Not this.

A Gaza charity headed by the interior minister of the terrorist Hamas group on Wednesday offered $1.4 million to any Arab citizen of Israel who abducts a soldier.

The charity is not just Hamas-linked, as the AP headline states. It is part of Hamas, the current governing body of the Gaza Strip.

The Waad group from Gaza offered the bounty for Israeli soldiers in an e-mail sent to Palestinian media. The organization, which supports Palestinian prisoners held by Israel, is headed by Hamas’ Interior Minister Fathi Hamad. The minister did not return messages seeking comment.

The bounty is being offered in the typical Palestinian perversion of Israeli action.

Waad’s director, Usama Kahlout, said the bounty was in response to an Israeli group’s offer to pay Gaza residents for information on the whereabouts of Sgt. Gilad Shalit, an Israeli soldier captured more than three years ago by Hamas-allied terrorists.

Got that? An Israeli group is trying to rescue Israeli soldiers by offering rewards for information that might help get them released. The Hamas group responds by offering a reward for more kidnapped Israeli soldiers. Their actions are so despicable that words simply fail after a while. And so is the AP’s comparison:

Israel is holding some 7,500 Palestinian prisoners. Schalit is the only Israeli held by Hamas, while four Israelis who disappeared in Lebanon in the 1980s remain unaccounted for.

Why, exactly, are there 7,500 Palestinian prisoners in Israeli jails? Hm. Let’s think. It may have something to do with breaking the law. Why is there an Israeli soldier in Gaza? Because he was kidnapped in a raid from Gaza into Israel that killed and wounded other Israeli soldiers. But sure, all that really counts is numbers, not context. Obviously, Israel disproportionately imprisons Palestinians.

This is, remember, the group that Jimmy Carter and others insist will moderate its terrorism and settle down in a state next to Israel.

Sure. Because that’s just what groups that want to live peacefully with their neighbors do—offer rewards to kidnappers.

Toldja so: No way the U.S. goes along with the Palestinians going to unilaterally declaring a state. On the other hand, how the hell is it going to be contiguous when Israel lies between the West Bank and Gaza?

This makes me feel all warm and fuzzy inside: The IAEA, the one that couldn’t find the secret Iranian nuclear enrichment plant, says that it’s all set to be up and running within a year or so. Great news! Another plant Iran can use to cheat and retreat and build a nuclear bomb, and what’s the UN doing about it? Anyone? Anyone? Bueller?

Warm and fuzzy, part 2: Gee. The IAEA seems to have noticed that Syria is, indeed, looking to make a nuke, too. Go figure. Iran’s their patron, they hate Israel—who knew?

Bow wow wow: You know, we have such an amateur as president, he never got the memo that the U.S. President bends the knee only to God. Seriously, has any other American president been so obsequious? But hey. He’s the president of the world, right? Uh, except that even the Europeans are losing their affection for The One. So soon?

It was bad when George Bush the elder wanted to invade Iraq. He had to build a multinational force, including using pretend-Saudi pilots, in order for the war to get the go-ahead.

It was bad when George W. Bush wanted to track down the al Qaeda murderers and take them out. Didn’t matter if he was heading for Afghanistan or Iraq, the world shrieked about unilateralism and said that Cowboy George should not go it alone, but should get the world on his side first.

Now the Palestinians are threatening to unilaterally declare a Palestinian state. (They already did in 1988, and you can see how far that declaration got them.) But I hear no chorus of pundits and heads of state insisting that unilateral actions are the wrong way to go. In fact, the silence is deafening. But that’s not really the issue. The issue is misdirection. Why are the Palestinians suddenly threatening to unilaterally declare a Palestinian state? Because they refuse to come back to the negotiating table with Israel. And since the Obama administration has made it clear that it will no longer accept the excuse of settlement building as a reason not to negotiate, the Palestinians have come up with a little bit of misdirection that the media and Israel’s enemies can latch onto: Going to the UN to declare a state.

