Israelis abroad make excuses

Roi Ben Yehuda is an Israeli, or ex-Israeli, who lives in Spain and writes frequently for Ha'aretz. He previously (see 'Epiphany in a Spanish neo-Nazi bookstore,' Haaretz June 15, 2008) alleged that a Neo-Nazi Book shop is selling anti-Semitic materials in Barcelona. He further alleged that "just about everywhere he looked" he saw swastikas and anti-Nazi graffit. These claims were made by no-one else to my knowledge. They made Barcelona sound like a description of Berlin in 1932. This assertion could not be verified by a friend living in Spain. She notes that the sale of such materials is forbidden by Spanish law and that she did not see much graffiti in or posters of the type described in Barcelona. Perhaps others can enlighten us. Roi's story about Nazi bookstores and graffiti in Spain is therefore dubious, to say the least.

Roi's latest article tells us that many people, including apparently himself, believe that you can be an Israeli living in Spain or the United States or some other country. (See "Why Jews can have more than one home," Haaretz August 26, 2008). As Roi notes, there are as many as 600,000 such "Israelis" living in the United States.

This concept of "Israeli Lite" is shared by many Israelis living abroad. But the truth is that most people can have only one home and are not happy with split identities. You can be an Israeli with Spanish or American citizenship or an American with ties to Israel, but you cannot really be both an American and an Israeli at the same time.

If you live and work in the United States or Spain, your children will learn Spanish or English, and not Hebrew, and they will be Spanish or American. It is not likely they will be Israeli. Sooner or later, they or their children or their grandchildren are going to decide they are not Israelis. Roi is going to find himself less and less Israeli the longer he lives in Spain.

Everyone must make their own choices, but I am fascinated by the phenomenon of Jews who insist on living in various European countries: Spain, Poland, Germany, and also insist on complaining about anti-Semitism in those countries. All those countries have a history of anti-Semitism of course. If you live in France, expect good wine. If you live in Spain or Poland, expect the characteristic specialties of those countries.

In my view, living in Spain and complaining about anti-Semitism is like eating ripe Camembert and complaining about the taste. Often, these claims are clearly exaggerated, as happened in a hoax letter circulated about French anti-Semitism. Is anti-Semitic persecution a part of the "Jewishness" of these folks?

Roi is entitled to his opinion. The question is, why Ha'aretz wants to publish it.

More interesting is the question of why Sara Miller of Ha'aretz, as well as Roi Ben Yehuda himself sent me letters trying to tell me what I can and cannot write about Roi Ben Yehuda and claiming that what I wrote was 'libelous.' Of course, Ha'aretz would be justifiably upset if someone tried to censor them. What I wrote can scarcely be libelous unless there is indeed a major Nazi revival in Barcelona, which no other journalist has reported. Nor did anyone else report that everywhere they looked in Barcelona there are Swastikas. And if it is "libelous," what are we to make of the writings of Gideon Levi, Amira Hass and Yitzhak Laor about Israelis and Zionists? Is Ha'aretz prepared to guarantee that every accusation they make is absolutely grounded in fact and provable in a court of law?

As I have no desire for legal problems with Ha'aretz, the article is duly altered, but the message is the same.
Ami Isseroff

Continued (Permanent Link)

Media Watch International: some background

Here are some notes on Media Watch International, a pro-Israel advocacy group that has been mentioned in media reports about Prime Minister Olmert's finances.

Israel police on July 9 questioned Sharon Tzur, executive director of the New York-based group. Investigators reportedly asked Tzur about her connection to Morris Talansky, who had told police that Tzur was present on at least one occasion when Olmert received an envelope containing thousands of dollars. Media articles have described Tzur as an Olmert confidante and former Likud activist, and as "the mastermind behind HonestReporting.com."

In May, the newspaper Haaretz reported that in 2005 Tzur and Media Watch International paid a $2,200 bill for Olmert and his wife, Aliza, at the Peninsula hotel in New York City. According to the newspaper, Tzur said Olmert, who was then a cabinet minister, took part in eight meetings on behalf of her organization.

According to the group's website, "Tzur founded Media Watch International to counter the growing media bias in coverage of the Middle East. She oversaw the runaway success of Honestreporting.com, until it reached over 50,000 activists and became an independent organization."

The Jewish Telegraphic Agency quoted Tzur in 2001 as explaining that Aish HaTorah helped create Media Watch International: "In December [2000], the Jerusalem Fund of Aish HaTorah, an Orthodox group focused on outreach to secular Jews, provided close to $150,000 in seed money to create Media Watch International for a dual purpose: to absorb HonestReporting and continue with its activism and media watchdog work, and to educate the media with position papers, Tzur said." HonestReporting began as a project of Jewish university students in London after the Second Intifada broke out in late September 2000.

On its U.S. tax return, Media Watch International states that its primary purpose is to "monitor, review and evaluate the accuracy, quality and fairness of media coverage regarding the Middle East."

In 2006, the most recent period for which its tax return is available, Media Watch International reported it received tax-exempt gifts of $496,468 and spent $522,566. The outlays included $111,430 in salary and pension benefits for Tzur, who is listed as the organization's president. Its assets at the end of 2006 were $29,100 in cash, according to the tax return.

According to the tax return, the group's corporate name is "Media Caravan Inc. D/B/A Media Watch International."

The Media Watch International website states that its flagship program is Caravan for Democracy, which "fosters pro-Israel sentiment about Israel and the Middle East on colleges throughout the United States."

Media Watch International's website lists four other key people in addition to Tzur:

* Laura B. Newmark, manager of programs

* Lenny Ben-David, consultant and writer. A former deputy chief of mission at the Israel embassy in Washington, Ben-David is an independent consultant and publishes a blog at http://lennybendavid.com/

* Ronn Torossian, communications and marketing consultant. Owner of a New York public-relations business with a Los Angeles office, Torossian publishes a blog at http://ronntorossian.com.

