I guess it started in 1987, when I got my first letter to the editor published complaining how a cartoon used antisemitic imagery in its portrayal of then PM Yitzchak Shamir.

In the following years I had letters published in the Baltimore Sun and other publications.

Sometime after 9/11, I got a sense that highly paid columnists, PhD, government officials and other anointed could write the most absurd nonsense and started to e-mail articles that represented reality better than what I was used to seeing in the New York Times or Washington Post (with some exceptions).

I also became aware that you didn’t have to be a highly paid columnist, PhD or government official to get to make unsupported assertions. Regular folks could do that too.

The medium through which they did that was called a blog and I e-mailed one of the earliest practitioners of blogging if what I did could be considered e-mail blogging. She answered that she supposed it could. (I thought I preserved the exchange, but can’t find it right now, so that’s from memory.) As you probably can guess my source was none other than Meryl. And no, bloggers like Meryl, weren’t known for making unsupported assertions, they backed up their assertions with links to sources, not appeals to their own brilliance or supposed expertise.

And so I was drawn to the world of blogging. After some years Meryl invited me to post announcements of Haveil Havalim – the Jewish blogging carnival – at her blog, one of her efforts to promote pro-Israel blogging. Eventually I was invited to join as a regular blogger, a role I enjoyed – getting much wider exposure than I got at my own blog – until my retirement from blogging.

But for me and many others Meryl was a pioneer and inspiration, someone who showed us what pro-Israel blogging could be.

On April 15, 2002, there was a pro-Israel rally on the Mall in Washington DC. It was the height of the so-called “Aqsa intifada,” (or, if you prefer, the Oslo War.) I remember a sign at the rally to the effect of “Israel has 9/11 24/7.” That was the desperate feeling at the time. Every few days, it seemed, brought word of another horrific attack.

The Bush administration, which despite its mistakes, was fundamentally pro-Israel. But in an act of political deafness, sent Paul Wolfowitz to speak to the crowd. The problem wasn’t Wolfowitz but what he said. As the AP started its report:

A top administration official was interrupted and booed Monday when he told thousands of people gathered at the Capitol for a pro-Israel rally that Palestinians as well as Israelis have been victims of Mideast violence.

Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz was drowned out by chants of “no more Arafat” and booed as he told a packed crowd of thousands that “innocent Palestinians are suffering and dying as well. It is critical that we recognize and acknowledge that fact.”

Forget about the blatant bias of the AP in that article. At a time when Israel was defending itself against the most brutal terror war in its history, for Wolfowitz to mention the Palestinians at a pro-Israel was really dense, and as noted, the crowd reacted. Nothing wrong with sympathizing with innocent victims, but to attribute them to Israel self-defense was outrageous.

Andrew Sullivan, about 6 and a half years before he was completely unhinged, thought that was rather ungrateful of the crowd. Meryl pointed out the obvious:

It isn’t just the way the “boos” were blown out of proportion, or the way they were taken so out of context, and made to look as if the crowd cared nothing for the death of innocents. What bothers me most is that the impression is wrong. American Jews care greatly that innocents–on both sides–are dying. But the rally was the Israel Solidarity Rally–not the Israeli and Innocent Palestinian Civilians Solidarity Rally. We went to Washington to make our points–not listen to theirs. We went to hear speakers talk of the innocent Israeli civilians who are dying–murdered by Palestinian “martyrs”–whose comrades hide in the midst of innocent Palestinian civilians.

That was my earliest clear memory of Meryl’s work, and she’s been doing the same for ten years now: showing us how to fight pervasive anti-Israel bias in the media and the chattering classes.

May she go from strength to strength over the next 10!

Television footage showed the activists attacking marines with clubs, iron bars and at least one knife.

The Deutsche-Press Agenter takes the time to expand upon the commission, its reliance on video evidence, but not until after the obligatory anti-Israel five-paragraph lead. The AFP, of course, slants anti-Israel, quoting liberally from the Turks.