Oh, they don’t really believe it can happen. But that’s not the point. The point is, they’re hoping to get the world to back them on this, and to blame Israel for the lack of progress in negotiations. Will it work? Well. So far, everything else has. So let’s see how well this has worked so far today. We have three stories, three headlines, via the AP. Let’s take a look. First:

Palestinians to seek UN endorsement of statehood
Nov 15, 11:27 AM (ET)

The update:

Frustrated Palestinians to appeal to UN for state
Nov 15, 2:52 PM (ET)

And the last updated story last night:

Netanyahu Threatens to Retaliate if Palestinians Declare Statehood
Updated: Sunday, 15 Nov 2009, 10:46 PM EST

Yep. It’s working.

Israeli police storm Jerusalem’s holiest site

Holy crap! Israeli police stormed the Temple Mount? Really? Let’s see what
the Israeli media have to say. First, Ynet:

Jerusalem: Temple Mount riots resume
Nine police officers were lightly injured Sunday stones and Molotov cocktails hurled at forces stationed at the Temple Mount as part of the high state of alert in the area. A female Australian reporter was lightly injured by stones in the Old City.

Forces patrolling the area also noticed oil poured on the floor, apparently in order to cause the officers to slip and make their activity in the area more difficult.

A police force entered the Temple Mount compound in order to catch the stone throwers, using shock grenades. More than 18 people were arrested on the Mount and in its surroundings, including senior Fatah member Khatem Abdel Kader, who is charge of the Jerusalem portfolio in the Palestinian organization.

JPost:

9 cops, reporter lightly hurt in J’lem
Nine police officers and a foreign reporter were lightly hurt Sunday in clashes between security forces and Arab rioters in the capital.

Police were forced to storm the Temple Mount twice during the the day of fierce rioting, and were met by a hail of rocks and a firebomb.

And Ha’aretz, the Israeli paper most quoted by the New York Times:

Israel Police battle Arab rioters on Temple Mount; PA official arrested
Stone-throwing Arab youths wounded three policemen on the Temple Mount on Sunday as Jerusalem police, firing water cannons and stun grenades, raided the holy site in a bid to quell repeated bouts of rioting. At least 18 Palestinians were wounded over the course of the day.

Police stormed the compound twice; the first time was in response to Arab youths who pelted officers with rocks and poured oil on them.

Later Sunday morning, about 100 Arab youths renewed rioting at the Temple Mount, after which Border Police and regular policemen raided the site again, using stun grenades to disperse the rioters.

In other words, Arabs rioted on the Temple Mount and were throwing stones below at Jews, a life-threatening action. Israeli police moved in to stop the stone-throwing and rioting. And how does the AP portray this?

Israeli forces stormed Jerusalem’s holiest shrine Sunday, firing stun grenades to disperse hundreds of stone-throwing Palestinian protesters in a fresh eruption of violence at the most volatile spot in the country.

A wall of Israeli riot police behind plexiglass shields closed in on the crowd, sending many protesters – overwhelmingly young men – running for cover into the black-domed Al-Aqsa mosque. The mosque is one part of the compound known to Jews as the Temple Mount and to Muslims as the Noble Sanctuary.

After several rounds of clashes, dozens of protesters were still holed up inside the mosque at midafternoon, occasionally opening shuttered doors to throw objects at police. The Israeli forces did not enter the building and police said they had no plans to do so. There were no serious injuries.

You know what you didn’t see in the AP? Any stories leading up to the events that happened today. It was all over the Israeli press that Arabs were calling for rioting at the Temple Mount again. But the AP puts none of these facts into its article.

The Jerusalem Police will bolster deployment throughout the Old City, east Jerusalem and Temple Mount compound Sunday, following recent calls by both Arab and Jewish elements to arrive at the compound on Sunday.

The Islamic Movement announced it will make buses available for worshipers who wish to arrive at the mosque Sunday.

The movement’s spokesman Zahy Nujeidat said the flyer calling Arabs to protect the area was issued “in response to those who try and desecrate al-Aqsa.”

Instead, the AP puts this as the fourth paragraph:

Israel’s national police chief, David Cohen, accused a small group of Muslim extremists of trying to foment violence – echoing a charge made by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu two weeks ago.

