestinians * * *” he’d at least have let readers know that this was not made as a statement of “fact”.

    As for NYT, their editors are not required to publish horrors of this sort and should have removed the offensive, repulsive line or declined (as they have over the years declined to publish any number of my letters) the whole letter.

    Either way, NYT is to blame. Perhaps its letter editor(s) have drunk the Zionist cool-aid and believed either that this statement of fact was correct (!) or that such a racist slur was permissible in our otherwise usually politically correct world (!!).

  17. Sumud on April 24, 2014, 10:45 pm

    Netanyahu and Jodie Rudoren are promoting the ‘kill all jews’ meme by attributing it to Hamas, from a NYT/Reuters piece picked up in Fairfax press in Australia:

    Mr Netanyahu was emphatic in an interview on Thursday that Israel “will not negotiate with a Palestinian government backed by Hamas. These people are calling for the obliteration of the Jewish state [and were] openly, openly calling for the killing of Jews wherever you find them.”
    But he said Israel was still prepared to talk peace: “If we encounter a Palestinian leadership and Palestinian government that is ready to pursue genuine peace negotiations, we’re going to be there.

    Israel halts peace talks with Palestinians

    I included the second paragraph because Netanyahu slipped and let it out his desired goal is “genuine peace negotiations” instead of “genuine peace”.

Leave a Reply