The Irish Times presented a very fair and objective piece. NPR used the AP story to present a fair picture that showed the breakdown of the Turkel Committee. The Independent embedded a video in its story (which also detailed the makeup of the Committee and its investigation), although of course the article is slanted as anti-Israel as they could make it. Even the Hindustan Times managed to publish an article that pointed out the international observers on the investigation, placed there to blunt attacks on the committee’s credibility.

Now compare this to the AP report of the Turkish investigation into the Mavi Marmara incident. There is no information whatsoever on the makeup of the committee. There is no mention of the makeup of the Turkish investigation, except to note that the foreign minister—who is quoted throughout the article—was on the committee. Interestingly, none of the Turkel Committee members spoke to the press. The AP story repeates the Turkish accusations uncritically, even when they are known to be untrue and contradicted by video evidence. Just look at this lead paragraph:

A Turkish committee investigating Israel’s deadly raid on a Gaza-bound flotilla has refuted Israeli claims that its soldiers acted in self-defense, saying at least two activists were killed before commandos boarded the ship and another died “execution-style” as he lay injured.

Note the language in bold. Israel’s contentions are “claims.” The word’s implied meaning is that they are not true. Of course, what Turkey “says” is taken at face value. There should be a refutation of the lie that Israel killed two “activists” before boarding the ship, but there is none.

On a side note, once again, there is a major PR fail by Israel.

In Jerusalem, Israeli Foreign Ministry spokesman Yigal Palmor said he could not comment on the Turkish findings because he had not seen the report.

Palmor said Israel had submitted its own report to the U.N. and was waiting to hear “what lessons could be learned so this doesn’t happen again.”

Instead of the above, the Ministry should have been ready with its own talking points based on the Turkel Committe’s report. The tone of the AP article would be very different if it looked like, say, this (boldface is made up by me as an example of what could have been said):

In Jerusalem, Israeli Foreign Ministry spokesman Yigal Palmor said he could not comment on the Turkish findings because he had not seen the report. But he reiterated that the Turkel Committee had exonerated the IDF commandoes, saying they had acted in self-defense after being attacked by activists onboard the ship.

As an example, when the Turkel report came out, Turkey’s Islamist president made sure that he put on a big enough fuss to get picked up in his own article by the AP. The Islamists are running circles around Israel in the PR war. Let me put it this way: If words were weapons, Israel would have been defeated in the mid-70s, when the Palestinians ramped up the PR war and Israel continued to not understand how valuable the sound-bite is on television.

When the AP does finally quote the Turkel report, it does so in the last three paragraphs of the article, after repeating uncritically the ridiculous claims of the Turkish report. This one is my favorite made-up accusation:

Another activist, Cevdet Kiliclar, was killed with laser-guided weapons while taking photographs, the report said.

Always the innocent bystander excuse. None of the “activists” above decks that night were innocent. The IDF released a slew of video evidence showing the activists preparing to attack, and then attacking them. But for the AP, there’s no such thing as asking for evidence. And remember, they actually declined to accept the videos from the IDF, saying they had no way of knowing if the videos had been tampered with (which is absolutely false; videographers have excellent methods of determining the validity of a video).

This is, once again, not just media bias. This is also Israel’s problem. Israel needs to ramp up its PR department at the Foreign Ministry, at the IDF, at every office and institution so it can begin to change the anti-Israel bent of so many media stories. Or it can just stand by and watch the delegitimization of Israel, aided and abetted by the anti-Israel media.

Israeli air force strikes Gaza, 8 wounded

Note the headline has no context. Those evil Israelis are just randomly bombing Gaza and wounding people.

GAZA CITY, Gaza Strip (AP) – Officials in Israel and Gaza say Israeli aircraft have carried out retaliatory airstrikes in the territory after militants launched rockets into Israel.

