The New York Times Incentivizes Hamas Violence
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
The New York Times Incentivizes Hamas Violence
by Alan M. Dershowitz , Gatestone Institute, January 4, 2019
Hamas Fighters Prepare To Shoot Against Israeli Targets - GAZA CITY, GAZA STRIP - UNDATED: This handout photo from the Palestinian Islamic Resistance Movement (Hamas) group shows armed Hamas activists to prepare what appears to be homemade Qassam rockets that can be shot towards an Israeli settlements in a Gaza Strip. The mortar shells appear to be similar to those fired by Hamas and other military (Photo by Hamas via Getty Images)
In the Sunday New York Times — the most widely read issue of the week -- the lead story was about a young Israeli soldier whose bullet ricocheted off the ground and killed a young Palestinian medic who had admitted to being a human shield and who was videoed throwing a smoke bomb. The next day— in the less well-read Monday issue — the Times reported on the murder and torture committed at the hands Afghan troops affiliated with and trained by the American CIA. The piece opens with the troops shooting and burning an entire family including a three-year-old girl. The number of deaths associated with these units (who at times were mistaken for ISIS) could not be verified but accounts put them at hundreds in one month. Apparently, the Times's editors believe that the Israeli story, involving one soldier who shot one Palestinian under questionable circumstances, deserves wider coverage than deliberate massacres perpetrated by Afghan troops trained by the CIA.
The report's bias is clear from the introduction of the article and persists throughout the reporting. These reporters constantly characterized as "protesters," large groups of Palestinians that include violent Hamas fighters who carry weapons and maps of civilian targets. The Times's reporters portray the "protestors'" goals as "risking their lives to make a point" or "to break through the fence and return to their ancestral homes in what is now Israel." The goal of many of the Hamas fighters was, in actuality, to break through the fence and kidnap and kill Israeli civilians. The report accuses the Israelis of using "a policy that has taken the lives of nearly 200 Palestinians." Their biased reporting leaves the reader with the impression that all the people killed were civilians, although many were armed Hamas fighters. Even Hamas acknowledges that many of those killed were its combatant fighters.
While Hamas is happy to boast openly about their fighters tearing at the border fences in Gaza and hiding behind civilians to evade Israeli soldiers—the New York Times makes no mention of this. Israeli soldiers are portrayed as faceless killing machines, without a single reference to the fire kites, terror tunnels, rockets or cross border explosive devices utilized by the Palestinians, or to the double war crime of Hamas targeting Israeli civilians by firing rockets from behind Palestinian civilians. The goal of these Hamas-directed "protests" was to cross the border and kill or kidnap Israeli civilians using Palestinian civilians as human shields in order to maximize deaths of Palestinians so they can cry war crimes. We can see this play out in the IDF video which the Times characterizes as being "tendentiously edited." However, they fail to acknowledge that it accurately shows al-Najjar throwing a smoke bomb and declaring herself a human shield. Let the Times show the entire unedited video and have its readers decide whether it was fairly edited.
The report omits the trauma and wounds experienced by Israeli civilian residents who live near the fence. For days, the Israelis had lethal fire bombs, burning tires, and rocks hurled at them. These Israeli civilians are not occupiers or usurpers. They live in Israel proper not in occupied or disputed territory. This area was built from scratch by Israelis on barren desert land and the Israelis have a right to be protected from fire bombs and mobs determined to breach the protective fence. How would other nations respond to such threats? Certainly not by treating these dangerous mobs as peaceful protestors merely exercising their freedom of speech and assembly.
As it always does, Israel will fully investigate the circumstances leading to the death of al-Najjar. Reasonable people might agree or disagree with the outcome of any such investigation, but Israel has a good record of punishing soldiers who have exceeded their authority and engaged in improper use of lethal force. The Times's absurd conclusion that the shooter may have committed a "war crime," ignores the law of war crimes. Reasonable mistakes about who is or is not a combatant do not constitute a war crime. Moreover, the court that has jurisdiction over war crimes, the International Criminal Court, has no jurisdiction to investigate individual acts by soldiers if the nation to which they belong conducts reasonable investigations, as does Israel. Contrast what Israel does with how the Palestinians treat terrorists who willfully target and kill Jewish children, women and other civilians. The Palestinian Authority pays their families rewards – in effect bounties -- for their willful acts of murder. Hamas promotes and lionizes terrorists who kill Jews. But you would not know any of that from reading the one-sided New York Times screed.
Israel makes mistakes and sometimes overreacts in self-defense. But a biased one-sided story in the Times only encourages Hamas to use more human shields so as to increase civilian deaths and make the false case for war crimes. As long as the Times and other media continue to approach this issue in a biased manner, we can expect to see the cycle of Hamas's criminal behavior continue. All in all, it is a shockingly irresponsible report.
Alan M. Dershowitz is the Felix Frankfurter Professor of Law Emeritus at Harvard Law School and author of The Case Against the Democratic House Impeaching Trump , Hot Books, 2019. Distinguished Senior Fellow of Gatestone Institute.
Tags
Who is online
86 visitors
My comment?
