"A huge lie repeated often enough is accepted as truth." — Joseph Goebbels, Nazi Propaganda Minister

"Unanswered media bias and misinformation repeated often enough is accepted as truth." — PRIMER

Comment & Analysis

Commentary
Israeli Atrocities Should Not Be Masked By Friendship

Published in the University of Connecticut Daily Campus
October 11, 2007

Comment:
"Israeli Atrocities Should Not Be Masked By Friendship"

Analysis:
Even the title shows bias. While one cannot help but agree that Israeli atrocities, if any are perpetrated, should not be masked just because of the friendship and values we share with Israel, the title falsely implies both that Israeli atrocities are regularly occurring and are being whitewashed.

Comment:
"The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is a hotly contested subject among intellectuals, politicians and everyday people.

Analysis:
It's interesting that Maynard correctly points out one of the many fundamental errors in former President Jimmy Carter's deeply flawed and heavily biased book. The reason Carter gives for the offensive and inaccurate title he gave his book is the need to promote discussion about the Arab-Israeli conflict.

Clearly, there is no lack of discussion and certainly there is no lack of criticism, most of it unjustified, of Israel.

References to the conflict as "The Israeli-Palestinian conflict" are misleading. They falsely imply Israel is the party primarily responsible. They also ignore the fact that the conflict between the Palestinian Arabs and Israel is just a part of a much wider conflict, between dozens of Arab countries and Israel, of which the conflict between the Palestinian Arabs and Israel is actually a consequence.

It was the surrounding Arab armies which invaded Israel on the day the Jewish state proclaimed its re-establishment in 1948.

Comment:
"Unfortunately, most people who discuss this topic are armed with opinions and baseless assertions instead of facts, logic and reason."

Analysis:
Unfortunately, the writer of that observation is one of those people.

Comment:
"Their egotistic posturing and blind self-righteousness is what is causing the cycle of violence in Israel to continue."

Analysis:
There is no "cycle of violence." That misleading term falsely implies a symmetry both of action and reaction and the ability of either side to end the violence by not responding. There is Arab terrorism and there are Israeli actions undertaken to save innocent lives. If there was no Arab terrorism, there would be no violence; if Israel ceased its anti-terror activities, Arab terror would not end but would become more widespread.

It is sometimes said, with good reason, that if the Arabs had no weapons there would be no war, but if the Israelis had no weapons there would be no Israel.

Comment:
"These dogmatic, ill-informed people exist on both sides of the conflict, as exhibited by groups such as Christians United for Israel and the cartoonists who create television shows to teach children to hate America and Israel. The best way to combat the ignorance of Zionists and anti-Semites is with cold, hard fact."

Analysis:
Once again, the writer implies a false symmetry although, ironically, while doing so he subconsciously illustrates a reality knowledgeable people recognize but which supporters of Israel are reluctant to mention.

There is an asymmetry rather than a symmetry between Zionists and anti-Zionists.

Zionists are motivated by positive factors, the desire for the Jewish people, like other peoples, to have a nation-state of their own. Many people do admittedly suffer from a degree of ignorance, which unfortunately makes it difficult for them to counter baised and error-filled articles such as Maynard's.

The reality Maynard inadvertently acknowledged was the connection between anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism. Indeed, except in the rare case of a post nationalist who opposes all national movements, anti-Zionism, by denying to the Jewish people the right to a nation-state exercised by other peoples, is a form of anti-Semitism. Anti-Zionism is based upon hatred and cannot be ameliorated through facts.

By referring to Zionists and anti-Semites in the same sentence, the writer unwittingly acknowledged that, far more often than admitted, criticism of Israel is a way of expressing one's anti-Semitism. Since it is very difficult to determine the motivation in individual cases, it is very rare that supporters of Israel accuse anyone of anti-Semitism. In contrast, haters of Israel are constantly falsely accusing Israel's supporters of making such accusations.