The airstrikes are “retaliatory.” Not justified. They use a word that makes Israel look vengeful. There is also no context that the missiles have been launched at Israel on 20 of the first 40 days of the year. That’s right, on the average of every other day, Gazans are firing missiles into Israel. The AP does not note the missile attacks unless someone in Israel is hurt or killed. Or unless Israel launches “retaliatory” airstrikes.

Gaza Health Ministry spokesman Adham Abu Salmiya says the airstrikes overnight lightly wounded eight Palestinians. He says one strike set fire to a Health Ministry medicine warehouse in northern Gaza.

Yes, we have the “Israel didn’t hit a military target” line, which is what the Palestinian spokesliars always use, and which the media always repeate uncritically. Here we also have the named Palestinian spokesperson. There is no named spokesperson from Israel, which is apparently AP policy. Note the use, as usual, of quoting, “Israel’s military”:

Israel’s military said Wednesday that the strikes were in response to the firing of five rockets and mortars into Israel on Tuesday. The military said aircraft targeted a tunnel and two other sites used by militants.

Lastly, we have the boilerplate untruths that the AP accepts at face value.

The Hamas militants who rule Gaza have largely refrained from attacking Israel since Israel’s Gaza offensive two years ago. But smaller groups continue to fire rockets and mortars.

If Hamas doesn’t want rockets to fly into Israel, then rockets do not fly into Israel. I know this, the AP writers know this, Hamas knows this, and Israel knows this. But here’s the thing about our so-called objective media: If a group says it is not violent, therefore, it is not violent. (cf: Muslim Brotherhood)

The AP: Bringing you all the news that fits our narrative.

The left blames the right. The right blames the left. The sane blame insanity. What Loughner put on Youtube and what he said to friends about his conspiratorial beliefs is simple insanity. Many of us try to explain terrible events by trying to attribute order to them, giving them a cause and therefore and effect that we can comprehend. Some went after leaders on the political right including Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh, but most strongly Governor Palin. They argued that her words and actions incited this man to this deed. Palin had evidently placed crosshairs on a map of congressional seats to target as especially important to win for those politically aligned with her. Rep. Giffords district was one of them. “Palin put crosshairs on Giffords! She must be responsible!”

Well friends, Loughner published a lot online and with incredible and ludicrous details. No where does he mention anything about Sarah Palin, Glenn Beck, or Rush Limbaugh. Here is where anti-Judaism creeps in to the picture.

No few people accused Palin of inciting Loughner to this action and Palin responded by accusing them of a “blood libel“. “Blood Libel!” Some Jewish leaders screamed:

Blood libel is a term that belongs to us! It can only refer to accusations that Jews use the blood of others for baking matzah, for sacrifices, for gefilte fish, for powering Dimona, as a secret ingredient in Coca Cola, for making Barbies and other actions of pure evil.

Well, I embellish a bit. The reality is that “blood libel” does indeed have painful connotations for Jews. Libels have resulted in pogroms against the Jews time and again with some entire communities being massacred. Yet the concept is a simple one, and here Governor Palin was correct. The concept is that one community, or even a person, is accused of a murder in which they were totally uninvolved because the accuser wishes to do that community, or the specific people accused, harm regardless of their culpability. Jews were accused of crimes because people hated the Jews, not because they were involved in the crimes. Meanwhile, the Jewish community officially objects to Gov. Palin’s use of the term. Okay. I think it was appropriate to an extent, but using another term would have been better, one option which I will share with you in a moment.

Where does the anti-Judaism come in? It comes into the picture with the selective outcry about incitement. All one need do is to look at the difference between the coverage of the Fort Hood shooting and the Tucson shooting. In the Fort Hood shooting, the perpetrator was a devout Muslim who had at one point attended the mosque in America led by Anwar Al-Awlaki, near the top of the Al-Qaeda chart. Al-Awlaki is the head of Al-Qaeda in Yemen. No one in the mainstream media, N-O O-N-E, would ever accuse Maj. Hasan of being incited by an Imam in an American Mosque, would they??? Hasan had direct contact and was in communication with Al-Awlaki in America!!! But the media blamed the army, the right wing in fact, for persecuting him, even though the military welcomed him and went out of its way to help him through his schooling and residency.

