New York Times: It Started When Israel Fired Back
August 21, 2011 15:50 by Simon PloskerWhy is it that the New York Times still cannot distinguish the moral differences between Palestinian terror and Israeli measures to defend its citizens?
Take a look at this headline and accompanying photo from the NY Times’ August 20 story:
Why did the NY Times purposely choose an emotive image of a Palestinian child’s funeral? Particularly as Israel was also burying its dead as a result of a terror attack.
This sort of misplaced moral equivalence is typical of the NY Times which also states (emphasis added):
Israel blamed The Popular Resistance Committees for Thursday’s attack and killed its top commanders in an airstrike later that day, igniting cross-border exchanges after months of relative quiet under an informal cease-fire with Hamas.
So who exactly “ignited” the violence? According to the NY Times it wasn’t those who carried out Thursday’s terror attack but Israel for responding. In addition, the term “cross-border exchanges” implies, once again, some sort of moral equivalence between Palestinian rocket attacks on Israeli civilian targets and Israeli responses.
Send your considered comments to the New York Times – letters@nytimes.com – remembering to include your address and phone number if you want it to be published.
Nathan Zafran
11:22 pm
Aug 21, 2011
The NYT has sunk to such low meaness, that it should, if it could, repent for its sheer hypocrisy. As matters stand at the moment, this publication isn’t even worthy to serve as toilet paper.
Agree or Disagree:
1 
0
ivan cher
11:32 pm
Aug 21, 2011
The Age broadsheet of Melbourne illustrated its story of this terror attack with a photo of an arab child victim.
Australian SBS ethnic TV told the story as tho’ Israel initiated the exchange by attacking the G-Strip.
Rather like the Turks, the Egyptian’s demand for an Israeli apology was said by the Australian broadcaster “The ABC” to have been made because Israel invited the attack through lax border security.
Does Honest Reporting have a listing of arabs in significant positions in the media? e.g.
Fairfax Press of Australia, NYT, British M”ur”dical Journal, The Lancet?
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
11 
1
DAVID KAPLAN
11:47 pm
Aug 21, 2011
The NYT has been extremely anti-semitic at least as far back as WWII, when it deliberately buried news about the Holocaust way inside the paper, if it even mentioned it al all. Any Jew or anyone decent that buys this paper is someone who is willing to buy into idea that the world would be perfect if only all the Jews were dead.
Well, the NYT better keep their lousy rag well away from me. And woe to the idiots who advertise in it.
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
121 
2
Jack Fahy
12:53 am
Aug 22, 2011
David, I agree with your assessment of the rag, historically and present day! I am a Non-Jew and a supporter of Israel. As a young man I never thought too much about the Holocaust until a family friend who was a photographer for the army during the end of WW2 photographed the ovens, graves and the emaciated survivors at Buchenwald in 1945. I remember my Mom, Dad, two brothers and myself cried like babies viewing those horrid black and white photos. In my later years, I visited the Holocaust museums in DC and Houston, and my tears have not changed they just became more voluminous! God Bless!
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
93 
1
New York Times: Es begann damit, dass Israel zurückfeuerte « Medien BackSpin
1:24 am
Aug 22, 2011
[...] HonestReporting Media BackSpin, 21. August 2011 [...]
Agree or Disagree:
2 
2
Aida Rosen
1:44 am
Aug 22, 2011
Why do so many elite, East Coast Jews defend the NYTimes? Except for theatre and art, it is a lousy excuse for a newspaper!
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
55 
2
Aida Rosen
1:46 am
Aug 22, 2011
Why do soo many East Coast elites defend this sorry excuse of a newspaper? Except for theater & art, it is too biased to believe anything they write.
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
29 
1
David ziskrout
3:19 am
Aug 22, 2011
Why acknowledge the obvivous. The NYT continues to drown in it’s own predujice and attempts at journalism.
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
36 
1
Ella
3:46 am
Aug 22, 2011
No Idea what they are thinking.
The liberals are upon us again for the next round.
Oh well, I found a really good site with a great leave-in conditioner
leave-in conditioner
Agree or Disagree:
2 
5
Jayson Rex
3:47 am
Aug 22, 2011
The New York Times used to be one of the most influential newspaper in the world. Used to. One day it went into a steep dive, heading for a humiliating bankruptcy from which it was saved in the last moment by outsiders (Mexican money, etc.).
The editorial board had to kowtow deeper than ever before to those that saved their paper. To this end, the board members had to submit themselves to the demented agenda of ‘what is left of the Left’. And these groups supports Islamic extremists in the hope that they will replace the proletariat that jumped the Marxist ship after the implosion of Soviet Russia and Mao’s China.
Just like BBC and, to a lesser extend, CNN – both heavily financed by Arab money, NYTimes is trying hard to sell an even handed image in exchange for an increased circulation. In this project, NYTimes fails once again and miserably so. It is the destiny of Ochs-Sulzberger family to leave a disgraceful heritage to future generations.
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
44 
1
Azita
5:05 am
Aug 22, 2011
I agree with everybody. I hope all of the people who have left a comment have send a comment to NY Times and have forwarded this to their friends to so so as well. There is no replacement for the power of many!
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
21 
1
Gershon
5:11 am
Aug 22, 2011
I agree with the sentiments of Messrs Kaplan, Fahy, Rosen, Ziskrout and Rex. Moreover, how do we know that the photograph used is for real ? There have been too many faked photos or photos portraying something different and then used to try and suggest it is something Israel did.
This child may well be just sick or wounded by some accident and is not even dead.
I live down under so I can’t do much about what happens in the USA. Couldn’t you start a boycott of the NYT and in particular a boycott of anyone advertising in it ?
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
22 
1
Heather Roque
7:37 am
Aug 22, 2011
The only reason there are no images of dead Israeli children, is becatuse Palestinians don’t mind displaying their dead like trophies for the benifit of the media. Where the utmost rrespect is considered for dead Israelis and Jews alike. The western media has a lot to be accountable for as we will only be bombarded with this escalation and provocation by the Palestinians once Israel excersizes he right to defend herself! The media’s double standards are not only immoral, they are sickening!
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
32 
1
RichyUK
11:21 am
Aug 22, 2011
There is not, and never will be, any place called Palestine. These are arab terrorists perpetrating murder in Israel at any opportunity. Let’s do everything we can to make the rest of the world wake up to that fact.
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
30 
1
sav'ta shel Cohen
12:49 pm
Aug 22, 2011
The media loves to manipulate images – that is a fact! Give them an image of a crowd and they will provide you with any number of different “stories” about what is happening and why. The “stories” that came out of Iraq centered around just a few images rubbed our noses in that fact and caused us to lose any faith we had in media honestly reporting the news! One thing that is hard to hide, however, is a ridiculously weak piece of journalism that oozes with bias and prejudice like this one. What other nation would they portray as an aggressor when responding to violence in an attempt to protect its civilian population? The IDF does its best to avoid civilian casualties but the “militants” from Gaza purposely target Israeli civilians and conduct their operations among their own civilians. So, let me get this right, the NY Times believes and is comfortable with the idea that Israelis, when butchered, should take it with grace, acceptance and gratitude and should not be so politically incorrect as to take it personally and fight back! Yep, I can see how that would make a lot of sense to a bunch of anti-semites! Keep killing enough Israeli Jews, unchallenged, and pretty soon – just like magic – no Jews. Didn’t someone with bad facial hair once have some sort of name for such a process? The final something or other!
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
20 
1
Brent Pudsey
1:13 pm
Aug 22, 2011
It is a terrible thing when personal biases and agenda cloud the reporting of international news. In the case of the New York Times this has occcured. It is truly heart breaking to watch the funeral of anyone. However it was the rockets of the Palestinians that were fired upon Israel before she responded in self defence. Thus it is shameful to portray Israel as the wicked and blood thirsty villian who preys upon the most vulnerable.
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
25 
0
Stephen Gash
2:31 pm
Aug 22, 2011
Israeli Jews need to buy their own rockets are fire back without relying on the Knesset and IDF. Civilian self-defence is the order of the day and should be funded with a NORAID-type organisation called ISRAID, perhaps.
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
9 
2
R. Cross
5:27 pm
Aug 22, 2011
The New York Times used to be a good newspaper which took years to build its reputation. Reputation, like glass, can break and is nigh impossible to repair. If the Palestinians take a swipe at Israel, Israel must punch back. There is no such thing as a “limited engagement” and, maybe, both sides should think a little harder and curb the blind hatred by the hot-heads.
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
9 
1
Leonard Traines
7:39 pm
Aug 22, 2011
I do not understand the media such as the BBC & NYT always being anti-Israeli. I read some years ago, “Just why so many worship a man as if he were God (Jesus) & yet treat his people with such distain is so suttle, it will never be explained. Israel, so very little in the context of the vast Arab lands surrounding it, gives so very much in so many fields to the world, and is one of the greatest contributors for good in the world that has ever been or maybe ever will. Yet, the bias against this little nation whose gold is in its brain trust seems to go on and on without end. The militant Arabs have far exceeded it by their false propoganda into which apparently the UK has bought as well as other countries such as Norway, etc. I cannot help but believe Israel & the Jewish people are still here by the grace of the Almighty in spite of all the falsehoods against them. To BBC, the UK, Norway, the NYT, etc. try honesty for a change.
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
17 
1
Marc
7:42 pm
Aug 22, 2011
The clear message to the NYT should be that we will not advertise, nor subscribe to any of their printed or online media until they can see fit to review their journalistic bias and report farily!
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
14 
1
Joel Cohen
8:12 pm
Aug 22, 2011
In addition to writing a letter, people should drop a line with the Public Editor, Arthur Brisbane, public@nytimes.com
Agree or Disagree:
0 
0
Ina
9:32 pm
Aug 22, 2011
I agree, Israel will always be treated bias by the newpapers. But G-d will restore Israel and His people once they turn back to Him. Throught the prophet, Ezekiel (36:16-20) G-d speaks of His anger at the way the people had behaved, worhsipping idols and defiling the land – behaviour which led to thier exile and their scattering among the nations. To Leonard Traines, Isaiah 54:7-8. For a mere moment, I have forsaken you but with great mercies I will gather you. With everlasting kindness I will have mercy on you, says the Lord, your Redeemer! We have to worship Him for who He
is! Ina.
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
6 
0
Robert Lewis
12:03 am
Aug 23, 2011
I agree Ina. As a Bible believing Christian I believe we are grafted-in to our Hebraic roots. We are proud to be a part of your cause. There are thousands of Christians in the UK praying for Israel at this time and forever. God bless the great nation of Israel.
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
8 
0