NY Times coverage of Israel is a travesty. At a time when Haaretz is publishing critiques of repression of Israeli dissidents and cut-offs of power to Palestinians under occupation, New York Times publishes story on the army asking veterans to return old military equipment, which they have kept because of “collective nostalgia.”
It is incontrovertible that Israel commits war crimes and acts of state terrorism. If anything, Breaking the Silence doesn’t go nearly far enough. But the New York Times manages to diminish its work
The UN Human Rights Commission report on last summer’s Gaza war is inappropriately “balanced.” It is more or less equally critical of Israeli and Hamas actions, without regard to the differences between the vast and horrific extent of civilian destruction caused by Israel and the far lesser civilian deaths and destruction that resulted from the largely ineffective Hamas attacks. –Scholar Jerome Slater
Palestinian terrorism has been largely driven by the just cause of national liberation in part of Palestine rather than the unjust one of the destruction of Israel. By contrast, while there is a strong case that Zionist terrorism was instrumental in the establishment of the state of Israel during the 1940s, since 1967, its primary purpose has been to maintain the occupation. Jerome Slater’s argument, which did not find a home in a journal.
As Haaretz covers Israeli PM Netanyahu’s statements of incitement that are “liable to lead to another political assassination,” the New York Times story on the election campaign describes dueling and mostly cutesy campaign slogans, videos, and social media postings
Bias in the New York Times: Jodi Rudoren fears that an honest Israeli documentary will give “catnip” to the country’s critics, and Isabel Kershner says B’Tselem cleared Israel of targeting civilians in Gaza.
The NYT wonders, smartly, why the world should pay to rebuild Gaza when it will just be destroyed again. As to which side is responsible for the “collapse” of peace talks, the editorial is silent. As to which side is responsible for the destruction of Gaza, and for the likelihood of it being repeated, the editorial is also silent.