* "Our ghost writer," described as a New York native who lives in Israel.

How does Media Watch International compare to other pro-Israel organizations engaged in public affairs and media monitoring? Here are some highlights from tax returns for 2006:

The Israel Project, Washington, D.C.
Purpose: "The purpose of the Israel Project is to help protect the existence of Israel and the Jewish people and to combat anti-Semitism by educating the public in the US and in other countries about Israel and situation in the Middle East, and by educating opinion leaders and the media to the same effect."
Total revenue: $6,088,157
Officers' salaries and benefits:
$200,000 - Jennifer Laszlo Mizrahi
Net assets: $2,808,608

Zionist Organization of America, New York City
Purpose: "Public affairs -- to create public awareness in communities around the country about the happenings affecting the Jewish people. Zionist education -- to educate the public concerning the values of Zionism."
Total revenue:
$4,199,958
Officers' salaries and benefits:
$279,346 - Morton Klein, president
$170,144 - Meir Jolovitz, executive director
$48,000 - Sheldon Fliegelman, executive director
Net assets: $11,315,771

Middle East Media and Research Institute, Inc. (MEMRI) Washington, D.C.
Purpose: "to serve as a clearinghouse for information regarding news and other cultural media in and on the subject of the Middle East"
Total revenue: $4,078,038
Officers' salaries and benefits:
$87,268 - Steven Stalinsky, executive director
$62,314 - Yigal Carmon, president (20 hours per week)
Net assets: $1,551,622

Committee on Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America, Inc., Boston, Mass. (CAMERA)
Purpose: "To provide the educational services necessary to give members and the general public the ability to evaluate Middle Eastern reporting"
Total revenue: $2,559,469
Officers' salaries and benefits:
$174,368 - Andrea Levin, president
$115,707 - Alex Safian, associate director
Net assets: $4,169,269

HonestReporting.com, Inc., New York City (Middle East Media Watch, Skokie, Ill.)
Purpose: "To monitor and promote objective reporting by the media of events emanating from the Middle East in connection with the Israeli-Arab conflict."
Total revenue: $1,146,018
Officers' salaries and benefits:
None.
Net assets: $230,626
NOTE: HonestReporting.com, Inc., reported a total U.S. payroll of only $20,880. It listed as key officers [Rabbi] Ephraim Shore, Beitar, Israel, president; Joe Hyams, Beit Shemesh, international director; [Rabbi] Shraga Simmons, Kiryat Sefer, Israel, secretary; and Michael Weinstein, Jerusalem, treasurer. Its largest expense item was a $414,476 payment to HonestReporting Israel.

--Joseph M. Hochstein, Tel Aviv

Continued (Permanent Link)

British media bias: Israel at 60

British media bias: Israel at 60


Following is a summary of the main points of this important analysis (Israel at 60 in the UK media – an analysis). Not surprisingly, it shows that BBC and journals such as the Guardian and Independent were consistently biased against Israel, and included gratuitous conclusions that indicate an active anti- Israel slant rather than opinions based on fact: Israel doesn't want peace, Israel was created at the expense of the Palestinians... This is a good study, but we always want more. We would like to see (wouldn't we?):

1. An analysis of television broadcasts. Television and radio are more difficult to analyze for many reasons - images and tone are hard to quantify.

2. A comparison of the coverage of Israel at 60 to the coverage of Israel at 50. Is anti-Israel bias getting worse or is it receding?

3. A tabulation of specific factual errors and omissions in op-ed articles. Opinion pieces are "allowed" to get the facts wrong. When they are always wrong in a specific direction they point to bias.

4. Did accounts of 1948 mention that it was the Arabs that attacked Israel?

5. How much of this British coverage included criticism of Britain's own role in creating the conflict, in reneging on its role as the British mandatory, and in attempting itself to ignore or violate
UN Resolution 181, which called for partition? A mass of evidence indicates that the British wanted to ensure that the Negev would be part of Jordan. British failed to cooperate with UN officials and allowed Arab infiltrators to enter Palestine. It would be interesting to find out if any of this was mentioned in British commentary.

Ami Isseroff

Israel at 60 in the UK media – an analysis

http://www.justjournalism.com/plugins/p1999_media_special_articles/pdf/1504_Israel60Booklet_05.pdf


Just Journalism

contact@justjournalism.com

INTRODUCTION

In May 2008, Israel celebrated 60 years of independence since its inception in 1948. Just Journalism carried out a thematic and statistical analysis of coverage of this event in the UK media, during April and May 2008.

Scope of coverage

Our monitoring covered nine national daily newspapers, eight Sunday newspapers, one London daily and three weekly current affairs magazines. We also monitored the BBC News Website and six BBC Radio 4 programmes as well as a BBC2 documentary. (See Appendix A for a complete list of outlets and programmes monitored.)

Methodology

Our report has three objectives:

1 To summarise and evaluate the volume and depth of the coverage devoted to this event.

2 To identify the key messages that came through from the coverage as a whole.

3 To conclude at a macro level whether the coverage was broadly favourable, unfavourable or neutral.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Scope:

Israel's 60th anniversary was an event which received wide coverage in the UK media.

Seventy articles appeared in the print media, BBC Radio 4 aired 12 segments in the programmes we monitored, while the BBC News website featured over 40 articles related to this event. The Guardian carried the most coverage, followed by The Independent.

Themes:

A number of themes emerged from the coverage:

A key theme to emerge from the UK media coverage was that Israel does not seek peace. Eighty-three per cent of all press coverage which took a position on the issue contained the message that Israel does not seek peace.

Seventeen per cent of all press coverage which took a position on Israel's stance on peace contained the message that Israel seeks peace.

Only 16% of articles conveyed that Israel is a homeland for the Jews.

Just Journalism found that across all the coverage as a whole, the strongest theme to emerge was that Israel was created at the expense of the Palestinians. While Israel's anniversary celebrations received extensive coverage, this was generally offset by reporting on what the Palestinians call the "Nakba" or catastrophe.