Comment:
"Israel was created to provide sanctuary for a people who had been persecuted throughout their history, most infamously during World War II with the Holocaust. As of 1946, Palestine was in the firm grip of the British Empire. The ideology of Zionism was held by many Jews the world over. The goal of creating a Jewish state was mostly pursued by peaceful means, but some Zionist movements, such as the Irgun and the Lehi, resorted to terrorism in an attempt to create a purely Jewish state. The most famous Irgun attack was the King David Hotel bombing on July 22, 1946. This attack killed 91 people including 28 Brits, 41 Arabs, 17 Jews and five others."

Analysis:
In 1946, there was no "Palestine;" there was only an area referred to as Palestine. There has never been a country called Palestine.

The way the bombing of the King David Hotel is almost always used as an example by those accusing Zionists of terrorism actually illustrates how vacuous that charge is.

According to the generally understood definition of terrorism, the bombing of the King David Hotel was not terrorism.

The King David Hotel was used as British military headquarters, making it a legitimate military target. Additionally, the British were advised, in advance, that their military headquarters was going to be bombed and should be evacuated in order to avoid civilian casualties.

Comment:
"The Lehi were also violent, killing British soldiers, police, and civilians in their bid to drive out the British. Both the Lehi and Irgun jointly attacked the Arab village of Deir Yassin in April of 1948. There, they massacred over 100 unarmed Arab villagers in an official Israeli military operation to discourage the siege of Jerusalem by Arab forces prior to the founding of Israel. The Irgun and Lehi organizations were both absorbed into the Israeli Defense Force (IDF) at its founding and their leaders and members received complete amnesty for all actions taken prior to the founding of the IDF."

Analysis:
The alleged "massacre" at Deir Yassin is another staple of those trying to reverse the truth about who the terrorists were. Fabrications have spread so much the truth about what actually happened is impossible to determine. (A reasonable and credible report is contained among the "Myths and Facts" available at the Jewish Virtual Library at .)

Despite the uncertainty, there are at least two clear errors in Maynard's assertions. The Arab villagers were not "unarmed;" the Irgun suffered 41 casualties, including 4 fatalities.

The incident also clearly could not have been an "official Israeli military operation," since the incident occurred before the re-establishment of Israel and no "official Israeli military" existed at the time.

As describe by Myths & Facts, "Just four days after the reports from Deir Yassin were published, an Arab force ambushed a Jewish convoy on the way to Hadassah Hospital, killing 77 Jews, including doctors, nurses, patients, and the director of the hospital."

That attack was indisputably an act of terrorism.

Comment:
"Fast forward to the Six Day War in 1967. In response to possibly false Soviet intelligence showing plans for an Israeli attack on Syria, Egypt amassed troops and tanks on its border with Israel. Israel - backed with weapons from the United States and Great Britain - launched a pre-emptive strike against the Egyptian forces, although U.S. and Israeli intelligence agreed that the Arab states could not defeat Israel with military action. The strike on Egypt caused Jordan to invade Israel in an attempt to take Jerusalem."

Analysis:
In violation of the agreements ending the Suez Crisis, Egypt blocked the Straits of Tiran, an act of war. Our country reneged on guarantees given eleven years before. Egypt and Syria entered into an alliance and trumpeted the coming destruction of Israel, while Israelis dug mass graves in preparation for the casualties they anticipated.

Even after the war with Egypt and Syria started in earnest, Israel pleaded with Jordan's leaders to stay out of the fight. Had King Hussein heeded that plea, the West Bank would not have come under Israeli administration.

Comment:
"In the end, Israel was victorious because of their superior weaponry and they gained control over areas of Syria, Lebanon, Egypt and the Palestinian territories. The United Nations passed Resolution 242 demanding that Israel withdraw from the occupied territories that same year. Israel refused to comply."

Analysis:
This paragraph contains more blatant factual errors. Israel gained control over the Golan Heights, Gaza and the West Bank, but did not gain control over any Lebanese territory.