Let us compare that to the Tucson incident. In that, the media immediately looked for incitement by right wing leaders, going so far as to ignore the facts published by Loughner himself that negated their arguments. Who needs facts when you have a narrative that you like to use! Some of you have just noted that this is where Governor Palin is connected with anti-Judaism.

Jews and Israel specifically are often accused of crimes that they not only did not commit, but can provide evidence that they had nothing to do with. Yet there are those out there who accuse none-the-less. Is the argument that Israel trained sharks to attack tourists in Egypt not libelous? What about the argument that the Mossad is responsible for the attacks against Christians in Iraq rather than the Muslims who claimed responsibility? How about those who argue that Israel perpetrated 9/11? I could go on and on, but you get the point. The assertion that Governor Palin’s words somehow impelled this wacko (wacko is far nicer a term than is deserving) to bloodlust is not only totally unfounded, but is in fact controverted by the evidence offered by Loughner himself. Should Governor Palin and others similarly accused have called the media’s accusation a “blood libel” as opposed to a Media Libel, which is the term I would rather apply, or some other similar term? Perhaps she should have used another term. But fussing at her about her use of “Blood Libel” misses the real point. The real point is that the same narrative hugging, fact denying, that is going on against Israel and has been going on against the Jews for time immemorial is being applied in the mainstream American press to their perceived opponents on the political right.

Far from being guilty of anti-Judaism, Governor Palin and others on the political right including Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh, who were also similarly accused of incitement, were in many ways the victims of anti-Judaism simply applied beyond the boundaries of the Jewish community and unto friends of Israel. Meanwhile, as I write this, Rep. Giffords, a strong supporter of Israel and a member of the all too persecuted tribe, is making a remarkable recovery in a Houston hospital. My thoughts are with her, with her family, with others making recoveries and with the families of those who lost loved ones to Sinat Hinam, blind hatred.

Because here’s what the AP wrote about the indictment filed against Hezbollah by the UN commission:

The court is widely expected to accuse members of Hezbollah of being involved in the killing, something the Shiite militant group has insisted it will not accept.

The Iran- and Syria-sponsored group fiercely denies any role in the killing and says the tribunal, jointly funded by U.N. member states and Lebanon, is a conspiracy by Israel and the United States.

Seriously? What next, the ravings of Jared Loughner as a defense of why he murdered six and shot 13?

Really, just when I think the AP can’t stoop any lower, I get to read drek like this.

Update: Yes, it’s the official boilerplate. From their latest article on the Hariri indictments:

The Iran- and Syria-sponsored Hezbollah calls the tribunal a conspiracy by Israel and the United States.

This is what now passes for journalism: Quoting a conspiracy theory as if it’s a legitimate rebuttal to the facts at hand.

The Gaza incidents came as a historic hotel in east Jerusalem was knocked down to build apartments for Jews after it was bought by a hard-line American Jewish millionaire decades ago. Palestinians object to any Israeli construction in east Jerusalem, which they claim as the capital of their future state. The Palestinians, European Union and U.S. condemned the latest project, saying it undermines hopes for peace.

The millionaire, Irving Moskowitz, a patron of Israeli settlers, bought the Shepherd Hotel in 1985. It was built in the 1930s as the residence of Haj Amin Husseini, who was forced to flee Jerusalem’s British rulers at the end of that decade.

Hm. Husseini had to flee the British. Why would that be, I wonder?

Oh.

In 1941, Haj Amin al-Husseini fled to Germany and met with Adolf Hitler, Heinrich Himmler, Joachim Von Ribbentrop and other Nazi leaders. He wanted to persuade them to extend the Nazis’ anti-Jewish program to the Arab world.

Funny how this “historic” hotel, which was the residence of a Jew-hated Arab Nazi, never seems to have its full history explained. But we expect no less from the anti-Israel media.