Note the attempt to blame it on Netanyahu and make it seem like a false accusation, when it is absolutely true. Also notice that the lead calls them Palestinian “protesters,” when, in fact, they are rioters. What are they protesting? Are there signs? Is there a cause? No. They are responding to the lies that Jews are going to “attack” al-Aqsa. It is incitement—not the “charge” of incitement. But those facts would affect the narrative, and so, they don’t wind up in the story.

Typical. That’s why I have an entire category titled “AP Media Bias.”

Subject: Richard Goldstone’s faith and its effect on the Goldstone Report

To the editor,

For some weeks now, when the AP reports on the Goldstone Commission’s report, it uses something along these lines:

Israel did not cooperate with the probe, and angry Israeli leaders have condemned its findings. Still, Goldstone’s record as a war crimes prosecutor in the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda, as well as his Jewish faith and attachment to Israel have made it hard for Israel to refute his report.

Source: http://apnews.myway.com/article/20091020/D9BERP1G0.html

Is it the AP’s policy that because Richard Goldstone is Jewish, his report must be accurate? This is a logical fallacy. The report must be accurate because it is accurate, not because its author is Jewish and has ties to Israel. In point of fact, many people have found many inaccuracies in the Goldstone report, none of which have been reported by the AP.

http://www.goldstonereport.org/

http://www.globallawforum.org/ViewPublication.aspx?ArticleId=104

http://elderofziyon.blogspot.com/search/label/Goldstone%20Report

Any of those three links can give you example after example of errors in the Goldstone report. None of them uses Goldstone’s Jewishness as a barometer of the accuracy of his report. All of them refute the report by example, showing that it relied on Hamas terrorists as “eyewitnesses,” or ignored evidence that would invalidate a claim against Israel.

If what you are really trying to say is that Israel’s proponents can’t call Goldstone biased against Israel because he’s Jewish and says he’s a Zionist, then please say so. But that, too, will be wrong. Because there are plenty of Jews who are biased against Israel. Noam Chomsky comes immediately to mind.

Please stop using this logical fallacy in your boilerplate about the Goldstone report. One can absolutely refute the accuracy of the report even though Richard Goldstone is Jewish and has ties to Israel. Those two things have nothing to do with the facts of the report.

But the media is more active than we may realize, and journalists profoundly affect what we understand about international law. One way is through the language that journalists popularise in their reports and broadcasts.

The first reference to war crimes by the British press in relation to the Gaza conflict came less than 48 hours into Israel’s operation. It was a quotation from a Hezbollah militant in Lebanon, claiming the assault was a “war crime and represents genocide”.

What is most interesting is not the readiness of the journalist to include war crimes allegations in his report so soon, but that the journalist saw it fit to quote the legal judgement of an avowed enemy. Somewhere in the mind of the journalist is the logic that these soundbytes convey drama and sell papers.

And so every Israeli self-defense is subject to a filter, which suggests that each such action might well be a violation worthy of condemnation if not punishment.

Consider the other side of the coin. On Friday Israel released twenty female security prisoners in exhange for a video of captured soldier, Gilad Schalit. Schalit has been held for three years and not allowed any visits by the Red Cross. How did the Associated Press orient its story? On the plight of the prisoners!

Women make up only a tiny minority of more than 7,000 Palestinians held in Israeli prisons, but they often pay a high personal price for what has largely been a supporting role in the Palestinian uprising.

Some have raised babies behind bars, and others have watched their families torn apart in their absence.

Now notice in these opening paragraphs there’s nothing about what the women may have done to deserve incarceration. It’s as if the Israelis arbitrarily picked the women off the street.

Fatima Ziq, 41, was pregnant when she was arrested in May 2007 as an alleged accomplice in a foiled suicide bombing. She returns to Gaza City with a toddler — her ninth child — who has known only prison life.

Zhour Hamdan, 45, was a married mother of eight when she was picked up in 2003, also as an accomplice in an aborted bombing. Her husband has remarried, and her children were forced to fend for themselves.

“Our mother was the heart of our family,” said one of her daughters, Neveen, 22. “When she was arrested, our entire life changed.”