A snapshot of the overall newspaper coverage indicates that 44 % of articles contained the message that Israel was created at the expense of the Palestinians, and this rises to 54% when looking at the broadsheets.

This message is particularly prominent in The Guardian and The Independent. Sixty-seven per cent of articles in The Guardian contained this message.

There was a noticeable lack of coverage of domestic issues in Israel, of concessions Israel has made for peace and of the existential threat to Israel posed by Iran.

Nevertheless, there were divergences in messages across media outlets:

Eighty per cent of the coverage in the Daily Telegraph, for instance, contained the message that Israel faces existential threats.

On BBC Radio 4, the strongest message was that Israel is a homeland for the Jews – a message appearing in 42% of items.

By contrast, the strongest message on the BBC News website was that Israel was created at the expense of the Palestinians – a message appearing in 45% of web articles

....

The purpose of extracting the key messages from each item of coverage was specifically to focus on the main

impression that was being conveyed to the reader or listener. We extracted the key messages from each individual

news item or article and then aggregated all the individual messages into common categories.

The messages we identified fall into eleven main categories, described below. Each article may contain one or more

of the following messages:

1. Israel was created at the expense of the Palestinians

This message came through from pieces that implied that Israel's 60th anniversary should necessarily be seen alongside Palestinian displacement and dispossession in 1948. These pieces usually refer to what is often described as the "Nakba" or "catastrophe".

2. Israel does not seek peace

Coverage in this category conveyed the sense that Israel is not seeking peace.

3. Israel is an entirely negative phenomenon

Coverage in this message category portrayed Israel in a fundamentally negative way, occasionally questioning the legitimacy of the Jewish State.

4. The Palestinian refugee problem is the fault of Israel

Coverage in this category referred exclusively to the events of 1948, but suggested that Israel is chiefly to blame for the Palestinian problem.

5. Israel has lost its ideals

This message was derived from coverage relating to an erosion of Israel's founding ideals and values.

6. Israel's future is uncertain

This message came through from pieces raising questions over Israel's future existence as a result of demographic trends, regional conditions or its policies.

7. Israel faces existential threats

Coverage in this message category highlighted the existential threats facing Israel, most commonly the threat from Iran.

8. Israel is a homeland for the Jews

This included pieces conveying the sense that Israel is a focal point for Jewish identity or that Israel is a haven for Jews around the world.

9. Israel is a successful country

Coverage containing this message conveyed admiration for Israel's accomplishments or recognised that Israel has excelled in key areas such as democracy, economy, social diversity and the high-tech industry.

10. Israel seeks peace

Coverage in this category conveyed the sense that Israel is seeking peace.

11. The Palestinian refugee problem is the fault of the Arab world

This covered pieces that referred exclusively to the events of 1948, and suggested that the Arab world is chiefly to blame for the Palestinian problem.

MESSAGING IN NEWSPAPERS

The section below summarises the key messages within the printed publications. A full discussion of the messaging in individual newspapers and magazines can be found in Part 5 – Analysis of Individual Media Outlets.

The broadsheets and tabloids are addressed separately.

Key messages across all newspapers

Eighty-three per cent of articles which took a position on Israel's stance on peace contained the message that

Israel did not seek peace.

Sixty-two per cent of articles which blamed one party for the creation of the Palestinian refugee problem

blamed Israel.

Forty-four per cent of articles contained the message that Israel was created at the expense of the Palestinians.

Twenty-seven per cent of articles contained the message that Israel is a successful country.

Twenty-four per cent of articles contained the message that Israel faces existential threats.

Sixteen per cent of articles contained the message that Israel is a homeland for the Jews.

Sixteen per cent of articles contained the message that Israel has lost its ideals.

Fourteen per cent of articles carried the message that Israel's future is uncertain.

Ten per cent of coverage contained the message that Israel is an entirely negative phenomenon.

...

Key messages in broadsheets

Fifty-four per cent of articles contained the message that Israel was created at the expense of the Palestinians.

Eighty-eight per cent of articles which took a position on Israel's stance on peace contained the message that

Israel does not seek peace.

Ninety per cent of articles which blamed one party for the creation of the Palestinian refugee problem

blamed Israel.

Twelve per cent of articles contained the message that Israel is an entirely negative phenomenon.

Twenty-two per cent of articles contained the message that Israel faces existential threats.

Twenty-six per cent of articles contained the message that Israel is a successful country.

Sixteen per cent of articles contained the message that Israel is a homeland for the Jews.

ISRAEL WAS CREATED AT THE EXPENSE OF THE PALESTINIANS

[Figure omitted]

.... For instance, out of 15 articles on Israel's 60th anniversary published in The Guardian, 10 (67%) contained the message that Israel was created at the expense of the Palestinians, whereas neither of the two articles in The Independent on Sunday contained that message.

Overall, 54% of articles in the broadsheets carried the message that Israel was created at the expense of the Palestinians.

All the daily broadsheets published at least one article containing the message.

Two out of four Sunday broadsheets published articles with the same message.

An example of this message:

"That is why today – the anniversary of the end of the British mandate in Palestine and the declaration of Israeli statehood – is also a day of mourning for 10 million Palestinians and their supporters: the commemoration of the nakba, or catastrophe, that led to the destruction of their society and expulsion from their homeland."

(Seamus Milne, Expulsion and dispossession can't be cause for celebration, The Guardian, May 15, 2008)

ISRAEL IS AN ENTIRELY NEGATIVE PHENOMENON

[Figure omitted - only the Guardian and the Independent carried this message]

Overall, 12% of articles in the broadsheets carried the message that Israel is an entirely negative phenomenon.

This message was only carried in The Guardian and The Independent.

An example of this message:

"Sixty years after the creation of Israel, there could not be a wider gap between the cruel reality of Israel today and Herzl's dream." (Jacqueline Rose, Israeli fiction – the nation's conscience, The Guardian, May 10, 2008)

ISRAEL DOES NOT SEEK PEACE

[Figure omitted]

Forty per cent of articles carried the message that Israel does not seek peace. All the daily broadsheets published articles containing the message.

