Disproportionate Reporting, Selective Outrage

You’d hardly know that all of Israel is under siege. The networks would rather you stay tuned to their pictures from Lebanon. According to ABC-TV, CNN and other “Friends of Hezbollah”, never mind who started this, and forget the million and a half Israelis who’ve been made homeless.

As usual, NPR Radio is serving as propaganda minister for terror and, also as usual, Israel is at war with the press.

Or rather, the press is at war with Israel.

Any mention of the 200 bombs falling on Israel from day to night? Hardly. What about the thousands of Israelis wounded in flesh and in spirit – meaning shell-shocked today and perhaps for the rest of their lives? No, there’s no time for this. Forget Haifa’s Rambam Hospital. The pictures from Lebanon are better, much better than pictures from Meron, Israel, where seven-year-old Omer Pesachov was murdered along with his grandmother as the result of Hezbollah missiles.

But leave it to the New York Times to cynically portray itself as dispassionate and neutral. On July 27 it ran a story – “Tide of Arab Opinion Turns To Support For Hezbollah” – that subtly, as subtle as a snake, makes the argument that Israel is at fault for failing to make friends and influence people.

We are asked to believe that because of the IDF’s “disproportionate response”, Israel’s terrific friends in Saudi Arabia and Egypt -- well, they are friends no more. Yes, that’s the gist of this piece, that at the outset, Israel had the Arab world on its side, but then those Jews did something bad. They got serious about defending themselves.

Therefore, if only those Israelis would quit fighting back, think of all the friends they would have.

Even Mel Gibson might come around.

Memo to the New York Times: Saudi Arabia was never a friend of Israel and neither was Egypt. Please, not all of us are so stupid. Quick question to all those reporting from over there: How do you know those casualties in Lebanon are “civilian?” Has this been verified by your fact-checkers, or are you simply buying Hezbollah as a reliable source?

Another memo: Your reporters keep saying that Hezbollah may be bad news, but they do provide social and humanitarian services to the Lebanese. Really? You have seen these schools and hospitals you say Hezbollah builds and maintains? Are these facts, or do these scoops arrive at your desk from the Hezbollah ministry of information? NBC’s emotional Richard Engel, for example, who praises Hezbollah for its (alleged) humanitarian deeds, makes no pretense of being impartial. He has plainly (or so it surely seems) thrown himself in with Hezbollah.

Thank you BBC and all other Hezbollah/Hamas cheerleaders for letting us know that Ehud Olmert has apologized for Qana. But you may have noted that Hezbollah routinely positions itself and its arms right there in the middle of the population. Even the UN’s Jan Egeland has called them cowards for hiding among women and children. (This was carried by FOX.)

But obviously, Islamic terrorists never have to say they’re sorry.

Someone, somewhere, did (reluctantly) concede that Hamas and Hezbollah do their dirty work behind human shields.

Such as the news media, perhaps?