Coptic Christians make up about 10 percent of Egypt’s population of 80 million. They complain frequently of discrimination, though they generally live in peace with the Muslim majority despite occasional flare-ups of violence, especially over limits on church building.

I guess a suicide bombing killing 21 and wounding 80 after a New Year’s mass made them decided that the “occasional flare-ups of violence” needs to be retired.

Egypt has seen a string of attacks on Christians in recent years, most notably, in January 2009, when seven Christians were killed in a drive-by shooting on a church in southern Egypt during celebrations for the Orthodox Coptic Christmas.

Christians, mainly Orthodox Copts, are believed to make up about 10 percent of Egypt’s mainly Muslim population of nearly 80 million people, and they have grown increasingly vocal in complaints about discrimination.

But of course, this being the AP, they have to “balance” the constant stream of Muslim attacks on Christians with tales of Christian violence.

In November, hundreds of Christians rioted in the capital, Cairo, smashing cars and windows after police violently stopped the construction of a church. The rare outbreak of Christian unrest in the capital left one person dead.

So, what, Christians rioted and murdered Muslims over the canceling of a church? Uh, no.

One person died and 68 others were injured when security forces halted construction on a church citing violations of building permits.

Angry Christians hurled stones while riot police responded with tear gas and rubber bullets near the church and later in clashes outside the governor’s office.

Oh, the cops killed the Christian, not the other way around. Yeah, that makes them just as violent as the Muslims murdering them by the dozens. In church.

It’s all about the balance, you see. The AP starts the new year off the same way it ended the old: Not objective, telling its own narrative, not really informing. Happy new year, AP!

So many things. But let’s start with the number one issue: The AP uncritically passes along the Iranian government publication’s description of the hanging of a man accused of spying for Israel as absolute. There is no “alleged,” no “the government says,” in fact, there are no qualifiers whatsoever that the “reporter” has done no original reporting whatsoever, but is simply parroting IRNA. What is IRNA? It’s the Iranian government-funded and controlled news agency. That’s like quoting Pravda uncritically during the bad old days of Communist Russia. So yes, there’s a major ingredient of a news article missing here. It’s called “investigating,” not “parroting propaganda.”

According to IRNA, Siadat confessed to spying for Israel starting in 2004 in return for $60,000, as well as an additional $7,000 each time he met with Israeli handlers. IRNA said he met up with Israeli intelligence agents during “foreign trade” trips to Turkey, Thailand and the Netherlands and that he transferred data through a digital camera, transmitters and laptop.

IRNA reported that Siadat was arrested in 2008 while planning to flee Iran. There were no details on whether Siadat was a government employee or how he obtained the classified information.

There was no immediate comment on the execution from officials in Israel.

[...] Espionage is punishable by death under Iranian law. Iran and Israel have been enemies since the 1979 Islamic Revolution in Iran, with Tehran periodically announcing arrests of people suspected of spying for Israel.

The next paragraph should go on to say that the Iranian regime frequently calls opponents spies and sends innocent men and women to prison for that “crime.” But it does not. Instead, we get a listing of Iran’s spy trials as if they were absolutely rock-solid, including one of Iran’s most egregious “Israeli spy” scandals:

And in 2000, a court convicted 10 Iranian Jews of spying for Israel in a closed-door trial and sentenced them to prison terms ranging from four to 13 years. All were released before serving out their full sentences after international pressure.

It was more than a closed-door trial. The judge was also the prosecutor. The Iranians presented no evidence whatsoever against the “spies.” It was clearly a frame-up.

The trial, which began April 13, has all the hallmarks of a judicial frame-up. It is being held under conditions that contravene all acceptable judicial norms. A Revolutionary Court judge acts as investigator, prosecutor and judge, and appoints the defence counsel. The trial is held in secret.