Of the Sunday broadsheets, only The Observer published an article with this message.

An example of this message is the following:

"there has always been a strain of Israeli society that preferred violently setting its own borders, on its own terms, to talk and compromise. This weekend, the elected Hamas government offered a six-month truce that could have led to talks. The Israeli government responded within hours by blowing up a senior Hamas leader and killing a 14-year-old girl." (Johann Hari, Israel is suppressing a secret it must face, The Independent, April 28, 2008).

ISRAEL HAS LOST ITS IDEALS

[Figure omitted]

Overall, 14% of articles in the broadsheets carried the message that Israel has lost its ideals. Of the daily broadsheets, The Guardian, Financial Times and The Times carried the message. Of the Sunday broadsheets, only The Observer published an article with this message.

An example of this message is the following: "Today, with the 60th anniversary of independence fast approaching, there are a significant number of Israelis on both left and right asking whether in the intervening period the Israel declared by its founding fathers as a largely secular, communitarian project has not somehow lost the plot.." (Sam Kiley, Israel: 60 years of hope and despair,

The Observer, April 20, 2008)

ISRAEL IS A SUCCESSFUL COUNTRY

[Figure omitted]

Overall, only 26% of articles in the broadsheets carried the message that Israel is a successful country. All the daily broadsheets published at least one article containing the message.

Three out of four of the Sunday broadsheets published articles with the same message.

An example of this message:

"…60 years after its creation the very existence of the state of Israel remains nothing short of a miracle: a miracle of human will, determination and ultimately of hope. In less than three generations and in spite of extremely difficult conditions, Israelis have managed not only to survive but also to create a rich and original culture; to achieve spectacular results in science and medicine; and to create a technological hub in the region." (Dominique Moisi,

Israel's Pride and Prejudice at 60, Financial Times, April 30, 2008)

ISRAEL IS A HOMELAND FOR THE JEWS

Overall, 16% of articles in the broadsheets carried the message that Israel is a homeland for the Jews.All the daily broadsheets except The Times published at least one article containing this message. Three out of four of the Sunday broadsheets published articles with the same message.

An example of this message:

" …This Zionist anthem articulates something very deep in Israelis' sense of themselves: they are a nation formed by those who had no other place to live. The Holocaust, inevitably, looms large in this: the establishment of a Jewish state just three years after the liberation of Auschwitz was no coincidence. After 2,000 years, the world was finally persuaded that the Jews deserved what every other people regarded as a basic right: a place of their own." (Jonathan Freedland, As it turns 60, the fear is Israel has decided it can get by without peace,

The Guardian, May 7, 2008)

ISRAEL SEEKS PEACE

[Figure omitted]

Overall, only 6% of articles carried the message that Israel seeks peace. This message was only contained in three articles in The Daily Telegraph, The Independent and The Sunday Telegraph. An example of this message:

"Mr Rabin, who won the Nobel peace prize for negotiating the Oslo Accords with the Palestinian leader Yasser

Arafat in 1993, showed that the Jewish state could also make painful concessions in the interests of peaceful

coexistence with its Arab neighbours". (Con Coughlin, As Israel remembers horrors of the past, the future

looms dark, The Daily Telegraph, May 2, 2008)

ISRAEL'S FUTURE IS UNCERTAIN

[Figure omitted]

Overall, 18% of articles carried the message that Israel's future is uncertain.

The Guardian, The Independent, Financial Times and The Observer published articles carrying this message.

An example of this message:

"..Hopefully I will not live to see the day when it becomes possible that the State of Israel might no longer exist" (Daniel Barenboim, Israel and me, The Guardian, May 14, 2008)

ISRAEL FACES EXISTENTIAL THREATS

[Figure omitted]

Overall, 22% of articles carried the message that Israel faces existential threats. This message featured particularly strongly in The Daily Telegraph. The message was not carried in The Guardian, The Observer, The Times, and The Sunday Times.

An example of this message:

"For a long time Israel has been accused of crying wolf over surrounding countries that want to "drive it into the sea". Now it has a neighbour whose president has not only made that threat explicit, but who intends to develop the capacity to do it." (Martin Bright, New Statesman, The Great Betrayal, May 19, 2008)

21

BBC Radio

Key messages in BBC Radio coverage

Forty-two per cent of coverage contained the message that Israel is a homeland for the Jews.

Thirty-three per cent of coverage contained the message that Israel was created at the expense of the Palestinians.

Twenty-five per cent of coverage contained the message that Israel faces existential threats.

Twenty-five per cent of coverage contained the message that Israel's future is uncertain.

BBC News Website

Key messages on BBC News website

Forty-five per cent of web coverage contained the message that Israel was created at the expense ofthe Palestinians.

Thirty-one per cent of coverage contained the message that Israel is a homeland for the Jews.

Twenty-six per cent of coverage contained the message that Israel is not seeking peace.

Twenty-one per cent of coverage contained the message that Israel is a successful country.

PART 3: POSITIONING ANALYSIS

In addition to categorising key messages, we also observed how Israel was presented in broad terms, by noting whether each piece of coverage was positive, negative, or neutral, as defined below:

Positive

Israel was cast in a largely favourable light.

Negative

Israel was cast in a largely unfavourable light.

Neutral

Israel was cast neither in a favourable nor unfavourable light.

Overall Statistics For All Newspapers

Just Journalism found 70 articles across all the newspapers with relevant coverage.

Thirty-six per cent of coverage was negative.

Forty-three per cent of coverage was neutral.

Twenty-one per cent was positive.

[Figure omitted]

23

Broadsheets

Just Journalism found 50 articles across the broadsheets with relevant coverage.

Thirty-eight per cent of coverage was negative.

Forty-two per cent of coverage was neutral.

