Attack of the Media-ites

Aren’t the media wonderful? Overall, I mean. A bigger bunch of Israel-haters you’re never likely to see.

Every time I run across the kinds of reports I saw this week in the New York Times and The Economist, I am reminded of the great label my late friend, David Lewis, ascribed to the media: the Media-ites. David was a funny guy.

The allusion to the ancient foes of the Israelites, the Midianites, is well-placed in today’s world, as “reporters” savage the Jewish state at every turn.

There in the NYT — “The Old Gray Lady” — is a feature on a “peace activist” working in the West Bank. Even better for Leftist writers and readers, this activist is an Israeli Jew. Even-even better, he’s gay.

Ezra Nawi, a plumber by trade, goes from Palestinian village to Palestinian village, helping with various projects and protesting the “occupation.” The writer of the piece, Ethan Bronner, begins his story with a description of Nawi bouncing along in his jeep, near Hebron. Trailing him is another vehicle, manned by Israeli troops, who are “stalking him.”

Also, the Palestinians in that area are “exceptionally poor” and unable to claim the land they “bought decades ago.” Bonner then goes on to chronicle alleged beatings of Palestinians by Jewish “settlers.”

After quoting Yehoshua Mor-Yosef, an “Israeli settler” who says that Nawi doesn’t want a real solution to the conflict, he just wants to “cause trouble,” Bonner begins the next paragraph with the words, “True or not…” goes on to describe Nawi’s legal troubles, as we awaits sentencing on a charge of striking a policeman during a confrontation.

These kinds of stories from the media have circulated for decades and notice this: they are stories. Advocacy journalists — those who report in order to further their own world views, not necessarily to report news — often employ “story,” because they know it is emotionally effective with readers. It is much easier to get readers to believe that the Palestinians are merely abused peaceniks, rather than try and frame that argument in factual terms.

(By the way, this is also an effective tool of American religious leaders, such as mainline protestors against Israel, and the Emergent community. They successfully employ emotive stories in order to influence.)

Then, The Economist, that British propaganda tool, had a plethora of stories concerning Israel and her place in the Middle East. Suffice to say, subtly, these media reports hammer home the point-of-view that in fact Israel does not have a place in the Middle East, or anywhere else. They don’t like Jews.

Three separate articles in the June 20 edition implore/demand Israel to shrink herself to the point of disappearance.

In the first article, we read that:

“Israel’s prime minister has at last accepted that a Palestinian state must exist alongside an Israeli one if there is to be any chance of a durable peace between Arabs and Jews in that tragic sliver of land that three great faiths consider holy.”

Interesting. What The Economist editorial staff fails to understand — deliberately, I believe — is that the Palestinians have not, do not, and never will recognize Israel. This is known not only by Israel’s supporters, but also by her detractors. Do not think for a moment that international diplomats, American presidents, and religious “peace activists” do not know this. They know it.

They do not care.

Incredibly, The Economist quoted Egypt’s dictator, Hosni Mubarak, as saying that Netanyahu’s demand that Arabs recognize Israel as the Jewish state would “scuttle the chances of peace.” This kind of lunacy passes for diplomacy, and shows just how flawed current peace efforts really are. The Israelis must accept a 23rd Arab state, but none of the Arabs will accept the lone Jewish state?

Crazy, man.

And this stuff doesn’t just come out of thin air. England was prepared for modern Jew-hating centuries ago, as intellectuals and scientists like Charles Lyell, Herbert Spencer, and John Tyndall began tinkering with Scripture. In short, they didn’t like Scripture and began to allege that early Bible books were myth or legend.

It took some decades, but their agenda survived them and is now in full bloom: Israel-bashing is in high-fashion, since, for one thing, so many do not put any credence in the Bible as a book of history and truth.

That’s why The Economist and The New York Times can insist that Israel recognize Palestine at the same time they allow “Palestine” to refuse to recognize Israel.

This is insanity, and it passes for journalism in our day.