A great article and the author is right on in all that he wrote.
Dear Friend Buzz: Isn't the use of one's own civilian population as human shields a war crime? A crime against humanity?
Shouldn't this be prosecuted against those in hamas, fatach, hezbollah, and other terrorist organizations in The Hague?
I don't recall reading about such trials there, or condemnations of those who use their own kind as human shields to protect terrorists as they seek to murder civilians in Israel?
Maybe it is high time I and we did.
E.
In the eyes of the International Criminal Court, the United Nations and most of the left-leaning media, only Israel is at fault, NEVER the Arabs/Muslims.
Is there anyone here who doesn't think that cartoon posted above is the truth?
This is another one of those many occasions where Dershowitz wanders off the relative safety of the legal reservation and simply becomes Likud's Kneepadder-at-Large for Bullshit.
Dershowitz took to many rides on that Lysergic Acid Diethylamide train.
And that would explain the NYT's antisemitism how?
Dershowitz ride on the train has nothing to do with Anti Semitism.
And neither does the NY Times.
Anti-Semitism arises from the right wing. "Blood and Soil. Jews will not replace us." You know, the usual stuff.
Dear Friend Cerenkov: Happy New Year to you and yours.
May it be your best one yet.
Enoch.
Dear Friend BBL-1: Happy New Year to you and yours.
May it be your best one yet.
Enoch.
And my most sincere wishes to you and all. A new and better day will dawn. On that I am confident.
Dear Friend BBL-1: Great thought.
Much appreciated.
Thanks.
E.
I wonder if you will admit that there is antisemitism among the extremists on BOTH sides of the aisle - and as I see it, the Democrats are now starting to load their ranks with pro-BDS anti-Israel members - inclusiveness is a liberal doctrine, is it not?
Thanks, Enoch. The same to you and yours.
Wrong, as the seeded article demonstrates.
Admit nothing. The so called 'liberal folk' who wish to end bankruptcies for families when a member gets seriously ill are usually not Anti-Sematic.
Can't say that for the 'gun folk' the 'blood and soil people' or 'the wall idolaters.'
Just can't see it. Sorry.
The 'seeded article' demonstrates nothing.
Well, you have to actually read it... The conclusion is quite clear. The NYT holds Israel to a higher standard, which is the definition of antisemitism. There is no argument. That's just the facts.
Double Standard
Discriminatory laws holding Jews to a different standard than other citizens have also existed for centuries. From empires imposing additional taxes on Jews, to outright denying the right to Jewish practice, to more recent ghettoization, Jews have been subject to different laws than their neighbors.
The same is happening today, at the international level. Of the 2017-2018 UNGA resolutions condemning countries, 20 of the resolutions were against Israel – and six against the rest of the world combined . Furthermore, since the establishment of the UN Human Rights Council, about 50% of its resolutions concerning specific countries have been against Israel . No other country has received such treatment. Singling out Israel for condemnation while ignoring massive human rights abuses in other parts of the world is holding Israel to a double standard. Expecting Israel and Israeli organizations to adhere to a higher standard of human rights singles out Israel as the only Jewish state, and is thus an expression of anti-Semitism.
Exactly. Liberals like that MFing new Representative poll that trick all the time.
But it's essential to keep throwing out that false accusation over and over when their argument is so false and impoverished.
Defending antisemitism must be your special hobby.
So, would it be your contention that Israeli opposition to the policies of its own government is anti-semitism? f so, the following political parties which are in opposition to the current government's policies with regard to settlements and Palestinian issues would be "anti-semitic:"
Zionist Union (2nd largest political party by seats in Knesset)
Yesh Atid (4th largest by seats)
Kulanu (5th largest)
In fact, Netanyahu's coalition government has a mere 2 vote majority out of the total of 120 seats. So by this country's rightwing "supporters" of Israel that means that half of the Israeli population as reflected by it's legislature is anti-semitic.
They can read the article without comprehending it. Case in point?
LOL!
Using false antisemitic smears in hopes of shutting people up is just barely cloaked fascism and a tactic of the desperate. I see right through people like you while you have no idea how worthless that attempt is on me. And, by the way, I notice how you desperately avoided the case I put to you and just came back with the same worthless BS. Figgers.
The second one who doesn't seem to know what that phrase means even while getting the words right.
Once again-----WHOOOOOOSH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
case in point
[case in point]
DEFINITION
an instance or example that illustrates what is being discussed.
"the “green revolution” in agriculture is a good case in point"
Thank you for providing such a sterling example of "case in point"!
Apples and oranges. The Israeli left wing does not hold the Israeli right wing to a DOUBLE STANDARD, which is what Dershowitz's article is about.
Not too sure that will be helpful to those in need of help.
Well said. I assume his inability to comprehend the difference is disingenuous.
Dear Friend Cerenkov: Many thanks.
Much appreciated.
E.
Continuing to have to define antisemitism for those who use the FALSE ACCUSATION that they are being called antisemites in order to block the debate is unfortunately my constant and regretful burden to bear.
The why the ? in 2.2.20? That's what didn't make sense.
Apples to cow pies, that one. Dershowitz (cheered on be people here on this forum) is claiming any criticism of Israeli government policies constitutes antisemitism while a very large segment of Israelis themselves are making the same criticism of their government. It's a BS attempt to shut down legitimate opposition to despicable policies which violate decades of broken promises made by a succession of rightwing Israeli governments to the US, it's biggest supporter.
Anti-Semitism arises from the right wing.
True.
However what your comment is only partly true-- the true fact is that it also arises from parts of the Left Wing as well.
(Unless, of course, you actually believe that Stalin and other Communists in the USSR were all political "Conservatives"-- and that Communism was a "Right wing ideology).
I'm sure you won't forgive me if I have a lot more respect for Dershowitz' acumen and opinions than I have for yours.
Stalin a left wing liberal? Don't think so. Communism Soviet Style a left wing thing? Tough one. However, the way the old USSR governed was not much different than the current Russian Federation under the Putin Regime which is right wing autocratic oligarchy. Which begs the question; Why does the Trump admire it?
Although there is this: At the end of WW2, the Jews of Europe said that The Soviet Union gave them life and America gave them hope.
Back to anti-Semitism. Generally speaking it is a right thing, at least at this juncture of history.
American heroes like Charles Lindbergh and was so publicly and staunchly against any intervention to stop nazism as to be effectively pro-Nazi which effectively served as antisemitism. To be fair, so was ol' Joe Kennedy although most of his anti-interventionism was motivated more by his understandably Irish hatred of the British.
The only thing the seeded article demonstrates is that Dershowitz sees antisemitism even in the day of the week when articles are published in the NYT. When skin is that thin, the argument is thin as well. So it is with every newly-minted rightwing supporter of the current Israeli government when it tries (but fails) to stuff dissent and rational discussion by hurling the antisemitism rock at those of us who can see what what that government is doing.
For your benefit, Atheist (son of Abraham our father), so you will have lots of fodder to criticize, I intend to post every Dershowitz article I happen to see. I'm happy to be able to do you that favour.
You screamed IMPASSE and now you're responding to me. [Deleted] So, I will return your "favor" by calling out your BS every time you put it up.
P.S. You finally figured out most of the Hebrew. Who did you ask to look it up for you?
I posted impasse on a different thread. Just because I did that does not stop me from responding to you on another one because your insulting nasty comments should be dealt with. I'll not flag your comment about my honesty and integrity because it should remain as an indication of the person you are.
I have been able to read Hebrew since I was a child - and don't need any help. In fact my father's name was Abraham. Your insinuation is just another example of insulting nastiness. Keep it up - this site really needs people like you as an example. Personally, I think it's insulting for a person to call himself "Atheist" and use Hebrew wording for his pseudonym.
So? It's on this discussion. But, don't get me wrong. I'm fine with you breaking it. I can now ignore it the next time you try to run away.
If I broke that impasse a mod would have punished me for doing so, but they didn't, did they. Obviously I was right because this is a different thread so your comment that I did is just another nasty insulting accusation.
And yet, months ago, soon after I put that Hebrew up YOU asked me what it meant. You must have a very short memory for your comments here (and apparently for language retention also) but I don't.
LOL. I didn't ask you what it meant because I didn't know. I asked you what it meant because I thought you didn't, and wanted that exposed. Your comments to or about me rarely fail to be insulting. What I question is why it would not be hypocritical to call oneself an atheist and use the language of Judaism in the same pseudonym.
Of all the 641 commandments of Judaism, belief is not one of them. There is no Jewish prayer equivalent to the declaration of faith of the Catholic "Apostles' Creed." This does not come from me but the Orthodox Jewish rabbi who gave me instruction many years ago when that was my first question to him. There is nothing whatsoever incompatible with being a Jewish atheist and you probably (or should) even know that as you would have had to have met more than a few in your life.
You are correct-- the Jews did indeed build the Titanic!
And in fact the only reason they did it was to deliberately kill people-- that newspaper article was correct!
(/sarc)
I'm not seeing the connection with my comment about Dershowitz and the Titanic article.
I think that people should read the actual story that is being referred to in this article before forming an opinion either way. Here it is:
May I point out at the bottom of the story ( which is very long) is this:
The Times also took drone video of the protest field and worked with the research agency Forensic Architecture to create a 3D model of it. We added the cellphone videos we collected to map the movements of the medics, the protesters and the soldiers. We froze the fatal moment in time, and retraced the path of the bullet from a group of Israel Defense Forces snipers through a group of medics over 120 yards away.
We interviewed Gaza health officials and Israeli military officials, including senior commanders overseeing the Gaza border, military lawyers and the official spokesman. We visited Israeli sniper positions at the fence. We spoke with nongovernmental organizations and experts in international law to assess whether the shooting may have constituted a war crime.
Reporting was contributed by Yousur Al-Hlou, Malachy Browne, Iyad Abuheweila and Neil Collier from Khuzaa; Ibrahim El-Mughrabi from Gaza City, and John Woo from New York.