Twenty per cent of coverage was positive.

Therefore nearly twice as many broadsheet articles were negative than positive.

[Figure omitted]

... The Guardian and The Independent contained the most negative coverage while the

Telegraph titles carried the most positive coverage. None of the Sunday broadsheets carried negative articles.

BBC Radio

Just Journalism monitored 42 broadcasts on BBC Radio 4, including Sunday, Today and The World Tonight, finding 12 pieces of relevant coverage.

Seventeen per cent of the coverage was negative.

Sixty-six per cent of the coverage was neutral.

Seventeen per cent of the coverage was positive.

BBC News Website

Just Journalism found 42 web items on the BBC News website.

Forty-three per cent of the coverage was negative.

Fifty-two per cent of the coverage was neutral.

Five per cent of the coverage was positive.

Therefore negative coverage outweighed positive coverage by almost nine to one.

Of the 42 items published, 20 were authored pieces. Interestingly, a separate study of the authored pieces

revealed the following:

Sixty per cent of the coverage was negative.

Forty per cent of the coverage was neutral.

[The detailed analysis of journals is omitted]

CONCLUSION

The 60th anniversary of Israel's creation was an event that received extensive coverage in the UK media. This coverage varied across the media outlets, but the strongest theme overall was that Israel was created at the expense of the Palestinians. The focus on this theme suggests a shift in the British media towards the Palestinian narrative on 1948.

A second theme that emerged from the UK media was that Israel does not seek peace, characterised by the focus on the Israeli occupation of the West Bank and its policy towards Gaza. In contrast, there were few references to the concessions that Israeli governments have made over recent years in order to advance peace with the Palestinians– from Oslo in 1993 through to the Camp David talks in 2000 and the Disengagement from Gaza in 2005.

Arguably, the most noticeable omission in the coverage was the lack of focus on Israel's domestic issues, such as the hi-tech industry, the impact of immigration on Israeli society or relations between the religious and secular populations. Israel's 60th anniversary provided a rare opportunity for the UK media to explore and scrutinize the diverse challenges facing the Jewish State and its society. Yet, with a few exceptions, such as the Economist, the Financial Times and BBC Radio 4, the British media missed this opportunity.

Continued (Permanent Link)

Censored: A tourist's view of Israelis practicing the art of normalcy

Believe it or not, the writers of mighty Ha'aretz are reaching out to try to censor little old me. Here is one of two instances. I will report the other one elsewhere if time permits.

Brigitta Moll from Cologne Germany visited Israel as a tourist for a few weeks. Evidently that made her into an expert, as all such tourists are. So Haaretz published her article: First impressions of a European in Israel to tell people of the world what Israel is like. She seems to have come with the idea that she is entering a war zone, and so she diligently gathered material in support of her views. If Israelis act like almost anyone else, it must be because we are pretending and hiding the truth.

The truth is, that even in the worst days of the Intifada, Israelis were far more likely to die of traffic accidents (or coronary occlusion) than of suicide bombings or other terror attacks, as Brigitta notes. At the time, and during the Second Lebanon War, nobody pretended that things were "normal" here. But the truth is also that generally Israelis, like everyone else, go about their business most of the time and do not even think of the conflict. We are busy here with other things as well. The conflict is one aspect of life, but not an all-consuming one. If anything, the accusation of Palestinian Arabs is that for Israelis they are invisible. It is not entirely an unfair accusation.

Israelis have also developed, to some extent, a certain familiarity with and contempt for danger. The sight of soldiers in the streets has not been familiar in Europe for a long time. Israelis are used to seeing soldiers in the streets, in their own homes (our kids) and in the mirror for that matter. It has been that way for 60 years now. That is "normal" for us. It must strike visitors as odd. But objectively it is really not especially dangerous here. This normality is somewhat maddening to those who think we are all "bad guys" who should be suffering, though tourists will find it reassuring.

If Ha'aretz editors really think Israel is under such immediate danger, it is difficult to understand why they publish so many articles that are critical of Israel. When the guns are shooting, the pen of criticism is generally silent.

But the stereotype of Israel as a target of suicide bombers, as a country of fearful Jews anticipating a second Holocuast persists. It is exploited for different purposes by the right and the left in this country, and Brigitta's article must've filled the editorial bill for such articles.

Israel has many things to offer tourists - holy places for religious people, topless beaches for those who want sun and sex, bauhaus architecture in Tel Aviv, nightlife, quaint corners of life preserved from other periods of Middle Eastern history. But Brigitta came to write about the conflict it seems, so none of these attractions are evident in her article. But if she wanted to write about that, why didn't she come to Sderot when the Qassam rockets were falling, rather than writing about Tel Aviv? Isn't it strange to come to a peaceful city and write only about the conflict?

Air travel and fast boats have made the world a small place. It is very strange to read such a "travelogue" article, appropriate to the days of Richard Burton or perhaps Marco Polo, when today any interested European can come to Israel and see what is here for themselves, rather than seeing it through the peculiar lens of Brigitta Moll.

After telling her readers that Israel looks normal on the surface, Brigitta Moll felt the compulsion nonetheless to show that Israel is really only about the conflict. She wrote that the normal animation surprises her. She wonders how people can cope with conflict ridden reality.

Brigitta evidently interprets everything she hears and sees to support her view. A graffiti about a "Secret Nuke Cellar" must certainly be a sign of conflict tension according to her, since Europeans never joke about war, Brigitta tells us. Really? During the Cold War there were many jokes in USA about nuclear war, and I remember that Danish and Italian tourist guides joke about the activities of their neighbors in World War II. Everyone has war jokes. Perhaps it is tactless to tell Brigitta this, but the German war jokes are quite famous, though often not very funny to others.

Brigitta finds a soldier who took a trip to India. This too must be all about the conflict, because the soldier says that sometimes you just have to get out of here. What, European young people don't take trips around the world? We find them in Israel and Jordan and Egypt and America and India. Are all these backpackers escaping some conflict in Europe we do not know about? It doesn't occur to Brigitta that it might be possible that young people want to see the world before settling down, and not be confined to our little, wonderful country. The wanderlust of Israeli youth must be due to the conflict.

