World news: when Israel defends itself, it’s racist

In the international news arena, certain news services have a reputation for being anti-Israel. We know about that reputation because they don’t hide their bias.

In America, The New York Times and the Washington Post have that reputation. Overseas, the French AFP and the Arab Al Jazeera have it. There are others.

This essay is about the AFP. It’s just published another anti-Israel article (“Israel revokes senior Palestinian official's entry permit”, June 14, 2016).

AFP reports Israel has revoked the internal travel permit of a senior ‘Palestinian’ official (ibid). Without a travel permit, that official, Mohammad Madani, can’t get into Israel legally. AFP says Israel’s new Defense Minister, Avigdor Lieberman, signed the revocation order (ibid).

AFP quoted Madani as saying that the decision to cancel his permit was proof of the ‘racist policy’ of the newly appointed Lieberman (ibid). That was a red flag. A ‘no permit’ decision is ‘racist’?

AFP is shrewd. It cites a direct quote from the offended official, a quote which demonized Israel. But AFP offered only a hint of rumour to explain why Israel did what it did: Lieberman “was widely reported to have said” that Madani’s purpose in coming into Israel was to destabilize local politics [my emphasis] (ibid).

 AFP didn’t explain what ‘local politics’ meant. But why would an important anti-Israel, non-Israeli want to come into Israel to destabilize Israel’s local politics? Local politics concerns itself with neighbourhood noise, garbage pickup, schools, etc. Why would Madani come into Israel from the PA to get involved with street lights?

The AFP is disingenuous for an anti-Israel purpose. It’s not telling the full story about Madani. But then, that’s part of the ‘anti-Israel’ press strategy: if you don’t tell the full story, it’s easier, for example, to make people believe Israel is ‘racist’. 

The anti-Israel press demonizes Israel through a device called, distorting context. For example, here, the only authentic context presented to explain the revocation was the ‘racism’ quote. AFP provided no other possible context except a frivolous rumour about Madani’s involvement in ‘local politics’.

The real context for this revocation has three elements. First, the PA has long had a goal of harming Israel by destabilizing Israeli politics (Naom Amir, “Palestinians inciting terror to influence Israeli politics, security official says”, jerusalempost, December 4, 2016). Second, Madani’s purpose was to start another anti-Israel political party in Israel (AFP, ibid). That Party has nothing to do with what is commonly termed, ‘local politics’. Madani is interested in Israel's national politics. His intent, in other words, was consistent with the long-standing PA goal of ‘interference’ inside Israel (jerusalempost, ibid). Third, Madani isn’t just anybody. He’s a ranking official in the PA who, like his anti-Israel peers, isn’t interested in local Israeli issues. He’s interested in the destruction of the Jewish state by any and all means possible.  

Conveniently, AFP failed to reveal that Madani represents a Palestinian Authority whose purpose is to ‘erase the Zionist entity’, Israel (Article 22, PLO Charter). He’s an enemy of Israel. If Israel keeps him out, is Israel being ‘racist’—or is it cautiously protecting itself during a time of Arab violence (see below)?

Yes, it’s possible Defense Minister Lieberman may be overreacting to Madani’s potential threat. But Lieberman is responsible for keeping Israel safe and right now, Israel has been the victim of an on-going PA-inspired nine-month terror spree. Madani represents a PA which has actively incited that wave of terror (see Palestinian Media Watch). Israel is ‘racist’ to keep him out of Israel?  

By failing to reference this context, AFP failed its journalism responsibilities. It produces pro-‘Palestinian’ propaganda, not news.

Look at the calendar. In the 275 days between September 13, 2015-June 7, 2016, Arab terror attacks in Israel have included 151 stabbing attacks, 92 shootings, 43 car ramming attacks and one bus bombing (“Wave of terror 2015/16”, Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs, June 7, 2016). That adds up to 287 life-threatening attacks over a 275-day period. During that time, 38 Israelis were killed and hundreds more wounded (ibid). In addition, there were hundreds of fire-bombing attacks, rock attacks against police and sometimes daily stoning of Jewish cars.

With that kind of context, Israel is not ‘racist’ to keep senior PA officials from entering Israel. But of course, AFP doesn’t agree. For AFP, if the Israel-hating Madani says Israel is racist, then that’s good enough for AFP to print.

This reporting style is typical of the anti-Israel press: it picks an Israeli action, characterizes it as ‘racism’ (or some other morally offensive crime), then ignores (or distorts) the real reasons behind Israel’s decision to act as it did.

The anti-Israel press attacks virtually everything Israel does to defend or protect itself. The press will absolutely not give Israel the right to defend itself.

It doesn’t want Israel to defend itself. Can you guess why?