Some of the 13 were arrested in January 1999, while others were jailed in March of last year. The first of the defendants, Hamid Tefilin, is a shoe salesman. He was arrested eighteen months ago and held for five months incommunicado. The prisoners include shopkeepers, teachers and a 17-year-old student.

Defence lawyers have argued that the men should be acquitted, as the prosecution has not produced any evidence or witnesses to back up its case. The state’s case rests on the fact that nine of the thirteen men have admitted in court to involvement in espionage, some in televised confessions. The confessions were made without the presence of a lawyer.

Relatives insist the prisoners confessed under duress, after being held in solitary confinement for more than a year. Family visits have been limited to five minutes. Defence lawyers Shirzad Rahmani and Esmail Naseri-Mojarrad said their cross-examination of six of the accused showed that some of them had lied in their confessions.

The world put pressure on Iran because the charges were bogus. The defendants were arrested and held in solitary confinement until they confessed. Their lawyer received death threats for insisting his clients were innocent.

But sure, AP, just roll off the story without the relevant facts, because it fits the anti-Israel narrative.

I’d list the number of its own rules this story breaks, but this post has already taken long enough to write. The AP editors that let this piece through as is should be ashamed of themselves. News organization my ass.

New headline:

Palestinians, Israelis trade rockets, airstrikes

New lede:

Israel on Tuesday launched an unusually heavy series of airstrikes on Gaza in retaliation for Palestinian rocket attacks, raising the prospect of a new round of bloody fighting after a relative lull for two years.

The military said the Israeli strikes hit seven different targets in Gaza. Palestinian officials said eight militants were wounded. Then the Palestinians fired another rocket at southern Israel, lightly wounding a 16-year-old Israeli girl.

The violence followed the deaths of five Gaza militants Saturday in the deadliest Israeli assault on the coastal strip in months, indicating a trend of escalation. Two years ago, incessant rocket barrages from Gaza led Israel to launch a punishing three-week invasion that left more than 1,400 Palestinians dead, including many civilians.

New analysis: Israel’s actions were “retaliation” for 13 rocket attacks over the last two days. Still left unsaid in the article is that the deaths of the five “militants” above were caused by their crowding around a bunch of rockets that they were getting ready to fire into Israel.

We also have the AP bringing up the Gaza war, the standard boilerplate that “many” (better than “hundreds of”) civilians died in the war fought to stop the rocket attacks. Also, as soon as AP mentions that Israel is now targeting Hamas, they feel the need to explain thusly:

Although Hamas, the Islamic militant group that rules Gaza, has limited attacks on Israel since then, Israel holds the group responsible for all attacks from the territory. A number of smaller militant groups have continued to fire rockets and mortars.

Nothing happens in Gaza without Hamas’ permission. Rival terrorist groups don’t go to the bathroom without asking Hamas first. But the fiction is duly reported by the AP, and parroted by the anti-Israel forces. And, of course, the “violence” is also inhibiting peace efforts.

The violence added to tensions in the region stemming from the impasse in peace efforts.

Cue the “It’s all Israel’s fault” AP explanation of why there is no peace.

The U.S.-backed talks have broken down over the issue of Israeli settlement construction in the West Bank.

Of course. Because the issue of Hamastan firing rockets into Israel on a regular basis coudn’t possibly have as much of an effect on peace talks as building new apartments in the suburbs of Jerusalem. More than 200 rockets and mortars heading into Israel in 2010? Not nearly as important.

I suppose things could be worse. There could have been a weird-ass headline like this one by Reuters:

Kindergarten near-miss highlights Gaza risks.

Um—what? WTF does the one have to do with the other? Are they trying to connect the headline to this quote?

“The situation in the south is tense and fragile, and it could deteriorate if a rocket attack causes a large number of casualties,” Lieutenant-General Gabi Ashkenazi, the Israeli military’s chief of staff, told a parliamentary committee.