Imagine that someone from the Middle East visits the USA as a tourist. They are convinced that Americans must think only of the war in Iraq. But all they see around them are people going to work, shopping or relaxing. So they seek out someone who says they went for a trip abroad to get some "space," and present that as proof that all Americans are obsessed about the war in Iraq.

Of course, most people will see what they are prepared to see and use it to justify whatever they believe. Such people can never learn anything new. They know all about it already. It is their privilege to write what they want, and it is up to the reader to beware, to come and see with their own eyes when they can, and judge for themselves.

If a travelogue still has any value today, it is to try to capture what a people really think about their country and their life, rather than perpetuating what others think about them. Brigitta did not have to come here at all to write her prejudiced opinions. All over the world there are such people, who think in terms of stereotypes: Spain is only about bull fights, Germans are only engaged in drinking beer, French people are always in bed and British have no sense of humor. These are OK for ethnic jokes, but they can't be the basis of reasonable journalism. Travel is supposed to broaden one's vistas and change the stereotypes, and travelogues should pass on realistic information, not more stereotypes.

That is hardly the end of the story. Brigitta has written to me that I must delete this Web log article because she does not agree with the way her text is being used in the blog. She protests that her article was intended to be "balanced." She came to a peaceful city and reported only conflict, and she thought that was "balanced." It does not not occur to her that I have the same license to see things through my eyes, as she has to see things through her eyes. Only Brigitta's opinion can be heard.

But Brigitta of course, did not ask the graffiti writer if that is how the graffiti was intended, and did not get permission to use it in the article. She did not ask me or anyone else if we agree with the way she portrayed our country, which she thinks is sensitive and balanced.

If I have somehow misinterpreted Brigitta's message, if she has not portrayed Israel as a place full of people obsessed with the conflict, then she failed to communicate very well in her article. If she has written about the theater and the concerts in the Mann auditorium and the beaches and the nightclubs, then maybe I have a reading deficiency because I couldn't find anything abut those things. It is not that Brigitta should not have been critical. There are bad things here. If she wrote about the nice or ill mannered people she met here, I missed that too. To visit Israel and not meet one rude person is really exceptional! If she noticed the disorder and regrettable uncleanliness of Tel Aviv streets, which must be striking to European eyes, I must've missed it. I could see only one thing in that article: conflict, conflict, conflict. It is not a problem of unfair criticism, but of a peculiar monomania.

I know that many people often misunderstand what I write as well. It is their privilege - the article has to stand on its own. It never occurred to me to try to silence them.

This is not the first time that Ha'aretz writers have attempted to censor my opinion of them. They have been given a great forum for their ideas, but they begrudge me this little one. More about that another time.

I have removed the text of the article, which you can find at Ha'aretz and judge for yourselves unless Ha'aretz has archived it.

I have not asked Brigitta to remove her article from Ha'aretz, on the grounds that I do not agree with the way she has used my country. But Brigitta should not be able to dictate to me what I can and cannot write. "Die Gedanken Sind Frei."

Ami Isseroff

Continued (Permanent Link)

Palestinian Ma'an News: 2 Stories - one in Arabic, one in English

Netherlands and Denmark fund terror glorification, hate language of Palestinian news agency

By Itamar Marcus and Barbara Crook

 

 

A Palestinian news agency that receives financial support from the governments of The Netherlands and Denmark glorifies terrorists, releases news stories using hate language and is a highly politicized, hate-promoting news organization. Paradoxically, Ma'an News claims to be "objective, accurate, balanced" and to "increase Palestinian media credibility," according to its web site.

1- Ma'an Honoring Terrorists and Murderers as Shahids

 

Ma'an has glorified the recent Palestinian murderer of eight Israeli yeshiva students, the Dimona suicide terrorist, the killers of the two Israeli hikers and the terrorists who attacked a boys' high school with the very highest Islamic status attainable, elevating them to the status of "Shahids" or "Martyrs for Allah." According to the accepted Palestinian interpretation of Islam, there is no higher status that a Muslim can achieve today than that of Shahid. In defining terrorist murderers as "Shahids," Ma'an is by definition sending its readers a straightforward message of honor for the killers, and approval for the many murders. Negative or dishonorable actions could not elevate an individual to Shahid status. (See below for full sources.)

 

In its English versions of these reports, Ma'an did not honor the terrorists  as "Shahids" or use the similar English term "Martyrs."Note, for example, the difference in Ma'an reporting on the murder of the two hikers:

 

Ma'an Arabic News	Ma'an English News
"Two of the operatives died as Shahids."  [Dec. 28, 2007]	"Two Israelis, two Palestinians killed by gunfire near Hebron."

 

The explanation for this and all other discrepancies between Ma'an's English and Arabic reporting is that this politically-charged Arabic terminology, together with the examples of Ma'an's use of hate-language (below), would readily expose Ma'an's lack of professionalism and messages of approval of terror if repeated in English. In addition, it must be assumed that the governments of The Netherlands and Denmark would be outraged to know they are funding terror glorification and hate journalism.

 

2 - Suicide Bombers: Ma'an uses term of higher honor: Shahada-Seekers

 

With regard to suicide terrorists Ma'an goes even further. According to Islam, someone who intentionally seeks Shahada - death for Allah - is greater than someone who achieves Shahada while not actively hoping to die. The Arabic term Istishhadi - Shahada- Seeker- is used by terror organizations to define and add a higher status of honor specifically to suicide terrorists .

 

Ma'an has followed this lead in its Arabic reporting of the Dimona suicide bombing that killed one Israeli woman and critically injured her husband. Note the apolitical report by Ma'an in English, where the suicide bomber is reported to be just that, "a bomber," followed by the Arabic Ma'an reports that use the term of highest honor, "Shahada-Seekers."

