Thursday briefs

Racist, apartheid state appoints Ethiopan Jew ambassador: Yes, those horrible, awful, apartheid racist Israelis did it again. They defied the narrative and made an Ethiopian Jew an officer of the state. Oh, but wait–this doesn’t impact the narrative at all, because Jews don’t count, no matter where they’re from–just like the world does not consider refugees the 750,000 Jews driven out of Arab nations after the birth of modern Israel. The narrative is all-Palestinian Arabs, all the time.

In-depth anti-Israel narrative: Wow. Just–wow. The AP releases an article on the legality of Israeli settlements. The language could not be any more loaded.

[…] The settlers grabbed the land without government permission.

[…] However, half a million Israelis already live on war-won land, in more than 130 government-sanctioned settlements and some 100 unauthorized outposts set up by settlers who are open about their desire to impede any partition.

You know what’s missing from this story on settlements? This.

Police arrested three Palestinians from the village of Far’ata on suspicion they infiltrated the Havat Gilad outpost on Tuesday and burned a residential structure. A dog who was inside the structure died in the fire.

The AP and Reuters seem to have missed this story. AFP caught it. Why was it ignored? Because it goes against the narrative to report on how Palestinians burn down Israeli homes. It’s supposed to be the other way ’round.

A pro-Israel op-ed in the Times: And on an Iran strike, no less. Well, that’s a rarity, as anti-Israel op-eds generally outnumber pro-Israel ones by two to one. Read it now, before it’s subsumed by thousands of anti-Israel comments.

This entry was posted in Iran, Israel, Media Bias, palestinian politics. Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to Thursday briefs

  1. ger says:

    Not only is the new Ambassador Jewish and black—She’s a WOMAN!

  2. David says:

    And it was extremist Avigdor Lieberman who appointed her!

    Here’s the backstory to the AP article.

    The preferred NYT narrative is that Israel is an out of control ally about to unleash destruction on the world because it is “nervous” about Iran. Having Gen Yadlin present Israel’s case in a calm, controlled fashion was good. The Pickering op-ed wasn’t bad, as it didn’t seem to condescend towards Israel. But the Indyk op-ed was atrocious and more in line with what I’d expect from the New York Times.

  3. Alex Bensky says:

    I see. Doing anything on “war won land” is illegitimate. Russia Out of Karelia! Ask Bolivia its opinion on “war won land.”

    Note that even insincerely the Palestinians could score a lot of points by saying something like, “Of course the future democratic, secular state of Palestine will allow Jews to be citizens, subject to the laws like anyone else.” But that gained territories will be judenrein–I use the term advisedly–seems to be OK with people who would be horrified (justifiably) if Israel said to its Arab citizens, “OK, there’s the Arab Palestinian state there. We’ll help you pack.”

    I refer everyone to what Meryl calls the Exception Clause but should more properly be named after its discoverer “the Bensky Corollary to Absolutely Everything.” In brief form it states: Every statement by anyone or any group, any time, on any subject, contains an implicit clause: “except for Jews.”

Comments are closed.