2. Rocket attacks on Israeli civilians, and sniper attacks on Israeli soldiers, are characterized as expressions of Palestinian "impatience" with Israel.
3. Hamas rockets that target and successfully kill Jewish civilians are called "stray rockets," as if they misfired and unintentionally struck their target.
4/ The antisemitic alliance between the Nazis and Amin al Husseini, which resulted in the broadcast of calls to "kill the Jews wherever you find them" is sanitized as an collaboration "against Zionism."
12/ A stabbing attack by a Jordanian assailant against Israelis is rewritten as "a confrontation involving an Israeli guard at Israel’s embassy compound in Amman, which left two Jordanians dead."
14/ That same Islamic Jihad, which has murdered countless innocent Israelis in brutal suicide bombings, is described as “nettlesome" and "unruly" little armed group.
15/ Between the headline and the lead, the paper couldn't decide whether self-propelling rocks hit a car as someone was dying inside, or whether unknown attackers were busy attacking "road" when the car happened to get in the way.
16/ And today, similarly tortured language. While turning Israel's retaliation (and not the initial Palestinian arson attacks) into what tested the cease-fire, the paper remakes those arson attack into balloons that somehow, mysteriously, floated into Israel.
@michaelcrowley
17/ Consider just the last two examples. A middle school English teacher would send such language back to students as imprecise, obfuscatory, and inadequate.
What does it tell you that the wordsmiths at the
@nytimes
—the writer and layers of editors—send out that muddy slop?
What do you call an organization that massacred Jews in synagogues, that slaughtered airline passengers from around the world, and that is listed as a terror org by the EU, US, UK, Japan, and Canada?
To the NYT, it's a "Palestinian liberation group."
A Palestinian rocket attack against… the air?
At least the updated version improves a bit on the early language. But here we are again: professional reporters twisting themselves into a knot because, seemingly, it hurts too much to report plainly.
20/ Now the newspaper absurdly claims Palestinian Islamic Jihad, a terrorist group sworn from its inception to Israel's violent destruction, was "founded…to fight the Israeli occupation."
Happened again, so apparently NY Times reporters got the green light to pretend Islamic Jihad fights "occupation," and not "Israel's existence."
Not just a lie. A lie meant to soften the image of a murderous, antisemitic terrorist group.
1/ Four
@nytimes
journalists reported this (in print today), and not even one had the thought that, wait a minute, *cheering the attack in which a thousand Jewish civilians were targeted for slaughter* doesn't count as a "critique" of Israel, blistering or otherwise?
This
@nytimes
whitewash of Hind Khoudary might not rise to the level of their Reefat Alareer fiasco—hard to surpass that—but this counts as an error of omission, seemingly meant to protect her reputation.
The Palestinian peace activists she ratted out to Hamas were ARRESTED.