 

Ma'an Arabic News	Ma'an English News
"Ma'an - Senior military figure [Abu Al-Walid] of the Al-Aqsa Brigades in Gaza, rejected the suspicion that Israel aroused regarding the identity of the two Shahada-Seekers, who carried out the Dimona action... Pictures of the two Shahada-Seekers etc ..."  [February 5, 2008]	"Al-Aqsa Brigades dispel doubts about identity of second Dimona bomber... Speaking to Ma'an on Tuesday, Abu Al-Walid reiterated that the bombers were Luay Al-Ghawani and Mousa Arafat ... Israeli security officials had expressed doubt about the validity of the image of the second bomber."

 

 

Note also that under similar pictures of the mothers of the bombers, Ma'an uses the objective caption in English: "Mother of suspected bomber," and the honor caption in Arabic: "Mothers of the Shahada-Seekers".

Ma'an Arabic caption	Ma'an English caption
"Mothers of Shahada-Seekers"	"Mother of suspected bomber"

 

3- Ma'an denies Israel's right to exist- all Israel is "Occupation"

Ma'an uses very politicized hate language to routinely reject Israel's right to exist, and even to deny Israel's existence. For example, when reporting on Israeli Arab doctors who visited Gaza, Ma'an defined them in Arabic as "Palestinian doctors from inside 'Occupied Palestine'," Ma'an's term for Israel. In this case, Ma'an's English language report on this story followed similar hate language:

"Palestinian doctors from 1948 territories [another Ma'an euphemism for Israel] visit Gaza... A delegation of doctors from Palestinian territories occupied since 1948, from outside of the Green Line, visited the Gaza Strip."  [February 29, 2008]

 In this article to deny Israel's legitimacy on its land, Ma'an went out of its way to use a particularly awkward hate expression. Instead of using the simple, accurate and apolitical wording, "doctors from Israel," Ma'an used 13 cumbersome, politically-charged hate words to describe the doctors' origins:

Ma'an political language	Accurate apolitical language
"doctors from Palestinian territories occupied since 1948, from outside of the Green Line"	"doctors from Israel"

 

It is also important to note that later in the same article, Ma'an used the term "Israel" as follows: "...crippling siege led by Israel." The difference is striking. When referring to the land or location - Ma'an called Israel "Occupied Palestine."  In referring to the government of Israel or criticizing Israeli policy Ma'an used "Israel." (See other examples below.)

 

Finally, since Israel's very existence is presented by Ma'an as an "Occupation," the Israeli army in Arabic is referred to with hate language identical to that used by the terrorist organizations: "the occupation forces." Here, as in some of the cases above, Ma'an avoids the hate language in English. One example is a Ma'an report after Israel arrested three suspected terrorists.

 

Ma'an Arabic News	Ma'an English News
"Occupation forces arrest ..."  [March 25, 2008]	"Israeli forces raid ..."

 

See below a list of examples where Ma'an glorifies terrorists and uses hate language.

 

PMW comment:

Last year PMW documented that Ma'an used this politicized hate language after the suicide terror attack in the Israeli city of Eilat. [See PMW Bulletin]

In Arabic, Ma'an had reported that Eilat was "in the south of occupied Palestine," the mother of the terrorist was said to be from the "occupied city of Jaffa", though Jaffa is part of Tel Aviv, and Ma'an had honored the suicide bomber as a Shahid.

We find it surprising and unfortunate that the governments of The Netherlands and Denmark continue to fund this hate journalism without demanding a change. Hate incitement, including denial of Israel's existence and glorifying terror, is universally accepted as a paramount cause of continued Palestinian terror. These governments, together with governments who have blindly funded Palestinian schoolbooks, bear direct moral responsibility for the continued hatred that is being ingrained into future Palestinian generations, and bear a moral responsibility for the terror and its victims.

  

The following are additional examples of Ma'an using hate language and honoring terrorists.

Ma'an grants Shahid status to all terrorists in recent terror attacks. The following are in addition to examples above.

 

1. Jerusalem Yeshiva terror attack - 8 students killed:

Ma'an Arabic News:

"8 dead and two Shahids in the Jerusalem Operation. The operatives were from [village of] Jabal Mukbar..."  [Ma'an, Arabic news, March 6, 2008]

 

2. Terror attack in High School in Kfar Ezion:

Ma'an Arabic News:

"Ma'an discloses the identity of the two Shahids from the Ezion operation."  [Ma'an, Arabic news, January 24 , 2008]

 

3. Two hikers ambushed and murdered as they strolled on nature walk

Ma'an Arabic News:

"Two of the operatives died as Shahids, two more were injured and two Israeli soldiers were killed."  [Ma'an, Arabic news, December 28, 2007]

 

Ma'an English News:

"Two Israelis, two Palestinians killed by gunfire near Hebron."

[Ma'an, English news, December 28, 2007]

 

4. Suicide Terror attack in Dimona- one woman killed:

Ma'an Arabic News:

"Ma'an - Senior military figure [Abu Al-Walid] of the Al-Aqsa Brigades in Gaza, rejected the suspicion that Israel aroused regarding the identity of the two Shahada-Seekers, who carried out the Dimona action... Pictures of the two Shahada-Seekers etc ..."  

 

Ma'an English News:

"Speaking to Ma'an on Tuesday, Abu Al-Walid reiterated that the bombers were Luay Al-Ghawani and Mousa Arafat"    [ English news, February 5, 2008]

 

Ma'an news releases promote the hate message that Israel has no right to exist, calling Israel "Occupied Palestine" or "territories occupied after 1948," Israel's government the "Occupation Authority" and its soldiers the "Occupation forces." Note also when Israel is mentioned it is often put within quotation marks- a common linguistic method to express non-recognition.

