The Scottish Sunday Herald‘s Foreign Editor, David Pratt offers a classic example of how journalists can distort the facts to suit their personal interpretation of Israel and the Mideast. On 28 May he claims:
Even among Israelis, the term “Hafrada,” separation or apartheid in Hebrew, has entered the mainstream lexicon, despite strident denials by the Jewish state that it is engaged in any such process.
In fact, just a cursory glance at a Hebrew-English dictionary reveals that the term “Hafrada” does not literally mean “apartheid”. Also, as a concept, “Hafrada” has certainly not entered the Israeli lexicon, but rather, the term “Geder Hafrada” (“Separation Fence”) referring to Israel’s security barrier. Thus, Pratt deliberately and dishonestly claims that Israelis have begun to privately use their own term for “apartheid” while inaccurately stating that Israel’s security barrier and the apartheid ideology are one and the same.
Pratt’s fuzzy logic and linguistic gymnastics demonstrate a fundamental misunderstanding of the “separation” concept in the context of the Israeli-Palestinian situation. Both Israelis and moderate Palestinians are in favour of separation in the form of a two-state solution – an Israeli state and a Palestinian state. According to Pratt, are all advocates of this internationally recognised solution to the conflict supporters of apartheid?
In any case, as HonestReporting has pointed out on numerous occasions, the apartheid accusation is a false comparison employed as part of a campaign to demonise Israel and can be properly refuted with the correct information.
The remainder of Pratt’s analysis demonstrates that his expertise of Mideast affairs is on par with his linguistic abilities. Again employing the “apartheid” claim, Pratt fails to acknowledge the role of the Palestinian leadership in deliberately launching an armed confrontation with Israel as part of the Oslo negotiations:
… what lay behind the second or al-Aqsa intifada in 2000 was the bitterness bred by the protracted Oslo peace process. Its failure to deliver any positive tangible change meant that Palestinians continued to live in what was effectively an apartheid state.
While undoubtedly the Palestinian situation has deteriorated, Pratt fails to attribute the causal effects of Palestinian economic corruption and mismanagement along with the terrorism against Israelis that derailed the Oslo process in the first place. Likewise, Pratt addresses Israel’s security barrier and restrictions on Palestinian access to Jerusalem without even mentioning the threat of suicide bombings that have made such measures a defensive necessity for Israelis.
Comments, particularly from our Scottish subscribers to the Sunday Herald: www.sundayherald.com/contact.shtml
GUARDIAN “UNLIMITED”
While “Guardian Unlimited” is this newspaper’s title for its widely-read website, it is becoming a more apt description for the unlimited number of anti-Israel articles that the Guardian has been publishing in quick succession over the past few weeks, as previously covered by both HonestReporting UK and its international sister site. Hot on the heels of these, David Hirst has adopted the flawed conclusions of Mearsheimer and Walt’s “academic” study into an all-embracing “Israel Lobby” in the US, blaming this for the US invasion of Iraq while claiming that “were it not for US policies, Hamas would never have won the elections.”
Also unlimited is the vicious anti-Israel and sometimes anti-Semitic language on the Guardian’s “Comment is Free” blog. As the moderator of its own Backspin blog, HonestReporting supports free speech but unlike the Guardian, recognises that this also entails responsibilities. As commentator Stephen Pollard has found, the Guardian is rather slow to deal with incitement on its site.
HonestReporting UK will continue to track the Guardian’s escalating anti-Israel demonisation campaign.
BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL’S SECOND OPINION
Back in April, HonestReporting UK reported on a politicised and flawed study published on the BMJ’s website. The study elicited reactions from a number of medical professionals and rational individuals, including top physicians from Israel’s internationally renowned Hadassah Hospital, who call into question the very methodology of the study’s research. Despite these objections, HonestReporting UK is disappointed that the BMJ has decided to republish the offending article in its latest print edition. HonestReporting UK calls on subscribers who happen to be medical professionals to write to the BMJ and make your comments known.
HonestReporting UK
to media bias.