United Nations Resolution 242 called for Israeli withdrawal from territory, not "the territory," a crucial difference that was hotly debated at the time. The withdrawal was also to be part of a negotiated peace agreement, something the Arabs refused to consider.

Two months after the Six Day War, in Khartoum in August 1967, the Arab leadership adopted its infamous three noes: "no peace with Israel, no negotiations with Israel, no recognition of Israel."

Comment:
"Skip ahead nearly a decade and a half to 1981. The IDF launched a series of airborne bombing runs against Palestinian encampments in southern Lebanon. The PLO retaliated with rocket fire, killing 29 Israelis over the next 11 months. The IDF retaliated with a full out invasion of Lebanon in 1982."

Analysis:
The writer conveniently omits the fact that the PLO had established a mini-state in Lebanon in the mid-1970's, simultaneously using it as a base for terror operations against civilians in northern Israel and also leading to the Lebanese civil war.

It was the PLO's terror attacks that Israel reacted to, leading to the Lebanon War in 1982. It was the PLO's mini-state that led to the de facto take-over of Lebanon by Syria, with ramifications including the assassination of government officials critical of Syria continuing to this day.

Comment:
"The casualties of the invasion speak for themselves. According to United Nations estimates, over 19,000 Lebanese civilians were killed during the invasion. The IDF lost 675 soldiers."

Analysis:
From Myths & Facts: "'It is clear to anyone who has traveled in southern Lebanon, as have many journalists and relief workers, that the original figures of 10,000 dead and 600,000 homeless...were extreme exaggerations,' wrote the New York Times' David Shipler, a sharp critic of the Israeli war effort.

"The 600,000 homeless figure originated in mid-June 1982 with the Palestine Red Crescent, headed by Yasser Arafat's brother Fathi. Francesco Noseda of the International Committee of the Red Cross, who had originally used the bogus number, later repudiated it."

Comment:
"The most disturbing incident in the war, however, were the massacres at Sabra and Shatila, Palestinian refugee camps in Lebanon. On Sept. 16, 1982, the IDF surrounded the camps and allowed extreme Lebanese right-wing militias to enter the camps and slaughter thousands of their inhabitants."

Analysis:
Israel was guilty of not recognizing the brutality and inhumanity of the Christian Phalangists, themselves angered by the atrocities perpetuated against them by Palestinian Arabs under the leadership of Yassir Arafat. What is most interesting about the atrocity at those refugee camps is that rather than blaming the perpetrators, it is invariably Israel which is blamed.

Comment:
"Eighteen years later, the Palestinians and Israelis came together at Camp David with Bill Clinton in an attempt to create a peace agreement. American media reported that Ehud Barak, the Israeli prime minister, offered a generous settlement that included Palestinian statehood and part of Jerusalem. The reality of the situation was that the IDF would still be in control of the borders, airspace, aquifers and Jewish settlements in the new Palestinian 'state.'"

Analysis:
There is a plethora of errors in the above paragraph.

Israel, of course, would have been in control of its borders with the Palestinian Arab state, just as we control (or try to control) our borders with Mexico and Canada. It would not have controlled that state's other borders.

The aquifers do not respect borders; they are partly under the disputed territories and partly under Israeli territory. It is a practical necessity that they be handled jointly. One of the under-reported disasters resulting from the Oslo Accords has been the damage to those aquifers caused by irresponsible, uncontrolled and unregulated drilling in the territories now controlled by the Palestinian Authority.

Under the Israeli proposals, there would not have been any Jewish "settlements" left in territories given to the Palestinian Arabs. Those areas would have been ethnically cleansed of any Jewish presence.