 

1."The Occupation authorities [editor: replaces 'Israeli authorities'] have been enforcing severe restrictions since the morning hours on the entrance of residents to the blessed Al-Aqsa Mosque, and even on the entrance into the city of Jerusalem within the borders of the occupation municipality [editor: replaces 'Jerusalem']. They have prevented hundreds of the residents of Jerusalem and the Palestinian territories occupied since 1948, [editor: replaces 'Israel'] who hold blue "Israeli" identity cards from..."

[Ma'an, Arabic news, February 29, 2008]

 

2."He said that 72 prisoners have died as Shahids during the al-Aqsa intifada, 58 of them from the West Bank, one from the territories occupied since 1948 [editor: replaces 'Israel'] and 13 from the Gaza Strip..."       [Ma'an, Arabic news, February 29, 2008]

 

3."In a research paper he published on the issue of the number of prisoners of Palestine which has been occupied since 1948 (The "inside" prisoners) [editor: replaces 'Israeli prisoners'], he emphasized that this number is an important number in the equation of the historical and cultural struggle against the Israeli occupier..."    [Ma'an, Arabic news, March 15, 2008]

 

Note in this previous example that instead of just writing the single word "Israel," Ma"an used a very long term: Palestine which has been occupied since 1948. However, Ma"an itself felt the need to further explain its own cumbersome usage by adding in parentheses, ("inside" prisoners) meaning 'Israeli Arab prisoners.'  It shows again that Ma"an is willing to burden its readers with linguistic contortions, rather than use simple and accurate language which would indicate recognition of Israel. In this case the language it avoided writing was "Arab prisoners from Israel."

 

4. "Dr. al-Asta did not compare the outlook... to one who lives in the racist Ghetto in Occupied Palestine..."   [Ma'an, Arabic news, February 24, 2008]

 

5. "A delegation of doctors from Palestinian territories occupied since 1948... visited the Gaza Strip." [Ma'an, Arabic news, March 17, 2008]

 

6. Discrepancies between English and Arabic reports:

Ma'an Arabic Report:

"The occupation forces" detained 3 residents in Bethlehem and al-Duha".    [Ma'an, Arabic news, March 25, 2008]

Ma'an English Report:

"Israeli forces raid Bethlehem and seize 3 Palestinians"

[Ma'an, English news, March 25, 2008]

Ma'an Arabic Report:

"The Israeli occupation army seized the town of Kafin afternoon today, Wednesday..."  [Ma'an, Arabic news, March 26, 2008]

Ma'an EnglishReport:

"Israeli forces stormed the town of Kafin in the West Bank Wednesday..."  [Ma'an, English news, March 26, 2008]

Continued (Permanent Link)

Flour power claim: Each Palestinian eats half a ton of flour each day

No wonder those Palestinians were so anxious to buy flour in Egypt. It seems each and every Palestinian in Gaza consumes half a ton of flour every day!! At least, that is what the Boston Globe claims. Martin Kramer points this out. Apparently, their various activities result in a need to consume huge quantities of carbohydrates.

See also: Amazing fact about Gazans

Sahten!!

Ami Isseroff

Gaza buried in flour

posted Monday, 28 January 2008

The Boston Globe has just run an op-ed under the headline "Ending the Stranglehold on Gaza." The authors are Eyad al-Sarraj, identified as founder of the Gaza Community Mental Health Program, and Sara Roy, identified as senior research scholar at the Center for Middle Eastern Studies at Harvard University. The bias of the op-ed speaks for itself, and I won't even dwell on it. But I do want to call attention to this sentence:

Although Gaza daily requires 680,000 tons of flour to feed its population, Israel had cut this to 90 tons per day by November 2007, a reduction of 99 percent.

You don't need to be a math genius to figure out that if Gaza has a population of 1.5 million, as the authors also note, then 680,000 tons of flour a day come out to almost half a ton of flour per Gazan, per day.

A typographical error at the Boston Globe? Hardly. The two authors used the same "statistic" in an earlier piece. They copied it from an article published in the Ahram Weekly last November, which reported that "the price of a bag of flour has risen 80 per cent, because of the 680,000 tonnes the Gaza Strip needs daily, only 90 tonnes are permitted to enter." Sarraj and Roy added the bit about this being "a reduction of 99 percent."

Note how an absurd and impossible "statistic" has made its way up the media feeding chain. It begins in an Egyptian newspaper, is cycled through a Palestinian activist, is submitted under the shared byline of a Harvard "research scholar," and finally appears in the Boston Globe, whose editors apparently can't do basic math. Now, in a viral contagion, this spreads across the Internet, where that "reduction of 99 percent" becomes a well-attested fact.

What's the truth? I see from a 2007 UN document that Gaza consumes 450 tons of flour daily. The Palestinian Ministry of Economy, according to another source, puts daily consumption at 350 tons. So the figure for total consumption retailed by Sarraj and Roy is off by more than three orders of magnitude, i.e. a factor of 1,000. No doubt, there's less flour shipped from Israel into Gaza--maybe it's those rocket barrages from Gaza into Israel?--but even if it's only the 90 tons claimed by Sarraj and Roy, it isn't anything near a "reduction of 99 percent." Unfortunately, if readers are going to remember one dramatic "statistic" from this op-ed, this one is it--and it's a lie.

Sarraj is a psychiatrist, but his co-author, Sara Roy, bills herself in her bio as a "political economist." Her research, the bio reports, is "primarily on the economic, social and political development of the Gaza Strip." You would think someone with this claim to expertise would know better than to copy some impossible pseudo-statistic on the consumption of the most basic foodstuff in Gaza. Indeed, in a piece she wrote a decade ago, she herself put Gaza's daily consumption of flour at 275 tons. Did she even read her own op-ed before she sent it off to Boston's leading paper? If she did, what we have here is a textbook example of the difference between a "political economist" and an economist.

Continued (Permanent Link)

Barry Rubin: How The News Is Made

Bad as this is, the idea that Israeli media are doing the same thing is really appalling. See  Israeli law and the media

How The News Is Made
Barry Rubin
December 26,