“Alleged accomplice?” Was she not tried and convicted? And the only reason she’s being released is because the action she abetted was unsuccessful. Does the article ask what kind of society impels pregnant women to be actively involved in the destruction of innocents?

As far as Zhour Hamdan, was she abandoned by husband because of her absence or on account of her age? If her husband abandoned their children too, what does that say about her husband?

But if glossing over the crimes the women were involved in wasn’t bad enough, the AP goes further:

The release of prisoners is an emotional issue for both sides.

Palestinians view the prisoners as heroes fighting Israeli occupation at great personal cost, and virtually every Palestinian family has current or former detainees in its midst.

In contrast, many Israelis see the inmates as terrorists.

Israelis “see” these inmates as terrorists? Please. They are, by definition, terrorists. They attempted to kill civilians. Their success in doing so isn’t really relevant to what they are. It’s not a subjective judgment. That Palestinian society views them as heroes, says something about the society and about the apologists who glorify the terrorism.

The Israeli public is divided over whether to release large numbers of prisoners in exchange for Israeli captives. Some argue that such releases only drive up the cost of future exchanges and increase the dangers of future attacks.

“Some argue?” Well it’s more than an argument. It’s documented that a portion of those terrorists who are released early return to terrorism and innocents again pay the price.

As Meryl noted, there have been other articles of this ilk about Gilad Schalit or more generally.

The media may claim that they report the news, but what they report is a narrative, shaped by ideology. It has the effect of shaping opinion to fit the views of “journalists” and advocating for their preferred causes. It is generally not what we would consider “news.”

Crossposted on Soccer Dad.

Israel prepares for battle over war crimes claims

The update this afternoon:

Israel trying to dodge overseas prosecution

The original lead:

Oct 1, 7:55 AM (ET)
By AMY TEIBEL
JERUSALEM (AP) – The Israeli government and military have retained high-powered international lawyers and set up a joint task force to fend off attempts by Palestinians and their supporters to try Israeli officials on war crimes charges abroad.

For nearly a decade, activists have turned to courts outside Israel in an effort to try Israeli political and military officials outside the jurisdiction of their own courts. While none of the attempts has succeeded, they could intensify further after a U.N. report accusing the Israeli military of committing war crimes during its devastating offensive in the Gaza Strip in December and January.

In a sign of what could lie ahead, British activists this week attempted to have Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak arrested on war crimes charges for his role in the Gaza war. A court rejected the request.

Concerned that government officials and military officers traveling abroad could face war crimes charges, an interministerial team joined by legal experts from the military is in place to protect officials and officers involved in Israeli military operations, a government official said. He spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to discuss the matter with the media.

The U.N. report accused Israel of using excessive force and endangering civilians. Some 1,400 Palestinians were killed in the offensive, most of them civilians, according to Palestinian officials and human rights groups. Thirteen Israelis were also killed. The report also said Palestinian militants had committed war crimes by targeting civilians.

The update:

Oct 1, 4:10 PM (ET)
By AMY TEIBEL and PAISLEY DODDS
JERUSALEM (AP) – Stung by a damning U.N. report alleging war crimes in Gaza, Israel is taking extraordinary steps to fend off potential international prosecution of its political and military leaders, hiring high-powered attorneys, lobbying Western governments and launching a public relations blitz.

Israel has dismissed the U.N. investigation into its winter offensive in the Gaza strip as biased, but its latest moves show it is clearly concerned.

The U.N. report appears to have energized pro-Palestinian groups that have hoped for years to bring Israelis before courts in countries that recognize the concept of “universal jurisdiction” – trying people for crimes unrelated to their own territory or nationals.

Most recently, British activists attempted this week to have Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak arrested during a trip to Britain for war crimes connected to his role in the Gaza war. Barak was untouched – but only because the court that considered the request ruled that he enjoyed immunity as a Cabinet minister.

But the incident raised the prospect that Israelis might find it increasingly difficult to travel to European countries that recognize universal jurisdiction.

Just look at the differences in the first five paragraphs. It’s absolutely a hit piece on Israel, and it’s obviously Paisley Dodds’ work. I can’t find any other stories by her about Israel, but it seems like she’s being eased into the spot by her editors.