Because if they are, that’s about the worst headline ever, although it ranks up among the best-ever whitewashes of Palestinian terrorism against Israel. Get it? the “Gaza risks” are that if the terrorists don’t stop firing rockets, and one lands and hurts or kills a large number of Israelis, the risk is that Israel will invade Gaza again. At least, that’s all I’ve got. Anyone have any better ideas?

Violence escalates along Gaza-Israel border

“Violence.” Rocketing civilians is “violence.”

Now, let’s parse the lede:

The Israeli air force has hit seven suspected militant sites in Gaza while the Palestinian militants sent a rocket into southern Israel in a flare-up along the Israel-Gaza border.

Note that the onus is on Israel. The AP describes the Israeli airforce as being the instigators in a “flare-up.” A kassam rocket nearly hit a kindergarten, and the AP does not mention that in the lede, nor that a girl was injured. There’s a picture at this link. UPI managed to report the information that only the Israeli press is currently reporting, and also include a picture of those “home-made” rockets.

In the rest of the AP story, note that the angle is on the Palestinians. The AP names the Palestinian quoted but attributes all Israeli quotes to “the military.” Note also that the second paragraph reports the wounding of three Palestinians but does not identify them as terrorists. The AFP managed to report that they are terrorists. Lastly, the AP uncritically reports that the IDF hit a “dairy factory.” Shades of Saddam Hussein’s baby milk factory.

Gaza health official Adham Abu Salmia says three Palestinians were wounded in the airstrikes. One reportedly was a dairy factory.

The military said on Tuesday the airstrikes targeted smuggling tunnels and a weapons-manufacturing facility. It says some of the tunnels were dug so militants could infiltrate Israel to carry out attacks.

We still haven’t found out why the IAF is bombing Gaza. And we’re already three paragraphs in. Remember that in many “World News” sections in your local paper, the first three paragraphs are sometimes all that you read. In those three grafs, we’ve learned that “violence” flared up on the Gaza border, the Israelis bombed seven terrorist sites while the terrorists only fired one rocket, and that Palestinians were hurt, but no Israelis. So, now what is the AP going to reveal?

The military also says the airstrikes were in retaliation for the firing of 13 rockets and mortars at Israel this week.

Israel Radio says the rocket fired by Gaza militants on Tuesday landed near a nursery school. No serious injuries were reported.

Ah. Now we get the reason, near the end of the article. But the really nasty bit of yellow journalism is the addition of “No serious injuries were reported,” because the writer can point to that and say that he did mention the 14-year-old girl’s injuries—just not that she was 14, running into a sheltered room from the shower, and struck by flying glass shards in her leg (also that the rocket missed a gas truck by mere yards).

It is articles like this that foster the pro-Palestinian side of the rocket and mortar attacks on Israel. This is one of the tentacles of the delegitimization of Israel, and the dehumanizing of Israelis while humanizing the Palestinians. These are the news articles that go into thousands of American newspapers, are read on thousands of American radio stations, and are researched by thousands of American television stations for the evening broadcast.

An update went out around 7:30 this morning. Here’s the lede:

The Israeli air force hit seven suspected militant sites in the Gaza Strip in an unusually large operation early Tuesday, and Palestinian militants retaliated by sending a rocket crashing down near a kindergarten in southern Israel.

Gaza health official Adham Abu Salmia said three Palestinians were wounded in the airstrikes. A 16-year-old girl told Israel Radio she was slightly wounded by shattered glass in the rocket blast.

The violence was the latest sign of escalating tensions along the Gaza-Israel border, where five militants were killed Saturday in the deadliest Israeli assault in the coastal strip in months.

Note that the AP manages to make the Israeli girl’s injury a result of the IAF bombing terrorist sites. Also that they did not name the girl, though her name is all over the Israeli media. And last, they note the killing of five terrorists, but not that they were a rocket squad, that they were about to launch rockets, and that they were proudly proclaimed as martyrs by PIJ. They make it seem, once again, that the rockets go into Israel because Israelis kill Palestinians.

The next update will whitewash the Palestinian side even further. Mark my words.