Posted on 05/24/2018 5:13:02 AM PDT by SJackson
How was the New York Times’ coverage of the Gaza suicide-riots? So off-target that not even the Times’ own Pulitzer Prize-winning op-ed columnist, Thomas Friedman, believed it.
The Times news columns had been insisting that the suicide-riots (to use a term I picked up from a Weekly Standard editorial) were drawing international sympathy and attention to the Palestinian cause. Perhaps this was wishful thinking, or a self-fulfilling prophecy, but, in any event, that was the Times’ story, and it was sticking to it, at least until Friedman came along.
A “news analysis” in the April 8 Times by Jerusalem bureau chief David Halbfinger reported, “Palestinians seem energized and enthusiastic about sustaining a generally nonviolent form of protest — even if it is Israel’s harsh response to it and the mounting Palestinian death toll that has put their conflict with Israel back on the international agenda…The Israelis, for a variety of reasons, have long been worried about such a shift. And they now find the world paying attention as they use disproportionate force to prevent what they believe could be a catastrophic breach in the Gaza fence.”
An April 21 Times news article by Isabel Kershner and Iyad Abuheweila claimed “Israel has drawn international censure for using live fire against the mostly unarmed protesters who did not appear to present any immediately life-threatening danger to the soldiers.”
An April 23 Times news article by Iyad Abuheweila and Isabel Kershner reported that the death of a Palestinian boy “has intensified international attention and censure over Israel’s handling of the protests that began on March 30.”
And a May 14 Times news article claimed “Israel has stirred widespread international anger over the use of lethal force against mostly unarmed Palestinian protesters.”
Now comes Friedman, in a May 23 New York Times op-ed:
history is full of such injustices and of refugees who have reconciled with them and moved on — not passed on their refugee status to their kids and their kids’ kids. It’s why so few Arabs, so few Europeans, so few anybody, rose to Hamas’s defense. People are fed up with it.
So the Times news columns imagine “widespread international anger,” “international censure,” “intensified international attention and censure,” and “the world paying attention.” Friedman, on the other hand, writes that “so few Arabs, so few Europeans, so few anybody, rose to Hamas’s defense. People are fed up with it.” These two depictions of reality, if not flat-out contradictory, are at least in tension with each other. My own sense is that on this particular point — measuring the scope, severity, and gravity of overall world reaction to the Gaza riots — Friedman has a more accurate perception of it and is closer to the truth of the matter than the Times news columns are.
Throw the women and kids up front the fake news is in town
..................
Thomas needs to get with the all the fake news that's fit to print Times. An intervention is needed.
They had a big outage at their Brooklyn printer, I heard, on May 18, and failed to deliver papers to many of their subscribers and news vendors.
All the print that we want to make into news.
He must be taught to love Big Brother all over again. Room 111.
“Israel has drawn international censure for using live fire against the MOSTLY unarmed protesters who did not appear to present any immediately life-threatening danger to the soldiers.” (emphasis added)
Got to LOVE their use of our language. So if it’s a crowd of 100 people, and 10 of them are shooting AK-47s at the Israelis while the others are ranting an raving, one can say that the crowd is ‘mostly’ unarmed.
This is the CRAP you get when the Left owns the media.
As far as Freebirds is concerned, he needs to Google Walter Duranty if he surprised by the NY Times today. Back then, his FLAT-OUT LIES led to the deaths of THOUSANDS of Americans (he basically said that the Soviet Union was a ‘paradise’ in the middle of the Great Depression, so thousands of Americans, including families went there for a new life - virtually everyone was killed by Stalin).
TO THIS DAY, the NY Times STILL will NOT renounce what he did.
The only answer is that history is full of such injustices and of refugees who have reconciled with them and moved on — not passed on their refugee status to their kids and their kids’ kids. It’s why so few Arabs, so few Europeans, so few anybody, rose to Hamas’s defense. People are fed up with it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.