Nice. She’s off to a great start.

You would be wrong.

Israel shuts down for Day of Atonement amid fears

Alternate headline:

Israel shuts down for Yom Kippur, amid fears of perceived Iranian nuclear threat

Ohmigod! Israelis are terrified! What, what could possibly be the reason for this headline?

The start of the Jewish Day of Atonement at sundown Sunday marked the beginning of a day like no other in Israel, on which even Israelis with no connection to religion tend to put their normal lives on hold.

This year Yom Kippur, the holiest day of the Jewish calendar, comes at a particularly somber time following revelations of a previously hidden Iranian nuclear facility and more missile tests by the Revolutionary Guard.

Holy cow! The Iranians are trying to build a nuclear weapon? Did you know that? Did we know that? Did anyone know that? No wonder Israelis are terrified on Yom Kippur! Iran is trying to build a nuke!

“That proves to whoever was still in doubt that Iran is the most serious threat today on the peace of the world and its security,” said Israeli Deputy Foreign Ministry Danny Ayalon, speaking to Israeli Channel 10.

Um… and this is newly scary because…?

When Yom Kippur began at around 5 p.m. local time, TV and radio stations blinked off the air, flights in and out of Israel’s international airport ceased, and nearly all businesses closed. The streets emptied of cars and cities and highways were eerily quiet.

[...] But the holiday’s apparent calm conflicted with many Israelis’ fears about the perceived Iranian threat.

This fearmongering story quotes exactly zero Israelis who say they are scared. Really. Not a single quote. Not one. So I have to ask: What exactly is the point of this article? To being the narrative that a fearful Israel is going to lash out at Iran? Or is it just plain lousy journalism?

I’m thinking the latter.

So, all my fearful Israelis, I hope you have an easy fast, and may you be inscribed in the Book of Life for a good year. Maybe even a less fearful one.

Oh, wait. No they didn’t. They told the Lebanese army that terrorists were going to fire rockets into Israel. And nothing happened.

Lebanese civilians saw the terrorists drive into their area, unload the rockets, set a timer, and leave. Then they notified the authorities.

Oh, wait. No they didn’t. Nothing happened. Except that the rockets flew towards Israel.

The Israelis also filed a complaint about the rocket fire with the UN. I expect the UN to investigate the incident and issue a statement insisting that the Lebanese government is responsible for keeping its terrorists in check.

Oh, wait. No they won’t. Nothing will happen. Unless Israel retaliates, in which case, Ban Ki-Moon will issue a statement urging “all parties” to exercise restraint.

Benjamin Netanyahu warned today that Israel won’t accept these kind of attacks from Lebanon, and won’t hold back if attacked.

But nothing will happen.

Oh, wait. It will. Israel will respond if attacked, and will respond heavily. And the world will come down on Israel’s back, insisting that A) Israel is using disproportionate force; B) The Lebanese people are not responsible for Hezbollah’s action, in spite of the fact that Hezbollah is a fully-participating member of the Lebanese government; and C) Israel is deliberately targeting civilians.

And the way we know this is to check on this spin from the AP, buried deep in the article reporting on Netanyahu’s remarks:

In mid-July, a suspected Hezbollah arms depot exploded near the Israeli border. Israel said this was proof the group was rearming and stashing weapons in populated villages.

An illegal weapons depot explodes a short distance away from Israel’s northern border. UNSCR 1701 forbids Lebanon to have these weapon depots. And yet, the AP says that Israel claims this is proof that Hezbollah is rearming. Not the UN. Not UNIFIL. Israel says it, and therefore, we can question the truth of the claim.

The dates change. But really, the stories remain the same. I should just start recycling my old posts. It would save me a lot of time.

But I notice that phrase hasn’t been used lately. The AP seems to be using just the words “east Jerusalem,” and not capitalizing “east,” which is, at least, progress. There is no such city as East Jerusalem, and I wish Jennifer Rubin at Contentions would stop referring to the nonexistent city.

I guess my fans over at AP don’t have the stones to respond to me, but their editors can’t deny facts when presented to them.