Liberal NY Times verges on antisemitism

May 21, 9:04 AMNY Israel Conflict ExaminerRichard Shulman

Previous Next

2 comments Print Email RSS Subscribe

Subscribe

Get alerts when there is a new article from the NY Israel Conflict Examiner. Read Examiner.com's terms of use.

Email Address   Include other special offers from Examiner.com Terms of Use

“Israel has been rattled by signs that the Obama administration has sworn off the unstinting support of Israel that was a hallmark of the Bush years…”  (Mark Landler, NY Times, 5/15, A8.)  It was an editorial statement in a news report.

“Unstinting” support?  Myths arise even while events remain fresh.  People are poorly informed, even in this “information age.”  The NY Times, enmeshed in the Presidential campaign, made many statements that after the election it reversed, though without acknowledging its original misstatements.  I remarked on several.

The myth that the US government was very pro-Israel obscured media recognition of Pres. Bush’s later, harder line against Israel.  When he switched from consulting Vice-Pres. Cheney about foreign policy, to consulting Sec. of State Rice, his anti-Israel stance became patent. 

What were some of his policy changes?  Sometimes he changed emphasis, and sometimes he changed directions.  For one thing, he or Rice insistently demanded of Israel that it dismantle roadblocks and checkpoints.  Often when Israel accommodated the demands, terrorists got through and murdered Israelis.

The Oslo accords permitted Israeli construction in the Territories, though, I forget, perhaps on Israel not to expand beyond community bounds.  Bush’s Road Map, however, called for not building out from settled areas, though still within community bounds.  Bush’s regime came to call for not building in empty lots within settled neighborhoods.  Increasingly restrictive.  Unstinting acceptance was given to illegal Arab building.  Double standard!

Remember US insistence that Israel not sell AWACS or other weapons to certain countries?  Some of those customers would not be expected to threaten US security.  However, Israeli arms manufacturing competes with US ones.  The US government pretended to be protecting security when it was protecting trade.  That puts a moral pretext on superpower pressure. 

The Bush administration adopted as its foreign policy priority the establishment of another Arab state within the core Jewish homeland.  It would deprive Israel of strategic depth, secure borders, and much water, and give terrorists a base.

The Road Map expects the Palestinian Authority (P.A.) to eradicate terrorism before getting further Israeli concessions.  The Administration reneged on that.  Also, it gave funds to the P.A., and trained their troops.  The P.A. freed terrorists.  

The notion that the US gave unstinting support to Israel veers on traditional antisemitism, which holds that the Jews control world policy.  Unfortunately, that notion now permeates the foreign policy establishment, of which the NY Times is a pillar.

For another demonstration of Times bias: