-Caveat Lector-

>From http://www.arabnews.com/Article.asp?ID=14209

}}}>Begin
Arab News
SAUDI ARABIA'S FIRST ENGLISH LANGUAGE DAILY



http://www.arabnews.com/Article.asp?ID=14209

The slaughter of Palestinian people
By Norman Solomon, Special to Arab News
Published on 11 April 2002

In times of crisis, many policymakers and journalists pay special attention to the
editorializing from America’s most influential papers. The spin of news coverage and
the mix of individual opinion pieces usually indicate the outlooks of the media
establishment, but the editorials by powerhouse newspapers convey more direct
messages.

With carnage a daily reality in Israel and the West Bank, some editorials have been
entirely predictable. The Wall Street Journal, true to ideological form, applauds
Israel’s iron fist and urges the White House to stand firm behind Israeli leaders. In
contrast, more refined Washington Post and New York Times editorials tell us a lot
about common US media reactions.

For editorial writers at the Post and the Times, an incontrovertible fact is that 
Yasser
Arafat must be held responsible for the suicide bombings of recent weeks. “It cannot
be forgotten that Arafat refused to take serious action to stop a sickening wave of
suicide bombings against Israel, and that Israel has a right to self-defense,” a Post
editorial proclaimed on April 3.

Countless other commentaries also echo officials in Washington. Few have any use
for a point that Zbigniew Brzezinski made on the PBS “NewsHour” as this month
began. “It’s absolute hypocrisy to be claiming that Arafat can put a stop to the
terrorism,” the former national security adviser said. “And it’s — let’s put it mildly 
—
poor information on the part of the president to be maintaining that. This guy (Arafat)
is sitting isolated. Ariel Sharon is trying to repress the Palestinians and terrorism 
is
not stopping. How is Arafat supposed to put a stop to it?”

Typically, both the Post and the Times fixate on the strategic efficacy of the Israeli
military offensive rather than its flagrant illegality and fierce cruelty. “Like 
Sharon’s
previous attempt to destroy Palestinian national aspirations through an invasion of
Lebanon, this strategy is doomed to failure,” the Post editorialized. A day earlier, 
the
Times had clucked that Sharon mistakenly “seems determined to end terrorism by
military means alone.”

The Times could not resist clanging a timeworn bell about terrorists who “aim to drive
Israel and its Jewish inhabitants straight into the sea.” Such hyper-rhetoric punches
old emotional buttons. (Cue Hollywood’s “Exodus.”) But as Michael Lerner, an
activist American rabbi, observed days ago in an open letter, “Israel is in no danger
of going out of existence — it is the fourth largest military power in the world, and 
it
faces a Palestinian people who have no tanks, no airplanes, no heavy artillery.”
Lerner was cogent: “Let us be clear that Israel is using its power today to preserve
the occupation, not to preserve its safety.”

While quite properly calling for an immediate halt to the horrendous suicide
bombings, New York Times editorials are notably patient and rather equivocal about
bringing an end to Israel’s occupation. In the first paragraph of a March 30 editorial,
the Times recommended “a commitment to withdraw from occupied lands.” In the
closing paragraph, the newspaper declared: “Israel must make clear that it
recognizes the need to relinquish the bulk of the territories it took in 1967.”

Translation: Even at this late and bloody date, the New York Times can’t bring itself
to forthrightly call for an immediate and total end to the occupation. Instead, the
paper resorts to ambiguity; Israel should recognize the need to leave “the bulk of the
territories.” If a foreign power had been occupying your home for 35 years, how
would you feel about the idea that it should “recognize the need” to leave most of it
— merely remaining in control of, say, all the hallways and doors?

Most editorial writers seem determined to detour around obvious parallels with
apartheid-era South Africa. Evasions and apologetics for basic elements of Israel’s
policies dominate so much of the US media landscape that insightful comments by
Brzezinski were conspicuous: “The Israelis are becoming increasingly like the white
supremacist South Africans, viewing the Palestinians as a lower form of life, not
hesitating to kill a great many of them.”

Parrot-like, highly selective media use of the “terrorism” label is providing top US 
and
Israeli officials with invaluable propaganda cover. Meanwhile, Brzezinski has it right:
“You cannot define the loss of human life in terms of the number of Israelis killed by
brutal, savage, inexcusable Palestinian terror. And it does take place. The fact of the
matter is that three times as many Palestinians have been killed, and a relatively
small number of them were really militants. Most were civilians. Some hundreds of
children.”

The New York Times ended an April 3 editorial with this sentence: “Only the most
bankrupt leadership — spiritually, intellectually and politically — allows this 
macabre,
self-delusional act of ruin to pass without anguished condemnation.” Those words
referred to a recent suicide bombing. But they also apply to the US government and
major media outlets continuing to wink and nod while the Israeli military slaughters
Palestinian people.

***

(Send comments to [EMAIL PROTECTED])





Copyright © 2001 ArabNews All Rights Reserved.
End<{{{

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Forwarded as information only; no automatic endorsement
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material
is distributed without charge or profit to those who have
expressed a prior interest in receiving this type of information
for non-profit research and educational purposes only.
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +

"Do not believe in anything simply because you have heard it. Do not believe
simply because it has been handed down for many generations. Do not
believe in anything simply because it is spoken and rumored by many. Do
not believe in anything simply because it is written in Holy Scriptures. Do not
believe in anything merely on the authority of Teachers, elders or wise men.
Believe only after careful observation and analysis, when you find that it
agrees with reason and is conducive to the good and benefit of one and all.
Then accept it and live up to it."
The Buddha on Belief, from the Kalama Sutta
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +

"Always do sober what you said you'd do drunk. That will
teach you to keep your mouth shut."
--- Ernest Hemingway

<A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/";>www.ctrl.org</A>
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please!  These are
sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis-
directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with
major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought.
That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and
always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no
credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply.

Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html
 <A HREF="http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html";>Archives of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]</A>

http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
 <A HREF="http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/";>ctrl</A>
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Om

Reply via email to