Comment:
"Yasser Arafat refused the treaty and the breakdown of talks led to the Al-Aqsa intifada, a Palestinian uprising that continues to this day. Palestinian protestors, upset by a heavy Israeli military presence at the Temple Mount in Jerusalem, threw rocks at Jews and tourists attempting to reach the area. The IDF responded with quick and brutal force and in the next six days, 61 Palestinians were killed and 2,657 were injured. The violence continued and Palestinian suicide bombings against civilians and soldiers were met with tank assaults, air strikes, and curfews by the IDF."

Analysis:
Saudi Arabian ambassador Prince Bandar Ibn Sultan said, "If Arafat does not accept what is available now, it won't be a tragedy, it will be a crime." (This quote is widely available. is just one source.)

After rejecting peace, Arafat and the Palestinian Arabs planned a terrorist war. There would have been no casualties on either side had Arafat agreed to peace. Indeed, even without agreeing to peace, there would have been no casualties if he had not started a terrorist war.

Palestinian Arab leaders have admitted they were just waiting for a pretext to launch their offensive. If it was not for the hostility of the Palestinian Arabs, visits by Jews to their holiest place would be routine; indeed, the fact that Israel has allowed the Muslim Waqf to control the Temple Mount, the holiest site in the world for Jews (and a distant third for Muslims) is testament to the sensitivity Israel has shown to Arabs and Muslims.

Comment:
"The destruction of Palestinian homes has left over 3,000 families with no places to live since 2001. Sixty-five percent of working age Palestinians are unemployed and 75 percent of all Palestinians live in poverty."

Analysis:
There is no question the Palestinian Arabs in the disputed territories are living in terrible conditions, but the blame ought to be placed appropriately. They have been living under their own government for well over a decade, but their government has chosen to wage a terrorist war rather than work to build a civil society and improve the lives of the people.

By all objective criteria, the conditions in the disputed territories improved dramatically after the Six Day War, when those territories came under Israeli administration. It was only when the Palestinian Arabs launched the intifada in the late 1980's that conditions started deteriorating and that deterioration accelerated once the administration of most of those territories was handed over to the Palestinian Authority.

Comment:
"Three million Palestinians live under the Israeli military occupation, which has been declared illegal by the U.N.."

Analysis:
All the Arabs living in Gaza are living under their own government, currently under control by Hamas, while the areas in the West Bank where approximately 95 percent of the Palestinian Arabs live have long been under the control of the Palestinian Authority. Thus, the assertion about three million Palestinian Arabs living under Israeli military occupation is absolutely false.

The United Nations has never been reluctant to condemn Israel. The writer of this Comment & Analysis has searched for any evidence of the United Nations declaring Israel's so-called occupation illegal and found none. For example, the "Jews Against the Occupation" web site contains a long list of United Nations resolutions condemning Israel, with no indication of any declaring the occupation illegal.

The United Nations Security Council Resolution 242, passed in conjunction with the end of the Six Day War, called for withdrawal in conjunction with a peace agreement. Thus the United Nations implicitly recognized Israeli administration of those territories as legal pending a peace agreement.

Comment:
"Unfortunately, the United States has vetoed over 33 U.N. Security Council resolutions condemning the Israeli occupation since 1973, but that's not the only support the United States gives Israel."

Analysis:
As noted above, the United Nations shows no reluctance about unfairly condemning Israel. It contains an automatic majority which will pass any anti-Israel resolution, regardless of how absurd and unjustified.

Comment:
"In addition, the U.S. supplies them with over $6 billion of aid each year, $3.5 billion of which is earmarked for military spending. Thanks to this money, Israel now has the fourth most powerful military in the world and the second largest fleet of F-16 fighter jets in the world."

Analysis:
Once again, the writer has his facts wrong. American aid to Israel is currently approximately $2.4 billion. Under a ten year agreement made with the then Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu, the assistance given to Israel under our foreign aid budget was reduced from $3 billion per year to $2.4 billion per year, with all the aid to be military assistance needed to counter the array of weapons owned by the dozens of hostile Arab and Muslim countries surrounding Israel. There has been some small amounts of additional assistance, such as $40 million for refugee resettlement, but the figure given by the writer is far mor than double the actual amount.

