July 25, 2005

by Andrew Silow-Carroll
The Times' "insane" comparisons

I always find myself defending the New York Times against charges of anti-Israel bias, and then they go and publish an editorial as dumb as this.

In a nutshell, the editorial writer condemns both right-wing Israelis and militant Palestinians of "hijacking" the Gaza withdrawal. Hamas is insane for carrying out "Palestinian-on-Israeli violence." The Times writes, fairly and accurately, that

No reasonable person can doubt that the Hamas attacks hurt the Palestinians more than the Israelis.

"Meanwhile," the editorial continues, "Israel's extremist right wing is doing its own hijacking." How?

While polls show most Israelis support the withdrawal of 8,500 Gaza settlers, you wouldn't know it from the noise being made in Jerusalem, or in the desert near the Gaza Strip, where thousands of religious protesters have camped out, pledging to do whatever they can to hamper the withdrawal.

Okay, so they're protesting, which is what people in a democracy do (would only that the terrorists would wave flags instead of rifles). But in what way has the Israeli right "hijacked" the process? Has Sharon waivered in his pledge that the withdrawal will be carried out? No. Does the Israeli majority no longer support withdrawal? No. There is a lot of ugliness on the side of the Orangmen -- egregious Holocaust rhetoric, irresponsible name-calling, rabbis' calls for resistance that invite a civil war. But it's the cheapest kind of "balance" to equate bombings and shootings with mass protest, both in intent and effect.


How do I send you an e-mail?

Posted by: dani at July 25, 2005 6:01 PM

Well said.

Posted by: AbbaGav at August 5, 2005 4:18 AM
Post a comment

Remember personal info?

type the word "captcha" (you would rather decode a crazy picture?)