Comment:
"In recent years, Israel has continued to lash out against its Arab neighbors. In 2006, Hezbollah fighters from Lebanon kidnapped two Israeli soldiers and killed three others. Because the Lebanese government lacked the capability to reign in Hezbollah, Israel retaliated by launching bombings for 33 days and a massive ground invasion that resulted in the deaths of nearly 1,100 Lebanese civilians, 500 Hezbollah fighters, 117 IDF soldiers and 42 Israeli civilians. Just last month, Israel launched an unprovoked bombing run against targets in Syria."

Analysis:
Israel has exercised extraordinary restraint in the face of constant provocation and repeated attacks. Hezbollah, recognized as a terrorist organization by our own government and responsible for murdering more than 200 American marines in their barracks in 1982, set up its own mini-state in Southern Lebanon. From there, it launched countless Katyusha rockets against northern Israeli cities and towns, even after Israel completely withdrew from Lebanon in 2000. Despite repeated pleas from Israel and even from the United Nations, the Lebanese government refused to exercise its sovereignty in Southern Lebanon.

The kidnapping of Ehud Goldwasser and Eldad Regev was not an isolated incident, but a hostile act that could not be ignored.

During the war Hezbollah ignited, Hezbollah deliberately targeted Israeli civilians; its thousands of Katyusha rockets were not aimed at military targets, but at population centers. In contrast, Israel tried its best to avoid harming Lebanese civilians, going so far as to warn the Lebanese as much as 24 hours in advance of attacks against Hezbollah bases. Unfortunately, not only did Hezbollah operate out of civilian areas, making it impossible to avoid civilian casualties, but Hezbollah also prevented Lebanese civilians from moving away from the fighting.

Syria, along with Iran, is a prime benefactor of Hezbollah. Virtually all the weaponry Hezbollah gets, including the Katyusha rockets, come through Syria. The reality is that Syria, through its proxy, has been constantly attacking Israel without having to pay a price.

The reports regarding the apparent Israeli raid in Syria indicate that Syria, in conjunction with North Korea and likely Iran, has secretly been trying to develop nuclear weapons. If, as appears the most likely reality, Israel bombed a Syrian nuclear site, then Israel performed a great service not only for itself, but for America and the rest of the civilized world. It's just one more example of the tremendous payback we get from our principled support of the only democracy in the Middle East.

Comment:
"These are the facts."

Analysis:
As shown, those are not the facts.

Comment:
"If anything the American media is coddling Israel by not criticizing its military occupations. The foreign news media, such as Al-Jazeera, the BBC, and Israeli newspapers give a much clearer picture of what is going on in the occupied territories than the American media does. With the fourth most powerful military in the world, a powerful Washington lobby, billions of American dollars and the American media in their pockets, Israel has more support than it deserves given its history of violence and aggression. In order to create a just peace, America must engage both the Israelis and Palestinians and demand accountability from both sides, not just from the Arabs."

Analysis:
There has been no shortage of criticism of Israel in the American media or even by the American government; we have just not been as skewed against Israel as the foreign media.

The writer makes no mention of the hundreds of millions of Arabs and Muslims arrayed against tiny Israel's roughly seven million people. Nor does the writer mention the tremendous financial resources possessed by the Arab oil states and the influence that buys. Our government is selling $20 billion worth of advanced weaponry to Saudi Arabia, weapons which Israel must be prepared to defend itself against.

In reality, we give far more assistance, in the form of exorbitant oil prices alone, to Israel's enemies than we give to Israel. We also give Egypt, Jordan and the Palestinian Authority roughly the same total amount of direct foreign aid as we give Israel, but get virtually nothing in return from those states.

Search WWW Search PRIMER

Printer Friendly Page

For more information about PRIMER-Connecticut, send email to info@primerct.org

PRIMER-Connecticut • P.O. Box 7194, Bloomfield, CT 06002